Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
OP posts:
Thread gallery
37
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 07/09/2026 14:46

Keeptoiletssafe · 07/09/2026 11:28

I am not surprised this has happened. Schools have been guinea pigs in all this from people who thought they could redesign the wheel. It’s disgraceful.

It doesn’t meet the new technical guidance from the DfE. I can look at my notes and tell you why if you want. There’s been massive changes this year and it’s obvious why. The technical stuff discusses BS6465 so that’s in your favour.

It doesn’t meet Building regs and ADT which of course schools are said to have an exemption.

However in the current Document M it states:

Educational establishments
0.15 From 1 April 2001, maintained schools
ceased to have exemption from the Building
Regulations. Certain school-specific
standards relating to Parts K and M
contained in the DfES 1997 Constructional
Standards as described in Circular
DfES/0142/2001 are subsumed in this
revision to AD M (see 1.33 – Note re: (l) and
(m), 1.36, 1.37 (b).

So ADT is the Approved Document by the Secretary of State to show how to meet the Building Regs.

Current Doc M also has a section on separate sex toilet washrooms for accessibility.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66f6c5eec71e42688b65ee11/ADM__V2_with_2024_amendments.pdf

Putting it right requires a lot of money.

I am at work but will tie a few things together. It’s all so bloody time consuming - sorting out a safeguarding mess that should never have happened in the first place.

" I can look at my notes and tell you why if you want" - yes please - what you can - within your own pressures and constraints - as I can pass it direct on to the legal team looking at this. Huge thanks but you're also not obliged!

OP posts:
Igmum · 07/09/2026 13:55

I’m really hoping that this is the year @SingleSexSpacesInSchools wins. He has the law of the land, the Supreme Court, the DoE and Mumsnet on his side. The school has Brighton Coucil and the GLP. I would say it’s not a fair fight but frankly I want them defeated so soundly that every other head teacher in the country rushes to correct any issues in their own schools.

TheInvisibleWorm · 07/09/2026 13:38

Making them financially responsible probably doesn't go far enough. In situations like this where the Head is knowingly and deliberately falling in their safeguarding duty, they ought to be criminally responsible. Maybe if an actual prison sentence was a possibility they might give a shit about girls' safety.

Keeptoiletssafe · 07/09/2026 12:55

moto748e · 07/09/2026 12:47

There ought to be a way to make such ring-leaders (like the HM in the this case) financially responsible. That'd shake them up a bit.

The DfE gave me a handy list of who is responsible for safeguarding failures in which type of school.
ps it’s not the DfE.

moto748e · 07/09/2026 12:47

There ought to be a way to make such ring-leaders (like the HM in the this case) financially responsible. That'd shake them up a bit.

Datun · 07/09/2026 12:31

MrsOvertonsWindow · 07/09/2026 12:26

They're doubling down aren't they. Admitting that you've been breaching safeguarding for all this time is beyond some professionals and they're going to have to be dragged through the courts before they ever admit to this.

So many places are, councils, schools, hospitals, offices.

I hope at some point, the never-ending stream of failed court cases will prompt some fucking judge with the smidge of a spine to say you have utterly failed safeguarding, knowingly and deliberately.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 07/09/2026 12:26

moto748e · 07/09/2026 12:24

I still don't understand the school. What is their end-goal here? They surely know what they are doing is neither legal not sustainable, and at some point there's going to be more expense to change the toilets again? And legal costs.

They're doubling down aren't they. Admitting that you've been breaching safeguarding for all this time is beyond some professionals and they're going to have to be dragged through the courts before they ever admit to this.

moto748e · 07/09/2026 12:24

I still don't understand the school. What is their end-goal here? They surely know what they are doing is neither legal not sustainable, and at some point there's going to be more expense to change the toilets again? And legal costs.

MarieDeGournay · 07/09/2026 12:19

Like everybody else here, I'm so fed up with this.

FFS - a block of toilets for boys. A block of toilets for girls. A block of accessible toilets (which are mixed sex so a carer of the opposite sex may accompany the user if nec, but enough of them so some are single sex would be a plus).

It's not difficult, is it? It was already in place. It worked for forever. It's good training for adult life for gender-questioning children to know that they will never be entitled to use toilets on the basis of gender ID because they are designated on the basis of biological sex, so get used to it.

The amount of time, effort, energy, disruption, money, anger, dismay, distress, etc etc caused by a tiny number of very loud, very aggressive and sometimes very violent men demanding to pee in the ladies' is beyond belief.

Wishing the OP and DD well.

And is it only me who hears the William Tell Overture whenever KTS is invoked and unfailingly appears, wielding Facts?😁

edited to add 'violent' men, I mistakenly typed 'angry' which doesn't go far enough.

Keeptoiletssafe · 07/09/2026 11:28

I am not surprised this has happened. Schools have been guinea pigs in all this from people who thought they could redesign the wheel. It’s disgraceful.

It doesn’t meet the new technical guidance from the DfE. I can look at my notes and tell you why if you want. There’s been massive changes this year and it’s obvious why. The technical stuff discusses BS6465 so that’s in your favour.

It doesn’t meet Building regs and ADT which of course schools are said to have an exemption.

However in the current Document M it states:

Educational establishments
0.15 From 1 April 2001, maintained schools
ceased to have exemption from the Building
Regulations. Certain school-specific
standards relating to Parts K and M
contained in the DfES 1997 Constructional
Standards as described in Circular
DfES/0142/2001 are subsumed in this
revision to AD M (see 1.33 – Note re: (l) and
(m), 1.36, 1.37 (b).

So ADT is the Approved Document by the Secretary of State to show how to meet the Building Regs.

Current Doc M also has a section on separate sex toilet washrooms for accessibility.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66f6c5eec71e42688b65ee11/ADM__V2_with_2024_amendments.pdf

Putting it right requires a lot of money.

I am at work but will tie a few things together. It’s all so bloody time consuming - sorting out a safeguarding mess that should never have happened in the first place.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66f6c5eec71e42688b65ee11/ADM__V2_with_2024_amendments.pdf

moto748e · 07/09/2026 11:18

Surely you can't have 'boy in one cubicle and girl in the next one' with gaps under the walls, for obvious reasons? Not that they sound compliant anyway. It's the motives of the school that I find hard to fathom. They surely know what they are doing. So, why?

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 07/09/2026 10:35

LlynTegid · 07/09/2026 10:26

Regardless of whether there are any Muslim pupils in the school, you do not know if there will be at some point when someone moves into the area, or in next year's intake. Or someone who converts (one did when I was at school over 40 years ago).

Agreed. I was just wondering if the parents of existing students were aware - the Muslim parent community was very vocal about things being actually single sex (and not the kind of linguistic sleight of hand single gender - i.e. lying - that is in fact mixed sex) at my DD's school.

I suspect insurers might not be too happy to hear about this arrangement either.

TheInvisibleWorm · 07/09/2026 10:28

My daughter has now given me a more detailed account of the toilets. In one block, the male and female signs are on individual cubicle doors, each containing one toilet. Those cubicles open into one communal washroom. There is a set of sinks for girls and another for boys, but no wall or partition separating the two areas.
@SingleSexSpacesInSchools

Are these cubicles the standard ones with gaps at the top and bottom, or full-height walls? Either way they don't sound compliant, and if they have gaps then the situation is basically exactly the same as before the labelling was added. It's not about the cubicle being single-sex, it's about the facilities as a whole being single-sex.

LlynTegid · 07/09/2026 10:26

Regardless of whether there are any Muslim pupils in the school, you do not know if there will be at some point when someone moves into the area, or in next year's intake. Or someone who converts (one did when I was at school over 40 years ago).

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 07/09/2026 10:19

Are there no Muslim pupils in the school? I can't see this arrangement being popular with any very observant religious families (of a variety of religions including Islam).

It sounds like an absolute disaster that doesn't meet any legal requirements at all.

Are the adults in charge at this school idiots (you don't need to answer this one)? Do they really think that just changing the sign on something magically makes it legally compliant?

I suppose that's at least consistent with other areas of magical thinking incompatible with reality. Let's just hope they don't suddenly decide all the children can fly if they say so and ask them to jump off a tall building during PE.

How does your daughter feel about it? Does she know what the other pupils think?

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 07/09/2026 09:17

@Keeptoiletssafe i am as usual extra grateful for your thoughts (and everyone else!!)

OP posts:
TwoLoonsAndASprout · 07/09/2026 09:17

(Iirc, no, these toilets are not compliant, but KTS will have the regs…)

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 07/09/2026 09:15

Paging @Keeptoiletssafe - your expertise is needed!

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 07/09/2026 09:01

Once more into the breach - dear friends.

A start-of-term update, and I’d appreciate some help from those here with expertise in school premises, safeguarding and equality law.

My daughter has now given me a more detailed account of the toilets. In one block, the male and female signs are on individual cubicle doors, each containing one toilet. Those cubicles open into one communal washroom. There is a set of sinks for girls and another for boys, but no wall or partition separating the two areas.

There are also three unisex toilets. Each is a fully enclosed, floor-to-ceiling room with a toilet, its own sink and a door that locks from inside. However, those doors also open into the same communal washroom, rather than directly onto the school corridor.

In another block, my daughter describes cubicles whose walls and doors have gaps above and below, again with no wall separating the sink areas.

My daughter hasn’t heard any instructions about who may use which toilets, although she also hasn’t seen anyone using a cubicle labelled for the opposite sex.

  • [paragraph removed at OP's request]

I am certain the toilet arrangements described here remain non-compliant. The washroom itself is still mixed sex, with separation confined to labels on cubicle doors and different banks of sinks. That does not give girls a separate washroom or privacy from boys while washing.

The partly enclosed cubicles raise an additional concern if they are also within mixed-sex accommodation. The three enclosed rooms provide better individual privacy, but their existence doesn’t resolve the problems with the rest of the provision.

[KCSIE 2026, paragraph 113](assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a9081309a177a1decf97b00/Keeping_children_safe_in_education_2026.pdf), says additional mixed-sex toilets should be individual lockable rooms opening directly onto public areas, such as a corridor. I’d particularly welcome views on how that applies to doors opening into this communal washroom.

The recent [DE and FG v West Lothian Council judgment](www.scotcourts.gov.uk/media/mv5d53jw/2026csoh52-petition-of-de-and-fg-against-west-lothian-council.pdf) also seems very relevant: sex-labelled cubicles, shared washing areas and some self-contained alternatives, with a finding of indirect sex discrimination. I appreciate that the Scottish premises regulations differ from England’s, so I’m particularly interested in its Equality Act reasoning.

Could those who know this area help with:

  • The precise English requirements governing separation of the whole toilet accommodation, including washing areas.
  • How the individual lockable-room exception applies where a cubicle has no internal sink and users must wash in a mixed-sex area.
  • Whether the access arrangements described meet KCSIE’s expectations for private toilets and changing facilities.
  • Any further safeguarding or equality breaches we should be considering, and the evidence needed to establish them.
OP posts:
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 03/09/2026 10:02

Checked the three other biggest schools in town, not a single update from any of them

has anyone seen any policy updates from secondaries anywhere in the UK?

OP posts:
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 03/09/2026 08:43

Published Policies - The School now links to KCSIE 2026, but a review of all documents on its policies page, as of today, found very little evidence of relevant policy changes.

The safeguarding policy is out of date and says it is awaiting Government guidance on gender-questioning pupils. Its Equalities policy still references Brighton and Hove’s Trans Inclusion Schools Toolkit

There is no published school specific explanation in these documents of the current single-sex toilet and changing arrangements, individual alternatives, or instructions given to pupils and staff.

That doesn’t establish what happens on site of course, but policies rule all changes right?

OP posts:
TheInvisibleWorm · 02/09/2026 20:28

Zero faith in the school here too, OP, but you never know. Either way I hope your daughter has an easy time back at school!

murasaki · 02/09/2026 18:29

Best of luck to her, my niece is just starting year 11, it's a toughie. She's at a girls school with a militant foundation, so we are lucky there. I hope they have complied, but like you, I remain sceptical.

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 02/09/2026 18:23

Evening all - well my daughter starts year 11 - tomorrow. The school swear blind they are fully KCSIE 2026 compliant in all ways. I am asking my poor daughter to be a spy yet again.

I have zero confidence the school is complying, if anyone has suggestions about what to do next, tell me!!

Court case and dates, have to be kept QT for now but as soon as I can I will :)

OP posts:
EyesOpening · 02/09/2026 14:52

Do you have a date for court yet, @SingleSexSpacesInSchools ?
I had a look through your comments but I didn’t spot one.

Swipe left for the next trending thread