To wonder why an MP is lying about womens bathrooms?

Ah I see. I did think it was off she said the quiet part loud.

Because it is fact that statically most trans women have a penis and no intention of losing it.

No, i mean she is being sarcastic! I crossposted with you.

Poor Alison!

Can we all just agree that women's loo remain at the same or more number than any alternative. And that women's loos never contain a penis unless it's attached to a child under a certain age? Is that not a good system? Then you can crack on with gender woo woo toilets as much as you like but leave the woman's toilet alone ffs. How hard is this to understand?

Ah I see, it's not often someone says something so batshit I assume it's sarcasm.

Alison knows that women don't have penises. But she also knows that this is no longer a universally accepted fact.

@Pluvia ah no that is revolting and is going to haunt me. Household of boys.

Ops posts make a lot more sense when you understand the whole point is to knock down women's boundaries so men can benefit.

Why they're motivated to do this is anyone's guess.

Link!

www.qssupplies.co.uk/splashback-study

Read this and try no to gag. And in the bathroom, always keep your toothbrush and towels at least a metre away from a loo if men use it.

Women don't have penises. Biology not your strong point, @AlisonDonut?

Why would a woman actually WANT gender neutral toilets?
Given a choice between a women’s toilet and a gender (sex?) neutral one why would any woman not choose the women’s?
They have to remove that choice so they can claim women happily use them

If they've got urinals, they're not gender neutral because they're not suitable for women.

They are counted as being suitable for women, as some women have penises.

See how it works in practice?

The point is there will be places in the building where it takes a bit more effort to find out where the toilet you need is

If it takes more effort to find a women's toilet than a men's one, starting from wherever most people start from when looking for a toilet, then I think the person quoted in the tweet had a valid point.

From the photo posted up-thread, it does look like what used to be a women's toilet in a set of three has gone, I don't agree that a woman's toilet elsewhere makes that a non-issue.

Turning three toilets into four not being practical, the inequality problem can be resolved by making the men's gender-neutral as well.

The toilets in a building I work in have gone gender-neutral, the interior now consists entirely of a set of cubicles with a wash-basin in each.

In the interest of maximising through-put, maybe the Barbican can have a closed off urinals area and cubicles for everyone. This would leave women better off in the sense that they would have more cubicles than before. (99% of men only use urinals, so cubicles in male toilets have much less demand than cubicles in female, assuming equal space is given to men's and women's toilets, as is the case in most buildings.)

The Old Vic ran a campaign last year promising to add more toilets for women. However, it has instead scrapped all gendered toilets for 'cubicles or urinals'. Under the system, women would use 24 cubicle toilets, that are shared with men. However, men could use the cubicles or the 18 other urinal toilets at the theatre.

That was outrageous.

There's also a bit of a deliberate gaslighting technique going on here. There have been a few reports like this now, and there is a pattern.

Woman asks where female toilets are.

Usher refuses to tell her in some way, e.g. rude laughter, vague responses, or deliberately misunderstanding the question and directing her to the mixed-sex repeatedly. It's like they're trying to force women to try the mixed sex toilets, possibly with the expectation that women will use the mixed sex toilets out of desperation and then will decide that mixed-sex toilets are fine really. Like many other issues in this fight, there is a very nasty, easily identifiable dynamic going on here. A woman's no is seen as the start of a negotiation process.

Woman believes the member of staff who is implying that there are no women's toilets at all. Why wouldn't you believe staff on a matter like that?

If the woman complains afterwards about the lack of female-only provision to the press, social media or anywhere else, then the theatre/business and/or their flying monkeys state that the building does have single-sex toilets, and then try to imply that the woman is mad/deliberately lying.

It is a cynical and contemptible way for the theatres to behave and they don't deserve customers.

I wonder, franca if they are also the people who find defining sex based having the body type formed around a particular reproductive function degrading (whether that body is successfully functioning in that capacity or not, for whatever reason). Like Angela Raynor just said was degrading on TV this morning.

That would make defining females by the one thing that is the same through time and the globe degrading. But it is not degrading that those people, females, have to walk past males using the urinal to access a cublicle. Or degrading to the males as you rightly pointed out.

Indeed. There seems to be a vocal minority who thinks that any kind of safety or privacy whilst you shit and piss is derisory. They seem determined that we should have similar levels of degradation to them. Bizarre.

Yes, I've been astounded at the poor literacy/reasoning displayed on this thread.

I'm not sure they intended it, but every mocking, deliberately obtuse post has made me doubt the existence of the letter less. I can easily envisage previous posters treating a customer in their workplace with similar contempt by refusing to answer her question.

The OP is also fine to give away the dignity and privacy of men when they're using the urinal. I would guess that most men don't want women around when they use the urinal. Or maybe I just know a particularly pleasant group of men. I'd hazard a guess that the OP is quite a unique individual as a woman wanting to see strange men piss.

I must say that front-of-house theatre staff (in London certainly) tend to be young, liberal, arts graduates and are likely to be pretty frosty towards those with gender-critical views.

So, do you think then, that it could be true the account from the woman complaining to the MP.

This is the tweet for us to work out what was said, because I think we have established that OP seems to have fallen in the same trap as many on twitter and added their own political agenda to an unknown woman complaining to her MP.

I received this message today: “I was at the Barbican yesterday where there were male toilets, disabled toilets, and gender neutral toilets. I asked where were the female toilets as I am not gender neutral I am a woman and they laughed in my face. Women are being erased.”

Considering downwiththatsortof also said ’ I was in the Barbican a few weeks ago and asked the exact same question to an usher sitting nearby and got a very confused/ vague response. ’ which was minimised by OP. And again, we got told what toilets there were.

This thread was based on the tweet.

It cannot be said often enough it seems, because we still have a poster declaring the Barbican ‘answered’ but that statement was a PR blurb about how many toilets. Not that there is an issue with either their staff’s knowledge, their attitude or their understanding that there are many women who do not want to use gender neutral toilets and their reasons are valid and important to consider. A poster on page 17 declared it Literally a non issue. yet seems to have also not read the tweet either. Or read it through the political lens that the OP has. (Which is fine, but FFS at least read the tweet and actually respond to those words and not join in the ad hom attack on the MP. Or the completely anonymous woman complaining)

Plus there is plenty of confusion as to just what is a gender neutral toilet anyway as can be seen also on this thread.

It seems OP is very happy to give away women’s rights of privacy and dignity, to not have to walk past people using urinals, because they, the OP, are fine with it. That kind of ‘I’m alright Jack’ attitude that tries to force other women to accept situations they don’t want because the OP reckons it is fine in their view.

If what you say is true, then that seems to me that the Barbican needs to hire ushers who can professionally do their job, and at the same time the Barbican needs to own up that their staff may be lacking in knowledge or professionalism.

Funny that

There seems to be a very sinister agenda going on with all of this. Are women being forced into second class status as citizens? Forced to stay at home ? It certainly feels like it. Even becoming pointless to compete in sport now.

Must ask dh if football and rugby stadiums have gone gender neutral. I’m imagining not.