Australian documentary: Who decides?

It will be forever a lost cause in Australia as we don't have the same anti egalitarian cultural influences as the UK does.

It's the way you tell 'em!

Nope, don't let biological facts get in the way of a convenient fantasy.

ie you have no answer.

I remember so many posters would be telling us that there was not enough public support to make changes here in the UK in 2019.

Because of Gillard’s amendment, and the most recent mess that was getting same sex marriage in law, it is going to be harder in Australia. However, the more the public learn what has happened, the greater the slide of support.

It really is ridiculous to see someone post with such prejudiced bias that it is all just ‘far right’ when we also have seen directly what happens when people do this. Women simply ignore those pointing to them as Nazis and get on and get the changes through.

Polarising the argument such as ‘you are all manipulated by Rupert, and are far right’ has never worked because people just laugh. It doesn’t work in most of Australia because, in my experience, many people are simply not into tribal politics as I have seen in the UK. So, like the extremists yelling ‘stop murdering trans people’ and ‘you are all Nazis’ that I have experienced when I go to rallies where mostly left wing women are speaking, those ridiculous claims really only seem to make the person making the accusations feel righteous. Everyone else just has the discussion and continues to campaign.

Telling people that everyone who disagrees is manipulated by Rupert and yelling that they are the genuine feminists and denying public polling is following the countries such as UK because those polling companies are all ‘right wing’ comes accross as shouting into the void. It must be saturday night’s entertainment looking at the lack of coherency in the arguments or even remembering what was said.

Hmm...man who cannot identify a downward trend when he sees it 🤔

I have noticed that the brethren do find all the polling from reputable firms to be very triggering. Hence the 'nighty night', which I read as 'please make it stop'.

Here is a screenshot to show how Australian unisex compartments should be designed. They are floor to ceiling in height (in contrast to single sex design) and the door has be openable outwards from the outside because of the known difficulty of trying to open the door when someone has collapsed behind the door.

https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/editions/2019-a1/ncc-2019-volume-one-amendment-1/section-f-health-and-amenity/part-f2-sanitary-and-dts

As with the U.K., the occupant in a single sex cubicle leading out into a single sex washroom environment does not have to be enclosed. They will have information about who is around them. The occupants in the washrooms know how many people are in the cubicle and crucially will know if they are in need of assistance. It can be shown that this design is not as attractive for misuse, as any misuse is more able to be witnessed.

That’s one reason Australia’s ‘inclusive’ policy change in provision (single sex to unisex) leads to a decrease in health and safety. For example, when people collapse, it will take much longer to notice and this will affect the outcome. I know it will because of all the evidence and real life incidents I have collated.

Does an Australian 'sanitary compartment' by definition include a basin? Or will women exiting the sanitary compartment in a unisex toilet find themselves washing their hands/mooncup/clothing next to men, in a chamber isolated from the rest of the building by another door?

These are also a very good questions!

Apologies long toilet design geek post time.

A sanitary compartment is not a definition we have here but in Australia: ‘Sanitary compartment means a room or space containing a closet pan or urinal’.
It could have a basin in or not. This is more of a ‘catch all’ definition. Your home bathroom will be a sanitary compartment if it contains a toilet (or urinal), but not if it doesn’t.

If you want to go down a rabbit hole about Australian toilets, look up these references. Just as in America, there’s been some very invested people discussing abolishing single sex toilets for years. I am not suggesting they do not care about health and safety but I am saying they have not looked at the health and safety implications of changing standard designs because I have read their work trying to work out their designs. They have not done risk assessments or impact assessments on all different demographics.

https://parlour.org.au/advocacy-and-action/all-gender-bathrooms-an-ncc-update/

This is a key person talking toilets back in 2018, who recently won a gender equity award:
https://architectureau.com/articles/simona-castricum-finding-a-place-for-empathy-in-architecture/

Here’s the lobbying
https://www.abcb.gov.au/sites/default/files/resources/2026/NCC%202025%20Volume%20One.pdf?_gl=11mj948e_gaNjcxNzY1MDQ0LjE3OTM0NDgyNjQ._ga_DE8H8SFX8R*czE3OTM0NjgzMDkkbzMkZzEkdDE3OTM0NzMyODMkajI4JGwwJGgw

This is where I noted their design was similar to the UKs universal design:

• Single access – All-gender amenities to be constructed as single occupant facilities containing a WC, handbasin and means of sanitary disposal, accessed from a non-gendered circulation space

However, this is the actual governments NCC document for this year which I have just looked at and it doesn’t make it clear. So I think it needs further investigation. Maybe the government haven’t thought about the safety implications of entrance/exit routes and why handbasins shouldn’t be shared.
https://www.abcb.gov.au/sites/default/files/resources/2026/NCC%202025%20Volume%20One.pdf?_gl=11mj948e_gaNjcxNzY1MDQ0LjE3OTM0NDgyNjQ._ga_DE8H8SFX8R*czE3OTM0NjgzMDkkbzMkZzEkdDE3OTM0NzMyODMkajI4JGwwJGgw

England’s Approved Document T says: ‘There should be no shared hand-washing facilities in corridors, circulation spaces or shared spaces outside universal toilets…
For good access and the safety of the users, universal toilets, with outward or inward opening doors, must open onto a well-lit corridor or circulation space.

There doesn’t seem to be such clear safeguards in the NCC document as far as I can see with a quick scan.

There has been a concerted effort to change designs for ‘inclusivity’ which prioritises individual privacy over collective safety.

@JellySaurus from F4D4
(13) For the purposes of this part, an all gender sanitary facility comprises 1 closet pan and 1 washbasin within the same
compartment

Still not sure about exits/entrances around unisex toilets.

If anyone is upset by ‘othering’ don’t read on:
Explanatory Information
All gender facilities provided under F4D4(12) are for the use of females, besides others.

There is also:
Not less than one washbasin must be provided where closet pans or urinals are provided.
Half a washbasin is not allowed.

And you be crossing your legs if your the third female to work in an all male workplace:
If the majority of employees are of one sex, not more than 2 employees of the other sex may share toilet facilities if the facilities are separated by means of walls, partitions and doors to afford privacy.

Even I am bored now. But in all honesty in shows how daft this is. If woman/man female/male have no biological meaning then designs, regulations, legislation have no meaning.

Thank you, KTS. You are an absolute heroine to dig through all this.

Frankly, I don't understand half of what those Australian regulations mean. Do they make it so obscure deliberately?

Hope you're right, couldn't get much worse

The reality of biological sex is " colonialist, victorian clap-trap".

Yes, but in Britain the initial resistance movement actually managed to prevent key measures being enacted in parliament and then brought into law in the first place ( Gender Self ID etc). It is always easier not to implement bad law than it is to un-do it.

The tide has already turned......and now it is reaching Australia.
It was the grassroots campaign in nasty, old, regressive, colonialist Britain that first managed to restore some semblance of reason and common sense and halt the insanity in its tracks.

Understanding the reality ( based on a millennia of experience around the facts of sex) seems to be a rather looming existential threat to the claims of trans activists, though, doesn't it?

Does anyone know when or where or how this is airing yet? I registered - not sure if ive recieved/missed an email?

I'm watching now - registered but I think that wasn't necessary, there's just a link at https://whodecidesfilm.com/ . Not sure what will happen after the premiere though.

Please have a read of
https://spectator.com/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists/
Which is a good explanation of how Gender Identity Ideology has made such strides. Also you could watch the Repath Series on Beyond Gender with Stella O'Malley, that is excellent for the history of the trans movement.
Have a look at the Athena Forum website to get a European picture. There are people from all sorts of backgrounds and political perspectives that are deeply concerned about this.
I don't think anyone, if they read what I have read in the last few months, (Helen Joyce's book Trans and Abigail Shrier's book Irreversible Damage and Pornocracy by Jo Bartosch and Robert Jessel) or they listened to or watched Gender A Wider Lens or listened to Julie Bindle's podcast Julie in Genderland could not think that there is a pressing need to unravel Gender Identity Ideology in policies and law and to stop giving children powerful drugs to change their growing bodies. This is an oppressive and dangerous ideology. It has perversely sold the concept of the 'trans child' and has cruelly unravelled the rights of women and children to provide for the needs and desires of a small group of men.

Need to edit my words about need: I said at the end 'needs and desires of a small group of men'. I should have said perceived needs rather than needs. Nobody needs to have their body bits removed as a form of 'meat lego gnosticism' as Mary Harrington so memorably put it.

Oh sweet, it's out! I'm bookmarking to watch later on. The stream is available as a replay.

I actually really want to know why Fairgo doesn’t think lesbians should have dating apps.

I’ve done some very little looking to find the film is produced by a respected Australian showrunner and producer, Tony Ayres. His Wikipedia entry says he’s openly gay and had a traumatic childhood. Maybe there’s one, but I couldn’t find a connection between him and Murdoch with a cursory look.

Thanks.

I didn't expect that there would be.

It is just flinging shit at a wall and hoping something sticks types of accusations to deter people from watching something that someone doesn't agree with.

Fuck any intention of watching something and critiquing it with integrity or simply letting others watch it so they can decide for themselves. No. It is the instant derision and denouncement. When posters show them who they really are , we have to accept they are who they show us.

Spreading misinformation in this way is standard activist behaviour.

I watched this yesterday, a good introduction for people who have been largely unaware of what's been happening. I felt there was a missed opportunity for some statistics to really drive some points home about how widespread it is but I really admire those who turned up to speak on this film and it really hope it gains some correspondence, or could certainly open some eyes. Worth a watch. Great show.

The award for female software engineer of the year yesterday went to a man. https://womenindigital.org/women-in-digital-awards/women-in-digital-awards-2026-winners/

The world has gone crazy, or at least Australia has.