Sex Equality and Equity Network - Gender crit network for civil servants.

[fromorbit]

Important new initiative for government workers. This is where a huge fight back is going to happen in behind the scenes government, in memos and meetings. If we don't win in the civil service, it doesn't matter how many demos or cases we win, how many twitter threads we write, sooner or later sex differences will be erased. If you work in government/public sector get involved asp.

seen-network.uk/

"We are happy to announce the launch of our new UK cross-government staff network, the Sex Equality and Equity Network.
SEEN is a staff network committed to promoting and supporting sex equality and equity between women and men in our workplaces, and helping all staff to thrive at work and fulfil their potential. The focus of our network is on challenging sex discrimination and upholding rights and protections that relate to sex (including the protections provided to those with the protected characteristics of sex, pregnancy and maternity and sexual orientation, as set out in the Equality Act 2010). We recognise that to achieve this and ensure sex equality and equity sometimes requires treating women and men differently, according to our different rights and needs.

We are also committed to the protected belief (covered by the protected characteristic of religion and belief in the Equality Act 2010) that biological sex is binary and immutable, that biological sex matters for both women and men in our everyday lives, including for our rights and needs in the workplace, and that biological sex must not be conflated with, or replaced by, the concepts of gender or gender identity."

Didn't the Home Office change all the loos to 'gender neutral' aka mixed sex and staff especially women were walking to other gov buildings to use the single sex facilities? Taking quite a long time to go to the loo every time. IIRC they changed them back pretty sharpish.

Great answer!

Sex Matters are looking for exactly this kind of thing in the workplace. You can see what they are after here.
sex-matters.org/take-action/trans-awareness-week-leaks/

Nope, they changed the toilets on every other floor to be gender neutral, with single sex toilets remaining on alternate floors. As I understand it, with the gender neutral toilets, most people have continued to use the ones they used when they were single sex anyway.

If each toilet is in a separate room with its own sink, isn’t that the best possible solution for everyone? I would much rather no one else could hear me going to the toilet, regardless of their sex or gender, or see me wash blood off my hands after a messy period incident.

No, I prefer single sex looks unless I am dealing with my period, in which case I like a single sex self contained room. For whatever reason women's loos with cubicles and shared sinks tend to be cleaner and faster (in both cases it seems to be to do with the fact you are in a shared space that makes people tidier, cleaner, more considerate and faster than when you are in your own room). I also like having an on-hand women only space available in times of struggle.

Have you experienced the gender neutral toilets being discussed here @aseriesofstillimages ? Are you a civil servant? I know of one new build office at least at my Department that has nothing but this type of 'universal toilet'. There are no single sex facilities in the building, only these individual cubicles. I personally don't like them and know many others aren't keen on them, for a number of reasons many of which relate to the different standards of hygiene experienced in toilets used by men and those used by women. Liquids on the floor and seat, marks on the bowl etc are much more common in these new gender neutral toilets - could be coincidence, could be that they are mixed sex. I particularly dislike them because they open out onto a public corridor. I had an experience recently where someone tried to come in while I was actually on the toilet. I don't imagine there was any ill intent, the locks don't make it obvious whether the cubicle is occupied, and the doors are heavy and self closing so people are bound to need to try them to see if they're free. The toilet is too far from the door to put a foot out to block it, so if the lock isn't secure you'd be exposed to the whole corridor. You also don't know if the person trying the door is a man or a woman. Although on that occasion the lock was ok, the shock of seeing and hearing the handle move while I was semi undressed was just a totally unnecessary and avoidable stress that I don't expect to put up with at work. I want women's toilets. We can have men's, women's and GN if you want - I can't say I've ever had to rinse bloodied hands at the sink, and I've never seen anyone else do it either but if that happens regularly for you then by all means keep the individual cubicles too. Just don't override the silent majority who prefer single sex facilities.

I don’t have this sort of facility in my current building but I worked for several years in a building (civil service but not a government department) where all of the toilets were unisex self contained cubicles, and I found that much less stressful. They opened off a single corridor which was just for the toilets - as in you go through a door into a long room and all of the self contained cubicles lead off that room, so it’s not a corridor people would be walking up and down for any other reason. Many of the things you mentioned sound like a design flaws with the specific facilities you had, rather than a necessary feature of having self contained cubicles.

Fortunately it’s a while since I’ve had to wash much blood off my hands, as I had treatment that significantly improved my heavy periods. But I know I’m not alone in finding that when it’s really heavy it can be hard to avoid getting it on your hands. Obviously you wipe it off as best you can with toilet paper, so probably no one notices when you wash off the remnants, but I still felt self conscious about it.

No completely disagree that it’s the best possible solution - it is dangerous for people who are ill and need assistance such as people having seizures. There are thousands of people that are of risk of having seizures in this country. If you feel ill in public, where do most people go? The toilet. I have rescued someone who was unconscious because I could see their hand poking out of the door gap. They had choked on vomit.

Assaults and drug use and other antisocial behaviours increase when the toilet doors don’t have gaps at the bottom. At least one school child gets raped inside schools premises each day in Britain - I think enclosed toilets with no door gap would be a greater risk.

I have had to do a quick sweep of toilet blocks when fire alarms are going off. If there’s a locked toilet, you can quickly check if anyone is in it if the door has a gap.

I can't envisage a design workaround that would bring me to the position of wanting to share a toilet with men that I don't know. I just want single sex toilets. This is the default requirement under the health and safety legislation: the option to provide 'universal' toilets of this type is only permitted where it is 'not practical' to provide separate facilities.

All this too.

"At least one school child gets raped inside schools premises each day in Britain"

WTAF?? Where does this statistic come from?? Surely that can't be true.

Yep shocks me too and I was a teacher. These are the ones that are reported.
The report was pre-covid and was a parliamentary one, reported by the BBC.
I will see if I can google it.

Here you go:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36071502.amp

Where we’re talking about toilet facilities in civil service offices I would think the risk of assaults, drug use or rape would be vanishingly small.

On the risk to those suffering a seizure, does this mean we shouldn’t have any disabled toilets that are separate lockable rooms, as a person suffering a seizure might not be able to pull the emergency assistance alarm and no one would know they were in difficulty?

And yet drug use and assault allegations are hardly unknown in the parliamentary estate?

FFS! I had no idea it was that bad.

My epileptic Dd indeed is safer using the girls toilets than the disabled toilet and that’s what she used at school. She didn’t use the disabled toilet. Her friend in a wheelchair did use the disabled toilet as it was better for her with the space and ease straight out into a cooridor.

Some people have an aura beforehand and have the capacity to pull a cord. Some don’t and those suffering seizures who haven’t had them for a long time or the first time are more at risk.

There are around 600,000 people in the UK with epilepsy. For one third of them, their seizures are not controlled with current medication.

Many people with heart conditions have heart problems whilst straining as it puts extra pressure on the heart. Can’t remember the name for it but it’s why so many people are found dead in public toilets.

In my case, my friends and I rescued a girl from nightclub toilets when I was a student - possibly alcohol related? I don’t know. I do know she was alive when the ambulance took her away. But I don’t know if she would have been if she had been left behind a full length door all night as she had vomit all over her and was unconscious and would have been wedged against the door. We shimmed over the door to unlock it from the inside and get her out. I was alerted by her hand and foot poking out.

Good post, ZandathePanda

My point:
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's communal toilets?
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's fitting rooms in shops?
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's changing rooms in gyms and swimming pools?
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's sports?
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's awards for women?
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's prisons?
Why can't men, whatever their gender identity, just not use women's... everything? They are men, they already have their own stuff and more.

So glad to see this push back.

Sincerely wishing all the best to SEEN, Sex Equality and Equity Network.

@PaleBlueMoonlight

As in, it was an interview with someone who had transitioned on the intranet in support of trans awareness week, so their opinion. For that reason, I would not want to share it externally. But all the same, I bet an interview with me giving GC views would not be allowed to be published!

I worked in a civil service organisation and a woman there was raped. They of course got rid of her and it took years to get them to admit that they prioritised the man's 'career' over hers. Now of course she is so broken she can't work and she had to take the organisation to court to get anything and she got what was basically less than 1.5 years wages as compensation.

You seem to think men don't rape people if they work for a government organisation. That's not how it works. People with penises if they are rapists can get any job they want, and if they do get caught they are protected by the institutions.

That is terrible, obviously. I am not saying that men who work for government organisations don’t rape people. I’m saying that changing the toilets from communal to self-contained cubicles in government departments won’t result in an increased risk of anyone getting raped.

What if a man pushed you into a cubicle and locked the door?

There are so many different scenarios and situations but I cannot in any way see how making places where females use facilities accessible by men in any way safer? Every chip against sex segregation makes females less safe and less able to be in a situation where other females might assist them if trouble arises.

It’s opportunity with sexual assaults. If it’s a mixed sex area the opportunity increases for a woman and man to be alone in an enclosed space undetected.
There was a footballer that was caught out on cctv going into the ladies used in an assault trial. If it’s mixed sex toilets that ‘layer’ of protection has gone.

in both cases it seems to be to do with the fact you are in a shared space that makes people tidier, cleaner, more considerate and faster than when you are in your own room

Shared facilities are also quicker to clean and resupply and easier to use. If soap or towels run out in one dispenser you can use the next one along. And surely we've all passed toilet paper under the partition? The narrow cubicles aren't that easy to move around in, check clothes, see yourself in mirrors.

I used to work in an office with clever individual cubicles that opened off a narrow side corridor and the side corridor had a glass end-wall onto an atrium. After trying them a couple of times I used the proper ladies loos three floors down - the usual row of cubicles opposite a row of sinks and mirrors, off a side corridor with a door that didn't look straight into the toilets. More private, more dignified, easier.

I’m saying that changing the toilets from communal to self-contained cubicles in government departments won’t result in an increased risk of anyone getting raped.

The ladies' loos used to be a safer retreat from sexual harassment. Shared facilities with partition cubicles and open sinks behind a door for women only really are safer from workplace harrassment, rape during the office party, that kind of thing.

This is not an office situation but Helen Joyce describes a row of mixed-sex individual cubicles with floor to ceiling lockable doors in a nightclub that sounds positively dangerous. They're all off a narrow corridor so women have to run a gauntlet of cubicles used by pissed men. Quite apart from men who don't shut or lock the door, anyone can come out as you go past, anyone can leer at you or grab at you, anyone can block you, anyone can drag you in and shut you in.

And the trouble with this fight over trans women in women's toilets, and who can go in and who can't, is that the "easy" solution is to make everything indivdual and mixed sex - and more dangerous for women.