Another toilet one

[ResistTheWokeStasi]

Well, I have experienced a problem recently regarding toilets which hadn't occurred to me before.

I am female and use a mobility scooter. While I was waiting to use the disabled loos at a conference venue an (apparently able-bodied) man skipped ahead of me to go in first!

This has never happened to me before, and is something I had not considered if it becomes practice to make the disabled/accessible loo the "gender-neutral" one. For women using the ordinary toilets, if they become mixed-sex, maybe aggressive men will que skip, knowing the women are not likely to challenge them?

Just to give more context. There was no que out the mens or anything, and he hadn't checked the mens to see if there was a que. Even if he had, I was still ahead of him in the que. If he was desperate I would have "let" him go before me if asked.

Initially I thought, surely he didn't see me? But this seems unlikely, and he avoided eye-contact with me when he came out, which is making me think he had seen me.

The context actually makes this action worse. We were at a political conference. There is a chance this person did it to me deliberately to put me in my place, due to a previous online disagreement over trans ideology. I don't know whether that is more or less consolation.

This has never happened to me before. Sometimes I would be at an event and people would use the disabled/accessible toilet due to a long que forming at the ordinary ones. I think this is ok, as sometimes the ques are very long, and not many obviously disabled people at the event. However, in this scenario, normally people will let the disabled person basically que-skip ahead of them to access the disabled/accessible loo, so that they don't block access. But this was someone actually skipping in front of me to use the disabled loo.

No one else did this to me at the conference, but I was a bit surprised at the amount of apparently able-bodied people using the disabled loos. I know the odd person could have had some invisible condition, but I doubt most did. As there were not many toilets, it could have been due to ques some of the time, but I am wondering if the signage was confusing people? I am attaching pictures o the disabled/accesible loo door below.

I thought it was obvious that there was a disabled loo (mixed-sex), and then other ordinary toilets as well beside it. I didn't think to take more pictures of the layout and other signage.

If the signage was causing an issue, this is a worry if this sort of signage becomes more common.

I can't believe that I am actually posting something about people's toilet habits!

Just to clarify, there were seperate mens and womens toilets beside the disabled/accessible ones.

That's not ok. Have you complained in writing?

No, not yet. There were other (even worse) accessibility issues as well. Do you think I should write to the conference organisers and the venue? Or just one or other?

In don't think either will listen to me, to be honest, but it still might be worth highlighting. I might have more luck with the venue though.

I am having a bit of an argument with the political group over a very unthinking "say yes to everything without question" trans policy. In one way I don't want to divert on to this issue, which may come across as petty, but on the other hand hard to swallow the "inclusivity" bullshit in light of this sort of behaviour.

I have a condition which actually doesn't make me disabled, but does make me occasionally find I simply cannot wait until I get through the queue elsewhere. I have to plan where I am knowing where toilets are in advance etc.

I try not to use disabled loos but as a visibly able bodied woman when I am caught that short - if anyone disabled is waiting I explain or apologise. People are usually fine and it's easy to tell if they need it more urgently than myself once I ask if they mind and not be entitled

If he had a condition like me - he I think would have done the same... I feel bloody guilty when it happens!

I would definitely complain and should he have some hidden disability he can make that known if the complaints acted on

The upper sign is indeed rather confusing, I am use to there just being the picture of the person in a wheelchair. If there's no additional sign, I just assume it is for disabled people of both sexes.

The writing below should have made it clear.

Could be that the sign was causing the issue, but I still think the man was rude.

It is rather easy to tell one has entered the wrong toilet, and the decent thing to do would be to immediately walk out again and use the correct one.

I tend to be elsewhere with my thoughts and I have accidentally wandered into men's toilets, but the sight of the pissoirs usually alerts me in time.

I also accidentally wandered into disabled loos, there's no mistaking them for normal ones, really.

... I have to admit that I am a bit obsessive about doing things correctly, so I do think you are right to fear people will be confused ... and most people probably won't walk out again when they're in.

I would write to anyone who would listen. I wrote to a venue last weekend and they replied that they are changing their gender neutral toilets to reflect feedback. Even if you are the first - you won't be the last and they will have to listen.

Yeah, Interesting, I have sympathy with that as I also have bladder problems, and don't always use the scooter when out, but might use a disabled loo if the other one is up or down stairs.

What is making me think he was just being a dickhead is the fact that he said nothing either before or after he went in. Most "normal" people would have said something I think. One woman apologised when she came out (she did not que-skip though, and had not seen me before going in). She told me she was bursting so just went in to the first toilet. Which I understand.

I do feel a bit awkward about complaining about it, as I am possibly am getting the wrong end of the stick somehow, and it feels weird to be discussing someone's toilet habits! What a year this has been.

I suppose maybe you could frame it as requesting the signage be clearer to people?

I do think he was being a dick though probably if you had had dealings with him before. If I had a ding dong with someone I would want to be explicitly clear I wasn't using the toilet to spite them! That would be incredibly petty and lose whatever my argument was as me just being an utter prat!

Him possibly misunderstanding the sign doesn't excuse the queue jumping though.

Clearly a dickhead.

If you know who he is, you could write to him directly. Rather than mention the gender stuff, just say that he failed to take your priority into account as a disabled person.

Reads to me like a misogynist, disablist idiot.

Some people just don't register the existence of different people. Like drivers being being constantly aware of and alert for other traffic, yet not registering the cyclist and hitting them. Doesn't excuse them! The same happens with able-bodied people and 'everybody else'. Some people do it deliberately.

But, in this case, I'm sure he knew exactly what he was doing,

The sign is unclear, though. It seems to say that the facility is for everybody including disabled people, whereas the wheelchair sign should be placed first: it is for disabled people, whatever their sex or presentation.

But TBH only a selfish idiot would misinterpret it!

I think that the sign is clear, and that the venue really does intend it to be used by able bodied people as well as disabled people, as a unisex/mixed sex toilet for those who don't want to go into the toilets for their sex. That would concern me, and I would ask them to explain their reasoning on that.

Two points here: for one, there is no excuse the Person skipped line, without asking and without even mumbling something like ‚i am so sorry, I just can‘t‘ while rushing in. None.
Second point is I find the sign confusing to the point where I might not even look for another toilet sign and miss another sign easily. To me this sign reads ‚everyone can use it, and it is fit for disabled people and for baby’s Diaper change, too.

Let's break this down a bit:

Complaining about a named individual using that particular toilet is surely just going to get you in hot water for presuming that the person does not have a disability. Neither the venue nor the organisers are going to be challenging that person on whether they are disabled or not, so this gets you nowhere.

Complaining to a venue or organiser because a person, whether you name them or not, queue-jumped at the toilet is going to get you nowhere because it's a one-off that neither the organisers nor the venture have any control over and there is no action they could reasonably take in this circumstance.

You personally could contact the person and have a conversation about their choice of toilet, but you really don't want to question whether they have a disability, because that would make you a disablist arse with apparently no awareness of hidden disability.

Or, you personally could contact them about the queue jumping, which might actually get you an apology and improve their behaviour for next time someone in a mobility scooter is waiting to use the loo.

This has sort of happened to me too. At a venue the ground floor disabled loo was also the women's. The men's were across the corridor, no access issues at all. I walk with a stick and went to use the disabled / women's loo. Had to wait and out walked a man, no walking stick, no physical disability. I looked at him quizzically and he said to me 'I am disabled'. I turned to look at the men's loo across the corridor and then back at him, he didn't even have the courtesy to look sheepish. He was just an entitled moron.

I also believe entitled morons will take advantage of confusing signage. He would also have been the sort of person who in the future will say 'I am a woman' in order to use women's loos.

I was at the Tate recently and noticed some toilet signs that were also confusing.

1. Aren't most disabled toilets mixed sex? Does this "all gender" sign imply anyone can use the toilet in addition to disabled patrons? I'm unsure.

1. I admit I didn't go into the mixed sex toilet so don't know the setup, but the door wasn't wider to accommodate wheelchairs and access through the door seemed quite narrow so I wonder if this actually takes away access for disabled patrons in that the management say "we have a disabled toilet on X floor" when it actually isn't fit for purpose and people have to find another loo on a different floor.

It all seems to create unnecessary complications.

flippinfluppin or, he was disabled and was using the disabled toilet because he needed to. Not all disabilities are visible, and it's not ok to use trans identity politics as a justification for disregarding that.

I see at as a repurposing of the disabled toilets to include those who would like to use a gender neutral toilet. That’s what I would complain about. Gender neutral toilets shouldn’t disadvantage those who have their own individual needs.

It doesn’t need to be about the queue jumper at all.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I think Agnes has a point, and that maybe this toilet has been repurposed as being for everyone? Or this is their answer to people wanting "gender-neutral" toilets? The conference centre was on a college campus, which I think increases the likelihood of this. I will write to the venue to get clarification.

This was in Ireland, bye the way, where there has not been much of a push for "gender-neutral" toilets outside of the colleges, that I know of (though I have heard of some issues in a work-place).

Just as changing single-sex toilets to mixed sex, thus potentially making the default in these formerly female spaces male, turning the disabled/accessible toilet into a "gender-neutral" toilet could make them become, in practice, the "for everyone" toilet where the default is able-bodied (interesting that the disabled sign was the last in the row on the uppermost sign. I did not see anyone I knew to, or seemed to, identify as trans use this toilet bye the way). This might not be too much of an issue where there is plenty of provision of accessible toilets, but where there is already pressure on use of the disabled/accessible toilet it could become an issue.

I do think the design in this building was very poor. The first floor had no toilets and you had to go to the upper floor for toilets. There were only a handful of toilets there, where hundreds of people, potentially, were exciting from talks or classes all at once. Madness.

On the suggestion of writing to this individual personally, not a hope, though this might work in another situation. This guy, I think, is a bit of an "angry guy" type, who might have issues with women who speak up in their own defence (I am not just basing this on his attitude about the trans thing). He may not even had intended the que-skipping as a way to show me my place, he may just have considered himself to be more important and for me to be irrelevant.

Thanks again everyone for the feedback. It is helpful to talk these things through.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I think Agnes has a point, and that maybe this toilet has been repurposed as being for everyone?

That is certainly how I would have read it, right or wrong.
The queue skipping is quite another issue, of course.

The point of an accessible toilet is that it is the only toilet people with mobility devices can access. It is not ok to repurpose those (very few) toilets to serve a much larger group, and rendering them too busy for the people they were designed for in the first place. It's like the bloody wheelchair spaces on the bus and the many people who always have 101 reasons why their need to commandeer that space for their convenience is more important than someone in a wheelchair having the right to travel.

Point this out to the organisation OP. If they need to repurpose toilets then they need to insure, with Equality Act guidance, that there are sufficient wheelchair accessible toilets available for the population using them. Having seen the degree of local authority kicking off and legal threats when disabled toilets are repurposed for storage and other things (which very frequently happens) I suspect this is going to be a solution very quickly stamped on.

(And all you need to report is: as a mobility device user who can ONLY access the wheelchair accessible toilet, I was recently unable to access a toilet on your premises as it was busy with non mobility device users who were using it in accordance with the changed signs. This is not in keeping with the Equality Act.)