Are toilets still allowed to be cleaned by members of the opposite sex?

Nope. Did I say they were?

Are male cleaners a recognised minority group? 🤔 Asking for a friend...

Oh! Would that apply? Even if they’re a trans woman? Would they not have to make ‘trans cleaner’ signs? I dunno, I’d just find myself a bit confused if I waltzed in to the terror zone, sorry, toilets, to see someone cleaning who could be more feminine looking than me. Particularly if I were to expect some kind of balding janitoresque male. But then again, I guess I wouldn’t have time to even have those concerns as I shouldn’t even be going in there with a sign like that up there. For my protection. I’d only be asking for assault if I did.

You forgot men claiming to be transmen

I think you should wait for a really terrible non-gotcha, the children in toilets one is my favourite, and unanimously pretend like everyone is all stumped. Then perhaps they can go off and run it as a good argument and see how it goes down.

On that note, the topless protests are stunning and brave and I’ve never been more moved. Just a few more and I’ll give in and agree to all the demands.

Yeah, generally, the way it goes is - media gets public to hate on and attack all minorities. Once we’ve covered one, we go for the next. America is a little more advanced than us with this, but we’re not far behind in this strange little nation.

The sign stating 'male cleaner' will have the required result. What would be the difference?

Oh that question is, like, sooooo Page 10!

Is there a rota of you, and as soon as the thread starts to lapse into sense, which it already did on Page 1, there's an alert on your phone that says 'Your turn to say something silly on the toilet-cleaning thread - anything will do, even something that has been answered several times already - just get in there and flood the zone with what ifs'
Apologies if you were being sarcastic, deadpantrashcan, and your post was a parody - it's so hard to tell!

Well surely, if the argument is that trans people who use female toilets are in there hoping to abuse women, trans cleaners should also be banned from being able to enter, as they would also have the same agenda. In fact, they may have even got the cleaning job as an opportunity to spend even more time in toilets. Watch out.

Don't forget masculine looking straight women, masculine looking gay women, flat chested women, transmen who were pretty much ignored up to now

I'm sure I'll remember some more

Another bingo card is required

Also women with PCOS.

So what?

Is this the latest whataboutary now? We’ve had what about Black women, what about 8 year old boys, and now, what about male cleaners.

What if it’s a trans cleaner?

Oh good lord, I personally and only speaking for myself of course couldn't care less if a trans woman uses the toilets but this thread is beyond ridiculous. Got a headache just from reading it!

It is not a false scenario. I am sure it does happen and probably mostly in pubs and clubs where there will not be male cleaner in attendance at the time.

Your comparison of a woman entering a toilet to avoid a male person to one of encountering a male cleaner signed as being in that toilet is the falsity.

The reason I chose that example is because it’s one which has been used on here many, many times to explain why trans women shouldn’t be allowed in female toilets. I remember coming on this forum 5 years ago and people were even saying it then.

No.

Nobody has ever said they seek saftey in public toilets to avoid men actually chasing after them.

Women use toilets to avoid men, like in night clubs.

Its very different.

That's funny, I was just thinking of a 'what if humanoid aliens came to earth and their men looked like women....' as a parody of the silly what ifs we've had on this, and other, threads.
And no, I don't have any homework to do, so there nah!😄

The reason I chose that example is because it’s one which has been used on here many, many times to explain why trans women shouldn’t be allowed in female toilets. I remember coming on this forum 5 years ago and people were even saying it then.

Now suddenly we’re not talking about trans women, the scenario ‘never happens’.

If it’s a false scenario, it’s not me that’s made it up!

Indeed. It's also a consequence of these men never having heard to word NO before. So the nonsense idea that women taking male toddlers into changing rooms or male cleaners in women's toilets means that they're entitled to follw women in there.
Their lack of ability to comply with the law or respect women's rights to safety and privacy says something very grim about how they cope alongside others in a democratic society.

I look at these types of threads as one way that others can think though the false arguments being raised. When you see the whataboutery and fuckwittery it is sometimes helpful to see different approaches in the answering and rejecting it to better establish your thoughts.

See how the points land so to speak.

It's a bit like when DS went through the 'would you rather' phase it reaches the point where I say enough it's impossible to have legs instead of ears or an arm instead of my nose so I don't have to choose.

But what if humanoid aliens come to earth and their men look like women and their women look like men what would happen then? Arrggghhhh shut up, don't you have some homework to do?!

I expect there will continue to be a stream of gotchas, getting ever more fanciful, until they have to accept the law.

Yep, totally agree. As far as gotchas go, I've seen some real corkers on here and other social media. It's almost funny. Until you realise there really and truly are people who think things like a 6 year old boy is a threat in a women's toilet.

“What about this then? Betcha haven’t thought about that have ya? Eh? Eh?!”

I think it just shows that one side of the debate/law has thought about it very deeply, considered it carefully, and in the case of the SC, written a thorough rationale.

And the other side hasn’t thought about it much at all beyond feelz. I expect there will continue to be a stream of gotchas, getting ever more fanciful, until they have to accept the law.

I think it's related to the campaign to paint the Supreme Court ruling as having confused rather than clarified the law.

Yes, I think you're right @MarieDeGournay. ⬆This coupled with a complete inability to apply even a modicum of common sense to a situation. The need for every tiniest, minutest aspect to be spelled out. The tedious reluctance to acknowledge the meaning of words in context. It is painful.