National Trust & tampons

[oncemoreuntothebeachdearfriends]

NT have made free tampons available in the gents' toilets in a castle in the Lake District. Not unisex toilets, but actual gents.

Not just any tampons, but vegan tampons (WTF are they?).
And they're also available in the ladies.

YABU They are demonstrating what a kind, caring organisation they are, & covering their arses.

YANBU They are bonkers, tossers... add your own words.

What if they don’t pass? Are they allowed or not?

There are clear benefits to women to have access to condoms
There are no benefits to men to have access to tampons

They’re meant to technically but would probably be safer and more comfortable not doing so.

I am struggling to see how any grown up could get upset about this.

If it helps someone, great. However, it’s hardly going to have a negative impact.

And where does this say "a man is committing a crime if he is in the women's (or vice versa)", please?

This is about holding organisations to their obligations to provide single sex spaces and ensuring their policies are lawful, as they should be.

Again, that does not mean a man / woman is committing a crime by going into the women's / mens loos.

These are tampons

Yes, because no man in the history of the world has ever had any relationship whatsoever with a menstruating woman who might need sanitary products.

For other reasons I'm cancelling our subscription to NT but I'm pleased our money won't be spent on this in the future.
I'm beginning to wonder how I managed to get through 45 years of periods without having to rely on protection being supplied by a tourist attraction.

I'm as gender critical as they come and I can't get wound up by this. According to the supreme court judgement both trans women and trans men can be barred from the women's toilets. If that means trans men need to use the mens, then happy for them to be in there (I'm male).

Some trans men need tampons. So supplying tampons may be beneficial, and certainly isn't causing any harm

You're assuming the ladies is stocked/has some left, or that the young child, bearing in mind periods can start as young as 7 or 8 can use the machine, or forgetting that adult males may be in charge of disabled women.. and trust me, disabled loo NEVER have sanitary products in.

.

It Will be considered harassment of the opposite sex
They can therefore be charged

Will it? Where has this guidance / draft legislation been published please?

It’s not your choice or right to speak for others

It is harassment and in contravention of the Equalities Act

They aren't machines, they dont have draws or anything there's nothing to "use" . They literally drop the products down.

Perhaps they'd be better off moving the dispenser from the gents to the disabled loo. And the stock that is never going to get used in the gents and putting it in the ladies...

Under: What does the law say?
"The Supreme Court judgment in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers was crystal clear that the Equality Act requires that single-sex services are provided based on biological sex. This is because in order for a space (or service) to be lawfully provided for one sex only, it must satisfy one of several criteria for “single and separate sex exceptions” in the Equality Act. These list situations in which it is appropriate to provide a service for one sex only, or for members of both sexes separately. If a service provider designates a space as for men or for women and then states in its policies that certain people of the other sex can enter, then the space is likely to fail to meet these criteria.
Often these situations relate to bodily privacy (such as washing and changing). Once a service provider puts a sign up which labels a space as being just for women (or just for men), they have created a situation where, if someone of the opposite sex ignores the sign and makes their way into the space, this is likely to be “unwanted conduct” which has “the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment”. This meets the definition of harassment under section 26 of the Equality Act, related to the protected characteristic of sex, and creating an environment in which service users are subject to such harassment is unlawful.
The widely promoted idea that people may choose the facilities that suit their gender identity, or that they “feel comfortable with”, is legally wrong. Facilities are either for one sex only or for both sexes (sometimes called “unisex” or “gender-neutral”). There can be no excuse for a service provider to let people use the facilities marked for the other sex based on their gender identity."

No, there is no law in the UK that forces trans women to use men's toilets or vice versa. The Supreme Court ruling states that in certain situations, under the Equality Act, excluding trans women from female-only spaces might be lawful if it's a "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim," such as protecting privacy and dignity. But a trans person is not breaking the law if they use the toilet that matches their gender identity rather than their biological sex.

This is legal advice given to sex matters
This is how people who contravene will be legally dealt with in law.

By charging them with harassment. I’m sure someone on here has posted the info if you RTFT

So what we have is a third party interpretation that it might be a crime once the guidance from the SC ruling has been properly formalised?

So in other words, it is still not a crime.

I'm not, the supreme court did. They specifically said that transmen, so natal females, can be excluded from the women's. So that leaves the mens.

Am I over the moon about this? No. I have a spectacularly shy bladder, meaning I have to use a cubicle. Transmen will also need to use a cubicle, so I'm going to have to wait longer. But if the choice is that and transmen don't get to use the toilet at all, then the men's it is.

So not actual guidance or draft legislation from the govt then, but third party interpretation of what they think could happen?

Transfolk are already being shoved into disabled loos, and now you want to give uncle tom cobbly and all reason to go in there? "oh.. i'm just using the tampon dispenser" says the able bodied bloke nipping in and blocking it for the disabled person who needs it.

fuck us disabled folk i guess.

Yes there should be one in the disabled loo, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't also be one in the mens for the men to access for partners and daughters needs.

Well this is a nice catch 22. If you can't cite any instances of trans identified males attacking women in womens spaces, then your argument has no basis and can be dismissed.
Whereas if you can cite instances of trans identified males attacking women in womens spaces, then you are an obsessive weirdo so your argument can be dismissed.

Utterly nuts , if you excuse the pun.
NT are going down in a lot of people's view and seem to be more interested in making a statement then the upkeep of our assets.

It's stupid. Men can't use tampons and women should not be in men's loos.