Sunderland Minster refusing to comply with Supreme Court ruling

Yes, this. They’re not really offering a service intended to be helpful. Just making a nasty, snide and blatantly obvious dig at any woman who dares challenge their oh-so-holy dogma.

And in reality of course their virtue-signalling is causing real and undeserved distress to women.

I find it seriously distressing how bloody thick these people are, and apparently they are providing service to communities.

Yes, I marvel on a daily basis at the monumental levels of stupidity displayed by these people.

Obviously she doesn't understand that the reason women don't want men in their toilets is not just for safety, but for privacy and dignity too. You'd think it wasn't that difficult to grasp.

And she's breaking the law of course. I don't know why she thinks that's admirable, or why people who want her to follow the law are somehow disgusting or despicable. She deserves to have the arse sued off her.

And St Paul was talking about who was a part of the church, not who could use the loos.

LOL excellent comment😂

Jesus Shaped😆

"Was Jesus shaped like a sarcastic passive aggressive misogynistic small-minded grandstander?"

Yes, obviously. With a sideline of hypocrisy and stupidity.
And the CofE wonders why it has lost and alienates people.

Jesus wept.

Thankfully St Paul did not draft Building Regs Document T or EA2010

Galatians 3:28

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

This is not just offensive because it's deliberately opposing the law, but it's also an unpleasant passive aggressive combination of sarcasm and smarminess.

It's so public, so blatant, and so shameless, that they deserve to be challenged by any channels available, not just comments on FB - complaints to the diocese, letters to the local papers, letters, cards, everything. Just an overwhelming amount of clear, preferably polite, objections to this outrageous position.

On their website they have this bizarre statement:
We are striving to be a “Jesus Shaped People” .

Was Jesus shaped like a sarcastic passive aggressive misogynistic small-minded grandstander?

Perhaps the good Rev Canon would like to take a leaf from the Church of England's Holy Bible, revised by His Majesty's special command, A.D. 1611, Appointed to be read in Churches:

Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves – Philippians 2:3

(in other words, stop thinking about yourself all the time and being so selfish and blind to other people's needs)

Think what a difference this could have made if they'd gone with "you can pee next to me" i.e. welcoming transwomen into men's toilets.

It might have changed a few minds, opened a few eyes and led the way in genuinely being kind and welcoming.

That's appalling.

That's a sarky comment, not genuine. They're saying if you really think that you're going to be murdered by a lovely transwoman we will come in with you to make sure you're not. Because of course nobody is going ask for a chaperone, it's an intimidation tactic. Deliberately extreme because they think you wanting sex segregation is extreme.

And yes, it's unlawful.

And absolutely bloody yes, as a PP pointed out, is there an equivalent sign on the men's toilets? That men will be accompanied by another man, if they're uncomfortable with a transman in there.

i'd bet my mortgage there isn't.

I'd also be there will be some complaints, and that sign will be taken down soon

The absolute nerve of some of the pro comments on the piece remind me how far there is to go still

Came here to share this story - https://www.facebook.com/sunderlandminster/

The comments are open - have to stand up and be counted

Also - this is a perfect case of what I and so many other here have said

it will take WAY MORE than the Supreme Court and the EHRC guidance. it will come down to individual people taking individual places to court, en masse to force the issue

it's a war of attrition that TRAs could win if people lose the energy to fight

That's nasty.

"Wait outside the stall until you have safely used our facilities."

What a huge burden to put on a female visitor. They are basically saying, come and tell us you have a difficulty and we will label you unkind, a bigot, etc.

What woman wants someone else - certainly someone who is not with them - waiting outside the door? We know that people are embarrassed at being heard.

Safety - the assertion that women are only concerned about safety. What about privacy? Dignity? Obviously those don't count for Sunderland Minster.

And as pps have already pointed out, this only goes one way. Sunderland Minster obviously does not care about, or fully recognise, women.

Trans rights again. No concern for or interest in women's rights. Sections of the CofE are lost.

And, let’s face it, no guarantee that your ‘escort’ is actually female? Could be a man, could be a transwoman 🤷‍♀️

Like pp, I hope they have some legal reaction.

😂😂😂

Might the Charity Commission have a view on a charity declaring its intention to flout the law?

I'd be curious to know if the volunteer could be a man and what they would do if they saw a transwoman coming into the bathroom. It doesn't say

Either way this whole thing feels very performative. How many transwomen are actually members of their church (I assume it is 0), needless virtue signaling which exposes them to being sued. I hope someone sues them.

There's a comment from someone saying, "I'm ok with this and I'm Jewish." Then when you look at their picture you realise they're a trans-woman.

The notice says "..please do ask one of our clergy or volunteers who will gladly accompany you into the toilets, and wait outside the stall until you have safely used our facilities."

Where does it say the volunteer (or member of the clergy) will ensure no TIM comes in? Or go in first to check whether there is already there?

And presumably one of the clergy could well be a man.

The authorities, steeped as they are in TRA propaganda, think "These stupid TERFs believe they'll be attacked by any and every TW so we'll give them a token bodyguard".

As I say, privacy and dignity dimply don't figure.

What it’s saying is ‘ooh if you’re so scared of these people who just want to live their lives in peace we will stand outside the door to listen for your screams’ it enforces this idea that we are paranoid and over the top. Fuck our privacy and dignity. Fuck the fact they are encouraging these men’s fetishes. They are just helping us silly women right ?

Maybe I misunderstood, but it sounds like the volunteer will be waiting outside the bathroom, not actually going inside with you. Obviously asking a volunteer to listen/smell as someone inside a toilet is too much to ask imo.

Oh, you don't get privacy from TIM.

I assume they would stop any TIM they see whilst you are in the bathroom? Tell them to wait until you finish?

This came up on my feed today so came here to see if there was a thread.
lots of people seem to be asking the same question as here, why not chaperone them to the men’s!
their little work around still breaks the law, i hope they get sued