Wetherspoons on the SC Ruling

Of course, if companies rush to spend money on facilities for this ruling, it's merely another kick in the teeth for the disabled who have been told for years that it's "unreasonable" to facilitate access to some buildings. But as we all know, nobody cares, so that's alright.

Companies have been virtue signalling for a while and it takes a bit of time for the tanker to change course. So they still leap before thinking.

The Supreme Court ruling will have an impact though, thankfully.

I wonder if orgs like this (who have a high student customer base) could call toilets 'Queens' and 'Lads' or something to just indicate that those facilities have e.g. sanitary disposal / urinals but don't specify that they are single-sex?

However many times you circle round this issue, it always comes back to the fact that letting people falsify their legal documents is stupid.

Can confirm I’m not a troll 😂 I’ll make sure to send you a photo of the next bloody tampon in find on the floor of a public toilet.

what an odd thing to think I’ve made up.

you having never experienced a messy toilet doesn’t mean no one else has.

In much the same way I’ve never felt threatened by a trans woman, but I’m not going to suggest that other people haven’t….

Is that funny?

I’m glad you’ve had perfect public loo experiences, but that has no effect on mine 🤷

I wonder how they would approach training staff to enforce this. If a woman complains that there’s a bloke in the toilets, I would think it’s quite likely that the bloke would produce a passport or drivers license that he’s had changed. I think it would be quite hard for the member of staff to say ‘ it doesn’t matter what the passport says you’re clearly a bloke, so use the gents’.

Good point- but it only makes sense until they're sued/fined.... actually what is the penalty for breaking the law on this?!

If this is true, then it makes sense as they know who their core customers are.

• Men who wouldn't want transwomen in their toilets.

• Students

Yes- probably most dangerous in an establishment serving cheap booze with nowhere to burn it off dancing!

Thing is - I don't understand why so many companies have rushed into making statements about this.

All they really need to say at this point is something along the lines of: "Thank you for your enquiry. We are taking time to consider the impact of the Supreme Court ruling on all our customers. Further announcements will follow in due course."

They have a wide range of beers at very reasonable prices, and people like that. I can pay £3 for a British beer that I’ll happily give a go at the Spoons, or £6 for an insipid Eurolager at another pub.

I quite like the fact there’s no chance of anything being nicked that’s on the floor.

I sincerely hope the regulations take into account that floor to ceiling enclosed cubicles are dangerous.

I understand it's to provide as much privacy as possible, but that shouldn't be at the expense of safety.

Why support Tim Martin though? Other pubs are in restored buildings! Does it have to be the cheapest? I’d just say no: we don’t go there.

As if I needed another reason to hate Wetherspoons.

If they’re mixed sex and not single sex toilets, then they have to adhere to certain stipulations like floor to ceiling walls etc. it’s unlikely that their current toilets are set up that way so they wouldn’t be able to just change the sign and call it a day.

what if they just labeled toilets as toilets and not put any genders on them ? would that be legal

I think Wetherspoons did allow dogs at one time, but because some, probably a minority, of customers were letting their dogs pee and crap inside on the carpets (which I believe are bespoke to each establishment) they banned them. Unfortunately they couldn't tell the good dog owners from the bad ones. It's a strange parallel to recent events.

The Bananarama defence 🤣 Thank god for Naomi Cunningham!

I am most disappointed in Spoonies.

I agree. There are Wetherspoon's pubs in some lovely old buildings. They are also very affordable places to meet to have a meal. The only thing I have got against them is that they do not allow dogs, even in the beer gardens, which is quite unusual these days.

I know that some people prefer venues that are "dog free" and some people are allergic. Most pubs the size of a typical Wetherspoon's that are "dog friendly" do segregate "dog free" and "dog friendly" areas. Wetherspoon is oddly out of step on this.

Anyway, access to single-sex toilets is the main priority. If they don't get that sorted out then whether or not they are "dog friendly" is irrelevant.

They either operate as mixed sex /gender neutral or single sex. Whatever is on the door is who should be using the facility. If the door indicates women or female then TW should not be allowed.

TBF, Spoons is often good at repurposing historic buildings and giving them a new lease of life. My local one is a Grade II listed building.