Why can't people respect the rules around toilets!?!?

[coffeeandmycats]

I’m really angry and just need to get this off my chest. Me and my sister run a small shop, just the two of us and a couple of customer toilets, one for biological women, one for men, signs on the door. Never had any trouble. Until today.
A regular female customer comes up looking pretty upset, says there’s a man in the women’s loo. I go in to check. At first it sort of looked okay, hair, maybe a trans woman? But then I heard a deep voice, saw stubble and a broad build, a wig that looked like a last-minute costume. It was clearly a bloke who didn’t pass. Not even close.
I said politely, this is the women’s loo, please leave. He stared at me and said flat out, “I was born female.” Not I identify as a woman, he literally claimed he was biologically female. I asked him to go and he refused.
So I rang 101, didn’t want drama and wasn’t sure what rights we had as shop owners. The police said we can’t challenge how someone describes themselves. If he says he was born female, that’s it. We’re not allowed to question it based on how he looks. And since no laws were broken, they won’t come unless he’s being abusive or refusing to follow reasonable requests after shouting multiple times.
They also confirmed that the new Supreme Court judgment about women-only spaces is civil law, not criminal. That means even though legally women are defined by birth, you still can’t challenge someone in the moment just because they say they’re female.
I looked into it after, and yep, the Supreme Court (in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers) ruled that “woman” in the Equality Act 2010 means biologically female. But that applies to protecting women-only spaces under civil law. It doesn’t let us stop someone on the spot from walking into the wrong loo. The police still can’t act if someone says they’re female, even if it’s clearly false.
This bloke walked into the women’s loo, lied about being born female, made women uncomfortable, and we’ve got no legal leg to stand on to stop him. Women customers left feeling unsafe.
So what exactly are we supposed to do? Sit back and let it happen because the law only kicks in later on? Are we just meant to trust someone who’s lying about their sex to decide what sexed spaces they can use?
It feels like women’s rights are just words, no power in real life. Anyone else run into this mess in their business? I'm nearly losing my mind over how absurd this is.

They aren’t though. It doesn’t reflect what you’re claiming. Toilets are relevant, along with all single sex spaces/services/associations of 25 or more people. And in fact many key scenarios where sex is important were discussed during the SC hearing.

I’d keep them locked and customers have to ask for the key. You can make sure you give them the right key.

Edit: My Screenshots from the report previously linked seem to be deleted.

& in particular quoting the SC

It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word “woman” other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010.

They did however rule on the definition of “woman” as a biological female when it comes to single sex spaces. With all your “legal expertise” do you really not grasp this?

Single sex spaces provided to the public are relying on the single sex exceptions in the Equality Act.

"nor is it to define the meaning of the word “woman” other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010."

If you say so.

I don't think the fact that someone identifies as trans is important enough to justify the actual erasure of women in law and public life.

If trans women are women (they're not) then the word "woman" no longer means anything and actual women have no word for themselves and no sex based rights. It's astonishing how many people will publicly admit to being fine with that as though it is some sort of badge of pride.

this is firmly in the remit of the Equality Act 2010.

So then stand by the women advocating for single sex spaces. Or you will literally end up with what you don't want.

What do you think the purpose of the single sex protections in the Equality Act 2010 is, and why are you trying to claim that the government says toilets aren’t included, exactly @SoMuchBadAdvice?

You run a cat cafe, yet you have enough room for two sets of toilets? Not just one cubicle of each, but proper sets with more than one cubicle? Must be a massive cat cafe. Were you peeking into the stall when you saw the man? Or were they washing their hands? If so, they were probably about to leave anyway. This is complete rage bait. Nearly every cafe I have ever been to has got just enough room for one toilet. Who are you? MacDonald's?

Well not just men. I’ve seen several posts on threads over the years where women have suggested that trans women should use disabled facilities. No. Not good enough. If you don’t want trans women in women’s lavatories, why should disabled people accommodate them?

Plus a change table in both toilets, I don't believe this for a minute!

Lots of people who make this decision on behalf of public spaces disagree with you.
Perth Museum, for example. Very new facilities (in an old building). Unisex, self-contained and kept spotlessly clean. It presumably took account of stats and still concluded that this is the best solution.

Even if you think the poster isn't in good faith, the numerous posters supporting that if it was that the man was going into the women's and that's okay shows that people aren't prepared to follow the law.

Men do this. I suggest you listen to trans people.

https://x.com/marycatedelvey/status/1897370783816790064

The museum sector is very ideologically captured.

we rented a building, did it up and turned it into a cat cafe. it came with the toilets attached, why is that hard to believe?

also people keep commenting on the change table but they are like 250 pounds plus an hour to install...

Oh the drama!

Male people exist. Female people exist.

Whatever it is that makes a male person believe himself "a woman", it is manifestly not the same thing as being female.

So there should be no issue whatsoever with being accepted as a trans "woman", whatever that is, and also being expected to continue to use male single sex provisions.

Being seen as your actual sex is not "erasing" anyone from public life. There is no rational reason or arguement whatsoever by which something inside a male person's head makes them any more a female person than any other man.

If you can give me one concrete reason, just one, why a trans women's "gender" has anything whatsoever to do with my "sex" then please do, I am genuinely all agog to learn it.

But until you can come up with an arguement that is anything other than "(s)he says (s)he's just like you and that's good enough for me, and if you were a nice person you'd just accept what (s)he tells you as well", I'm afraid all I see is women being manipulated to put men's needs ahead of their own the same as always.

also if there is only a change table in the womens can a man use it? I assume not but i'm not sure

Really? By whom?

I would have thought that as many are under the auspices of local authorities, they would adhere absolutely to the latest health and safety advice.

You need to check out the posts of @keeptoiletssafe. She is really knowledgeable in this area. She saved the life of someone who passed out in a cubicle (with gaps under the door so could see there was a problem) and sadly was unable to save another because they were in a completely blocked off space.

Gaps under doors are there for a reason.

By the trans brigade, among other trendy causes.

Because that's what the HoC report says, I've linked to it, why don't you read it? Especially the bit about Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, which does address toilets.

You can also read the actual SC judgement, which doesn't use the word toilet once.
https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0042_judgment_updated_16f5d72e76.pdf

It's a bit depressing providing screenshots, links, & quotes, and then getting replies from people who haven't bothered to read the actual documents that they are posting about.

I'm done.

But is that not exactly what trans people are doing when they claim to live as the opposite sex? How can anyone claim to be really the opposite sex in their mind without believing firstly that the opposite sex all think in a specific way, and secondy that they are somehow privvy to this feeling and also experience it despite in reality having no idea whatsoever what it is to be the opposite sex and be treated as the opposite sex are treated?