I need help with an issue at work re transgender training and mixed sex loo proposal

[catgirl1976]

So it’s happened.

A well meaning colleague has been giving some training today on how to support transgender colleagues. All good.

I wasn’t able to attend (and knew that I would probably explode if they started misquoting the law etc) but a close colleague (who is gay, not that that is hugely relevant) did and reported back.

The training wasn’t full mermaids batshit but was pretty bad (and colleague felt very patronised by some of the lgb stuff - they might use “queer” instead of lgbt which he finds offensive- that was discussed and concerned by some of the trans stuff)

However they are proposing making all of the loos mixed sex. They also were proposing making everyone have their preferred pro nouns on their id badge but thankfully that got dropped. They also said that if someone wanted to use the bathroom of the gender they identified as that was fine and that people could change gender on a whim.

I’m all for supporting transgender colleagues but I need to speak out about the misinformation and most importantly the proposal about the toilets.

I am in a position where I have to protect the organisation legally so I am well placed to object but I want to do it right

I so far am planning on raising that this would break health and safety laws and ask about how this works for people of faith who cannot use mixed sex facilities and how women’s safety and privacy would be protected. We are not a school but do provide education to young people under 18 so I am wondering if it is worth quoting the legislation for schools.

I want to prepare a calm, factual and accurate rebuttal of the proposal and would really appreciate it if you could help me. If anyone could quote any useful legislation, studies, case law or relevant concerns it would be a massive help.

Thank you mumsnet

Alternative proposal - they make the Male toilets mixed sex/all 'gender' and keep the women's toilets female only.

It's a compromise, any trans/NB staff do not have to feel 'invalid' as they would be using a neutral toilet, not a male one, and women get to retain their dignity privacy and safety.

Please put my name down for the Network....

Pronouns are a puzzling one. Because when you are talking to a person, you do not use pronouns. You use the word "you", which is general and gender-neutral, or their name.

It is no use telling me that your pronouns are "she" and "her" if I am talking to you directly - because I would just say "you".

Disability comes in many forms and I am happy to consider transsexuals disabled as far as toilets go if their dysphoria makes it hard for them to use the toilets of their sex. I no longer think even fully operated transsexuals should use women’s toilets (if they are Male). But when it comes to everyone else under the ‘umbrella’ they can use their own sex loos. If they feel unsafe then they need to have a word with their employer about male violence in the organisation.

Birds, transgender/transexual people are NOT disabled, therefore should not be using the disabled toilets. Good God, there aren't enough disabled toilets as it is (I speak as someone who has multiple health problems, including bladder and bowel incontinence).

@Birdsfoottrefoil that's nice of you to give away disabled people provision that they had to fight long and hard for and still don't have enough of.

Why though? This bit stands out at me. Why "thankfully dropped?" I can see why they want pronouns on their badge,
Pronouns is the bit a lot of people struggle with. As in I'm not going to call you that as you're not"

I kind of agree, but from a different standpoint.

I attended a 6 week course based in a college in Dec/Jan where the leader made us give out our pronouns at the start of each session, in case anyone's pronouns had changed in the last seven days.

If someone will be using the same pronouns year in year out I'm fine. But I am capable of even forgetting my own birthdate, so if someone wants me to use new pronouns for them on a regular basis I'd appreciate it if they put it on a badge actually.

I disagree, if you are mentally ill enough to remove parts of your healthy body resulting in what might be some dodgy plumbing (many do not have a clear directed stream), need ongoing medication, and very likely have other comorbid mental health conditions (post transitioners have a higher rate of suicide than those who don’t transition) then I think you are disabled. I don’t include AGP, transvestites, , non gender conforming etc in this, only transsexuals.

Mental health is not a condition for using accessible toilets.

Do you have a physical impairment?

Also, you need to have the debate wirh the trans who insist is not a mental health condition (unless they need their insurance to pay for their meds).

And plenty of men don't have decent enough plumbing judging by their inability to avoid peeing on the floor and walls, but they aren't using the accessible loo.

And will they put sanitary bins in all the loos?

Probably not, lest it offend transwomen who do not have periods.

*And will they put sanitary bins in all the loos?

Probably not, lest it offend transwomen who do not have periods.*

I guess they would mark them "For menstruators only"

I would suggest they stick with separate men's and women's, and make a very small block for the minority who want mixed sex loos. I absolutely hate mixed sex loos with a vengeance. They absolutely stink. They make me gag when I go in them.

Three things to add here:

1] Schools are required by law to provide sex-segregated toilet and washing facilities for children aged 8 years and over. If your organisation hosts groups of school children it may be relevant to raise this as a child protection issue [see Section 4 in link below]:

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/1943/made

2] If a person does not have a GRC the person should be treated as their natural sex. This is current case law and it stands as precedent:

www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5b46f1fa2c94e0775e7ef4e3 [see para 70 onward]

This case law was successfully used in 2013 [after the GRA 2004 came into existence]:

www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7bb60d03e7f57eb1a1f [see paras 63 - 68]

3] Equality Act 2010, Schedule 3, section 27 [single sex services]
subsection 6:

(6) The condition is that—

(a) the service is provided for, or is likely to be used by, two or more persons at the same time, and

(b) the circumstances are such that a person of one sex might reasonably object to the presence of a person of the opposite sex.

[This subsection can be applied to toilets, changing rooms etc]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3

[scroll down for Section 27 and see also ss 26 and 28].

The granting of a GRC does not grant an open licence for anyone to enter the spaces of those of the opposite sex. A GRC is granted only to protect the individual in his or her relationship with UK law to ensure that person access to relevant law, for example in a case of sex discrimination.

I hope this is helpful.

That is perfect thank you Jackie

Thank you all I will let you know how it goes

Suggest mixed sex and female-only toilets?

• This protects the women from danger plus those who have the cultural or religious reasons. Also saves privacy and dignity for those who are concerned.

Those who want to be down with the kids can hop on in with the men in the mixed sex loos. Everyone's happy.

Lamaha Recently I passed through Gatwick Airport (T1) which was fairly newly renovated. They had separate men and women's loos but, and this is a first for me, the women's loos were all separate floor-to-ceiling cubicles with a wash basin in each cubicle. The queue was long and moved quite slowly slower than when the basins are in a communal area, which makes sense. The loos looked nice and modern but all the doors were filthy sort of stained!
Almost exactly my words when I saw them. They were grim. The cubicles were sort of warm and muggy and damp feeling, with wet/splashed floors. And that sort of rusty concrete municipal car park design on the doors/walls. Imagine unveiling...that.

And will they put sanitary bins in all the loos?

Probably not, lest it offend transwomen who do not have periods.

Let's not forget about those tw who like to simulate periods by extracting the used towels and tampons from the bins and wearing them in their own underwear or orifices. Much better than faking it with the tomato juice ice pops.

Then posting about it all on the internet of course.

If mixed sex and female only provision is offered, inevitably there are those who will march into the female only, declaring that they identify as female.

The bottom line is, however nicely you try to do this, it will eventually come down to the organisation having to take a clear line about what single sex means, and being willing to police it. In work places this should be considerably easier as it directly working with employees. But it's not helped by government messing around trying to avoid having to state that single sex means actually biologically male or female regardless of your choice of identity and there are some places that are specific to biological women only.

@BuzzShitbagBobbly, re Gatwick Airport.
Oh, so the "dirty" look was actually deliberate? Art, or something? I did find it odd that everything else was so modern, and the doors looked so filthy. I guess I'm too old to appreciate modern design!

I am capable of even forgetting my own birthdate, so if someone wants me to use new pronouns for them on a regular basis...
...they can take a hike. That's about controlling other people to the nth degree. When speaking directly to somebody or about a person in a company I would use their preferred pronouns, politely, if it was a settled long-term thing. Not if it changed on a whim.

They need to consider why women’s toilets were made separate in the first place, and the value women get from being separate and what they avoid by being separate.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3581606-Resource-thread-with-concrete-examples-of-men-being-grim-in-unisex-toilets

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3203454-What-do-you-use-the-womens-toilets-for

I would literally hate mixed toilets. I think trans people should be able to use the loo of the gender they identify with & that wouldn't bother me, but I wouldn't want to go to the toilet with men in the cubicles next to me, I don't think men would like it either. Going by the conversations I hear from them in the office & how much they stink the toilets out.

Surfingtheweb, you write I literally hate mixed toilets.

And then with the next breath you say I think trans people should be able to use the loo of the gender they identify with & that wouldn't bother me.

You do realise that as soon as males use the ladies they become mixed sex, don't you? That thing you hate. And that you don't get to decide what other women find acceptable?

so if someone wants me to use new pronouns for them on a regular basis
Sorry, I refuse to be drawn in to this humiliation.
My pronouns are fucking obvious.
As is the case with most of those insisting you refer to them with a pronoun that is clearly not 'them'
Words matter and have meaning - a he is not a she and I will not be bullied or shamed into participating in these lies.
This is a hill I would be prepared to die on if it is introduced in my workplace

Not sure if the argument in terms of age is a good one, as to suggest that older women are resistant to change can be perceived as ageist in itself. Hope you don't mind me saying.. when i can be bother to read the s**t that passes as our new trans policy I'll be using 3 arguments, health and safety, social inclusion for religious staff and safeguarding vulnerable adults and children, as I work in the care sector.