Toilets

[Sleepyquest]

So I have just walked into a massive female only toilet facility and out of a cubicle walks a man. Not a trans man or a trans woman or anything else. An actual man who looks like a man. So apparently they can use our spaces now as casually as fuck.

What do we do!?

Well I'm.sure there will be people coming along to tell you that he obviously assumed they were unisex and poor darling made a mistake.

Its bull of course. Was there cctv? I'd report to the establishment and the police as he was likely there for predatory reasons

Report it to security and insist that someone goes in there and checks for hidden cameras.

How do know it was a man? This person is a transwoman. I hope the problem here is obvious.

My husband reported it to security who were quite alarmed (I was surprised they were but glad!) they were going to send someone to check. It's very obvious it isn't unisex

Just posting this here:

news.abs-cbn.com/news/08/22/19/the-toilet-is-sacred-sotto-says-no-to-trans-women-in-womens-restrooms?fbclid=IwAR1sd03a45ce2rP4z4VX5ZaS4ik334ri3rNMSqzVh48OXfOtrMVtrLpUmcM

Well done Sotto!

MANILA—Senate President Vicente Sotto III on Thursday said he is opposed to the idea of allowing transgender women in restrooms assigned to women.

Sotto has become more vocal rejecting the idea after concerns were raised about the possible abuse that could take place in case this setup is allowed.

“I now feel very strongly about it because it has turned from a transgender rights to a women’s rights [issue],” Sotto told reporters.

“This is now an issue on women’s rights because I feel that a woman’s body is a temple and to her, the toilet is sacred. It’s where she has a weakest point. Kaya kung ikaw meron kang sandata, hindi ka dapat du’n nagsi-CR (If you have a penis, you should not use the women’s restroom). You go to the men’s room.”

Not sure about Soto's view of a woman's body being a temple and a loo being sacred to her. Maybe it's just a language thing. But it puts me in mind of St Paul's description of a woman as 'a temple built over a sewer'.

I prefer a man to compare a woman's body with a temple, than to regard it as a passive and non-consensual receptacle for his seed! I will take my compliments without looking into the horse's mouth pardon the mixed metaphor especially if it means not opening our toilets to men.

Besides, I personally have no problem with the "body as temple" simile -- I've practiced Yoga for 45 years and that's the general principle behind the philosophy.

I’ve seen an obvious man in a women’s toilet. He looked at me in horror and asked if it was the ladies and I said I believed it was, but assured him the signs had confused me initially as well (which they had).

Doesn’t sound like your man made the same error Sleepy.

@AnyOldPrion It makes me wonder how many people who are older, sight-impaired, foreigners etc might be confused by the new idiotic signs for toilets. Same as the language really, way to confuse an immigrant woman who might not understand she is the 'cervix-haver'.

I’ve been sure for a while that confusion is one of their deliberate It goes hand in hand with all the language shifts.

I’ve been sure for a while that confusion is one of their deliberate It goes hand in hand with all the language shifts.

I think so too.

"Fuzzy fences", at one time, was a concept pushed by some senior people in the prison service to try and blur the boundaries between different types of prisoners in the supposed interests of inclusivity. Sex offenders and those who most definitely were not sex offenders is one example. Experienced staff, those in the frontline, were aghast and it didn't take off. Even in prison, prisoners have their own hierarchy, and separation is necessary on the basis of safeguarding.

This would be the same thing.

So was this man using the ladies because of self-identification, or what?
He could have done the same before all this self ID nonsense, surely?
There has never been enforcement in toilets, nothing ever to stop anyone doing this before.

He could have done the same yes.

But pre self id it wouldnt have resulted in the police being called on you for challenging him.

Depends what you mean by enforcement. Most toilets it would be enforced by the owner turfing any men out and possibly banning them from the premises if they persisted. This would be legal. Also depending on circumstances it could be considered antisocial behaviour or harassment and they could be arrested for this.

Most toilets it would be enforced by the owner turfing any men out and possibly banning them from the premises if they persisted

The owner wouldn't know unless someone reported it.
We don't know if OP reported it or not, they didn't say. If they did, the man may have been turfed out.

The owner wouldn’t know unless someone reported it

That is the same with any crime - unless someone reports it, or it is brought to light in some other fashion the perpetrator is not punished/the law is not enforced. If you speed down the motorway your breaking if the law will not be enforced unless you are spotted.

Sorry, OP did report it, I forgot about the update.
I'm absolutely opposed to self ID and allowing men into women's spaces, but it seems in this case, self ID had nothing to do with it - a man was in the women's toilets, it was reported and someone was sent to check.
There's no difference in this case to what would have happened 10, 20 or even 50 years ago.

Self ID has a lot to do with it. Men like this know they are far less likely to be challenged because people are going to fear being called a bigot.
If they are challenged they either claim they made a mistake or claim they are trans.
Remember Danielle Muscato (amongst others) does not present as a woman apart from the donning of an occasional dress.

Men like this know they are far less likely to be challenged because people are going to fear being called a bigot.

Predatory men will be fully aware of any loopholes in protocol and you can be certain they will use ANY weakening of protections to their advantage.

Societal disapproval would have been a deterent in the past, as would the risk of being called out. The more the lines of societal acceptance are blurred, the more problems will arise.