Bristol Watershed toilets situation.

I like to inform people as you know 😁

Dear Watershed,

Thank you for your response. I’m afraid it raises further concerns.

You state that the EHRC code “suggests” you must formally recognise these toilets as mixed‑sex. The code does not require organisations to remove single‑sex toilets, nor does it prohibit maintaining them. It also does not state that failing to convert a single‑sex toilet into a mixed‑sex one creates legal risk.

Your decision has effectively removed an accessible women‑only space. The only remaining single‑sex women’s toilet now requires entering the cinema area or seeking permission, which is not equivalent provision.

Please confirm:

• The specific part of the EHRC code you believe obliges you to remove single‑sex signage
• Whether Watershed intends to restore an accessible single‑sex women’s toilet

I value Watershed greatly, but this change has made the venue less accessible and less welcoming for women who prefer or require single‑sex facilities.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Excellent, another thread breaks out on X to make the world think MN is nothing but a refuge for cranks who have nothing in their lives but a toilet obsession.

I don't know or care about Watershed but it seems they've taken the safest way to negotiate the comically absurd EHRC 'guidance'. Take a moment to enjoy the EHRC explaining law to the select committee.

about:blank Dr Stephenson and the Select Committee

Interesting comment at 10:12, 'there is no criminal offence of using the wrong space'. She's correct, there isn't, no matter how much agitators and right-wing rags lie about it.

Some gems from this absurdist comedy.
Service providers are legally responsible
Service providers are not expected to enforce the law
Service providers can set whatever rules they like for their service
There is no legally reliable test to establish the sex of a service user
There is no criminal offence of using the wrong space

And similar observations that leave service providers saying 'wtf do we do to remain lawful and not subject staff to the stress of being toilet police.'

To call it a dogs breakfast is to be rude about dogs breakfasts. Expect many more services to follow the Watershed example.

Let's see what their insurers say.

You are not reading and taking in what I have written. From what I can see of this venue’s toilets, I disagree they have taken the safest way.

If collating loads of information about health and safety incidents in toilets makes me a crank so be it. I am campaigning to make toilets safer and to do that I have listened to everyone’s viewpoints. But I also look at academic articles and design solutions from around the world. I have read local newspapers around the country, coroners reports and police reports and done FOIs to get further information on statistics. Most of all I look at what happens in real life.

You may be unaware it is almost unheard of to be murdered in a non-domestic toilet. Scare-mongering on social media would suggest otherwise. However, dying in a non-domestic toilet is relatively common. It’s where you rush to when you feel ill. It’s also where you could have an overdose as it’s a common place to do illegal things. To stand a better chance of surviving a bad stroke, seizure, cardiac arrest, choking incident etc you need to be noticed on the floor of your cubicle. To take one example, British Transport Police data shows on average a person has died every 5 to 6 months in a station toilet for the last 10 years. It doesn’t break this down to design or how many were rescued. These deaths are from medical incidents or self harm. No homicides.

The reason this is relevant here is that their ‘inclusive’ design means total privacy which is more dangerous. ‘Inclusive’ is a misnomer - it’s least worst for healthy men. What I do know from investigating a lot of toilet deaths is that private design delays finding a person by hours or sometimes days.

Toilets are vulnerable places. That’s why there’s a special section just for them in the Sexual Offences Act (2003). That’s a whole other section of a very large report I have compiled with lots of facts and figures.

I really do know what I am talking about when it is about toilet design and safety. It’s also common sense.

Despite what you have said, it is very easy to be lawful. Just follow building regulations.

Link is broken, try again, do watch if you enjoy absurdist comedy

If toilets are not "safe spaces" anyway, as is being asserted up thread, everyone may as well use the correct toilet for their natal sex and have done with it.
There's no excuse for demanding any other arrangement or for spending money on changing perfectly serviceable Ladies' and Gents' to accommodate the preferences of a tiny minority.

It is really simple. Just use the gents with all the other blokes, there's a good chap.

Women campaigning for single sex facilities, services and spaces are 'cranks'.

TRAs having piss protests, topless demonstrations, and petitions about buckets to shit in are stunning and brave.

EHRC guidance, the new toilet provision and the remaining single sex, fully enclosed toilets, aside, if the toilets the OP used are cubicles inside a room then they simply don’t meet the requirements for mixed sex usage.

“And whilst I expect most Trans+ people are using the inclusive loos, there are some Trans + people who (like some cis people) prefer not to use gender neutral toilets.
The only change we have made is signage - the updated EHRC code suggests we need to formally recognise these toilets as mixed sex and tell people we have done so. This is not illegal, in fact without new signs the EHRC code could have left us vulnerable to legal action.”

It seems they are trying to say these toilets are mixed sex but gender specific, whilst believing the new signage protects them from legal action even the toilets don’t meet the requirements. Very odd.

The Watershed is truly dreadful.
Their stairs are painted with the hideous Progress Pride Flag.
It is my nearest cinema but I no longer go there.
It's a trans activist organisation and no longer safe for women.

Women in Bristol know and care about a cinema that has chosen to make its toilets knowingly less safe for women.

May I jump on this with a question about another public/entertainment venue please? I am 99% certain the set up is not permitted, but to check before I contact them. The venue is used by all ages, kids to pensioners.

These toilets have 2 separate doors, but leading to the same bank of toilets. The door signs just say "toilet", no specifics. You can walk in one door, and out the other if you want.

Inside is one long row of cubicles with floor to ceiling doors, BUT the sinks are all outside the cubicles in a row opposite.

This was in a lower ground floor, and I didn't see a disabled toilet or lift facility in that area, but I wasn't looking closely (ditto for baby change). But it is relatively new build (2000s?), so I'd be very surprised if there was no disabled access/baby changing.

Thank you!

I think Bristol is generally considered as ‘woke’ so I doubt they will change this. I don’t think that trans women actually want mixed sex. They want to be able to go into a female only space. So The Watershed are being inclusive but not actually giving the trans community what they want. Men don’t especially like this set up either as they can’t just use a urinal & be straight in to loo & back out again. They have to queue up. Many women don’t want mixed sex either as the cubicle won’t be as hygienic after a man has been standing up to pee in there. So I can’t understand why they have invested so much in the new toilets.

YANBU but I can’t see it changing.

@TemporarilyCantDoMyself I think this contains what you’re after.
“ADT 1.22
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.
If the cubicle doors or partitions have door gaps, they can only lead on to a single sex environment.

I think that Watershed are trying to give TW exactly what many of them want, which is affirmation for some and fetishistic pleasure for others. The clue is in how they are badging the toilets. They accept that they are mixed sex, but they are not labelling them as mixed sex. They are labelling them as Women's Trans+ inclusive (and Men's Trans+ inclusive).

The women in the toilets are a resource for the men.

https://www.watershed.co.uk/info/everything-you-need-know-about-toilets-at-watershed

I just looked at Clare Reddington’s LinkedIn & it’s predominantly Trans+, toilets & refugee articles - there is very little about the cinema or the creative industry. So I doubt your email will have any impact. I think a lot of the younger generation would probably like the inclusive vibe.

According to LinkedIn they have free cinema & popcorn for asylum seekers in local hotels. I can’t see the asylum seekers wanting to have communal toilets - I don’t think Trans & Muslim faith communities share many common values. It’s a nice idea however to offer something to those people, but I just don’t see it working.

1.22 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.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6901feb971b575684c3cf7c4/ADT_2024_rev16Jun25.pdf

Page 4 (14/36)

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6901feb971b575684c3cf7c4/ADT_2024_rev16Jun25.pdf

Requirement T1: Toilet accommodation

Intention

a. Separate single-sex toilet facilities are provided. Universal toilets can be provided in addition to single-sex provision and where space allows.

All toilet accommodation should have clear and appropriate signage

No not single cubicles, mixed sex (Universal) toilets must be Toilet facilities provided in a fully
enclosed room which contains a water-closet
and washbasin and hand-drying facilities.