To wonder why an MP is lying about womens bathrooms?

Why the hell has this thread been moved from AIBU?

Perhaps it didn't go as well for OP in AIBU as they had hoped.

@Franca123, looks that way.

Yes. The very first thing an extreme activist has to do is to dehumanise the women who are disagreeing in some way.

That way the monstering and demonising can start.

I always assumed they'd want to remove religion as protected characteristic? Never seen them say it out loud but how else does their agenda work? You must necessarily remove protections for religious people. I assume that's what the Labour Party want. Am I wrong in this reasoning?

The only place I have ever heard sweatpants referenced.

And to add, 'gender neutral' is a nonsense. Mixed sex is the correct term.

Got accused once on here of wearing 'sweat pants' and a pony tail. Could not work that one out for the life of me.

I'm a 'Tory' now because I disagree with the OP's extrene agenda. Actually, I was a very active Lib Dem for a couple of decades before they decided that women's rights weren't allowed to be spoken about. But so what if I were a Tory? Are Tories not allowed opinions in this brave new world you're building?

When a woman doesn't want to use gender neutral toilets at the Barbican and is faced with a choice of:

(a) using any of the five womens toilets available;

@TeaKlaxon how can she? The usher wouldn't give her directions.

There's also the fact that they may realise that the uniformed may see their nonsense and realise what all this gender ideology is really opening up.

Sorry FWR regulars.... I started a commentary this morning on all the tactics being used on this thread because it was really becoming apparent to me and others how deeply prejudiced the OP was.

Another one relegated to the naughty corner.

Oh.... another tactic used by activists is to get threads moved out of AIBU to the Sex and Gender section of MN.

Because they mistakenly believe that by getting it moved, they can then state that no one outside of the 'echo chamber' (watch that phrase will be coming very soon) cares about the topic. I mean OP has already tried this with the swivels and squirrelling this morning in attempting to apply guilt - 'why are you not fighting for x, or supporting x, or whatever I want to try to shame you for not doing when the reality is that many of you will be already doing it but I want to feel superior'.

They simply hate the fact that the majority of people do not want single sex toilets to change to mixed sex for a very long list of reasons that are all valid. And that the majority of people actively support having some mixed sexed toilets for those who wish to use them but as an additional option.

Which the Barbican may or may not have provided.... Good if they have I think we can agree if they really have retained single sex spaces it is a good thing.

But that this NOT the point. The point is that a woman asked for the directions to those single sex provisions and was laughed at.

That was what the tweet was about regardless of OP's attempt to make it about something else.

Another one relegated to the naughty corner.

Derogate
"theactoftalkingabout ortreatingsomeone in a way thatshowsyou do notrespecthim, her, or it"

It's also listed as a synonym for denigrate.
I think it was fine to use it there, Helleofabore.

Why the hell has this thread been moved from AIBU?

I thought this was in AIBU - has it been moved or am more sleep deprived than I thought.

I think you should learn what derogation means.

I suspect you meant denigration?

Yep. I have noticed that you have some grammatical errors in your posts too OP, amongst the glaring inconsistencies and sparpling tactics.

But thanks for superciliously and pettily pointing out two of mine over the past couple of day.

If you think calling a crank a crank is equivalent to calling someone a traitor then crack on. I disagree.

Who on this thread has called you a traitor? Please post the post so we can look at it.

Because your credibility is very low and has been since the first post.

They (the sensible and sane person) does not typically go to complain to their MP (or indeed, an MP 150 miles away from the establishment).

I thought austerity and cuts to council budgets exacerbated by covid issue has meant were increasingly losing publicly assesible toilets.

Add in this mixed sex loo business and I can see that for many members of the population - especially with aging population - it's an increasing issue tha's adversly affecting people's lives.

The constituency MP would be the correct person to raise issues with - especially if its a wider issue than local area.

Plus last thing our NHS needs is increase in UTI due to loss of toilet facilities.

I personally don't want to walk past urinals - can't see any females in my family being comfortable doing that and can't really see men in my family being comfortable having unkonw wemen and young kids do that when tehy used them - in fact teen DS wouldn't he can be awakward enough in public toilets anyway.

If I was at a venue asking for women loos - I'd want directions not a debate. I suspect the person writing to MP was more caught out because it was a sepecial trip involving 150 mile travel and they were unaware in advance of the mixed sex toileting arrangements at the venue.

I don't find this odd at all - though use of "bathrooms" for public toilets I do find bizzare.

I don't know this MP but I have been keping an eye on shadow cabinet and the current government statements - how the shadow cabinet aren't doing better and looking more electable is beyond me.