Is Andy Burnham reasonable to say only a small minority of women object to men being in their toilets? YABU he's right, YANBU he's wrong *titled tweaked by MNHQ at OP's request*

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15830845/Andy-Burnham-men-identify-women-use-female-toilets.html

'I don't think that's a majority view. I think it's a minority view and quite a small minority view, actually. But it is a view so you can't completely ignore it. Possibly they might be women who have experienced male violence at some point in their life. I don't know, that's one way of looking at it.'

loos as in you go in, there’s a row of cubicles with a gap under and above the cubicle and communal sinks outside the cubicles?

I haven't suggested anything really. I was just curious what posters thought about those particular toilets that I see more and more when I travel. That's all !

I think he is unreasonable.

Why do men who dress as women think they are unsafe in the male toilets?

Is there any actual data on rate of assaults?

Why are men dangerous in the men's toilets but perfectly safe in the women's?

No. Sinks inside the cubicle. Just a common area to enter to go in one, that's all.

Then I'm afraid you're being duped; the 'toilets' is always what's mentioned because many people like you will not know about the situation in depth, and so find it trivial, and so not resist, not realising that if men are legally permitted to be women in some situations, then all the rest of the things Mrs O lists are open to them too. It's a whole package deal. You can't have selected bits of it.

And it's lovely that you personally aren't affected by mixed sex provision, you'll be fine in the mixed sex gender neutral facilities, won't you? Very nice for you.

I'm sure though that you're not advocating that women who aren't as lucky as you and do have barriers to being able to access a mixed sex multi cubicle space should just be discarded and left without any access at all? In order that men can have their favourite preferred choice of all the facilities?

Gaps above and below the doors?

Fair enough!!! I am being sensitive because I am tired of this shit and the weasly leaders who aren't doing their job.

I honestly and sincerely did not mind until I became a mother (i.e. grew a protective brain). Now I give a shit about so many things which were not even a flicker of a thought in my head prior.

I must have been really unworldly (=stupid) in my student days - like walking alone at night, entering closed spaces with strange men in them, etc. etc.

I never thought I’ll miss Starmer, but I will if Burnham takes over.

Sad times.

Having to choose between smallpox, cholera and the plague.

I know it was said in the past, but it is a massive overreach for him to feel he speaks on behalf of women, majority, minority or anything in between.

PPs wonder if he has overcome his stupidity. Even if he has he is still stupid.

How can we even consider people like this as our leaders and representatives when they speak lies and say things tantamount to me saying “I know that Andy Burnham accepts that a small majority of ducks believe his wife is a frog”. Lock me up!

That seriously is the best analogy I've heard so far. Yes. That's exactly how it feels.

@OpheliaWitchoftheWoods
OK. No point in me replying any more. I was just asking about one thing but now you are twisting that as 'people like you' and creating division when 'people like me' could have stayed on this thread and learnt something.

I'd prefer not to now.

I wonder how the female population of Greater Manchester feels about that statement. As part from grateful that he's moving on.

'People like you' - people in your situation, who do not yet know the full background. And so will voice that they don't get the problem, they'd be fine, and let it happen.

The result is many women left with very serious issues. Sharing this information really matters, because this is not an honest agenda in any way.

It should matter that a man is dismissing women’s concerns.

it should matter that someone who wants to be our prime minister will not support laws grounded in material reality but instead supports laws based on quasi religious beliefs that are detrimental to women.

Don't be disingenuous. You said "it doesn't worry me at all" (emphasis on the at all, to make a point). Fine. It doesn't worry you. But it worries others. So posters then explained to you why it worries others.

Doesn't bother you to go into a toilet after a man and find he's pissed all over the seat? Because with the rise in gender-neutral toilet, that keeps happening to me.

Those are even more dangerous in that case

For one, toilets have a gap at the bottom so we can see when someone goes in feeling sick and then passes out. Hundreds of lives are saved by this design.

Two - single occupancy toilets with a basin inside are deliberately sound proof, meaning it would be very very easy for someone - probably a man. - to take a child in there and abuse them, and not be heard or seen

Oh and they cost about 3 times as much as normal, had them for years, sex separated toilets.

I don't claim to know what other women think, but if he thinks only a tiny minority of women care about using toilets with men, why does he think it's customary to segregate toilets? Why does he think we have wasted all this money over the years creating separate provision if nobody cares?

Why are all those women queuing if they could just use the men's loos?

I just want him to take the trouble to make a coherent argument.

Interesting about the kids being taken in as a safety feature.

This is a bit complicated...

The response in the OP is pretty awful. Has Burnham been asked again recently? Is he prepared to disassociate himself from them now?

We have unisex toilets in many places in the UK, particularly places that only have one or two toilets. (I think the safety concerns have been explained to you), but that isn't what Burnham is arguing for.

He is suggesting that we should have segregated toilets that anyone can use.

For anyone who is genuinely interested in the issues around toilet design:

Search for the poster @Keeptoiletssafe who has done huge amounts of research on toilet design.

Single-sex toilets with a door gap are the safest and most hygienic design.

This makes me think of Hampstead Ponds. Male pond, female pond and mixed pond. Trans women still want the female pond.

Weirdly only got complicated the last 10 years. Before that it was pretty obvious...