Idea to solve the toilet/changing room 'problem'

Only way to make this work would be to designate all mixed sex facilities as sitting down only and equip them with splash back paint for floors and walls. Seems to work OK for deterring back alley urination so why not in this setting.

thesafegroup.co.uk/blog/splash-back-paint-tackles-urinating-in-street

No, because if my employer chooses to go with the unisex "guidance", what then? I still don't want to be near blokes in the toilets, and I don't care that "official" guidance now validates it. All it does it make it even harder for me as a woman to speak up!

Also - why are this experiment starting from a point of mixed facilities when single sex has always been the norm? In doing this you've already handed the advantage to the (tiny minority) "interest group"!

No thanks.

Or you could have the obvious solution that's been around for decades, namely potty parity legislation. 1:2 in favour of women would be a good start to get closer to equal wait times, although some argue it should be 1:3 or 4. Then some unisex cubicles to supplement that.

I have had men refuse to even get something out of my handbag when asked. They would rather just bring me my bag than go looking in my 'female space' handbag. I don't know any men that would want to use female toilets or changing rooms. This makes me question what sort of men would freely do so.

And if this isn't working for all interest groups, tough luck? I don't think it's bending over backwards to listen to everyone and then balance needs (and wants)

I don't class men wanting access to women's facilities as an 'interest group'.
You don't take away single SEX facilities because some men think they are entitled to use them.

I'd run the consultations, don't worry 😉. Id make sure women's voices were listened to

The issue here is that you include men in your definition of women.

Although, now I come to think of it, we now have the likes of Katie Dolatowski and Jessica Yaniv to concern us, don't we?

Not really because the chances of meeting the two people you named are infinitely small. But when toilets become mixed sexed you have every male welcome. And then everyone realises there will be problems - hence the full length doors. But then this discriminates against many groups due to safety and hygiene (see my long post around 15.18).

The only way to make public toilets as safe and accessible to as many people as possible is for them to be single sex and have gaps above and below the doors. If there is enough toilets, then a gender neutral set can be made for those who may feel more comfortable in the opposite sexed toilet - but this ideally should be taken from the men’s allocation because in my limited experience, it seems men are more likely to use them.

"After the likes of Jamie Bulger who wants to be split up from their kids of the opposite sex just so people don't feel embarrassed!"

His name was James and he was murdered 30 years ago.
Parents have managed safe toilet visits in the three decades since then, thank you for your concern.

Although, now I come to think of it, we now have the likes of Katie Dolatowski and Jessica Yaniv to concern us, don't we?

@Grumpybutfunny Please read up on the effects of trauma on the brain. I know girls and women who cannot share toilets with men, because it is too anxiety provoking for them. That includes not being able to queue with men in a small room in front of cubicles. Some of these women and girls also get highly anxious if toilets are top to floor closed cubicles. I also know little girls who get scared if toilets doors are closed at all. They are not old-fashioned or prudish, they are severely traumatised and this trauma is hard-wired into their brains. These facts might be highly inconvenient for activists, but that doesn't make them less true.

Google hidden camera toilet and tell me honestly if you believe that all the women in those images knew and agreed to being filmed. The women who were filmed in toilets right around from where I live certainly didn't.

I find your position ignorant, unkind, exlusionary and naive.

Im a strong woman, how am I any less of a threat than a man, surely it's my strength you are worried about as most men aren't predators.

1. You can't force me to risk pregnancy by raping me. A man can.
2. Over 95% of sexual assaults are perpetrated by men and boys, according to the National Office for Statistics.
3. A strong woman will still be weaker than the great majority of men, due to not undergoing male puberty.

As for your ridiculous assertion that we cannot judge sex by sight and must ask, I remind you that male puberty causes differences to secondary sexual characteristics that are extremely difficult to conceal. I was recently at a social event and noted very quickly that one of the other guests seemed a bit odd-looking and I couldn't quite figure out why. When "she" spoke, my ears told me that the oddness was a result of a very thorough attempt, involving prolonged oestrogen therapy and surgery, to conceal male secondary sexual characteristics and develop female ones instead. Even with all that effort, the mismatch of residual male sexual characteristics attracted my attention and had me wondering what was different about this person. There are excellent evolutionary reason, namely our safety and freedom from forced pregnancy, for women to be able to sex-categorise someone at a glance and to notice when someone doesn't appear to fit into a sex category. Sexual assault survivors often have a heightened ability to do this.

I actually relaxed more after I heard this guest's male voice because I now understood why the guest had the slightly-odd appearance that had attracted my attention in the first place. The psychological phenomenon I experienced is similar to the uncanny valley, in that I found it far easier to accept someone who I knew to be a transsexual male than an almost-but-not-quite-right-looking woman. The uncanny valley is perhaps something that trans people should bear in mind when considering whether to be "out".

It would also be good to stop pretending that trans people are excluded from spaces. They are welcome to use the spaces designated for their sex class.

Perhaps we should stop framing men's desire to infiltrate women's spaces as "needs"
That'd be a good start

Interestingly the place near me that has now got a ‘gender neutral’ toilet due to a campaign that was started by a young non-binary biological woman, is used by men. The non-binary woman used the ‘gender neutral’ toilet for a few weeks but now uses the women’s. Haven’t asked her why but I would like to know.

Strange that isn't it @Tinysoxxx after all @Grumpybutfunny has told us that these toilets work for everyone don't you know so why would they not work for the non-binary woman who campaigned for them? After all how can the non-binary women tell that they are men who are using them, does said non-binary woman know the gender identity of these people? What say you @Grumpybutfunny , where does this leave your argument?

"But how to do you know the person stood next to you is genetically female without asking and believing them? "

The previous social contract was for men to stay out and for the very very few transsexual males to discreetly pop in and out and use a cubicle.

That has been broken by AGPs filming themselves wanking in women's toilets posting it online and calling it euphoria. And not a single one of the Be Kind crew calling it out.

Also, most transwomen don't pass on first glance. And none of them pass on a second glance.

Women said no

"no one is left out" - except the people who can't use mixed sex facilities for whatever reason, whether religious, trauma, or anything else.

I'd much rather have someone XX next to me, however strong. They are unlikely to attack (female socialisation, rates of violent crime in females etc show this), and if so, it's not likely to be rape. Most men aren't predators, but we don't invite them in regardless, because of the small number who are and the inability to tell in advance which is which.

Problems staying with small children is a different issue; family toilets could possibly solve that.

Of course someone who is XY is no better than someone who is XX, or vice versa, but they are different in terms of their sex and their requirements for single sex facilities.

If mixed sex facilities are the answer, why were women curtailed from public life for so long because of the difficulty finding suitable facilities when out? There is a need - privacy, safety, dignity - for single sex facilities, and most women want to keep them. Campaign for extra toilets if you really want mixed sex ones as well. Or family toilets or whatever else you think is needed. But don't do it by taking away needed facilities that others want.

Gender/sex neutral solves all the problems as no one is left out you just use the loo, changing rooms etc like a normal human.

so do single sex facilities. What is your point?

Gender/sex neutral solves all the problems as no one is left out you just use the loo, changing rooms etc like a normal human.

Single sex works as long as it is adhered to, no-one is left out, everyone knows what sex they are, gender identity is irrelevant.

All those talking about pad changes do you really touch toilet locks without using a wet wipe to clean up first!!! That alone makes me more convinced we need sex/gender neutral toilets!

🤨

Wetwipes are fucking atrocious for the environment.

Why are people so unable to see the real issue here??? This is NOT about what individual may or may not use a certain space. The point is that there is a genuine societal need for certain spaces to be separated by sex, and that both sexes should feel secure in their own private spaces, and that society recognises that need. Without that general consensus, sex based rights cease to exist.

But how to do you know the person stood next to you is genetically female without asking and believing them?

Some people would be happy with someone who is genetically female but taking significant amounts of testosterone and potentially with significant strength being next to them but not the one taking estrogen. That to me is discriminatory alone. Im a strong woman, how am I any less of a threat than a man, surely it's my strength you are worried about as most men aren't predators.

All those talking about pad changes do you really touch toilet locks without using a wet wipe to clean up first!!! That alone makes me more convinced we need sex/gender neutral toilets!

At the end of the day we are all human, my husband is no better or worse than me because he is XY vs my XX. I also love the quote from the science museum about dads in the female toilets, a) who doesn't let a kid go first and b) why should it be unique for him to be able to look after his daughter.

After the likes of Jamie Bulger who wants to be split up from their kids of the opposite sex just so people don't feel embarrassed! I would rather grown adults were embarrassed and dads could stay with their kids/wives etc.

Gender/sex neutral solves all the problems as no one is left out you just use the loo, changing rooms etc like a normal human.

Single cubicles are surely enough, they don't even need to be floor to ceiling as a peeping weirdo isn't going to stick their head underneath their going to use a concealed camera in this day and age.

Oh well, that's okay then! If I don't know they're perving on me using a concealed camera, it's presumably fine for us to have facilities that enable their access, is it?

No thank you.

This is why those who want toilets separated by gender instead of sex are transphobic. They are saying that anyone with a gender other than man or woman should be treated as their sex and only the special ones get to be treated as their gender.

@Grumpybutfunny i have no problem with a female identifying as a male using the female toilets. I do object to males using the female toilets. What’s your point?

Safety is a thing. As are privacy and dignity. I don't want to wash my hands next to my male colleagues after a shit or pad change even if I'll happily have dinner with them.