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

WhatNextCatsAsDoctors

do you understand now?

If there's a sign that says there's a male cleaner in there, a woman can avoid the space altogether.

If there's a sign that says there might be one in there, but we don't know when, she can avoid the space altogether.

But since you raise the issue, maybe sanitary companies could put signs in toilets that say this toilet is only ever cleaned by women.

I'd quite like to see it, to be honest.

Very reassuring to know that some companies completely understand the trauma that some men inflict on women.

edited to add that the reason companies use these signs is precisely to warn women. Precisely to warn women who might be troubled.

Unlike you, they realise it's not a game

'I think you should inspect'
Aye OK.
Patronising much?

But to answer, yes, a woman would quite possibly have that instinctive fear, but then think, 'Oh, well, it's a cleaner, he's probably seen it all before, and anyway he's just got his head down and wanting to get to the end of his shift.'

And anyway, public loos have signs saying that male cleaners may operate in them; so by going in them, you've given your – informed, crucially – consent.

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

for some woman it does!! I don't know what so difficult to understand about this. Not all women think the same.

Some women will not use public toilets if there's a possibility of a man in there.

Other women will.

Any man in a woman's single-sex space is behaving creepily/being creepy, whatever he identifies as.

As someone who has cleaned loos for a living there is no one more invisible than a cleaner essentially you are a support system for a mop, or a cloth and bottle of cleaning spray. In the scenario described I’d be happy to see a male cleaner as I’d ask them to look outside and see if anyone was waiting.

Can you not see how challenging it would be to have different rules for toilets and other single sex spaces? At a previous workplace the female toilets were in the female changing room.

I came on to say I think someone has been catching up with pertinent episodes of Woman's Hour and decided to try them out.

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.

Surely it’s the Brazilian tribal counting system in action?

One - two - plenty

@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 think maintaining single sex spaces is about far more than toilets and it makes sense to draw a line at biological sex for clarity. Otherwise everything has to be decided on a case by case basis surely which just leads to confusion and sometimes newspaper headlines.

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.

There isn’t a benefit to women in letting men who identify as woman use their loos at best it’s a neutral act.

Honestly if you are looking for people to blame for the Supreme Court decision you should be looking to the “piss takers” within the trans community who aren’t content to nip and have a pee but need to photograph themselves wanking at the sinks to share with the internet. Or the ones who want to get changed in the ladies changing room regardless of other peoples discomfort. Or the sex offenders that would like to go to a female prison.

There was a social contract and people were being kind but they fucked it and a hard line was drawn. I believe they lurk on Reddit if you want to mooch over and have a chat?

That's a very interesting statement - the question in the thread title was answered on the very first page, so there was no 'obsession' at all, just a yes, because they are doing their job, not using the wrong toilet.
End of, full stop, QED, you'd think, wouldn't you?

Instead we got a stream of yeah but what if.. posts, which were also answered thoroughly and logically, only to re-appear again and again so there have now been 14 pages of this.

I've already posted after I think 9 pages of this silliness, saying that the question had been fully answered so what had been going on for 9 whole pages?

It's now 14 pages. Why do you think it is contributing to MN's alleged reputation for being obsessed with the stuff? I think you're reading the situation wrongly. The obsessed parties are whoever keeps posting flimsy yeah but what if.. scenarios again and again even after they have been conclusively answered.

edited to restore lost quoted post:
Christinapple · Today 08:44
They have a job to do, they're not there to commit a sex offence.
No wonder mumsnet has a reputation for being obsessed with this stuff

The best practice with male workers is they knock they call out male cleaner/plumber can I come in or does anyone want me to wait until they are finished? They then respect any requests to wait a moment and pop a temporary sign up to alert any women who enter when the man is already inside. The vague, permanent may be cleaned by any gender signs are shit and I do object to them. The best practice was standard practice until a few years ago until the ladies became a free for all anyway.

As for small boys not a worry because they are not a sexual threat, they are not a physical threat (even my tiny elderly godmother could probably fight off a 7 year old) and are with a female carer who stop them doing anything inappropriate.

Which is why there's a sign outside letting women know so they are aware a man is in there, what he's there to do and who his employer is. When that same cleaner goes for a pee in the gents he doesn't need a sign as he's allowed in there without any notice. It's really not hard to understand. If a trans woman gets a job as a cleaner exactly the same conditions apply.

You appear to be making both sides of the argument

and you come across as both bonkers and factually wrong on both sides 😂

Man alive woman. You really will go around in circles to confirm your views.

the reason men aren’t allowed to use toilets provided for women is that they’re for women. Men can clean the toilets but they can’t use them. The fact that you appear unable to grasp this makes me think you probably shouldn’t be allowed to cross the road by yourself

on a personal note, I expect to be in charge of whether or not I’m partially dressed in the presence of a man. You appear to think I should not expect that right?

Yes they could! That is why there's a sign outside to warn women that they are in there!

But according to the frequently used arguments on here (see the 3 I listed), male cleaners could cause harm just by BEING in there, regardless of their intent or where they pee!

There is no difference. Male cleaners and trans women should both pee in the gents.

That was a response to this. Sorry, for some reason my quote function isn’t working properly.

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.

They have a job to do, they're not there to commit a sex offence.

No wonder mumsnet has a reputation for being obsessed with this stuff.

The two most lame and revealing arguments on the toilet front are now being trotted out ad nauseam:

• male cleaners
• little boys with their mothers

Happily, all they do is show up how ridiculous those who deploy them are.

That distinction you (ETA DurinsBane sorry I lost the quoting somehow with an odd MN error ) just made between theatres etc. and hospitals etc. does not exist in the Equality Act. Both are providing "a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not)". See

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/3/crossheading/provision-of-services-etc

(Caveat IANAL. But I think this is clear and uncontroversial.)

It’s men, not TW - all men. I don’t see men as a group of people I am prejudiced against - I have two lovely men sat within 10 feet of me right now - they’re lovely! But I wouldn’t want any woman to share a public loo or changing room with them.

Stop trying to make this into a ‘MN women hate TW’ argument. It isn’t. It’s a MN women recognise that males as a group, which includes TW, are a greater risk, and have different bodies which means dignity concerns need to be recognised.

That question has been answered a hundred different ways. You want to see a service provider as the same as a service user fine. That's your problem. The rest of us do want that sign and ability to choose. But even you have to recognise that the reason you know they are the same is because they are both men!
It doesn’t matter who we allow in where. We all know the truth.

Now my question to you:
Are women allowed to meet without any males present? If so under what circumstances? And knowing they are women, which means they have babies, can they meet under these special circumstances with their male offspring? Especially the ones still at breast. You know the stupid biology thing that just keeps getting in the way...

If transwomen, who you recognise as equivalent to a male cleaner, must always be permitted then you must realise that you do not believe that women have the fundamental human right of gathering as a sex class.