AIBU To celebrate the government finally releasing guidance on keeping single sex spaces single sex? Even if it is more than a year after the Supreme Court judgement

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

Nobody is banned from toilets, changing rooms or indeed anywhere else, but males must use the male facilities and females use the female facilities. Where possible gender neutral facilities may be provided AS WELL, but not instead of.

There will be a huge amount of disinformation about this rolling around today, but nobody is banned from anything, other than intruding upon the opposite sex.

"The updated guidance is expected to make clear that employers and service providers should provide single-sex lavatories, changing rooms and washing facilities on the basis of biological sex, after the Supreme Court judgment in April last year that held the legal ­definition of “woman” in the Equality Act referred to biological sex."

https://www.thetimes.com/article/b0750d21-426a-45d5-8cee-9578e33c6d9c?shareToken=a2e55a09e70500c14807d8eb1713db03

And contagion. Better air flow in cubicles than rooms. Less chance of catching something nasty.

Yes, and to add to that they always stink. It’s awful going into one after somebody else has just used it.

It would be a good idea, yes. We need real feminism back, the kind of feminism that studied the impact of growing up in a world surrounded by adverts and imagery demonstrating male dominance in the 90s. All I’ve seen recently is the occasional piece about male abuse in online gaming which is of course infamous for it.

And of course the stories of women academics who might question these things being pushed out by trans activists, as entire sectors, plural, related to the information world are destroyed by computers.

Whenever humans face severe economic change the first response from men is to attack the nearest woman. In Afghanistan that is happening literally.

Great video https://x.com/sexmattersorg/status/2057362014192758945?s=48

HOC running order

“as entire sectors, plural, related to the information world are destroyed by computers.”

and wealth I should add (was too late to edit). The private interests terrified by the direction of the early internet, who forcibly took back control of a society that was genuinely becoming more egalitarian.

The links between the trends in economics and culture are obvious.

Its always the women that are expected to budge up, never the men. Unisex toilets might sound like a good idea but are pretty awful IME as men piss all over the place and don't think to wipe up. A few of these in addition, as an alternative to proper single sex loos would help those who do or not cannot use the space designated for their biological sex.

Tried to find a pic to explain what I meant but obviously people don’t generally take photos of loos so struggled. At Manchester Met they have cubicles in some of the buildings with the sink and Sanpro and loo all in one self contained cubicle- does that make sense? So you don’t wash your hands next to anyone else, you go into a little private cubicle with floor to ceiling door. There’s no door to enter the area with the cubicles either, it’s open plan so no more opportunity to be sexually assaulted than in any other area of the uni.

I’ve been in some really grim women’s loos in my time too to be fair… The self contained ones I mentioned are generally always immaculate but then it’s in one of the best buildings at Man Met and it’s cleaned constantly.

There’s no door to enter the area with the cubicles either, it’s open plan so no more opportunity to be sexually assaulted than in any other area of the uni.

More than any other area where you can be quickly be shoved into a small, enclosed space and the door locked, you mean.

i wonder if there is now some guidance about membership of all women groups like the Women’s Institute who have changed their membership rules this year so only those assigned female at birth can join. It has caused a lot of upset and quite a number of members have not rejoined (19 out of a membership of 46 at one of my WIs).

As far as I understand, National Federation have always said they had to make these changes because the Supreme Court ruling forced them to comply with their charitable status and they did not have the funds to fight a legal battle.

the media say it’s in the guidelines - no obligation to be single sex but when you are it needs to be on the basis of biological sex. Whether “single gender” organisations are ever permitted is a bit of a grey area as it would depend on bog standard men bringing a case when excluded or women challenging on the basis of discrimination that they couldn’t have a female only group. Ones which have it in their charity articles won’t suddenly be allowed to admit men without changing them.

Yeah but if you wanted to be pedantic about this there’s nothing preventing a man from entering female only loos and doing that.

That design makes it far far more likely sexual assault can happen because its a completely enclosed, sound proofed room.

And, you are far more likely to die in them as people pass out, collapse and nobody sees them for 8 hours.

They are a huge retrograde step.

Nobody said a female only sign was a forcefield that repels men

BUT it does make it FAR easier to spot transgressors right?

Because the only males in there, are the ones BREAKING the rules.

How dare we think about celebrating won’t someone think of the poor menz,

now, where’s the champagne…

Thats a battle they could not win however much money they have.

They can set up a new charity called the institute which allows males and females in. but they can never have an organisation that allows actual females, and men in dresses, but not men in trousers.

It's actually quite frightening that a very vocal tiny minority have had this impact in the first place. #bekind can fuck right off into the past, I'm utterly sick of all this conversation. A man wearing a dress and lipstick is still a biological male and it's time that transgenderism is addressed as either the mental illness or fetish that it actually is.

No need to make it easier for them though is there? Burglars can always break into your house, but you should still lock the door.

They're designed to avoid that. Reasonable chance of another woman in another cubicle. Also I forgot to mention voyeurism. Most women's toilets are are designed with double doors and no eyeline. And harder to walk in and leave a camera in single sex provision.

I don't have the source to hand but there really are more sexual offences in unisex provision.

Why are crimes against women so often compared to crimes of property?

Bravo to that post, so well put!

Well not really, as other women would be coming in and out.

Oh heck. So is this one of those situations where potentially some git could scupper it even being reached by deliberately talking on and time wasting on a previous item.

About fucking time.

I’m picturing Bridget Phillipson in the House of Commons this afternoon with a wheelie suitcase, passport in hand, cab waiting outside to jet away from the ensuing tantrums.