There's something racist about toilet provision in the UK.

I’m all for calling out racism. But this isn’t it.

Ooh yes, I’ll do that too. I’d love to hear their reasoning.

You'd have to ask them that. I might look on their website and see if they address that point, or if there's a message board to ask on.

Unisex facilities are not a good idea anywhere. Not for women

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

Exactly, so why are amnesty international so invested in single sex spaces in the developing world? Surely creating mixed sex toilets would save money and space, freeing up resources for solving other problems. Instead of having to create two blocks, they could just build one.

Wow, you've managed to undermine racism, developing countries and refugees all at once. Well done! 👍 Feel free to go and live in a refugee camp if you feel they have it better than you.

But what space are you sharing? The bit where you wash your hands. That's it. It's not like you have to sit on a long plank with holes in and have to see a willy as you squat, is it?

I just don't get all this. All we have to share in a gender neutral toilets is fucking wash basin and hand dryer.

Um, "British" isn't a race?

It’s not the same; it’s totally different issue.

The fact that some people live in awful refugee camps does not mean women here have to share spaces with men. And TW are men.

Refugee camps generally see higher levels of crime, including sexual violence, because they house a mixture of people who are vulnerable, have experienced trauma, and have little left to lose. Not because of the demographic of who lives there.

Race has nothing to do with it, they would be dangerous in any country, and housing people from any culture/race/religion.

It's not racist to say that gender neutral toilets in a cinema or office in the UK are a better idea than gender neutral toilets in a refugee camp. It's just common sense.

Voice of reason. I can’t get on board with the fuss about this. It’s not racist at all.
Im a woman, and I don’t use same sex toilets with fear. Actually, quite often the womens toilets have huge queues because females take forever and a lifetime to wee. If I know there is a cubicle in the blokes toilets, I’m going to use it.

So why aren't Amnesty and various other similar aid organisations campaigning for mixed sex toilet cubicles with doors? Why do they know exactly what a woman is, and what dangers women face as a result of their biology, in India or sub-Saharan Africa, but here in the UK and Western Europe they think men can be women and women should be happy to share loos with men?

Amnesty applied to have their position on this heard as part of the the Supreme Court judgement between the Scottish Government and For WomenScotland. Amnesty and the Scottish government took the line that men who identify as women are women and should be allowed access to access women's single-sex spaces. The Supreme Court said no, 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 clearly means biological sex and men can never be women.

We really ought to be asking what Amnesty has against women in the UK, that it refuses to acknowledge the risk of men in women's spaces. Decent men stay out so that the bad father actors stand out.

👏 👏

Women and children are already very vulnerable in camps.

Making sure you don't piss next to a bloke in the loo in M&S isn't the same.

Stop with the rage bait.

It’s not racist to have separate facilities for men and women.
Trans shite has its rancid tentacles everywhere.
Which is another reason why the Supreme Court decision is so important.

It’s not racist to have separate facilities for men and women.
Trans shite has its rancid tentacles everywhere.
Which is another reason why the Supreme Court decision is so important.

Yes alot of TRAs seem to actively not want universal toilets or individual stalls for everyone. Which makes you think.

Well if I still had a wage, I wouldn't be comparing any increase to that in India. Why would I? You can be concerned about (perceived) inequalities, without forcing a label on it; which the OP has.

No. There are huge inequalities between life in Britain and, say, India in many respects.

So should we stop wanting better things for ourselves, or to get our single sex spaces back, until everyone in India has access to a toilet with a door? Don't be soft.

It is perfectly possible to want both things. Or are you going to forego all your wage increases until everyone in India earns the same as you? Or are you going to stop going to school at 10 until all girls in the world get to go to secondary?

The starting point is having access to toilet facilities per se. Anything, thereafter, might be considered a luxury.

most people i know are able to be concerned at several different issues before breakfast.

So it is possible to wish for more single sex facilities in the UK and also wish for any single sex facilities in other places. And the two are not equated because they are two separate issues.

Of course it's xenophobic to make that claim about men from other cultures. I'm still not sure it's racist, but certainly that statement is xenophobic. But the OP original question/point about the "toilet provision in thus country is racist"....that was odd. I understand the comments about cultural differences impacting the very presence of a unisex facility...but, im just saying that I believe it's possibly xenophobic rather than racist. Being a potential sex offender isn't more likely because of where you're from- and yes, whoever made that sort of statement needs to explain what they're actually saying. There's enough discrimination in this world, without orgs drumming up unnecessary fear.

But isn’t it racist to imply men of certain cultures cannot be trusted in mixed sex spaces but men of other cultures are? Can you imagine if a Reformed politician said that? These orgs are implying men in developing countries are more dangerous to women than Western men. If they did not believe thst, they would be campaigning for mixed sex toilets in developing countries as well as in the UK wouldn’t they?

Because at the moment they are campaigning for something that doesn't exist at all in a culture that isn't used to the concept of PT. This is a starting point. But it should be pointed out that there are also sanitation reasons for providing toilets and this issue is also being addressed by aid organisations so that toilet facilities are available to all.

Gender neutral toilets are not a new thing in this country. I have been in plenty of restaurants where there is one toilet area for both genders with two cubicles and a washbasin area. Nobody thought this was a problem, mostly because it isn't a problem.

Unisex toilets have existed here in various spaces for at least 50 years. Not every public space has room for separate toilet facilities.

I agree with your point OP - the implication is that men in the UK are civilised and can be trusted to not assault women, while men in other countries are uncivilised and can't be trusted. Imo there are men who will happily commit assault anywhere and so both sets of women need protection.