Predator filming women in toilets banned from female toilets but allowed in unisex?

[rowdywoman]

If I've read this correctly this nasty pervert who upskirts and films women in toilets is now barred from women's toilets but not unisex toilets. Judge Snow also issued a sexual harm prevention order that Quaid only enter public toilets designated for men, excluding unisex facilities for five years

Reassuring to know that gender neutral toilets are inclusive of sex offenders.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6752081/Teenager-caught-filming-woman-phone-toilet-cubicle-McDonalds.html

It's actually quite instructive in confirming to women and girls that they are at greater risk in unisex toilets, as confirmed by the Justice system, which allows sexual predators of girls to enter them.

So Stonewall et al are pushing for unisex toilets because...?

I've not read the article, just your quote. He isn't allowed in unisex.

Unisex toilets are, by definition, designated for men and women so could be argued as being designated for men. That would mean the man could argue he is allowed in them. But, the judge has excluded them to ensure he can't argue that.

If I said "you can only enter buildings on the right side of the road, excluding red ones" then you could go into buildings on the right side of the road, as long as they weren't red because red buildings are excluded.

This man can only enter toilets designated for men, excluding unisex. So he can go into the men's, but he cannot use the ambiguity of "unisex" to cheat his way into violating more women because they've been excluded.

Yes he cannot use unisex either. That this type of order exists and is deemed a necessary restriction to prevent harm reinforces women's needs for single sex toilets - and the offender needs them too, otherwise the sanction would be unworkable and judges would stop giving them out and then.. hmm, oh yes, that would really help out some male offenders wouldn't it.

Apologies I've obviuosly read that incorrectly. So he's barred from unisex as well as women's? So that's great that the judge recognised that he poses a threat to women in both. I've totally confused myself .

It would be good to hear more about how these sexual harm prevention orders are being used? And if they are working.