Lloyds Bank bans trans women from using female lavatories (STAFF)

This is true. M&S now have all gender changing in my local store. You get a lockable cubicle but a man could easily have put a camera in there because afaics there is no real monitoring! Considering that M&S is a popular place to buy lingerie and swimwear this policy is insane.

Hmm, isn't that discriminatory? Does the equality act apply to Pride?

Gosh….. Warwickshire Pride! How will Lloyds cope?

They can make it Trans and Allies Pride, or whatever. They're welcome to it.

Might be a new sign of the times. If Pride groups are unhappy being associated with sponsors who are law-abiding, we might be seeing a snowball of decline of Pride in general. I, for one, can't wait to see the back of them all. The've taken something that used to be truly inclusive and inspiring and made a travesty of it.

Lest we forget Liverpool Pride severing ties with Barclays:

https://www.lcrpride.co.uk/2025/05/08/lcr-pride-foundation-ends-partnership-with-barclays/

And then having to cancel the march:

cultureliverpool.co.uk/festivals-events/pride-in-liverpool-and-march-with-pride-cancelled-for-2025/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CIt%20is%20with%20great%20sadness,almost%20entirely%20volunteer%2Dled%20operation

Some will do it until they're sued. Some will do it because they're confident that they're on the RSOH, and that no one would dare sue them. Public services that continue to break the law are gambling with public funds. Eventually, insurance companies will stop covering them.

It's likely that most universities will "quietly drop" unlawful policies. If they don't, then they will be signalling that they are happy to continue to break the law. If they make a big announcement on their intranet, they'll have student piss protests on all their Open Days. So they opt for the slidey, hidey, you-can't-see-me coward's way out. Par for the course, from my experience in HE.

Seems like their march will end up somewhat underfunded...

Lloyds are complying with the law - I don't understand how other organisations are avoiding compliance with the law.

Interestingly I work for a university. They have very quietly removed the transgender policy saying students can use whichever facilities they like. They've fallen short of saying they must not use those for the opposite sex, but quite sensibly I think pointed out where all the gender neutral facilities are in each building.

It's something.

.

The employ around 2300 people in Bristol alone. Bristol. Enough said.

Lloyds is a massive company, they will certainly have more than one or two trans people in their employment.

I for one think that maybe they should - they’re one of the first to break cover to follow the law. Really heartening sign and I for one will be encouraging other employers to follow suit! Thanks for posting

Lloyds get in on whatever the latest trend is with great vigour. Providing they move within the law. Whether it be blokes in dresses, BLM or any anti white agenda.
But they are a bank after all and need to make profit, so when laws change, they must comply and will soon spin the narrative to suit.
Not much different to any large org I imagine.

Lloyds have been all in on trans since 2016. I believe they even pay for medical treatment. They topped the stonewall list several times Question is why

How would anyone know? Seeing Actual staff in a bank these days is like seeing a white rhino in the serengeti

I wonder just how many transwomen Lloyds have on staff? One? two? None? Or is this announcement simply a PR exercise?

Yes, they've stopped men from using women's toilets, as per the law.

Why do TRAs have a problem with this? What are the factual and historical reasons that women have to have single sex spaces and services in particular situations (toilets, changing rooms, prisons, intimate medical examinations, if they want to gather with other women,be lesbians and not shag men, or only date other women), and how are they relevant to the largely heterosexual mle population which "identifies" as whatever the hell they imagine actual women and girls to be?

I mean, these are all actual human rights for women that women had to fight for.

So could we be told whether men's ideas of "womanhood" ever really override the lived experience of the half of the population who are ACTUALLY women and girls and why? And have it eplained what similar experiences of oppression do men who id as women supposedly have? Can any TRAs on here point us to where 'trans women' have historically een treated as the legal property of male relatives, for example (in real daily life, not fetish), prevented from owning property or voting, prevented from working, having bank accounts or being able to make their own reproductive choices without censure?

If not, why not? And if yes, why would ANYONE believe women should be subservient to the men who are larping as them?

They've taken their time but it's still good to see.

What do you mean by "exposed as having false intent on FWR"? People of all opinions are perfectly entitled to post here, there isn't a mandated belief system or opinion you must adhere to to participate.

Like others I saw this last night and am pleased there is a thread about it.

Because despite those pretending it isn't a big deal (which just exposed them as having false intent on FWR) sadly it is news that a business is actually following the law.

Lets face it if we had 2 threads, one to list all the companies and organisations following the law, and one (the list of shame) for all those finding any number of immature, unprofessional, illegal and anti woman "rationale" for not following the law, it is obvious that the shame list would be many, many times longer than those doing the right thing!

I think that’s an excellent point @OpheliaWitchoftheWoods and that’s a perfect description of what TRAs want.