A worrying thought about the SC judgment

The Scottish Government wasn't concerned for your friend as they were intent on taking their legally held rights away whilst giving more to the men/tw. How does that make you and your friend feel? Surely that should be more worrying in the grand scheme of things.

@CorvusPurpureus Employee toilets have to be single sex

@Tiredalwaystired The transman issue was specifically covered. They can use the men's if they like.

Everyone is so concerned about the trans ppl they don’t consider disabled women and girls who now have guaranteed female only carers. Thank god as they’re the most vulnerable to sexual assault and abuse.

My friend is a trans man with a full beard. Had top half surgery but not bottom (yet) I really really worry for him now. Everyone is so concerned about the trans women they dont even stop to think about trans men.

I just hope he is welcomed in the ladies. 😢

(edit for typo)

I think that depends on the circumstances, but happy to be corrected.

So: hospitals, schools, work places - have a captive audience, must provide single sex toilets.

Entertainment venues - eg a friend of mine has run a goth club night in a function room above a pub for two decades. Capacity maybe 150, & people have always used opposite sex toilets to check eyeliner in the mirrors in the ladies, or jump the queue in the gents. She also has quite a few trans regulars. Her understanding is that she just needs to clarify that both toilets are open to everyone, & if you buy a ticket to attend you're happy with that, & she's good to carry on.

(I agree with her fwiw - no one HAS to attend her club night, & tbh I'd be pretty chilled using mixed sex toilets there - it's a fabulous night & very friendly.)

It might get interesting re privately hosted events if the venue decides its toilets are now single sex, I suppose - can a promoter book the space & designate provision as they wish?

However, the big win is that orgs now CAN do single sex provision!

I don't think anyone was ever out to stop a few middle aged gents in corsets from doing their lippy in the good mirrors in the Ladies in between dancing to 'Temple of Love', IF & ONLY IF that's the deal at a private ticketed event, that's the organiser's view of what will keep their demographic happy, & it's clearly stated when you buy a ticket to attend.

On the flipside, presumably a lesbian group could now book the exact same space for a women (SC definition) only speed dating event. & refuse entry to any males whatsoever.

It seems to me that this is win win sensible legislation for EVERYONE. About bloody time.

I was thinking it was interesting as it took me to it and it says page not found so I wondered if the government are looking at it! It appears to work again now.

HELLO GOVERNMENT IF YOU ARE WATCHING. Me again! Please do a proper equality and impact assessment for people with diabetes, epilepsy, heart conditions, neurological conditions that need safe toilets and make sure you detail safety gaps in the single sex specifications! Don’t rely on a private company who recommended enclosed designs (in your consultation for long term health conditions) because American toilet designers say they are supported by many transactivists. Look at the needs of people with long term health conditions.

Also if you say you can use the universal spec for single sex toilets add the gap in. The thousands of people having heart attacks and strokes each year will understand the need to be noticeable if collapsed. It’s nonsense to have defibrillators but you can’t see who needs them in the place people go to when they feel ill.

Finally remember if you are going to specify universal toilets can be opened from the outside, be aware of the problems that leads to when people let themselves in! The gap will at least give a women a bit of notice to grab her mobile phone. And may even prevent a lot of assaults happening in the first place in the otherwise unwitnessable privacy of a cubicle.

Document T only needs a few tweaks to save lives and prevent lots of criminal stuff happening inside cubicles.

The ones I know do. Also male changing rooms. Both look very much like men and would definitely startle people in a women's toilet.

I need to re-learn Mumsnet! I used to be able to do links and faces and everything, but thrdn had some time away, ad now I'm tech-useless!

(Ooh, faces in square brackets still work! I always loved the face...)

Yeah, I know a couple of Trans men who tend to use the men's toilets.

Generally men don't really care that much, we're not at risk from them in the same way women are from males in the female toilets.

Oh @RiotAndAlarum your link doesn’t work. That’s interesting!

That link is pre General Election.
What did the new Government do about bringing the consultation into law ?

Sorry - am multitasking yes that’s the consultation bit.

This is the document. I have problems with it as it doesn’t mention door gaps but the HSE tell me the single sex designs C and D can have door gaps. Universal ones say fully enclosed as privacy is more important (than safety) - brackets mine!
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/toilet-accommodation-approved-document-t

FWIW the SC ruling said that the GRC and any paperwork where the sex marker has been changed so it no longer matches the birth sex do not count when it comes to determining sex for single sex spaces. It's not clear what a GRC is for now, legally anyway.

Your sex, confirmed at birth by a genital inspection, remains unchanged.

A GRC does not give you the legal rights of the opposite sex because you remain in your birth sex class.

Is Document T this one (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/toilet-provision-in-buildings-other-than-dwellings-technical-consultation/outcome/toilet-provision-in-buildings-other-than-dwellings)?

My understanding was that the judgment only affects the relevance of GRCs in the context of the definition of sex in the EA.

Thanks, I think I'm beginning to get it!

If you can get the link to work, so people can share it properly, I'd be grateful!

However, if the SC judgment only gives us a sex-based definition of woman for the purposes of the EA is it still possible for transwomen with a GRC to claim to be women for the purposes of whatever the toilet legislation is?

NO
THat is the whole point.
GRCs are effectively loo roll now

But surely these ‘trans’ people can use the toilets for their biological sex?

i thought this was the point of the ruling, to define what a man or woman actually is?

Thanks @WarriorN , this was the missing part of my thinking, I was not aware of that obligation.

However, if the SC judgment only gives us a sex-based definition of woman for the purposes of the EA is it still possible for transwomen with a GRC to claim to be women for the purposes of whatever the toilet legislation is?

Then it's a mixed sex toilet, surely, and therefore anyone can use either toilet, or there is discrimination on the PC of sex.

You cannot let some men in the toilet and not others.

Gender reassignment isn't a relevant characteristic, unless you refuse to let any people with that PC into the toilet correct for their sex because of their gender reassignment, then it would be discrimination based on that characteristic.

That's discriminatory on the grounds of sex because a subset of males are allowed to access the women's toilets, but other males are not.

unless they’re fully contained cubicles with wash basins, in which case they’d be labelled unisex.

The organisation is not providing single sex toilets for women in that situation which they have always been legally required to do.

@CherryFlan
Male toilets, female toilets, wheelchair toilets
nothing else needed