"Misandry is the root of all trans fear. Men’s fear of other men. Women’s fear of all men."

One of the many claimants to the title "the oldest pub in England", back in the eighties, had a gents that opened off the bar and a ladies that was out through a courtyard, up a flight of stairs, and along to the far end of an ill-lit balcony.

They'll have had to change that since for accessibility reasons, but that's how it was back then.

I don't suppose many of the Laydeez would be keen on that! Nobody would see their brave gesture of going for a piss in the wrong place.

For a long time pubs usually had the women’s loos further away from the bars than the men’s, I think because originally they didn’t have women’s loos at all (if a woman visited her local she was assumed to go home for a pee) & so they were an afterthought.

I have nevertheless managed never to invade the gents!

😂😂😂😂 MNHQ we need that laugh emoji

I’ll have you know that we Everton fans rarely have reason to celebrate.

I know. I’d be interested to know whether he refrains from smiling, celebratory drinks, high fives and saying ‘YES!’ in cheerful tones when Everton wins in order to spare their opponents’ feelings or whether he thinks it’s only GC women who should decorously exercise restraint at all times.

I don't think Chopping and Lacksie are the same person, if only because their ideas of what a trans person is don't mesh together.

With Lacksie it seems to be "they just know" right from being a baby, they don't need to know about stereotypes or sex characteristics, and it's to do with something in the brain which we haven't really discovered yet. It's not made clear what "girl" and "boy" actually amount to.

With Chopping and aliases it's about feeling you are typical of, or more like the opposite sex in various unspecified ways, then turning yourself into a facsimile of the opposite sex with hormones and surgery, which is supposed to count as being the opposite sex for social purposes. "Girl" definitely amounts to being girly ( or thinking that you are).

Ah. Tbh I thought Lacksie might be A Flying Lawyer.
Either way, I definitely haven't covered ALL Chopping's various aliases on here.

I gotta be honest here. I largely enjoy omniuserid's posts. I love the way that an argument is advanced and then defeated. Then a new argument is advanced which is defeated. And again and again and again. The final argument can only be "You're all nasty blue meanies and I hate you."

I think you skipped the Lacksie incarnation.

Either way, the talking points are the same, as is the "asked and answered" diversion from any difficult questions.

For argument's sake I'd guess.

All BaileyChoppingNorthernHowseThegoodnewsGretel's "arguments" have been answered/refuted/debunked at various times on myriad threads more than once. Yet he keeps regurgitating them.
He doesn't understand the SCJ.
He doesn't understand "proportionality" despite it being his favourite word.
Or how single sex spaces are created and justified.
He just likes arguing with women.

I find him so mind-numbingly boring I skip over his posts now.

Translates as:
"Whenever I say so"

Bit then he's getting rewarded. I hope they find way to manage him out but it will be a time consuming nightmare for the manager.

They very well might!

I raise the possibility that the other staff might see it as a welcome relief to have him stay at home.

Just a possibility.

In terms of the resentment it would cause from other staff who don’t get this privilege and see that he got it from throwing a tantrum it may or may not be worth it, depending on the circumstances and people involved.

If it's a large organisation where his manager doesn't have to control the employee budget, it's an easy way to manage a troublemaker to let them skive off at home for a bit. One suspects that many managers don't have the enormous energy needed to manage some people.

If he feels unable to work anywhere he has to permit women to have their needed single sex space, then MH grounds probably do come into play. It's going to need to be written into job descriptions and contracts: tolerance of permitting women to have a single sex space. It's somewhat Victorian but would manage expectations from the first day of employment.

Given how captured the medical profession seems to be, I bet it will be that easy for him.

I think it is often overplayed that you can march in to see your doctor and demand to be off work due to stress. I am not sure; but I don't think it's that easy.

And ISTR he was quite contemptuous about her reasonable offer to raise his issue with higher ups re appropriate provision. Because clearly that wasn’t in any way what he wanted.

Usual desperation to find a loophole. In which case you could guarantee, women would find him in there daily, claiming they couldn't stop him because he was allowed if he was desperate.

The manager, thankfully, told him no, in no circumstances whatsoever could he invade women's single sex spaces, and if urgency was a serious problem for him she'd escalate it to see what they could do presumably about a gender neutral one nearer.

But he cleared his desk and went home anyway saying he was going to either work from home permanently or go on sick leave until he found a new job.

He asked her that question apparently.

Yes, he was whining that his manager had told him he could no longer use the ladies’ under any circumstances based on the new Civil Service guidance this week.

when told he had gender neutral facilities and could not use the women's single sex ones, trying 'but what if I'm really desperate and the women's is nearest...'

Whut? Seriously? In my local, the women's loos are near the seating area, the men's are a bit of a walk away. Without fail, ALL the men in the pub manage not to use the women's loos. Do male TRAs have particularly weak bladders or something?
#notforyou

They really, truly cannot stand the fact that women and girls are human and have rights, that women and girls are not on this planet purely for the benefit of men.

Tough - get over it.