Page 9 | Waterside Arts Centre Sale clearly ignoring Supreme Court

SigrunGard · 2025-10-05T12:52:32+00:00

i was at the Waterside last night with my partner. The Women’s was marked “women’s” but then written on the door in large letters was something to the effect of please feel free to use whichever facilities” match your gender identity or gender expression “. Mentioned it to my partner who said the same was on the door to the men’s ( he said someone asked a friend what that meant and the reply was apparently” some modern bollocks” - hard to argue!) I rather feel I should email them and point out that this is not right- anyone got suggestions for wording that doesn’t just make me sound bigoted!? thanks

WandaSiri · 06/10/2025 08:27

Ratafia · 06/10/2025 08:20

Only if you have a few thousand pounds to spare. The judgment is not as clear cut as people might think.

Show quote history

The law as clarified is clear-cut. The fact that it is being resisted does not change that. In fact that is probably the reason why it is being resisted.

Ratafia · 06/10/2025 08:26

EHRC guidance:

It is not compulsory for services that are open to the public to be provided on a single-sex basis or to have single-sex facilities such as toilets. These can be single-sex if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim and they meet other conditions in the Act.

Roodlegum · 06/10/2025 08:22

SparklyPombears · 05/10/2025 14:02

Point them at the Supreme Court ruling and threaten a lawsuit.

Oh don’t be silly @SparklyPombears 😆

Ratafia · 06/10/2025 08:20

SparklyPombears · 05/10/2025 14:02

Point them at the Supreme Court ruling and threaten a lawsuit.

Only if you have a few thousand pounds to spare. The judgment is not as clear cut as people might think.

MarieDeGournay · 06/10/2025 08:15

Pifflepafflewifflewaffle · 06/10/2025 07:43

were you threatened or assaulted by a trans person in the use of the bathroom, OP? You didn’t have time to take a photo so you weren’t there very long, fairly standard for a bathroom trip, I guess.

do you want this community space to have to yea their funding to create single cubicle toilets? Because a lot of theatres are listed buildings and this is pretty much impossible within building regs, which makes it pretty impossible for trans people to access without outing themselves.

threatening legal action to a community arts space that is more than likely well known for being a safe space for members of the lgbtqia community is wild. Enforcing another place where trans and non-binary people don’t feel comfortable feels a strange use of your one wild and precious life.

Bravo, social justice warriors, you’re outdoing yourselves, what a fantastic use of your time.

just a reminder… Segregation was legal. ‘no irish. No blacks. No dogs’ was legal.

Rosa Parks broke the law.

You're over-complicating things, Pifflepafflewifflewaffle!

The venue already meets requirements by having men's women's and presumably accessible toilets, it isn't required to have single cubicles installed. so you needn't be concerned about the cost.

But you highlight a good point: there is a cost in disruption and money to venues having to change their adequate and legal toilet provision at the insistence of a tiny percentage of the population who refuse to use the toilets designated for their sex.

All the venue has to do is take down the illegal notice, which costs nothing.

The only thing I'll say about your references to No Black, No Dogs, No Irish and Rosa Parks is that they are more ridiculous than offensive - but they are that too.

littlebilliie · 06/10/2025 08:10

Pifflepafflewifflewaffle · 06/10/2025 07:43

were you threatened or assaulted by a trans person in the use of the bathroom, OP? You didn’t have time to take a photo so you weren’t there very long, fairly standard for a bathroom trip, I guess.

do you want this community space to have to yea their funding to create single cubicle toilets? Because a lot of theatres are listed buildings and this is pretty much impossible within building regs, which makes it pretty impossible for trans people to access without outing themselves.

threatening legal action to a community arts space that is more than likely well known for being a safe space for members of the lgbtqia community is wild. Enforcing another place where trans and non-binary people don’t feel comfortable feels a strange use of your one wild and precious life.

Bravo, social justice warriors, you’re outdoing yourselves, what a fantastic use of your time.

just a reminder… Segregation was legal. ‘no irish. No blacks. No dogs’ was legal.

Rosa Parks broke the law.

Get over yourself, comparing this to racism you should be absolutely ashamed.

This is the law of the land

WandaSiri · 06/10/2025 08:09

Pifflepafflewifflewaffle · 06/10/2025 07:43

were you threatened or assaulted by a trans person in the use of the bathroom, OP? You didn’t have time to take a photo so you weren’t there very long, fairly standard for a bathroom trip, I guess.

do you want this community space to have to yea their funding to create single cubicle toilets? Because a lot of theatres are listed buildings and this is pretty much impossible within building regs, which makes it pretty impossible for trans people to access without outing themselves.

threatening legal action to a community arts space that is more than likely well known for being a safe space for members of the lgbtqia community is wild. Enforcing another place where trans and non-binary people don’t feel comfortable feels a strange use of your one wild and precious life.

Bravo, social justice warriors, you’re outdoing yourselves, what a fantastic use of your time.

just a reminder… Segregation was legal. ‘no irish. No blacks. No dogs’ was legal.

Rosa Parks broke the law.

Segregation of toilets on the lawful and rational basis of sex is bad, but segregation on the unlawful and irrational basis of gender identity is good? Is that what you are saying? If so, why?
Rosa Parks was making a stand for equal rights for her people who were second class citizens by law and in practice. People with the PC of GR have equal rights already.

Women have human rights too, you know.

Llamasarellovely · 06/10/2025 08:04

Pifflepafflewifflewaffle · 06/10/2025 07:43

were you threatened or assaulted by a trans person in the use of the bathroom, OP? You didn’t have time to take a photo so you weren’t there very long, fairly standard for a bathroom trip, I guess.

do you want this community space to have to yea their funding to create single cubicle toilets? Because a lot of theatres are listed buildings and this is pretty much impossible within building regs, which makes it pretty impossible for trans people to access without outing themselves.

threatening legal action to a community arts space that is more than likely well known for being a safe space for members of the lgbtqia community is wild. Enforcing another place where trans and non-binary people don’t feel comfortable feels a strange use of your one wild and precious life.

Bravo, social justice warriors, you’re outdoing yourselves, what a fantastic use of your time.

just a reminder… Segregation was legal. ‘no irish. No blacks. No dogs’ was legal.

Rosa Parks broke the law.

Mate, just pee in the men's. You'll be fine.

Roodlegum · 06/10/2025 08:00

SigrunGard · 06/10/2025 07:17

It’s unlikely I can get back to take photos unfortunately- the venue is not local ( we travelled about an hour to get there)

Its not a notice they can just take down, it would mean replacing the entire door into the loos as the statement is part of the design. But I shall be sending an email along the lines of that suggested by MariedeGournay

Show quote history

Let us know the response!

and next time if you see something like this that bothers you, worthwhile taking a photo so you can be sure of the wording

Pifflepafflewifflewaffle · 06/10/2025 07:43

were you threatened or assaulted by a trans person in the use of the bathroom, OP? You didn’t have time to take a photo so you weren’t there very long, fairly standard for a bathroom trip, I guess.

do you want this community space to have to yea their funding to create single cubicle toilets? Because a lot of theatres are listed buildings and this is pretty much impossible within building regs, which makes it pretty impossible for trans people to access without outing themselves.

threatening legal action to a community arts space that is more than likely well known for being a safe space for members of the lgbtqia community is wild. Enforcing another place where trans and non-binary people don’t feel comfortable feels a strange use of your one wild and precious life.

Bravo, social justice warriors, you’re outdoing yourselves, what a fantastic use of your time.

just a reminder… Segregation was legal. ‘no irish. No blacks. No dogs’ was legal.

Rosa Parks broke the law.

Original poster

SigrunGard · 06/10/2025 07:17

Roodlegum · 06/10/2025 06:12

What have you decided to do op @SigrunGard ?

It’s unlikely I can get back to take photos unfortunately- the venue is not local ( we travelled about an hour to get there)

Its not a notice they can just take down, it would mean replacing the entire door into the loos as the statement is part of the design. But I shall be sending an email along the lines of that suggested by MariedeGournay

OP posts:

Roodlegum · 06/10/2025 06:12

What have you decided to do op @SigrunGard ?

MarieDeGournay · 05/10/2025 19:39

OswaldCobblepot · 05/10/2025 14:21

I'd suggest replacing "actual gender" with "biological sex".

Show quote history

That's not a suggestion, that's a necessity, because that's what the SC ruling was all about: sex meaning biological sex, not 'gender'.

I think some posters have been a bit harsh with the OP for not remembering the wording exactly, not having the presence of mind to take a photograph etc - c'mon, she was just going to the loo at an event!

But the suggestion of going back and taking photos would be a good idea - both men's and women's toilets but if your partner isn't with you, you don't have to make yourself look conspicuous by going into the men's taking photos!
The fact that it is on either toilet is enough to make your point.

I'd keep the email brief:
The SC [date] clarified the law that sates that single-sex facilities have to be segregated by biological sex.
This was on the door of the toilets at your venue on ... , and it clearly contravenes the legal requirement for toilets to be used only by the people for whom they are designated.
I hope you are going to comply with the law and remove this notice'

something snappy like that.

Good luck!

stevegrabshall · 05/10/2025 16:22

I’ve seen this too. I think you should contact them to point out that they’re out of touch

Roodlegum · 05/10/2025 14:38

Redshoeblueshoe · 05/10/2025 14:30

I've just looked on X and someone has posted a picture of the door from a year ago. It says "Visitors are welcome to use the facilities reflective of their gender identity or expression."
Clearly the Supreme Court ruling means nothing to them

do you have a pic?

what an utterly ridiculous statement. Cringeworthy

IdaGlossop · 05/10/2025 14:30

AnonymousCatLady3 · 05/10/2025 14:04

Can you go back and take a photo of the wording? (& make sure you get the one on the mens loos too).

If you really want to complain you’ll need the above so they can’t say you misread it. Then something along the lines of

”Dear Waterside Management
I was recently at your centre and on using the toilets saw the attached notice.

While I understand that everyone needs to use toilets, the Supreme Court decision in April means that it is now a legal requirement to provide single sex spaces based on actual gender, not gender identity.

I would be grateful if you would let me know what plans you have to remove this notice and comply with the terms of the SC decision, to safeguard all users of the centre regardless of their gender. “

You could also link to the gov.uk site that has advice on how to comply now the law has been clarified.

But - be prepared for a backlash. Sale isn’t Canal Street but there’s still likely to be plenty from the militant trans groups around.

'...actual sex, not gender identity' would be clearer.