Transgender Toilets

? for real Roisin?

This is why paper trails are important.

I know this person and they are using their ‘trans’ status to continue with a series of vexatious litigations. Even prior to transition, this person was regularly trying to sue companies at employment tribunals and civil court cases. Her transition to, firstly Mx, then to Miss, has not slowed their appetite for taking businesses to Court.
The Condor situation (toilets etc) was misrepresented as it was not while this person was ‘onboard’ that she was ‘humiliated’ but was, in my view, a set up to get Condor to ‘discriminate’.
Ms Bisson was due to travel on Condor ship the Liberation, and telephoned the Company stating that she was trans and wasn’t sure which toilet she would be able to use. The telephone operator referred her to her supervisor who stated that they should use the toilet that they feel most comfortable with and if still not sure, they could always avail themselves of the disabled toilet if they wished. A perfectly measured response.
This explanation was taken completely out of context and Ms Bisson made a complaint to the Tribunal about discrimination. She employed a human rights lawyer (who now will have nothing to do with the complainant).
At the time, Condor were getting extremely bad press about the service that they were offering to Jersey and Guernsey residents in their efforts to link to both the UK and France. I believe that rather than fighting this action, and to concentrate on improving their service that they capitulated to the demands of Ms Bisson. However, to date, no toilet signs on the boat have been changed and really there was no need to do so.
Ms Bisson has continued to sue anyone that she perceives as stopping her doing anything she wants by always using, as a first port of call, her ‘trans’ status.
She is a taxi driver who has also been in plenty of scrapes with both the authorities and with the public. She often screams at customers if they have got into her cab and said something as innocuous as “alright mate”, bearing in mind that all one can see when getting into the back of a cab, is the back of the driver’s head and gender recognition isn’t always initially possible.

If this 'woman' really knew what it was to be a woman she wouldn't be demanding that the world change to accomodate her seems to me but what do I know

LadyStark - one last time: I don't want women in men's toilets (or men in the women's), so if you are a woman, you won't see a winkie. If you are a trans person, I would not have thought that seeing a penis is an issue. Are you trans? As julia says, maybe we have to start again and have separate individual bogs, with a separate communal urinal for those who want it.

how about closing all existing loos and replacing with accessible single cubicles using same space? maybe a few separate urinals
then us crips could join the queue and wait for an equal opp to piss
unlike now

Dunno about 'most' - 63% of you don't wash your hands, apparently!
(The corresponding figure for women is 40% which is also a bit shocking IMO.)

Grim, so what if penises aren't directly on view when you walk in? I don't want to have to avoid accidentally seeing penis, ever, even in a public toilet.

Firstly, I was just dispelling someone's assertion that penii were on view when you enter a men's loo. They aren't. It would be very odd if they were.

Secondly, I am not suggesting for a second that women should have to tolerate men or trans people in the women's loo. I was trying to say that I am perfectly comfortable with trans people using the men's loo while I am in there. It doesn't bother me. If it bothers women, they should not have to put up with it.

Thirdly, some men's public toilets are funky beyond belief. Most are not. Same goes for women's public toilets. My wife refuses to use them when we are out unless she really has no choice. So let's not assume that all men's toilets are piss-washed swamps and women's are some kind of nirvana. Most of us are pretty clean

And men are significantly more likely than women to not wash their hands, so it's not just psychological.

I inadvertently went into a toilet (temporary plastic kind, at a cafe / boat hire place that was having building work done) with a urinal in it the other day. I was nearly sick at the smell. I ended up emptying my mooncup in a bush on the island we were sailing to because I wasn't going to risk the lack of hygiene involved in mooncup emptying somewhere as unsanitary as that loo.

Hygiene is a consideration. Males stand to pee and females sit. We don't want to sit in pee.

singing There are millions of reasons why men should not use women's facilites.

I posted in response to Grimarse saying urinals are fine and dandy in the women's loos because you can't see cock. This would be basically inviting male bodied people to self select to use women's facilities whenever it takes their fancy.

It's about drawing the line isn't it.

And yes, urinals are really putrid and belong in the men's loos.

Men pee standing up, male bodied people pee standing up, I'm not going to check on all trans people who self select to use the ladies whether they have kept the loo seat sanitary, no one is. It's far more effective to have male bodied facilities and female bodied facilities.

Your own comment above 11:29 basically reflects what I think. If you pass, it's common sense to self select, use the facilities that reflect your trans-gender. No one will bat an eyelid and I'm sure this small minority of people are respectful to the female facilities. But let's not invite the whole male population to claim female space willy nilly.

Do urinals smell worse than toilets Ophelia? Do you really think the bad smell (if true) is an argument against trans people using the toilets that match their gender identity? I think there are legitimate arguments but I'm not sure I'd say that one is a strong one. But if you feel strongly I'd like to know more about your opinion.

you can't see a guy's cock when peeing into a urinal

We don't want the stench of urinals in women's loos!

This is about WOMEN'S SAFETY Grimarse, rtft. Not about men. Why would men care indeed, isn't it nice for you.

Just to kill off a myth that seems to get mentioned in here - you can't see a guy's cock when peeing into a urinal unless you stand next to him and make the effort. So you aren't presented with a row of knobs just by entering the gents.

That said, I have no objection to a trans person of any persuasion using the cludgee whilst I am in there, and I suspect most men feel the same. When you gotta go, you gotta go. I guess a few extremists are using this as a rallying cry for their beliefs. You get them in every political movement, unfortunately.

Homer, I'm not really sure why you care either way. You're male, this hardly affects you.

Apologies if this is already covered - I saw the linked article in David milliband Twitter feed and I thought it might be of interest here.
qz.com/692711/the-radically-simple-way-to-make-female-refugees-safer-from-sexual-assault-decent-bathrooms/

So this would mean that post op trans people who now have a vagina should be made to use the men's toilet

Are they doing vagina transplants now?

"And if that post op person with a penis is attracted to women, you would still insist they use the women's toilets?"

What is the purpose of asking this, I wonder? Is this trying to pretend that a transman with a surgical simulacrum of a penis is as much a rape threat as a man? Because if that were really the concern, then a lesbian with a strap-on would be as much of a threat (unless you believe that testosterone or identifying as a man do of themselves make you more likely to be a rapist.).

Although this seems to make the same ole mistake of assuming that the key issue is the actual threat posed by the individual, rather than the perceived threat. So, a non-passing transwoman could be objected to in women-only spaces both on the grounds that they are obviously not female (and we think such spaces should be segregated on the grounds of sex not gender), and on the grounds that allowing obviously male people into the ladies allows non-trans predatory males a free pass. The first is specific to the person involved, the second is general.

"...people should use toilets based on the genitalia they had at birth." That is a pretty weird definition of sex there! Actual sex isn't totally determined by the appearance of the genitalia at birth (as many intersex people know, especially those who suffered unwanted genital surgery as children), just that for most people, the appearance of the genitalia at birth is a reasonable estimator of sex. Of course, the definition has been attempted this way so it can be claimed that changing the appearance of the exterior genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics is changing sex, when it is just cosmetic surgery.

What would an answer that shows respect and consideration for females be? Not pushing your way into the ladies when you are male. If safety in the gents is the issue (which could be because you're a non-passing transwoman, or just a drag queen, or a small-bodied transman, or a transman who needs to change their tampon etc), then until we solve the problem of male violence, a sex-neutral separate cubicle would work.
So, putting tampon bins in the gents would not make transmen safer, since as all us ladies know, you can hear the bins opening! Using the private cubicle, could just be (as some of my gay male friends are) that you are shy of peeing at urinals, or a male who sits to pee for religious or cultural reasons, or just anyone who prefers a little more privacy.

Which seems to me to be a solution that increases general safety at minimal cost, whereas letting all of female sex PLUS those with a female 'gender identity' in obviously decreases it (since it itself destroys the very safety that transwomen claim they are seeking in the ladies!).

Letting anyone who identifies as X enter the preferred loo, that is surely the only suggestion that decreases safety for all concerned --apart from gender-conforming, straight men who would be as safe as they always were! So why would anyone prefer that if safety of us all was actually what mattered?

Yes, because that person will not have a 'penis' in the true sense of the word, and also because a female who is attracted to other women is not a man, she is a lesbian.

Toilets aren't segregated by sexual orientation Homer, but on sex.

It's been working pretty well so far, need to see some pretty good justification to change that.

I think as a society we really need to just spend the money and install individual facilities wherever possible. So changing rooms are no longer communal - everyone or every family is entitled to a lockable booth offering full privacy. Until then we can't make everyone happy and I personally feel there are two sides here who both have legitimate cases.

Homeriliad - there are a range of views on here but from what I've read I'd say the consensus is more along the lines of the following:

Women just want to feel safe. For that reason they don't want transwomen who obviously look like men or are indistinguishable from men in spaces in which they have historically had a fair expectation of sex segregation. They want to be able to object if someone who they believe to be male is in their changing room etc.

When it comes to transmen who are female but are indistinguishable from men opinions differ. Many don't want them in their female only spaces either although some think they belong in the women's toilets/changing.

I'd tend to take a pragmatic view myself. If you're trans and you pass and just want to pee then I'd say using the toilets etc that match your gender identity is probably the best option for everyone. But if you look like Arnold Schwarzeneger and think you're female you really can't expect all women and girls to be cool with that and I think in such cases women and girls should have a right to object.