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

It looks like there is a tactic being used on this and other threads, which is called - you couldn't make it up, and I didn't😄'Flooding the zone'.

The tactic is to overwhelm with information and questions and responses and scenarios so the original issue is...er, submerged - in irrelevancies.

Simple questions like 'Are toilets still allowed to be cleaned by members of the opposite sex?' which are answerable, and quickly answered, morph into a long long succession of flimsy whataboutery.

I think it's related to the campaign to paint the Supreme Court ruling as having confused rather than clarified the law. Same sort of tactic - like chaff to confuse radar.

I suppose the wisest thing would be to recognise the tactic and stop indulging it with replies, but sometimes you just can't help yourself, can you, and before you know it, it's Page 16. Or possibly 17 by the time I finish this.🙄

It looks like there is a tactic being used on this and other threads, which is called - you couldn't make it up, and I didn't😄'Flooding the zone'.

The tactic is to overwhelm with information and questions and responses and scenarios so the original issue is...er, submerged - in irrelevancies.

Simple questions like 'Are toilets still allowed to be cleaned by members of the opposite sex?' which are answerable, and quickly answered, morph into a long long succession of flimsy whataboutery.

I think it's related to the campaign to paint the Supreme Court ruling as having confused rather than clarified the law. Same sort of tactic - like chaff to confuse radar.

I suppose the wisest thing would be to recognise the tactic and stop indulging it with replies, but sometimes you just can't help yourself, can you, and before you know it, it's Page 16. Or possibly 17 by the time I finish this.🙄

It seems like they are parroting an experience they've never had, to me

That is very scary keeptoiletssafe.

And I agree that some posters don't seem to be able to understand what people refer to when they talk about using the female toilets as a place of safety. How that works etc. It seems disingenuous to me.

This thread seems full of deliberate misrepresentation of the reality of toilet cleaners. For example, the nightclub scenario. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a club (or other nighttime venue for that matter) have male cleaners who come in during opening hours. Some have attendants, generally female for female toilets. Mostly cleaning is done after hours. Places that have cleaners that go in tend to be big, heavy traffic facilities. Shopping centres, airports, service stations. I’ve frequently seen signs placed in the doorway when male cleaners are present. Sometimes when there are multiple toilets they close for cleaning. I’m pretty sure this happens at Heathrow.
All of this is done because it is acknowledged that many women will be uncomfortable with a man in that space. Even one who is working. Something the “What about this then” posters seem to conveniently overlook. Although let’s face it, the whole thread is an ill thought out attempt at distraction.

Are you a woman? I ask because that doesn’t seem a likely scenario.

Firstly, if she is being harassed to the point of running, a woman is more likely to go to someone like a shop assistant and start talking to them. People would notice a woman being chased by a man. So I presuming in this fictitious scenario, there is no one else about. In this case I think she’d be delighted to see the cleaner, especially if he were male. She wouldn’t be shocked to see him as she would have been able to hear him and his cleaning materials and see his shoes as there’s a floor to door gap in the single sex loos as she would absolutely used the gap to look out before leaving the cubicle. She’d probably say, can you see if there’s a bloke outside who is waiting round looking like…

Theres not a magic force field round the entrance to the ladies so the last thing you do is block yourself into a room where you are alone with someone chasing you so much you are running.

Constrast this with a real story: I have been in the ladies where a bloke came in after me and waited. That was scary because we were on our own in that block of loos. This was pre mobile phones. I knew he was there and it was a man by the sound of his shoes walking in softly, being able to tell from the way he walked and seeing his shoes from the floor to door gap. He was waiting by my door. I froze and didn’t do anything for what seemed like ages. When I heard the outer ladies door open, he ran out and another pair of ladies shoes I could see and hear came in. I came out and we had a few words about what happened. She said he just rushed out, she didn’t get a good look at him, peered round the door to look under all the cubicles and decided it was safe to come in as she could only see my feet. I didn’t report it because this is the kind of thing woman put up with. This is another reason why single sex toilets with door gaps matter.

If you saw statistics on how many sexual assaults there are in public toilets, you would realise why women don’t think toilets are a place of great safety.

Bizarrely not thought about it too much. Certainly doesn’t feature in the top 10 frightening moments of my life. Man with bloodied knife running towards me is much higher and again I froze. So much for running! He ran straight past though, trying to find and kill his wife.

The top scariest moments always involve children - other people’s and mine.
I reckon most parent’s do.

That's awful. Very frightening

This is the cognitive dissonance. If it was ALL men, then male cleaners wouldn’t be allowed either.

All the points about ‘well, it’s about intent!’ are grasping at straws. If it was just about intent then trans women just wanting to pee - the truth you openly mock- would be fine.

Few people have been able to answer my question:

An argument has been made on here for a very long time that the reason trans women aren’t allowed in female toilets is because in a scenario where a woman:

1. Is trying to escape a male harasser outside
2. Comes out of a cubicle with period blood on her hands
3. Comes out of a cubicle in a state of partial undress

Explain to me why that WOULDN’T apply to male cleaners?

Some of you have argued about informed consent, but how does that work for the first point where women’s bathrooms operate an emergency refuge (again, a common argument used on here)?

And even then, as we’ve established, the sign will almost always say ‘please be aware male cleaners sometimes clean this toilet’. I’ve actually never seen a sign which points out a male cleaner present in that moment, when there has been one inside.

So by the above logic, women who are uncomfortable with male cleaners would then need to just simply not use that toilet. Again, that goes against all the arguments parroted on here.

I understand that currently men CAN legally clean women’s toilets as they are a service provider and user, but the it’s a matter of if they SHOULD. My point is that if you were consistent and wanted to prove you weren’t just targeting trans people, you would be rallying against this too.

If your logic were consistent, you’d be fighting for NO men or trans women, no matter who they are or what they are doing, in women’s spaces. But you won’t, because male cleaners just don’t make you as angry because you all have a deep bias against trans people.

I’ve also never seen a ‘male’ presenting trans woman in the loo but I’ve seen plenty of male cleaners. One genuinely feels more like a real world issue.

Do you mean to shout to get your views across? Whatever, you and several others are missing the point that many toilets do not put the sign out for male operatives purely on a contemporaneous basis but rely on a permanent sign. As a result, women are left never knowing when a man might pop up. As many have said, dealing with period blood, leaking boobs after breast feeding, adjusting/changing clothing are all reasons this is not acceptable to many of us. Even when forewarned we cant necessarily wait for a male cleaner to leave if we are flooding, leaking or have needs related to disability. Our views count as much as those of you who are not bothered.

@Tiredofwhataboutery

I think maintaining single sex spaces is about far more than toilets

Agree, but toilets is what this thread is about.

There will be exceptions made for practicality like cleaners and small children. These are for the service users benefit as small children need supervision and women like clean toilets.

I’ll put it very simply: a woman is being harassed by a man and runs into a woman’s bathroom for safety. She leaves the cubicle, and sees a male cleaners. She is shocked, scared and thought this was a women’s space- she didn’t have time to see the sign on the door. She also has no idea of the intent of the male cleaner.

How is that okay with you all? Don’t you see how that’s not in line with ANY of the arguments you peddle on here?

I’m not looking for anyone to blame. It’s just very frustrating that none of you are admitting that these are double standards.

Are you a woman? I ask because that doesn’t seem a likely scenario.

Firstly, if she is being harassed to the point of running, a woman is more likely to go to someone like a shop assistant and start talking to them. People would notice a woman being chased by a man. So I presuming in this fictitious scenario, there is no one else about. In this case I think she’d be delighted to see the cleaner, especially if he were male. She wouldn’t be shocked to see him as she would have been able to hear him and his cleaning materials and see his shoes as there’s a floor to door gap in the single sex loos as she would absolutely used the gap to look out before leaving the cubicle. She’d probably say, can you see if there’s a bloke outside who is waiting round looking like…

Theres not a magic force field round the entrance to the ladies so the last thing you do is block yourself into a room where you are alone with someone chasing you so much you are running.

Constrast this with a real story: I have been in the ladies where a bloke came in after me and waited. That was scary because we were on our own in that block of loos. This was pre mobile phones. I knew he was there and it was a man by the sound of his shoes walking in softly, being able to tell from the way he walked and seeing his shoes from the floor to door gap. He was waiting by my door. I froze and didn’t do anything for what seemed like ages. When I heard the outer ladies door open, he ran out and another pair of ladies shoes I could see and hear came in. I came out and we had a few words about what happened. She said he just rushed out, she didn’t get a good look at him, peered round the door to look under all the cubicles and decided it was safe to come in as she could only see my feet. I didn’t report it because this is the kind of thing woman put up with. This is another reason why single sex toilets with door gaps matter.

If you saw statistics on how many sexual assaults there are in public toilets, you would realise why women don’t think toilets are a place of great safety.

@Tiredofwhataboutery

I think maintaining single sex spaces is about far more than toilets

Agree, but toilets is what this thread is about.

There will be exceptions made for practicality like cleaners and small children. These are for the service users benefit as small children need supervision and women like clean toilets.

I’ll put it very simply: a woman is being harassed by a man and runs into a woman’s bathroom for safety. She leaves the cubicle, and sees a male cleaners. She is shocked, scared and thought this was a women’s space- she didn’t have time to see the sign on the door. She also has no idea of the intent of the male cleaner.

How is that okay with you all? Don’t you see how that’s not in line with ANY of the arguments you peddle on here?

I’m not looking for anyone to blame. It’s just very frustrating that none of you are admitting that these are double standards.

The obvious solution is that the toilets could be temporarily closed if the cleaner is of the opposite sex (I’ve seen this happen a few times lately).

Or a mobile sign is used, stating that the cleaner is of the opposite sex, and then the service user can decide for themselves.

@Tiredofwhataboutery

I think maintaining single sex spaces is about far more than toilets

Agree, but toilets is what this thread is about.

There will be exceptions made for practicality like cleaners and small children. These are for the service users benefit as small children need supervision and women like clean toilets.

I’ll put it very simply: a woman is being harassed by a man and runs into a woman’s bathroom for safety. She leaves the cubicle, and sees a male cleaners. She is shocked, scared and thought this was a women’s space- she didn’t have time to see the sign on the door. She also has no idea of the intent of the male cleaner.

How is that okay with you all? Don’t you see how that’s not in line with ANY of the arguments you peddle on here?

I’m not looking for anyone to blame. It’s just very frustrating that none of you are admitting that these are double standards.

I have no idea how, but you are ALWAYS on here whenever I come on, and you always get a kick out of responding to my points without saying anything of value. You seem to enjoy mocking my points rather than responding to them. I don’t enjoy engaging with you because it’s never in good faith so I won’t again, but I just want to let you know that I see you always replying to me.