Ireland will no longer be providing single sex toilets in primary and secondary schools!!!

I don’t think the open plan layout will reduce bullying because groups will congregate round the sinks, especially if they have mirrors.

Because of the toilets NOT having gaps, more will be happening inside those toilets. Drug taking definately and assaults potentially?

If over one rape is being reported inside school premises each day, where in schools are these and other assaults happening?

This is the kind of detail the education bodies and school designers should be looking at. Before.

Yes, 3times, well said.

And, of course, in the context of safeguarding children, the risk/behaviour is turned upside down.
I have to submit evidence for Garda clearance repeatedly as I work with children. Am I high risk? (Middle aged mother with no history of abuse or additions)....No I am clearly not.

But, because children are vulnerable, all risks must be covered as much as possible. Hence I happily go through the Garda vetting procedures.
As does anybody working with children.
It's not failsafe, but it's there to protect the less powerful.

Nobody says "oh well, abusers are going to find ways to get at children no matter what we do (true), so lets just hope for the best".

That is one of my concerns about single sex toilets...the potential risk of an abusive person manipulating the situation to abuse children.
Any level of risk must be highlighted and mitigated.

Well if this is truly the case, you could essentially avoid going anywhere. There will be a news article of gender based violence taking place in a supermarket for example. As a woman, you’d avoid pubs, nightclubs, parks etc. I don’t see the answer being that you remove anyone would could face violence from a specific situation or place. Yes take reasonable precautions such as not going down an alley. Nevertheless wouldn’t be the woman’s fault of course if she did encounter violence in any of these locations. But if it was truly the answer to guard against any potential violence from men, women wouldn’t go anywhere

Women take steps to minimise risk all the time in all those situations. Sometimes we avoid places and areas because they don't feel safe. We don't have the option of avoiding toilets. Just because we can't sex segregate ALL areas doesn't mean we shouldn't sex segregate those we can. Bathrooms and changing rooms carry higher risk due to layout and functions than your average supermarket.

Yes, Lurky, in practice I suspect, that's what would happen.
And I wouldn't blame teachers for that.
Ideally, the situation would be that there is single sex provision, and boys are just not supposed to be in that space, so can be challenged if so.

In reality, open plan girls loo will probably become that space that boys run through as a dare.

Dont forget that the advised plans are for new build Primary also.
Can you imagine the stress of being an 11 year old in 5th Class, trying to deal with periods, and having the boys teasing (as they will).

So "passive supervision" likely means little to none in reality. Even if the open plan layout does prevent physical bullying or sexual assault, there will still be plenty of opportunity for the kind of behaviours other people mentioned above like banging on doors, verbal bullying, sexual comments etc. Sounds like a lovely situation to throw a 12 or 13 year child into.

But hey, when they grow up, we will have a generation of women learning from a young age that they have no right to boundaries based on their sex. I would imagine fighting for sex based rights will be harder for a generation that doesn't kmow what they're missing.

Lurky and Yadidaye... if you look at the consultation document that XXSex linked above, the proposal appears not to relate to teachers actively supervising the toilet area. Rather, that the open plan design allows for "passive supervision".

I dont know what the definition of "passive supervision" is, but I suspect it doesn't mean that a teacher is assigned to stand at the toilets- more that the prospect of a teacher walking past may be deterrent enough to stop bullying.

Now, having been a teenage girl in a mixed school, with teenage boys (the majority of whom grew out of the offensive "lets be crude while we wade through the hormonal surges stage of life" and became decent men) I wouldn't rely on passive or active supervision in the loos.

Upthread, teachers have commented on having their toilet door thumped by boys, who think that "periods" are somehow funny or weird.
Boys wont be deterred from that behaviour in the short term.
But, while they're learning, it's not fair for girls to have to deal with their own body changes and the immaturity of males at the same time.

So, let girls have some dignity and privacy in single sex places.
Trans girls and boys can go to a third gender neutral place (not the disabled loos).

This seems like another policy announced from the top down, probably by people who don't actually spend time in schools.

Children and teenagers of both sexes deserve access to single sex spaces, for a myriad of reasons. It can be argued around in circles but the reality is that children deserve to have access to a space that, while it may not ever be completely private, they can predict to some degree who they will encounter and how those people will act.

For the people who say, I know lots of women and girls who wouldn't mind sharing their toilets. Great, good for you and for them. But women and girls who don't, and those boys who don't, have the right to be accommodated too. Let a third space be available for those who are happy to use it.

And yeah, I can just imagine the staff meeting where the rota for standing outside the toilets is announced. As if teachers don't have enough to be dealing with.

So one of the big pro arguments for these designs seems to be how easy they are to supervise. Is the suggestion that teachers/other staff will be standing outside at break times? Weren't teachers in Ireland arguing a few years ago that supervising kids playing in the yard was outside their responsibility. Has that changed? I'm not sure i would take well to being told I needed to sit/stand outside the jacks for lunchtime to make sure there was no trouble. Or are the kids expected to supervise themselves?

I dunno, take steps to not put them in this situation in the first place?

Take responsibility as adults to make the risk assessments they cant comprehend yet.

Stop removing layers of safeguarding

Man you GC folks just love putting words in folks mouths and cherry picking what to argue against to suit your own agenda. Highly amusing.

The Everyone's Invited website has had thousands of reports of rape and sexual harassment and one overriding fact was that those girls did not bother to report because they knew nothing would be done as was evidenced by the few who did report and nothing was done, so I wouldn't be too cocky if I were you that Scottish Schools are such perfect places.

I suspect if you insist on exaggerating and making clear your lack of interest or respect for middle ground and what anyone else is saying then there's limited point in bothering to continue the conversation.

Or that it's just not reported.

Your comment about weighing up the pros and cons is a prime example of why people dont bother. It wasn't that long ago where part of the defence of a rape case ( now bear in mind WhatsApp messages basically admitted it had happened) was " well look at the underwear she was wearing.

Yes you heard right her underwear was held up in court to defend her rapist.

We are teaching kids that they have ti ignore their discomfort. That they are not e entitled to privacy dignity or safety and then we blame them for getting themselves into " dodgy situations"

Girls can't win. And they know it. They get to sit I'm class with their rapist instead.

I’ve never mentioned anything about “hurting the feelings of males” or anything even similar...

Probably worth noting that those publications with those statistics are England based whereas I am based in Scotland. In the many schools I’ve worked in over the years, there has not been one rape case having taken place on school property. Not that this has never happened in scotland, I’m sure it probably has. However it could be that we experience less gender based violence amongst teenagers even just being over the border.

So you understand why single sex spaces exist in the first place?

We have seen what happens when we don't, reflected in other countries where girls don't attend school as a result.

We are now very aware of the epidemic of sexual violence and harassment

We've had the me too movement

And this very recent school scandal in the news.

So either you don't believe it

Or you don't think it matters

Or you think.its not enough to exclude males . Which of course means you must have some idea of what you would consider a level at which we can reconsider?

Well I’d assume in this situation and this “male person” identifies as female and likewise could be facing safety issues in male toilets considering they identity as female.

Two separate issues here.

First: They may identify as women but they are male, not female as no one is able to change sex. Female is a biological reality and not an identity, and sex remains relevant. While some people base perceptions of others on gender expression, others do not share that belief and perceive based on sex. Obviously mutual tolerance is necessary.

Second: TW may well not be safe in male spaces, and absolutely no one should have to be vulnerable in a space where their privacy and dignity is affected and they feel unsafe. However this does not automatically mean that the only solution is that they use the female single sex space. Third spaces would meet the need without removing single sex spaces from female people. There are many other male people unsafe in male spaces: female spaces and femalehood isn't the refuge for anyone not safe in male spaces. Those spaces are to meet the needs of female people.

Can you give more information on how exactly this person attending toilets that match their gender identity excludes some females accessing facilities? I’m obviously not aware of these issues in as much depth as you are.

Women whose faith and culture means they cannot access mixed sex spaces regardless of how someone identifies, women with disabilities such as Autism, women with a history of trauma and sexual assault, women whose dignity, privacy and comfort to partially undress (as women have to) is too affected to be able to use mixed sex spaces for situations where they are undressed and vulnerable.

As I said above, absolutely no one should have to be vulnerable in a space where their privacy and dignity is affected and they feel unsafe. Solutions have to be found that don't involve telling those women they either prioritise the needs of the male person or lose access to any space. It cannot be only male needs and feelings that are valued.

Solutions have to work for everyone.

Well you don't seem to think this country has enough of an issue with gender based violence to protect our girls over hurting the feelings of males.

What has to happen to girls in this country if a rape a day in schools isn't enough to say no to males sharing spaces with girls when they are vulnerable?

What's What's acceptable level before we can say no?

Some single sex toilets are floor to ceiling - and some are not. That some are floor to ceiling doesn't make the problem of the non floor to ceiling ones go away.

Some girls have no problem with mixed sex toilets - and as you can see in this thread, some do. As do some women.

What are we going to do to find solutions that work for everyone? That's all that really matters here. As obvious for this thread, mixed sex toilets do not work for all girls.