If passport says female

I think it is also important for a scenario like this that as well as acknowledging that mental health should be cared for - there is also an opportunity to reassure... men don't tend to experience any form of violence from men in the loos - so no need for a man pretending to be a women to feel unsafe in the men's loos - no-one is interested, they can come in and pee and leave and even wearing the most 'outrageous' of women's outfits there is unlikely to be any comment...

If there were a strong belief that men cause violence to women in loos and this was a reason for 'trans women' who are now 'women' (so they argue) to avoid going into the men's loos in case of violence against them - then that strong belief would apply even more to men going into women's loos - and thus the trans community would have to admit that a 'trans woman' (i.e. man) in a women's space is far from ideal

so the trans community is confused - they can't argue strongly that they are in danger in men's loo's as it simply supports the argument of women against them being in women's spaces...

but equally it is difficult for them to argue no danger, because then there is no reason to go into the women's loos - the men's loos will be fine!

and to argue the truth that they want to be in women's spaces as men to validate their charade / or for more nefarious reasons is of course the truth that can not be spoken.

tough logic call for them - all because there is no underlying logic to a man claiming to be a woman!

the reality of course is that there is risk when men are in women's spaces which is why a 'trans woman' (man) should not be in women's loos (risk for the women) and has no issue being in men's loos (no risk as man in man's space)

wow there is a bit of a headache in all of that - much simpler of course to go back to men with men and women with women!

so, back to this lad - it is worth reassuring him that as he will clearly be seen as a bloke, whatever he wears - he will have no issues in the men's loos!

@RareGoalsVerge

(Apologies for the slow reply, limited screen time. Due to disability stuff, to be clear, I’m not of an age where I’m having things confiscated!)

The point is that an individual feeling discomfort or even distress about using the correct toilet facilities isn’t an access need. It’s one of the - many - reasons people identifying as trans need REALLY robust MH support; & arguably a reason to provide single-person gender-neutral toilets in addition to accessible ones; but it does not constitute an access need.

I’m looking at accessible toilets as a potential battleground, frankly: disabled people got wheelchair spaces on buses by fighting for them; then spent decades having to defend those spaces from people with pushchairs & bus drivers who weren’t interested; & even now, with it settled legally, wheelchair users get left behind at bus-stops (sometimes featuring horrified pram-wrangler shouting at the driver as she realises & the driver accelerates away) & drivers feel free to make it clear we are an inconvenience. Now it’s loos - already viewed as fine to use for all manner of reasons by a surprising number of people - that need defending as being a resource for people who require them rather than desire them.

... all true, but as his mother I'd be telling him that he was not welcome there.
Pedants' Point: it's The Equality Act, not 'equalities'

Let's be realistic, do you show a passport when you go to the toilet? No. A young male entering the women's toilets is just that, he's not going to whip out his passport and then everyone accepts him in there.

There isn't a law preventing men from going into women's only spaces. The police can't arrest them for that, but they can be arrested for other behaviour.

The equalities act basically protects businesses from being sued. For instance if he walked into a women's toilet, the business could demand he leave, previously he could've sued them because he's legally female, now he can't sue them as the definition of sex has been clarified.

If he wanted to join the WI, the WI can now tell him "no", previously if they said "no" he could bring a lawsuit under the equalities act.

... the fact that he seeks reassurance from a piece of paper just shows how desperately immature and deluded he is. That's really sad - there's no need for anyone to be unsympathetic or aggressive to his face, but I will not be told by anyone that this is anything other than craziness. I don't tell lies.

It's not kind to support a delusion which will make it harder to face and deal with what the real (mental health, autism) problems are, and harder to navigate life because he is pretending all the time.

It's not kind to women to expect us to absorb the rank sexism underlying gender ideology (we aren't a personality type or some clothes), nor give up our safety and privacy for someone who has given not thought to us at all because they are so bound up in themselves.

As a society we are serving these young people with poor mental health very badly by affirming their trans identities.

There are no other situations where we affirm someone’s delusions let alone provide medications and surgery, allowing them to damage their healthy bodies.

It’s hugely difficult for families, but affirmation is not going to put their loved ones on a path to long term health and happiness.

@Screamingabdabz, in transreality that's female priviledge, whereas recognising that transreality is all in the LARPer's head is literal violence.

My teenage dd lived with that from the moment she got consistently catcalled in her school uniform. Fear of male violence is something all women live with and have done since the dawn of time. Why do TW have to be a special case?

Kindness and decency includes being realistic and factual about expectations.

It is not realistic for this individual to expect or hope to be perceived as female.

It is quite realistic to expect to be able to live and interact with the world quite safely and openly with a trans identity and dressing and presenting in line with that. People really aren't that bothered mostly.

It's really difficult to get reliable disaggregated statistics when there have been so many years where the TRA lobby has been insisting that merely saying "male people cannot be female" is recorded as a hatred and people have had police visits for posting facts on twitteX - but in terms of safety the ordinary round of commuting, doing a job, doing the shopping and chores and all that, is perfectly safe. About 60% of victims of transphobic attacks are sex workers - which is not to say that such attacks are in any way acceptable or that the victims are to blame, but just that an individual who identifies as trans and is not planning to become a sex worker is probably a lot safer than they might otherwise be fearful of.

Your kindness can focus on helping build resilience - having the courage to go out into the world confidently claiming and embracing the right to reject gendered expectations is great. Expecting people to actually believe that someone who is clearly male is actually female is unrealistic, but there should be no shame in acknowledging and owning the fact of being a male who prefers to present according to feminine expectations. Resilience will include not letting the occasional sniggers get to you, they are part of the societal pressure towards gender conformity that created the whole realm of gendered division in the first place - if there were no sniggers, it would not be actually possible to be trans because there would be no expectations to reject.

The Equality Act enshrines a trans-identifying person's right not to be discriminated against and this is protection against less favourable treatment in employment, housing and access to services and opportunities. The FWS Supreme Court ruling confirmed this and upholds that trans identifying people have every right to exist and live their lives without fear. The clarification that was needed due to more than a decade of misinformation was just that the comparator for "less favourable treatment" is that a male who identifies as trans should not be in any worse a position than a male who does not identify as trans - rather than that they should have access to anything that is specifically for female people, whose rights to have female-only facilities and opportunities are also upheld and are not open to male people with a feminine gender identity any more than they are open to male people with any other kind of identity.

Being kind and decent to her will help. Transphobic violence is destroying so many trans women's lives.

it isn't being barred from women's facilities she fears. It's being attacked.

@RosaMayBillinghurst I'm sorry you feel offended. I am one of the people who need to use accessible loos - I lost half my digestive tract to cancer and I won't describe the consequences but I have plenty of understanding of the issues you raise, It's just that I don't put every single aspect of everything I know or think on a subject into every post I put on mumsnet.

In case it isn't clear, then yes it is obvious that part of this furore settling down to a new normal needs to be an expansion of the availability of accessible and unisex loos. Provision of accessible loos is absolutely inadequate. What a weird and nasty reaction to have though, when a further form of accessibility need is identified, to say "this resource is too scarce, you can't have it" rather than "this resource is too scarce, building regulations need to force a higher provision"

Approximately 25% of the population have some sort of disability though not everyone with a disability needs an accessible loo - I can't find a reliable statistic but I would guess around half that figure or 13%ish. But obviously many of the reasons why people need an accessible loo also mean that we take longer. I was at a theatre last night where the provision had approximately 12 units for males (10 urinals 2 cubicles), 12 units for females (all cubicles) and one accessible loo. There was a long queue for the women, no queue at all for the men, and I was one of 3 queueing for the accessible loo but my wait took longer than if I'd been able to join the womens queue. I believe that the obligation needs to be on providers to devote more floorspace to womens loos than to mens, and also that a minimum of one third of the units provided should be accessible.

The number of trans-identifying people is less than 1% and only a small fraction of those will have a dysphoria reaction so intolerable that they can't bear to use the facilities for their sex - but if it would be damaging to the mental health of a person to have to face that conflict on a daily basis then I don't see that as any less worthy a need than my physical and practical needs for a different kind of toilet provision and the number of people affected will simultaneously be not an overwhelming addition to the ranks of those who already need accessible loos but also a high,profile addition whose needs are getting a lot of attention and this could be of wider benefit if the consequences are a wider and more reliable provision of accessible loos.

It's generally accepted by most people that if it would cause a male person distress to ha e to use the mens loos then that's an accessibility need and it's perfectly reasonable touse the unisex accessible loo

That, frankly, is just as offensive as people insisting that TWAW & thus most women don’t mind TW using female loos.

The government don’t think it’s an appropriate solution - their 2024 Equality Impact Assessment on toilet provision specifically refers to it as a “misuse” of accessible toilet provision.

The provision of accessible toilets in the UK is already inadequate - Euan’s Guide Access Survey Results (2024) are one way to illustrate that (73% of respondents have come across a disabled toilet they’ve been unable to use; & while 22% of respondents who use Changing Places Toilets find them easy to locate, 79% do not!). Another is to consider that the £30 million investment in Changing Places Toilets promised in 2021 was enough to build 483 toilets. The number of people who need access to a Changing Places Toilet in order to go out for any length of time is approximately 1.08% of the population; clearly the number of people who need to use an accessible toilet because eg they’re a wheelchair user/use a walker/need the grab rails/have to change a colostomy or urostomy bag/will have a meltdown at the hand-dryers + door-slamming is vastly VASTLY greater. New developments - & redevelopments - of a certain size now having to include CPTs is progress; but it’s slow progress.

What disabled people absolutely do not need is yet more people making free with already-inadequate facilities.

TBH very few men don't still look like a man, even when making an effort.

I don’t want to derail this conversation but what was his thinking about changing his passport sex if he still looks like a man? This will presumably cause all sorts of problems at the borders in countries which have not had the same level of trans awareness raising that the U.K. has? Why add complications to the already stressful experience of foreign travel?

I am glad you asked this question. There may be people reading this who did not realise you can change the sex on a passport by doing nothing. You don't need to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate, even.

And I agree, this is probably going to mean he gets a lot more attention at border control, and that will not be pleasant if he is having mental health problems.

I hope he doesn't expect a woman to pat him down if he gets searched?

Under the Equality Act he is entitled not to be discriminated against, compared to other men. That means, if other men, who don't 'identify' as trans aren't allowed to go somewhere, do a job, or take part in a sport set aside for women, nor is he. Sorry if he's been misled about that.

This young man may find travelling a bit of a shock if he gets outside the Anglosphere with his passport. There are many countries where they won't hide their incredulity when faced with an obvious male in possession of a female passport. They may find it highly suspicious, too, and might not be very kind about it.

No cubicles, and separate from the ones marked for women and men. Both the ones I mentioned are one toilet and handbasin in a single, lockable room, just as you describe they need to be.

Cautious agree - but what's behind that door and what did it used to be? If they have put a gender neutral label on a room that contains just cubicles and shared sinks, and was previously a women's loo, then (a) that isn't compliant with building regs which requires unisex loos to have floor to ceiling enclosure and individual hand-wash facilities in each unit and (b) this action has reduced the provision for women - that's a detriment that could certainly be considered discriminatory if getting to a single sex loo is now a right pain.

But if it wasn't made that way then it's great! It's important for there to be some unisex facilities everywhere.

I’ve been out for coffee this am. I noticed that as well as the existing traditional loos, through one door then divided into men’s and women’s, there was a separate door with a sign saying ‘gender neutral toilet’. There is also one like that at the leisure centre where I swim. I’m a woman, I occasionally use it if I can’t be bothered going through the changing rooms to the Ladies. Let’s hope more of these start being available.

Yes, I think this is true in many cases.

No regardless of what his passport says, he's still a male, so he can't enter female only spaces.
When the politicians allowed the sex category on passports to be changed to anything the person wanted they rendered the document useless for verification purposes. Just like birth certificates, driving licences and all the other documents that could once be relied upon for ID, all meaningless now.
Beyond me why he would want to change his passport considering how devalued the information on is, if he needs a bit of paper to prop up his delusions he's knows what he's telling himself is not true, so nothing will be enough.

Well yes it's daft, but unless the government passes legislation to require all passports henceforth to be an accurate statement of sex (which I don't think they will) the fact is that passports with fictional untrue information have been issued, therefore a passport is not a reliable or meaningful document to prove or disprove what sex someone is.

"Sex and gender are two different things. Gender is controlled by the individual. Sex cannot be changed and for this individual will always be male."

This is why it's particularly daft to change things like sex on documents such as passports, because passports record the holder's the sex not the holder's gender (identity).