Is it safety or separation?

And today's derail comes from: WOmEn dO iT tOo.

No biological woman would have to ask the Op's question, most women have taken refuge in the Ladies at some time to escape a creepy man. I feel for the young women now who have nowhere to hide when out

Safe v safer; it ain't rocket science to distinguish the difference.

And wrt the language switch from TW to transpeople, we are not stupid, we see the attempt to obfuscate and obscure the fact that male humans, what us dried up old hags would have called 'men', are the people who are not welcome in single sex spaces and should stay out no matter how nice they are. We are not nasty old cowbags for telling you this.

For the vast majority of women we do feel safer in a woman only environment, I’m sorry that you don’t, but that is no reason to let men in.

wasnt there a study of sexual assaults in ?council owned gym and pool facilities? About half were single sex spaces - they had about 2% of the assaults ? Am I remembering correctly?

The statistics tell us that women are much, much safer to be around than men, for everybody. Nowhere can be 100% safe as you can never mitigate all risk. I have never felt physically or sexually threatened by a woman, but unfortunately I have by men many, many times. I’m sorry about your experiences, but they are the exception and not the rule.

Quite.

What might the agenda be of doing so?

To try and damage and destroy women's boundaries to the benefit of men who wish to use them?

It's over. The law's been clarified. Activists don't need to agree. That they don't agree with women's equality or rights is why that law needs to exist.

I’m not giving you a list of reasons why women don’t want men in our SSS, we say no, that is reason enough.

I’m so sick of the gaslighting.
We all know what sex is, we all know why we have single sex spaces and services.
We all know the crime statistics.

Anyone advocating for males in women’s spaces or saying women are as dangerous as men are a walking red flag.

What would be even better would be, within the block of single sex toilets, not only ambulant toilets but also accessible (disabled) toilets too. All these would have door gaps at the top and bottom of the doors and partitions. This would give people who need an accessible toilet, the health and safety benefits of single sex toilets.

Any mixed sex toilet, due to its privacy, needs to be placed in a very visible area, have noticeable cctv and also checked regularly. That includes traditional disabled toilets which are the traditional mixed sex private toilet which are abused.

This

Thank you for thinking of medically vulnerable people. I wonder if anyone could do an equality impact assessment for those with these health conditions?

The gaps were put into toilet doors for health and safety reasons. It’s well documented.
I have lots of examples of fatalities in toilets- it’s actually quite common as it’s the place people go when they are feeling ill. Also the process of elimination puts strain on organs like the heart. There’s millions of people in this country with undiagnosed heart conditions for example, and 11% of cardiac arrests are on the loo. It can be days before people are found, sometimes in very public places, because no one checks why the door is still closed.

female spaces only for females and not for males who choose to identify and females - they are not biologically female. That also means females who identify as males continue to use that female space

Agreed.

It's because of the relentless transactivism to stop women having a single sex space, even if it's in addition to a unisex one.

Anything deemed for women only has been targeted as transphobic. Therefore many companies take the line of least resistance and only offer unisex.

To me, it's one of the worst possible solutions, because I'm sharing a toilet with all men. Albeit not at the same time. I'm guaranteed to have to sit on piss in these circumstances. And you can't really clean it up, wiping it only really serves to smear it further.

New builds, of course, can choose what facilities to put in and one new build in my city - a performance venue - has installed a block of single sex female toilets, a block of male toilets, a disabled facility, and one labelled 'gender neutral'. This seems like a perfect and proportionate response to the active requirements of the general public.

If you personally are happy to change in mixed sex facilities no one is stopping you, please enjoy using the mixed sex spaces in addition to the sex based ones.

Women do not have to justify to anyone's satisfaction why they are permitted to say no to providing their undressed body to gratify a man's declared needs. Women's lives do not revolve around servicing the wishes of men.

Women's single sex spaces meet the inclusive needs of all women: not men. They are not there for men. The mixed sex spaces meet the needs of men who would prefer not to use men's facilities and of women who are happy to share mixed sex spaces.

This is all academic anyway: the law protects women's single sex spaces from men who wish to use them, and from women who wish to remove women's rights to choice, privacy, dignity, culture, safety and preference.

The arguments from those who feel women should not be allowed such rights when they inconvenience the wishes of men to use those women? Demonstrate exactly why women need those rights and protections in law.

My first experience of a 'changing village' was decades ago when our LA built a new pool. The mixed sex changing cubicles had big gaps top and bottom and benches. If you stood on the bench you'd be able to see into the neighbouring cubicles. Within a few days of it opening every single particle board walls had peephole drilled in them at about waist height. People tried to block them with gum and tissue, but these adhoc repairs didn't last. If the management tried to repair them they did a shit job.

Belatedly some cubicles were labelled male, some female but it wasn't policed.
The whole changing area was mixed sex, voyeurism was essentially designed into it.

Fortunately it was in the days before 'phone cameras, and gender. It never even crossed my mind to complain. I wouldn't say boo to a goose in those days.

I've not been there in decades. The gym I went to instead had separate changing rooms and showering areas for each sex. The changing room was communal with a couple of curtained cubicles. Individual showers with doors* and door gaps. I know which I preferred.

*my fella said there were no doors in the men's showers. We thought it was to stop the men from getting up to stuff!

Mmmm. Given their declared job, as a midwife to prisoners, @LoftyRobin might be expected to have slightly more awareness of the reality and impact of women's history and experiences.

I think everyone agrees on this thread, we all want to change completely separately from men, some of us would prefer to change in privacy from women also.
Its so hard to hear peoples experiences of sexual assault, it brings up such visceral reactions, I really send my sympathies to @Taztoy and @LoftyRobin and I hope you are supported by friends and family, no one deserves to go through what you went through.

My work have just opened a new building, it is a brand new build so has only unisex toilets, they are the type that comply with the law with a sink and toilet in an enclosed cubicle.
But I haven’t spoken to one person, male or female, who likes them.
None of the women have said they don’t like them because they’re scared of sexual assault, they just don’t like them because of privacy and dignity reasons (same as the men). I am not scared my male colleagues are going to attack me, I just don’t want to share toilets with them.

We also have staff members with conditions such as epilepsy and type 1 diabetes, and it is statistically shown that floor to ceiling doors in toilet cubicles with solid walls are more dangerous during medical emergency type situations.

So my point is nobody apart from a tiny minority of trans people want unisex toilets, why should we all suffer?
Why is saying “I just prefer single sex spaces” not a good enough reason? I have no problem with them putting in male, female and unisex, but why unisex only?

What is actually weird is this suggestion. Nobody is actively promoting it.

Your intention and points seem really muddled and confused.

Thank you.

Just a mention of this charity again:
www.euansguide.com/campaigns/safer-toilets/

and to highlight problems like this:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqjvnkzgr1no

Maybe, but i'm not certain how it then follows that you think we should have mixed sex facilities, even if there are individual cubicles within? What would be the point or purpose of that?

All cubicles is much more expensive especially as so many will need to be large enough for prams and buggies and a handful of kids