Are you tired of winning?

This. I don't know why saying you're going to keep on with the predatory behaviour is seen as a win.

The Equality Act allows a lawfully established separate or single-sex service provider to prevent, limit or modify people’s access on the basis of gender reassignment in some circumstances.

Previously this was interpreted as referring to people with the PC of gender reassignment using spaces of the opposite sex.

Following the SC ruling, it is interpreted as referring to people with the PC of gender reassignment using spaces for their sex.

I just don’t think you should expect to always get what you want.

So why do you?

I’m not tired of being proved right.

I am tired of being abused.

An entire thread, created for the purpose of bullying women is a great example of the tactics of transactivism.

The previous guidance was unclear. I think this is where the case by case idea came from

"A service provider provides single-sex services. The Equality Act allows a lawfully established separate or single-sex service provider to prevent, limit or modify people’s access on the basis of gender reassignment in some circumstances. However, limiting or modifying access to, or excluding a trans person from, the separate or single-sex service of the gender in which they present will be unlawful if you cannot show such action is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This applies whether or not the person has a Gender Recognition Certificate."

Which could be seen as a provider has to justify why an individual man with a GRC or PC of GR can be excluded from a womans single sex services.

Or that the provider could determine if the service could include all men with gender, or no men with gender.

proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim seemed to be used twice, once to justify single sex services in the first places, and again to exclude men with gender.

Ah, ok. Thank you. I thought the previous guidance referred to "case by case" but that may have been something else.

Well. They can use the cubicles can't they?
That's dignity and privacy taken care of.
There's no evidence that their safety is at risk in the men's. So we're all good then?
Good.

Maybe you are right. But that’s a pretty low opinion you have of trans people.

”Most comfortable”: thinking only of themselves? Given what you just said about threat, don’t you think at least some transwomen will want to avoid inflicting that?

And at least some will know the law has clarified this and will abide by that because that’s the right thing to do? It would be more comfortable for me to use the blue badge spaces but I don’t becuase they aren’t for me.

There must be some good ones, surely. Don’t you think?

It never said that explicitly.

It talked about SSE, but also said 'when deciding whether to use an exception, providers of a single-sex service must take a number of factors into consideration. These include the rights and needs of all users, including trans people.'

Yes, you're right. It's the law that hasn't changed but the guidance on how to follow the law has changed.

The previous guidance said that some men (those who identify as women) were allowed to use women's spaces.

This has now been clarified to have been incorrect. The replacement guidance says that they can't.

Yeah, he jumped the shark with that one!

A few months ago I was in a pub and went to use the ladies’ toilet. As I went down the corridor towards it a man (middle-aged, absolutely bog standard bloke) pushed past me and went to go in - I was just behind him at that point and said, politely, ‘sorry, this is the Ladies.’
Well. You’d have thought I had called him a needle-dicked pervent to his face. He gave me a look of pure hatred, muttered something unpleasant, turned and shoulder barged me out of the way.
He was totally, unreasonably, put out at being prevented from using the ladies toilet. The entitlement quite shook me, TBH.
When I went in it was empty. There were two stalls so I think he had been waiting for a chance to go in ahead and ….wait/wank/take photos? Shudder.

Like 2 ?

@FlakyRobin

If a neutral spaces isn’t provided and the accessible space is off limits, then trans people are going to use the space that is most comfortable. It’s just the reality of the situation.

or they could simply comply with the law and use the facilities set up for their sex…

As has been stated so often - there is no such thing as trans - you can’t physically or in any other way transition from man to woman or woman to man - therefore no ability to transition = no such thing as trans.

therefore, they are not trans - they are men / women as per their biological sex… so they do what every other man and woman does - use the spaces provided for their biological sex.

if they don’t then we need to protect others by ensuring that their breaking the law is seen to have consequences - to them and to the organisations that allow it…

Then they are self centred pricks. And don’t give a shit about how female people feel about this.

This is hilarious 😂 You don’t think it’s safe for biological women to share spaces with men, but in the same breath you’re advocating for men (In dresses) to be welcomed into women’s spaces. Haven’t you worked it out yet?

Decency

It's a weird concept, but until, what, ten years ago...? no man, whether wearing a dress or believing himself whatever he believes, would have thought he deserves access to the ladies toilet. Or changing rooms. Or any other single sex space.

Even if he gets his kicks from pretending to be a woman, his love for - and respect for - his mother, sister, daughter, niece... would mean that he would never, ever, colonise their safe and hard-fought space.

From a safeguarding point of view no it's not safe for women to share spaces designed as single sex with men, that's one of the main reasons for why they are designated single sex.

Which is why ALL men, and yes that includes the ones who wish they were women, need to follow the rules and use the gents.

And using your imaginary man that passes as woman...

I don't give a fuck where he pees as long as its not in the women's toilets. That is wholly his issue to solve. If there's a women's single sex loo then there will be a male version near by. If the man doesn't want to use that then that's his problem to work through.

But spaces are divided by sex, not gender.

Gender has no bearing on what space anyone should use.

From what I understand the current status is that Lambeth et al have decided to declare all toilets mixed sex and ignore building standards.

We will have to see how well that goes for those councils.

I am very interested to know whether they have consulted the relevant underwriters.

Also really want to know Mothin Ali's position on all this.

The men (and the OP) certainly seem to think so! It is as it ever was.

@FlakyRobin please can you direct me to the verifiable incidents where transwomen have been unsafe in toilets in the uk? UK court reports or coroner reports would be of use as that is the type of evidence I use rather than anecdotes.

Where transwomen have said they are unsafe it has been in the women’s toilets. I have been researching uk toilet safety for several years. The incidents of verbal abuse and physical abuse I have are unverified incidents of transwomen being shouted at then, in one case, two women pushed the transwoman out of the women’s toilet. No doubt that is distressing for all concerned.

However I do have incidents of transwomen assaulting women and girls, including verified convictions of men who say they are transwomen for the duration of being in the women’s toilets.

I have also collated many incidents of safety breaches around the U.K. involving both sexes. From this evidence, I know single sex designs are safer for everyone.

However, if transwomen are to use the women’s or vice versa, all designs have to become universal. Ironically (especially in England) they could look very similar (except different sanitary bin) but still would have to be designated male and female by a different pictogram on the door. Meanwhile individual privacy would be increased but Health and Safety, in real terms, would be reduced for everyone.

Why not be kind, and use the correct sex toilet so safer single sex designs are there for people who are the most vulnerable?

@iwishitwouldstartraining Lambeth may want all toilets to be mixed sex but they can’t be unless they break building regulations, British Standards, legislation, and HSE and BSR guidance. There’s a problem with urinals too and the Sexual Offences Act (2003). It won’t happen.

”You shouldn’t expect to always get what you want” only applies to women, as the men saying it carry on in full expectation of getting everything they want. Because men are entitled to get what they want, right?

And trans-identifying men who continue to do that that leave no one in any doubt that they are a misogynist who can’t be trusted. Trans-identifying men say they don’t like to be assessed in that way, and there is a very easy way for them to avoid that assessment. 🤷🏼‍♀️

If they want gender neutral spaces where there currently aren't any, they can campaign for them

it's not as though there hasn't been plenty of time to do this.

Even if there were confusion before 2022, the judgement then made it clear that the vast majority of people who identify as trans but do not have a GRC are legally regarded as their biological sex. It has never been likely that this would change. The 2025 judgement only clarified the situation regarding the minority with GRCs.

Even now, instead of getting to grips with what the law says or proposing alternative legislation activists are just relying on magical thinking.