UK radical feminists; what to do?

We are not blind and deaf and gullible in the extreme.

That's debatable.

You are so utterly predictable.🙄

They can have expertise on aspects of science or data. I believe Keeptoiletssafe is female, but if I'm wrong would her tremendous grasp of legislation and detail be any less valuable coming from a man?

@ProfessorBinturong that’s very kind and you're not wrong about me being a woman. Over several years I have discussed toilet design with lots of people, both women and men, who are extremely knowledgeable. From cleaners, academics, paramedics, charities for those with medical conditions and disabilities, cubicle manufacturers, politicians, architects etc etc. I have two biology degrees and am a qualified teacher so that helps with validity and stats in academic papers, and looking at microbiology.

The fact that I am female and a mother is a distinct advantage in toilet design, as we have different biological needs to men. I have had a miscarriage bleed in a toilet so a kind woman in the next cubicle passed me lots of toilet roll as I quickly had used all in mine. I have had to deal with toddlers, pushchairs and menstruation and not being able to close the cubicle door. These are not unusual things to happen to women.

Women are, along with children and those with certain medical conditions, unfortunately more vulnerable in mixed sex toilets in mixed sex environments. We need knowledge on who is around us.

The most important thing though is I have personal experience of when a single sex design saves someone’s life, and when a full height door led to harm, because that was why I formed a hypothesis about door
design which drove all of this research. However I soon found multiple sources before me had worked it out, and the advantages of doors not reaching the floor and having space over them have been stated in British Standards since at least the 1980s, it was just me bringing it up as a priority again. I tested out all the health and safety advantages listed by looking at many, many real life incidents in the last few years which show they are still as important decades later, for the same reasons. If I couldn’t get data, I tried with FOI requests. I looked at court reports and coroner reports.

In the last few years everyone was so focused on hastily making toilet cubicles private in case it was (or because they changed it to) a mixed sex environment, they forgot why the cubicles weren’t totally private in the first place. In some cases they stated but actively ignored the health and safety advantages, for the privacy in all ‘gender neutral’ design eg in a Scottish school design brochure.

It was another mumsnetter that made me realise the nuance of what I was fighting for - it was not only the compartment door but the single sex environment outside the door. One can’t happen unless the other is already there in place. I had it confirmed in writing by the Health and Safety Executive that the only time cubicle doors are permitted to have door gaps is leading into a single sex environment. In fact Approved Document T (2024) goes further in that all cubicles (whether having gaps or not) should be single sex: The layout when entering, exiting and using a toilet room or cubicle should cater for the safety, privacy and dignity of users. Cubicle doors should only open into single-sex toilet accommodation.

There are lots of different things that can lead to safer non domestic toilets and there are certain things you can do to help mixed sex toilets be safer. However, the majority of toilet provision should be in single sex environments for health and safety. Adding more mixed sex provision needs a proper risk assessment.

The right to privacy (not being outed) & the right to not being discriminated as in being 'othered' are human rights that yes even trans people are entitled to.

That right is predicated on the vanishingly few people who are genuinely not recognised as being male. The rights of that tiny number of people does not balance with the rights of the many women who don't want you in their spaces and have an existing right not to have you in their spaces.

It also means, if a person who genuinely passes as female is allowed access, that the 6ft 2 ex rugby player who women find threatening cannot be denied access and nor can the man who is getting visibility aroused by being in a female space wearing "female" clothing. And that is a definite violation of women.

Depends on the individual circumstances & many factors like age, sport, competency level & physical advantage from male puberty whether there is any disadvantage to females. There might be circumstances like 6/7 year olds playing team soccer at the same competency level & size where there may be no disadvantage or it maybe much older where safety & male pubertal advantage causes a disadvantage. The details matter.

Leave children out of this. In this country that isn't an issue because we understand physiology.

There is always disadvantage to females in every sport except equestrianism and even that is only in the dressage. The male advantage starts in the genes that come from the father as the sperm breaks into the egg.

There is no adult sport in the world where males would not consistently outnumber females in the medals of the dresses completed together, and chopping off body parts and taking female hormones doesn't change that.

The whole point of proportionality is to balance rights for potential disadvantages so I'm not sure what your problem is here as people can file for a discrimination claim against their employer in such scenarios.

The law has to have had boundaries. There is an age and career development at which it would be grossly unfair to women for a man to decide he is a woman and put himself on a woman only shortlist for a job or an award.

But as soon as you let one man do that, you can't stop the others because there's absolutely no way of setting that cutoff point.

People in this country, rightly, cannot claim sex discrimination as a female when they are male. As trans, they have all the discrimination rights they need enshrined in law.

I could make the exact claim about you…the difference being I'm right.

Except that you are referring to me having zero respect for men who claim they are women trying to usurp the rights of women and failing to listen to them telling you what problems it causes them. And in that you are absolutely correct.

Only by idiots.

Can someone explain to me, once and for all, how a person is outed as the sex they are, by using a toilet that is frequented by both sexes?

Quite.

I suspect the answer is roughly that people wont grasp that the six foot four brick shithouse with a beard and size 11 feet actually has a delicate lady soul underneath.

He needs the women to 'validate' his inner desires.

The exceptions under Article 8 cannot be dismissed with a misinterpretation of ‘proportionate’.

There are times when that expectation of ‘privacy’ of sex category is not applicable.

Exactly.

It's so perfectly, bloody, blatantly, couldn't be clearer, see it from space, obvious, I don't know why they still bang on about it.

It's pathetic.

Grown adults pretending to be freaked out by being othered, when they're fucked off with not being pandered to.

i've said it before, these men who go out of their way to promote transgenderism really make you wonder how patriarchy ever got off the ground.

They're idiots.

It can only be due to muscle, none of it's to do with brains.

You got a men's loo, a ladies loo and a gender neutral loo that was previously the disabled, which is how most employers will frig it.

You look pretty much female and nobody has any suspicion that you are disabled in any way that needs you to use a bigger loo. You head off to the loo and a female colleague follows you, expecting to go into the same loos. You peel off to the disabled.

If there were no sexed loos there wouldn't be an issue, but yes I can see how this is considered outing by people who have been completely accepted should be treated as female at work.

It's interesting how basically lying to everyone is regarded in some quarters as ok.

You can tell I am a woman because I am cutting up pear.

Still waiting for your data proving your claim there's more sexual violence in public toilets than workplace/schools/universities.

Still waiting from any data from you. Can you find any data on toilets? Why does it matter if there’s more sexual violence in schools than in a shop toilet? Or a university than a pub? I suppose I could send ages working it out but why? How much violence is enough for you to change your mind on public toilets? What is a public toilet? Not many of us use the traditional council-run public toilet you may be implying is a ‘public toilet’ since there’s only 1 per 15,000 people at a rough estimate in this country. We used to have so many more but they get closed down because of misuse (sex, drugs, vandalism) and the cost becomes too much keeping them in order. In this country councils don’t have a duty to provide public toilets. The true answer of incidents will never be correct as much is kept hidden - a fact you may have discovered. No venue is going to advertise what’s gone on in their toilets.

Also be mindful I am not going to start sharing the exact details on sexual violence from some random man in Australia. I note you aren’t so interested in deaths or hygiene (cleaning and ventilation) which are other reasons why single sex designs are advantageous.

If you have looked you will find it is extremely difficult to assess toilet safety. I can tell you who categorises assaults by location. British Transport Police. But only in station toilets (not in carriages) and then it doesn’t state what design each toilet is. Unhelpfully they list victims of assault by sex but perpetrators by gender. It can be worked out to a certain extent by crime code. They also list deaths in toilets. No murders in 10 years of data. Now that level of detail may seem unimportant but given everything that goes on in toilets it means when there are cries from Victoria McCloud saying about leaving the country and people are going to get murdered in toilets, there isn’t any evidence to suggest they are. There is a death in station toilets around one every five or six months on average. No data on how many people were saved from death by designs. We need designs so that these deaths within toilets can be prevented as much as possible.

…and that Amnesty has a women's single sex space policy….but I won't hold my breath given your track record.

No need to hold your breath. Look at my quotes from Amnesty on the Amnesty Thread. Plan International and WaterAid have similar initiatives of building girls and women’s toilets.

@Imdunfer what you are saying is nonsense.

we can see who are men.

we never consented toto male incursions in to female spaces.

Now as the law has now been clarified so not only do we not have to put up with this in workplaces, it is, as a matter of law illegal to allow it.

so i do not care, (or believe) that anyone will be outed.

But as one our regular posters says, anyone with a hidden disability who needs the facilities of an accessible toilet is “outed” as having a special need when they use that toilet. Why is that any different?

I wouldn’t think to comment if any colleague used the disabled loo. If I was asked about it I’d think that they must have a requirement that’s none of my business and think no more about it.

It does the whole “just want to pee” nonsense up for what it is.

You could also be outed, for instance, by not becoming the Earl of Grantham.

The GRA made it clear that there is no right to privacy where sex is relevant in law, (even in situations where we might think it should be irrelevant).

If it is legal to segregate a service by sex, then sex is relevant.

The only relevant argument is whether it should be segregated.

Making up laws and rights will not get anyone anywhere.

The disabled has been called Accessible for several years because of campaigning from various groups with ambulant conditions that mean accessible toilet design is better for their needs.

Various features try and mitigate the fact they are mixed sex and private. Radar keys, alarm pulls, opening out on to a visible circulation space.

It might help if you are able to follow the thread (which doesn’t seem possible) before making irrelevant random out of context allegations. If you did you would know the context here was the inconsistency in demanding single sex spaces in toilets due to male violence but not elsewhere where sexual violence is more common. You demanded proof of this which you were provided with & now are pivoting elsewhere to avoid acknowledging your ignorance or hypocrisy not sure which but given your bad faith actions I'm going with hypocrisy.

And I'm not going trawl thru threads because I don't believe for one second prove Amnesty's policy of single sex spaces in toilets as you have repeatedly misrepresented facts & as such would be a waste of my time. That you can't quote them here proves this.

Don’t say I am not nice to you.

“At a minimum, this would include setting up single sex, well-lit toilet facilities and separate safe sleeping areas. These women and their children have fled some of the world’s most dangerous areas and it is shameful that they are still at risk on European soil,”
https://www.amnesty.nl/actueel/female-refugees-face-physical-assault-exploitation-and-sexual-harassment-on-their-journey-through-europe

We have learned from so many mistakes in the past that women are at a greater risk for sexual assault and violence if they don’t have separate bathrooms,” says Amnesty International’s deputy director for Europe and Central Asia.
https://qz.com/692711/the-radically-simple-way-to-make-female-refugees-safer-from-sexual-assault-decent-bathrooms

The focus of the campaign for the next year is access to sanitation, safe and private bathing areas for women and improved policing in slums. The recommended actions below call for adequate protection for women from gender-based violence and for more
bathrooms and toilets to be provided for
slum residents. This work is part of Amnesty
International’s Demand Dignity campaign
which aims to end the human rights
violations that drive and deepen global
poverty.
https://www.amnesty.org/ar/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/afr320062010en.pdf
https://www.amnesty.org/ar/wp-content/uploads/2

Refugee camps? Are you serious?

As I said, bad faith.

How does having a disability mean one is one sex or the other?

'suspicion you are disabled' - maybe it's a good time to have a bit of awareness and education about disability. It's not about a loo being 'bigger', it's about accessibility.

You said:
And I'm not going trawl thru threads because I don't believe for one second prove Amnesty's policy of single sex spaces in toilets as you have repeatedly misrepresented facts & as such would be a waste of my time.

I gave you the facts.

Gretel isn't keen on facts.

What I would like to see is more accessibility in single sex design. ‘Ambulant’ designs are good.

(Plus toilets for non-ambulant people within the single sex accommodation).

Well I doubt if all colostomy bag wearers are happy about it either but in their case it's physically unavoidable.