How to approach the 'TW in a work loo' issue

This has been explained, patiently, multiple times. Refusing to engage with the issues or listen when women talk just reinforces the misogyny in all this.

The unions are well captured, too

Could you contact your union for advice/support?

The absurdity of this situation is that Sandra is essentially still physically Peter only perhaps that their external attire, makeup and hair have changed to others. She might feel a women but in is reality not. Had Peter walked into the female toilets there would be outrage.
I understand your concern I have the same reservations when my young DD goes into female toilets and changing rooms on her own.
You are right to want to protect your female privacy and should not be vilified or threatened for your concern.

What do you think your trans colleague will do to you in the toilet?

You say you are the "lowest of the low" in terms of rank so I can't imagine choosing this particular hill to die on.

If you do e-mail them saying:

'Please can you clarify our policy on which toilets, changing rooms and showers our transgender staff are expected to use?'

What if they write back:

"The women's toilets."

What do you do then? All because your colleague would like to use a toilet in their workplace.

Yep, it would be helpful if men could have some kind of 'you can pee next to me' campaign to show their support and acceptance of males who are gender non-conforming.

This whole thing about males accessing female spaces is predicated on a much-more-homophobic society of decades ago where a male who wanted to wear dresses had to do so "under cover" - attempt to pretend to be a woman to do so.

And their very ability to even do this was predicated on such a firm assumption of "person wearing dress = woman" that that assumption could override any doubt about their sex.

In 2021, both those assumptions are false - there's no reason to think that the men in the company would have an objection to other males wearing dresses, and there are firm laws to make sure there is redress if they do, and the massively increased visibility of trans people means the "anyone wearing a dress is a woman" assumption that could have potentially permitted passing no longer holds.

And in this specific case everyone knows this person is a man - they're in no way "under cover" here. No "witness protection" type justification remains. This historical convention of transwomen using women's toilets is functionally obsolete, and the level of problems of female spaces being invaded is now so obvious it's increasingly clear this sort of obsolete practice has to end.

I think a really good solution is to make all the men's loos unisex and the women's loos single sex. Job done.

The poster suggesting that a woman who cannot use a mixed sex space for toileting due to a disability should be bounced out to the accessible toilet needs to re read the Equality Act. You cannot treat a person less favourably on the grounds of their disability, and all the protected characteristics matter equally. Trans does not trump the other eight.

Reasons why women may not be able to use a mixed sex toilet include:

• disability such as autism (bear in mind that advice is that trans people should not be required to use a disabled toilet because of the 'stigma' so presumably this matters equally to non trans people too)

• trauma and history of violence, which obviously no woman should be pressured to have to disclose or be 'outed' for

• faith, culture and belief - obviously too, no woman should have to defend her faith or culture to others as if they're something wrong, disclose personal information or risk discriminatory treatment for being seen to have a faith/culture that conflicts with the needs of a TW

• freedom of belief, that a TW is male and being unwilling to share toilet facilities with any male regardless of circumstance. Which is perfectly legal.

It is pointless to be dishonest or avoidant of the fact that male people using the sex based space that matches their preferred gender identity conflicts with many women's need for sex based spaces and provisions, and access to women's provisions.

Women cannot be excluded from all available provision so that male people can have choice from all the provisions, because discrimination and massively less favourable treatment on grounds of sex. Women cannot also suffer less favourable treatment and added disadvantage for not being able to use mixed sex spaces.

The obvious solution is to provide sex based and mixed sex spaces alongside each other and meet all needs.

It depends on how intersectional and inclusive your transactivism is.

So a woman wants to use the toilets for women and you're mad/confused/against it?

No.

So a male wants to use the toilets for females and you're mad/confused/against it?

Fixed it for you.

It means 'adult human female' not 'anyone who says they are' which appears to be your definition.

So a woman wants to use the toilets for women and you're mad/confused/against it? Maybe you should use the mens toilet if you feel uncomfortable with women x

HR exam question: A male employee reports an incident of bullying by another employee whilst in the toilet facilities. Do you;

A. Investigate and deal with the report in line with company disciplinary process.
B. Suggest he uses the womens in future, they're a friendly bunch.

That trope about ‘no one changes their life in this way to use female toilets’ is pretty stale and really is empty. Maybe get some empathy for women who need the reassurance of single sex spaces. Or is your empathy only reserved for males…

PP suggesting Peter/Sandra needs to change their entire life are being very transphobic! You don’t need to present as female to be a TW

So, this newly transitioned male who has been using male toilets is now not safe to use those very same toilets from one day to the next? Just like that?

I’d be very worried about the males in your workplace OP if they are that unsafe! Blimey. I assume the change happened over a weekend so, someone must have become very scary over those couple of days.

Yes, why would the company be happy that Peters male colleagues, who have worked with and shared facilites with Peter for a period of time would suddenly become violent and transphobic and start attacking Peter for using the male toilets just because Peter has made some superficial changes to his name and appearance?
Is the change because male colleagues are intolerant and uncomfortable sharing space with a gender non conforming male? They should be educated and encouraged to accept Peter s new sartorial and lifestyle choices - after all Peter is no threat to them, their privacy or dignity.

It heartens me to see opinion harden up and move away from the "be kind" mantra. We've lost/ are losing so much thanks to that nonsense. "Be factual" is a more helpful phrase.

What part of that do you have difficulty with?

If people are seriously relying on the 'TW is safer in the ladies' schtick, then they're going to have to explain why the men's provision at this business is so fucking dangerous. Because that rather seems like it should be higher priority than allowing some specific males to use the women's provision instead.

Any inappropriate behaviour can be reported after it has happened and the perpetrators can be dealt with.

And I really can't imagine what sort of workplace this could be if transgender people are at risk of physical attacks for simply using the correct sex toilets to 'just have a pee'.

As always people rushing to put the male person's needs and feelings as superior to those of any female and minimising, denying and shaming to get females in line.

That's called sexism. In fact it borders on male supremacism.

The facts are that it is a protected belief that a TW is male, and to perceive a TW as male. Some women will choose to believe they are women and have the privilege to be able to enact this belief by sharing a mixed sex space. Some women will not.

It is not acceptable to block women from using all women's spaces so that a male can use them. It is not acceptable to compel women to use spaces against their choice, consent, comfort, dignity or protected characteristics, because a male person's rights are seen as greater than theirs. It is not acceptable to compel participation in a political belief that you do not yourself hold.

OP, ask where the single sex loos are. It is fair enough to make arrangements for the TW colleague, but this must be so long as others remain accessible and equally accessible for female people who require female only provision. Live and let live. Mutual respect.

Someone beat me to it, I was going to say they need to comply with HASAWA, you should have an accident book and an incident book, this should be recorded in the incident book and sent to management for a soloution.

Obviously the disabled toilet is suitable as a single cubical for both sexes and then you have men's and women's.