There's something racist about toilet provision in the UK.

[The13thFairy]

Am I being unreasonable to think there's something racist about 'oh, women and men can use the same toilets' here in the UK, when in developing countries and refugee camps, providing clean, safe and separate facilities for girls and women is seen to be of the utmost importance - because we know those foreign fellas will prey on them every chance they get; peeping, assaulting, you name it. Our British chaps, though, wouldn't say boo to a goose! Perfectly safe. Won't cause a moment's unease. Totally trustworthy, every man jack of them.

I often wonder if some people sit and think how they can get uptight about something. Do they have a checklist which they can tackle each day? It's Saturday, let me consult my list. Oh yes, I need to shoehorn racism in today. Now let's start a nonsense thread. 🙄 It really does the cause of fighting discrimination and zero favours.

No. They are saying men here in predominantly white Britain/ Northern Europe are no danger to women and women have nothing to fear from having them in their loos and changing rooms and showers, but men in developing countries, mostly places where people have brown or black skin, cannot be trusted to share spaces with women. The irony is that almost all the men who seek access to women's spaces her sin the UK are white, because AGP and transgenderism tends to be a white middle class movement. Look at all the photos of the topless men with moobs out, or the Trafalgar Square protest. How many black or brown faces? Not many. Transgender protests are the preserve, mainly, of white, far-left male misogynists — though there are a fair few female misogynists in there too.

I think the racism was implied in the different standards suggested for toilets in the UK and those in foreign countries - as if men here were more trustworthy.

Our toilet provisions are not in any way racist, but Amnisty and UNWomen are.

I don't think it's racist exactly.

Just utterly incoherent and lacking any logic.

Oh Gawd you lot, give it a rest will you?

This.. “I’m not giving to/ shopping at wherever because they have different opinions on Trans to me” is virtue signalling at its worst.. and so 5 years ago!
You’ve won, Primark has a big sign up saying changing rooms are for women only.
Go and find something else to be outraged about.

I knew what you were getting at OP, and you raise a valid point.

Organisations like Amnesty actively campaign for safe, single sex toilet and washing facilities elsewhere, here, they actively campaign against it.

Its almost as though they think only black and brown men rape.

Two words. Harshita Brella. Have you actually seen the way women are routinely treated by men in some countries? Bit hard to feel safe when you are ruled by a patriarchy that has outdated views of women and is not progressive.

Females being able to use a female toilet I would imagine falls into basic human rights.

Feeling a different gender and wishing to use toilets that assign with that disillusion I would imagine is not a basic human right.

One group has to trump the other on this one. And that has to be the one that is asking for a basic human right. It's not rocket science.

The other minority group shits out. That's the way it is. Doesn't mean you have to be cruel and abusive and hostile towards said group.

Ohhh FFS! The pivots that some posters are willing to make in order to make a point is at best tedious and at worst, insulting.

Around 1.4 billion people have no access to a private toilet and around 2 billion have no access to clean water in their home. It's hardly the same fight. I think it's a bit disgusting to equate the two

This with fucking bells on!!!!!!

Why are you trying to police what women talk and care about?

Exactly. Which is why women need single sex spaces. The OP is questioning why the same organisations understand that, but then campaign for mixed sex spaces ant the same time. Do they believe UK women do not deserve single sex spaces or do they believe UK men are somehow different to those in developing countries?

I understand and agree with the point you are making @The13thFairy - but I don't think it's general racism as such because the vast majority of people who are pushing for more unisex toilets in the uk have absolutely no involvement with provision of toilet and washing facilities at refugee camps, and the people providing toilet and washing facilities at refugee camps generally have no influence over decisions about unisex toilets in the uk.

It is certainly well known among the people doing relief work in refugee camps that without strictly single-sex facilities, rape statistics skyrocket.

If you could find and identify specific individuals who understand the necessity of and implement single-sex policies in African/Asian countries and who simultaneously support and promote mixed-sex policies in the UK then you could certainly accuse those specific individuals of racism.

No, not racist. WTH?

Tell that to my place of work…

Imagine presenting your hypothesis to your tutor: the emergence of racism in toilets in the UK.

😅

But these organisations are being racist. They are claiming that men in developing countries are somehow more of a danger in mixed sex spaces than the men in the UK. Can you imagine if Nigel farage made the same statement? How is that not racist? Either all men are an equal risk in mixed sex spaces or none are.

It's not racism, it's misogyny.

All women need single sex provision becaise we know men are a risk to us. That's recognised otherwise we wouldn't be told that if men want to hide in toilets to rape us they will do so there's no point in trying to keep them out - they'll do it anyway.

One of the markers of a civilised society is single sex toilet provision for women to protect privacy, dignity and safety.

Some countries have been behind others in providijg these single sex spaces and so there is a big focus it in some places.

In 2017, "Toilet: Ek Prem Katha" (translated as "Toilet: A Love Story") was released in India. A film about the fight of women in rural India to get toilet provision. In India, women in rural communities went/go (not sure of the current status) into the fields to go to the toilet together to lessen the risk of being sexually assaulted by men who would effectively lie in wait for them. It was a problem that hadn't been addressed.

Toilets didn't become mixed sex here because people decided that Western/white/whatever men presented less of a risk to women but because some of those men started claiming to be women and demanded the right to enter women's single sex spaces.

People in general (men and many, sadly and unfathomably, women) don't feel comfortable with women having the right to say, "No," to men and asserting their boundaries. And so they contorted themselves to believe TWAW to be ok with it.

They still believe that women need single sex spaces but in order to circle the square of not wanting men in women's spaces but not wanting to say no to men's wants in favour of women's needs and rights, they lied to themselves and pretended that men who say they are women became women no different to us.

It's misogyny.

Plenty of men dressed as women in south Asia, from street beggars to high society.

I agree OP, this type of ‘double standard’ is common amongst ‘liberal’ people, and they don’t see the racism in it.

I think the racism bit is a misnomer. Semantics key here.
the point you make is valid. That in some countries the provision of single sex toilets is seen as a priority in terms of women’s and girls health.

i think it is cultural not racism. In these countries the men have little doubt who the women are biologically. Women are segregated. Men see women who are not “protected” by a man at any moment as fair game to make sexual advances to- either low level harrassment, to rape and murder. The lack of casual social interaction between men and women make every encounter without a chaperone a risk for women. And risk is more keenly felt as women are often blamed entirely for what befalls them. Without toilet provision women are seen, even by a woke amnesty, as sitting ducks at their most vulnerable when relieving themselves in fields etc.

but this isn’t race. You only have to go back to pre 1893 and women in this co7ntry were in the SAME position. The often cited “toilet leash”. Women could not go out for the day due to lack of toilet provision for them. They were chained to their homes. Working class women were limited at jobs they could do, and working in groups of women where toilet provision became a necessity for employees, or they worked near/in their homes to use toilets (hence the segregation’s in many factories of women’s work vs men’s work )

Women fought for years to remove the toilet leash, until the law was changed to provide women’s toilets in 1893. Just the same as women fought for years to have single sex segregated jails.

before those battles were won, women were just as vulnerable as women are today in developing countries where amnesty is fighting for their provisions.

it is a culture of keeping women in their place (homes) and under control. Women need toilets to be independent, self sufficient and live a life outside of the home. Patrichial Culture wants to keep them there

in the west most men, and a lot of women have very short memories. Becuase we’ve moved away form the horrors of women being limited by the toilet leash, or vulnerable to sexual assualt every time they need to relive themselves, society has forgotten. The “not all men” was always the case, but sufficient numbers of men will always see women in lone position as an entitlement to harass or abuse. And a sufficient number of men and women, see no issue with subversively reintroducing the toilet leash, even if it’s an “unconscious bias” to being kind and inclusive to “everyone”.

the west, and amnesty staffers here, have forgotten their history. They’ve given away hard fought rights and laws. And made it out to be a fuss over nothing, it couldn’t happen.

but in developing countries they haven’t got there yet, and it’s patently obvious the cultural gap still makes women a sitting target.

so not racism. A blindness to cultural gaps between developed and developing countries. Or cultural gaps where women are still second class citizens.

But in the UK women are now becoming second class citizens all over again. And these Aid organisations are condoning that. Do they really believe Western men are more able to be trusted than those in developing countries? Why? Because of culture?

Spot on. But it's misogyny that underpins the divide.

It's misogyny that positions women as 'second class citizens'.

Unfortunately, misogyny is far too big a fish to fry so all any culture or society can do is recognise it and put safeguards in place to protect women.

Or, in the case of Britian, just make sure that misogyny isn't considered in hate crime legislation (some of the reasons given were around the unintended consequences of how it might negatively impact men).

No. Its because some men wanted to enter women's spaces and so they had to find a way of allowing that because women are still regarded as 'less than' men in Western society otherwise we wouldn't have been falling over ourselves to appease a few men's wants over all women's needs.

I think thst might be it. So not racist but misogynistic to the core,