Tried three places for lunch today and none cater for women

I didn’t say it was due to just no lift access, lift access was an example but it’s clear what I meant.

Inability to form coherent analogies?

I get it

But there are 33 million women in the uk, and far fewer people who have physical disabilities/lack of working legs. For some small businesses they can't afford it for the tiny number of potential customers who ask for it.

If every single cafe or pub was required to be designed to be completely, easily accessible to things like wheelchairs, a huge proportion of venues would simply close down, because:

• they are in old period buildings where the necessary renovations can't be made
• they are in very tiny spaces where there simply isn't room to manoeuvre/add a changing places loo
• the cost vs any additional profit due to more disabled customers, would result in them losing money and going bust
• they would have to compromise huge amounts of features/furniture/space the vast majority of their customers value, risking them losing all their business

It absolutely should be a requirement for new/modern venues to be accessible. But you can't try and shoehorn ramps etc into a tiny 16th century pub.

It shouldn't be the way it is which is exactly OP's point.

OP tried 3 places. I can't imagine they were all unsuitable due to no lift access, although i.admit I haven't RTWT

But if your disabled sometimes it's just the way it is.
I have mobility issues so I check before I go rather than hoping for the best.

I thought your message would have hit harder if you had simply framed it in terms of what happened to you as a disabled person. I think the overwhelming majority of people would agree that disabled people should be able to go out and about and have food at a pub/cafe.

I didn’t get it initially but I also think it’s a great way to same your point. Sorry this happened to you.

Not every small business can afford to install lifts and things though, and some listed buildings can’t allow it. Should we let small business close down and old buildings go derelict if they can’t make all these accommodations?

Clear to me. Not unreasonable at all. Good way to help us to relate to the experience. It’s so unfair. I guess some old buildings are maybe too hard to adapt? But so unfair and discriminatory.

This is awful to read. I wish disability access would become a priority. You'd think we'd have moved far beyond this point by now.

If a restaurant doesn’t allow a wheelchair user it’s because they don’t have the correct accessibility, such as steep stairs and no life etc. If a restaurant just doesn’t allow women, or people of different races for example it is outright discrimination and is a totally different issue.

Most people, or at least lots of us plan in advance or need to. Its not unusual or strange. Its not onerous either. Not as onerous as being turned away and having to shlep about trying to find somewhere, getting more and more hungry and upset

I also dont know why such a focus on listed buildings on this thread either, there are countless buildings, built all the way from the 1800s right through to the 60s and 70s which wouldnt be accessible necessarily or perhaps able to provide that accessibility.

Some are very easily remedied but many arent. In my small town you couldnt even get a wheelchair or pram on the pavement really let alone manage to move around some of the small gift shops.

I completely understand and am sorry you have this ongoing experience.
Kids in pubs? Great!
Accessibility for all adults? Nah.

Why don’t you say men?

This . Many buildings are not suitable for loos being downstairs or to install lifts.

I understand why you posted like that - it's exactly because nobody would tell a woman to call ahead to ask whether she could be accommodated/ would be allowed into a restaurant, but that's exactly what people with physical disabilities are told. In retrospect the fact that at the moment single sex spaces are politicised and frequently cause for heated debate and a lot of pick me style attempts to flex about not "seeing the issue" the analogy was lost a bit.

I suppose height would be a substitute analogy - but I definitely understand what you mean and why you wanted to make people actually think about how it would be to have to call ahead (possibly to multiple places) before being able to do things most people take for granted. If people actually spent a week in a wheelchair (without the luxury of being able to jump out and lift it up steps / nip through narrow spaces/ push it empty over grass or cobbles because it's just an experiment and they don't actually need it) they might be more sympathetic.

@Mrsmunchofmunchington so no female disabled toilets? Or just no disabled toilets?

Your post is very confusing and fails to make the point you may be trying to make.

There are indeed many establishments that refuse to cater for women these days - refusing to provide suitable single sex changing or toilets facilities or services like bra fitting.

Sadly, thanks partly to the pandering to the demands of disordered men, many accessibility budgets are likely to have been diverted into things like putting rainbow logos on trains, ripping out perfectly good single sex toilet facilities to replace with horrible mixed sex ones and rewriting all policies to discriminate against women which also gets expensive when they lose discrimination court cases.

It's a good analogy, once explained. We'd be furious if places were only accessible to men.

Except there is a huge difference because denying women would be based on just not wanting women to enter.

Completely different to someone in a wheelchair being physically unable to enter due to structural issues etc.

I feel really sad reading the comments on this thread. What a depressing world we live in. Complete lack of compassion and empathy. I think your analogy was excellent and made me stop and think. Things i completely take for granted. Im sorry you had to come home and im sorry for responses to your thread.

Maybe be a grown up, intelligent woman and explain your issue, without dragging men into into for gods sake.

The point she is making is that she shouldn’t have to plan in advance just to go out to lunch!

Did you deliberately choose venues not at ground level, op?