Tried three places for lunch today and none cater for women

[Mrsmunchofmunchington]

I went out for lunch today with a friend.
Well, at least we tried to have lunch.
All three places, two pubs and one cafe, were not suitable for women because you needed a penis to get into them or to use the toilet.
We ended up coming back to my home instead.

AIBU to think that everywhere should offer equal service to women?
Or is it my fault for not checking in advance that I could eat there without a penis?
Should I have researched on tripadvisor?
Am I too entitled expecting businesses to ensure non penis having people can pay to eat lunch at their establishment?

Day in the life of a disabled person.

There are loads of pubs/cafes here that are inaccessible. Mind you, there are loads that are accessible too. So there would definitely be a choice of places.
Not sure about changing places toilets though.

It's all women talk about, didn't you know?

I have disabilities as well OP but I do check ahead. I'm always impressed when the information is there and clear.

I was looking at West Horsley Place, 'Button house' in the Ghosts series.

https://westhorsleyplace.org/visit-us/access

They have detailed information about steps, gravel, even details of the accessible toilets with photos.

They have gone to such effort to explain the features that are or are not accessible it would seem a waste not to use the guide.

Yes it is shit that not everywhere is accessible, but what is accessible to one person might not be to another eg the raised bumps that tell a blind person they are about to step in to the road are not great if you use crutches.

I imagine it is the same with a food allergy, you will probably need to phone ahead and check.

The only reason why she used the sex of people is because most people on here are women and she was trying to get it across how it feels as a disabled person to be excluded from accessing places.

Sometimes places can appear accessible or even say they are accessible when you call but it's a whole other story when you actually go which is also a reason why it isn't always as simple as calling ahead because you soon learn that you have to ask 50 questions each time.

You don't need to 'womansplain'. It's obvious with hindsight now she's explained but the vast majority of posters had no idea what she meant.

Her analogy doesn't work though.

That's because 51% of the population are women. But 51% of the population do not have a disability impacting on access to a cafe or toilets.

So, being in a minority she can't expect everywhere to cater for her needs- harsh as that sounds, but it's a sad fact. I'm fully in agreement with everywhere catering for anyone with a disability but that's not how it is.

For example, my friend could say every shop , supermarket, railway station, garden centre, whatever, must have a toilet available at all times as their IBS causes immense stress when going anywhere.

So to try to make life easier, they phone up or investigate online.

I suppose OP must have been in an unknown town because normally you'd know which cafes etc were suitable.

Approximately 1.9 % of the population use a wheelchair. Rebuilding everything to accommodate them might be a laudable aim but it won't happen. Just having clean loos for the other 98% would be a good start.

Disability is a protected characteristic just the same as sex which is another reason why I assume she made the analogy.

Sigh...some people are determined to pick holes in anything. I understood you almost immediately @Mrsmunchofmunchington and it is shocking the lengths some posters are going to to let you know how wrong you are! I do agree that accessibility needs are different for everyone, however many places don't even try, because it's only 1 or 2 customers as far as theyre concerned

The analogy doesn’t really work though, does it?

Being refused access because you don’t have a penis would be a pure, discriminatory choice made by the person responsible for who is allowed to enter the premises and order food.

Being unable to access the premises due to practical, physical obstacles is different.
It could be a choice - the owner just hasn’t bothered to make alterations to the premises to facilitate wheelchair access - but often it’s not through choice and more to do with the fabric of the building and conversion being impossible or far too costly to be practicable.

Having said all that, I’m sorry you had such a frustrating day. At least now you can cross those venues off your list and explore others that may be able to accommodate your needs.

Protected characteristic? Protected doesn't equate to being catered for in 100% of places you may like to visit.

You're confusing being actively discriminated against and there simply not being facilities for everyone in the population, not as a matter of principle but the practicalities.

Only almost immediately.

My son had a stoma for 9 months. I'm well aware of how inaccessible toilets can be for those with hidden disabilities too as my son is both physically disabled and has a hidden disability.

I feel the same way about that too. Of course toilets should be more stoma friendly/hidden disability friendly.

The problem though is that there is such variation in what accessible truly means for each individual person and it is a very rare place indeed which can cater for any and all comers.

My wheelchair-using father had very different access requirements to my friends 9yr old, who is mobile-ish but incontinent and who needs a hoist in a toilet to be changed.

There are yet again different access requirements for those who are vision impaired or hearing impaired. And yet again different requirements for those who are autistic and who can't handle certain lights or noises. And again for those who are less mobile but who don't use a chair. And in all cases each person is different and what they need is different.

There is no "one size fits all" when it comes to accessibility.

I therefore do not think it unreasonable that specific requirements are checked before hand.

You are wasting your time, I'm afraid. If anything was gong to change, it would have by now.

Just almost not right away then? Being disabled and having limited to no access to buildings and facilities has bugger all to do with what the op was going on about ! Being cryptic to try and convey a message is not only irritating but inaccessible.

That's true. Though if somewhere claims to have an accessible toilet, I'm always surprised when it is actually down 3 steps or can barely fit in a child's wheelchair so an adults wheelchair isn't going to fit in.

I've given up asking about proper changing facilities, especially with hoists available.

So many people on here fixating on there being an accessible toilet and wondering why you would need to check anything in advance.

I have a family member who is a wheelchair user. They don't need access to a toilet away from home so this isn't an issue. They also use a battery powered chair which is big (and heavy). When they were younger and in a "manual" chair it was no problem to lift/bump them up and down a few steps, but there is no way to do this with the current chair. Low tables are also a problem as they cannot comfortably get close enough to the table.

Their chair requires a fair amount of space to move around, so no matter how "accessible" a venue is, if it has tightly packed tables and chairs then that is a problem. See also "door widths". The door may well be wide enough, but if the entry is via a ramp which sits at right angles to the door, there may not be enough space to negotiate the turn - maybe try doing it with a fully laden supermarket trolley or a double buggy and see how you get on.

The challenge and confusion is that there are places where they only admit men so it’s a real scenario and people took it as such. . If you’d said red hair or some other feature that may have worked. Or actually used the analogy. I get you are cross and frustrated but it’s not „our“ fault ie the readers.

we do live in a world where women can’t buy lunch „wherever“ that is why it doesn’t work as an analogy.

This is the problem. Accessibility is not merely about having the right toilet and sticking a ramp in.

Someone who is visually impaired, for example, may require the following depending on their specific circumstances:

• bright lighting rather than the atmospheric gentle/low lighting used by many restaurants and pubs (this though can cause conflicting issues for those with autism)
• menus in braille, large print, or in a different contrast
• wide and clear walkways, where they don't have to navigate through tables
• even floors, no old flagstones for example
• no low or narrow doorways
• clear and unambiguous signage in bright colours on toilet doors - no chintzy drawings or bowties / tiaras stuck to the door (as per my village pub!)
• high contrast markings on steps and uneven floors

Some of these are much easier to implement than others....

Being logical though, 2% may use a wheelchair, but they probably often go out to venues with at least one or more extra person. We have four children. The venue we choose for all 6 of us with be the venue that accommodates my wheelchair.

I don't expect everywhere to be able to adapt but it makes good business sense to do so if you can

It's not a great analogy because the places didn't say you couldn't come in simply because you are disabled, you weren't physically able to eat there. I imagine some people with disabilities would have been able to eat in some of those places.

I do feel for you, I have coeliac disease and it's frustrating not being able to pop in somewhere for lunch, grab a sandwich, go on holiday without lots of planning, guarantee there will be anything I can eat at an airport etc. But I'd imagine you'd probably say 'well you can't expect every restaurant to cater for every allergy'. Maybe you wouldn't but most people do think that and they probably aren't wrong.

Yes, places should be more accessible but accessible can mean lots of things and to be fully accessible a venue would have to be wheelchair friendly, have a changing places toilet, cater for sensory needs, have facilities in place for blind/deaf people, cater for all food allergies - the list goes on. Or is it just your disability they should cater for?

By bringing penises into it you caused a lot of confusion. It would have been much better to make your point about accessibility directly.
With all the current discussion on here about single sex toilets it sounded like you were talking about going to cafes and restaurants where there were only unisex toilets available.
Your point was poorly made because it was confusing and hit on a theme which gets a lot of attention on here and is a well-known MN discussion point. Lots of people, myself included, thought you were talking about that. Also the comment at the end of your OP about being disabled did not clear things up because it sounded like you were comparing being a woman to being disabled because women don't have penises.

However, there does need to be more discussion about accessibility for disabled people.

So many people on here fixating on there being an accessible toilet and wondering why you would need to check anything in advance.

I can guarantee that the majority of posters here (so >50%) have never once clicked the "Accessibility" section on a venues website.

And I can guarantee that of the remainder, at least half will have discovered that as far as the venue is concerned "Accessiblity" is webpage telling you how accessible the website is, and you need to either call (hah !) or try to contact the venue by their overly gushing social media.

And of the people that have tried that, around half will still be waiting for an answer.

And of the people that did actually get a reply, half will have found it was "I guess so"

And of the people that actually decided to risk a visit, half will have found a step that the staff "forgot" was there.

All of which happened to a friend who travelled 100 miles to a hotel that was "accessible" for a wedding. Got to the front door and there was a fucking six inch step not mentioned anywhere. Apparently the "accessible" entrance was (as per usual) at the back, Only they had decided to pea shingle the grounds so wheelchairs couldn't propel. Rather than be carried round she had to go back home.

I've often felt she earns her benefits. I couldn't be doing with shit like that daily.

Apparently the "accessible" entrance was (as per usual) at the back, Only they had decided to pea shingle the grounds so wheelchairs couldn't propel. Rather than be carried round she had to go back home

Ah yes, gravel. Absolute nightmare.

We once stayed at an "accessible" house in France. There was a very long, very flat path to the main entrance. It was covered in very deep gravel and impossible to get the wheelchair along it.

This is my absolute bugbear. I have ended up in tears before when confronted with a long stretch of gravel at a place that claimed to be accessible.