Zara - male bodies in female changing room

[BoreOfWhabylon]

An unimpressed Editor-at-large of the MoS was also there

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10275757/CHARLOTTE-GRIFFITHS-facing-dilemma.html

@Clymene

The reason they get away with it is because women are frightened of confronting men on the whole because we know they can hurt us.

They rule through fear.

I'm sorry to say. This.

CheeseMmmm
Asking, I have no idea why you are so intent on proving... Something.

I am fed up because I pointed out something from my own experience which supported your argument and you told me in so many words that "That's not correct" about my simply factual post; you were not there, I was, you were apparently telling me that what happened TO ME did not happen.

I found it hard to credit, but that is what you did.

You don't have to go far to find my posts; all three are on this most recent page of the thread (unless this post goes to the next page; they are on page 19).

I will say again what you clearly misunderstood.

1] Wards in hospitals always used to be single sex until they decided to make them mixed-sex some time in the eighties. Not "single gender"; that word was not used for human beings in the UK and by official organisations all that much forty and fifty years ago, though the prudish USA (which for example calls male hens roosters instead of cocks) may have made that change by then, "sex" being too rude for them.

2] When they realised that mixed-sex wards had been a mistake, they promised to put the wards back how they had been, but were unable to do so for various reasons.

3] What happened in the nineties was as you aver: mixed sex which they lied about.

You yourself said they had promised to BRING BACK single sex wards: how could they have planned to bring back something which had not previously existed? Mixed-sex wards were an innovation; the norm for centuries had been single-sex wards. And still was in the first eighty years of the twentieth century.

Not unlike school, gym and shop changing rooms, and public lavatories, in this country having been single-sex until this century.

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

CheeseMmmm Asking, I have no idea why you are so intent on proving... Something.

I am fed up because I pointed out something from my own experience which supported your argument and you told me in so many words that "That's not correct" about my simply factual post; you were not there, I was, you were apparently telling me that what happened TO ME did not happen.

I found it hard to credit, but that is what you did.

You don't have to go far to find my posts; all three are on this most recent page of the thread (unless this post goes to the next page; they are on page 19).

I will say again what you clearly misunderstood.

1] Wards in hospitals always used to be single sex until they decided to make them mixed-sex some time in the eighties. Not "single gender"; that word was not used for human beings in the UK and by official organisations all that much forty and fifty years ago, though the prudish USA (which for example calls male hens roosters instead of cocks) may have made that change by then, "sex" being too rude for them.

2] When they realised that mixed-sex wards had been a mistake, they promised to put the wards back how they had been, but were unable to do so for various reasons.

3] What happened in the nineties was as you aver: mixed sex which they lied about.

You yourself said they had promised to BRING BACK single sex wards: how could they have planned to bring back something which had not previously existed? Mixed-sex wards were an innovation; the norm for centuries had been single-sex wards. And still was in the first eighty years of the twentieth century.

My experience is similar to yours, AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

My mother was in and out of hospital a lot from the 1960s through to early 2000's due to diabetes and recurrent, severe leg ulcers.

I do not recall any men being on the wards in the 1960s or 1970s.

She was definitely on a mixed sex ward in 1982, although it was a new hospital with the ward divided up into "bays" and I think the bays were single sex, although I could not swear to it.

4-bed or 6-bed bays? I remember those too. And because the nurses' station was not in any of them the way it had been at the end of the long wards, it was easier for nurses simply not to notice someone who was in trouble in one of them. A nurse I knew well complained about that.

"Women's surgical" was one long ward with beds in ranks up either side of it, and not a male-bodied (or as we used to say in those days, male) person in sight unless there was a doctor on his rounds. There was one private room up near the nurses' station so they could put people who were likely to die during the night into it and avoid upsetting the other patients. And when someone did die, while I was in, they told any patient who asked that she had been moved into the private room.

Reading your latest posts *asking

I think this huge disagreement because when I wrote-

'Some of this was put in place decades ago. Single sex wards being the massive example.

'Always single gender. Big political promise at time. The govt told the NHS to always say single sex so as not to confuse the public. 90s I think it was.'

I thought it was obvious (but obviously wasn't!) that when I said 'always single gender' I mean during and after the big govt pledge that was so widely reported! Looking again I think 'at time' and '90s think it was' (actually 2000s) shows what I meant, but yes can see not actually v clear.

I suppose also when been on a thread a fair while chatting a lot and reading others, you can fall into trap of dropping posts in that assume readers will know from previous conversation what you feel about the topic.

So really sorry we were at total cross purposes and while I wrote short post because long previous discussion, (and there were things that pointed to what context),

For sure it could easily be read by someone just thought interesting and clicked, maybe scanned back over few recent posts to get feel, something seen and 'what? That's just nonsense' and naturally comment and off you go. (we went).

Can we draw a line under it?
I am sorry for lack of clarity leading to two people who I think agree having a right old row.

Genuinely. Wasted both our time and well it was a damper on my mood! And I really hate that that's happened tbh.

Hope that ok with you too .

Fair enough. I think the points are clear, and that's what mattered.

and sorry about the damper on your mood, which at the moment goodness knows nobody needs.

Hey it's all good!

Glad we got that sorted out :) Thank for posting to say.

Incidentally and at risk of this landing badly,

I noticed that we have really similar posting styles.

Fairly long, lots of dates, info, examples etc.
Determination when know correct (in this case we both knew we were correct!) to not back down.

So feel like I have an idea now on what like to be on other side to my posts when that happens.

And it's not very much fun... I'm glad we're on the same 'side'!

Hope you don't take that the wrong way please say wtf if you want!