13,000 toilets and 5,000 changing rooms to change to meet single sex guidance

Strictly speaking, cafés are workplaces and should have separate single sex facilities for the people working there.
Also, the code does say that trans people shouldn't be left with nowhere to use - that does pose a dilemma and risks either the disabled toilets being co-opted as general 'accessible' which isn't fair to the vastly larger number of disabled people, or (and this is where the cost element comes in, as others have suggested), everything becoming bloody gender neutral. 😕

But if gay men and lesbians use the facilities that concur with their sex, and why shouldn’t they, bi people have the choice of either - lucky them, and confused gender neutral people who don’t want to be defined by their sex need to grow up and learn how to make decisions then who does that leave who is shocked and upset?

Oh.

The usual suspects. Hello boys.

Most organisations will just have to change signs. Small organisation, like cafes will have only one single occupancy toilet anyway.

Its when they have just one unisex space with communal sinks where its going to cost money. Or they have two, but the toilet allocation isnt easily split between men and women.

But this set up wasnt adequate anyway so would always need remodelling. These organisation need to have words with whoever allowed these toilets to be built in the first place.

My children's primary and secondary schools put in those mixed sex toilets with communal sinks and a big open doorway.

Both schools could have made two separate toilet blocks, but for some reason didnt.

Its as if they wanted children to grow up getting used to this type of setup.

Absolutely. It's completely idiotic.

exactly!!

Well if trans people could just get the fuck over themselves and use the toilets for their biological sex then none of that would be necessary. If there is an extra cost it is on them.

A sign costs as much as you want it to cost. They could print two dozen "female" and "male" stickers to go over the existing signs for a fiver. Any particularly cash-strapped institutions could write "WOMEN" on a piece of A4 paper in ballpoint pen and stick it on with blutack.

Places like small cafes with one toilet are fine - there’s always been exemptions.

The main problem will be schools. Children have been the guinea pigs for mixed sex designs.

A lot of the Daily Mail comments (I know but it’s a barometer of sorts) were saying about the initial waste of money and it shouldn’t have been done in the first place. Most people are GC even if they don’t know it.

Schools shouldn’t have one set of loos, any HT who agreed to that was a fool - if they do then some new signage should sort matters

A single loo in a cafe is different as it a single lockable room.

I’m not at all surprised! Lots of places have one set of loos - even some schools. I assume one loo in a cafe is exempt?

Same

i haven’t seen very many toilets where it would need a complete revamp…just changing the signs back….

obviously i am very aware that this may differ for some organisations but it does seem a smidge dramatic

Oh dear. And when you add on the cost of the court case defeats...

I bet you’re right and what they’re calculating is being “trans inclusive”

I don’t get it either and it conveniently isn’t explained. Sounds like BS to me.

In the words of a former NZ Labour politician: "Diddums"

I don’t understand how it’ll cost so much - surely the only thing that needs to change is men obeying the law and using the spaces already available for their sex?

@IwantToRetire actually it can cost very little, just change the signs and leave the toilets as they are, its simple

So that's 13,000 toilets and over 5,000 changing rooms where women have been put at a higher potential risk than they eve should have been? Where women should have been able to do what they needed without the fear or at least discomfort of having men nearby?

Not in our name? That's OK. I'm 100% fine with it being done in mine instead. I don't consent to men using my body as a validation tool. And even if 10,000 other women are, they can't consent on my behalf.

And the cost to change it? Should have considered that when they made them that way in the first place then.. Separate facilities has worked for so many years, and without all the weird dramas that TRAs like to pretend will happen. They shouldn't have tried to fix something that wasn't broken in the first place.

Tough luck for them that the dildo of consequence rarely arrives lubed.

They wouldn't have to pay to fix it if they hadn't broken it in the first place.

😅

Have they costed out the alternative of having to change all the single sex cubicles into universal rooms, full floor to ceiling in height, with individual hand basins and dryers? That’s the design that meets the regulations, legislation and guidance if all toilets have to be in a mixed sex environment. Oh and also they have to lead onto a main corridor. Logistically that would be interesting.

Universal toilets would be more likely to need the extra cost of mechanical ventilation so not to smell and really should have extra alarms such as individual audio visual smoke alarms as recommended by the fire service.

Single sex cubicle design, with door gaps, within a single sex washroom is cheapest, safest, healthiest option.