‘Gender-neutral’ lavatories are an invasion of women’s privacy - Kemi Badenoch

[IwantToRetire]

I would never have guessed when I first became an MP how much time I would spend looking at toilet policy. But, increasingly, my job is spent legislating for common sense and stopping people determined to do destructive things.

A decade ago, there was no need to clarify who could use which toilet. However, in today’s world, some are trying to redefine biological sex to mean however one chooses to identify. This has led to multiple instances of organisations, <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/15i3m/www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/31/kemi-badenoch-gender-neutral-toilets-rishi-sunak/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">from schools to music venues, removing single-sex (male only or female only) toilets and replacing them with “gender-neutral” versions.

That is why today the Government is setting out clearly what the difference is, and what best practice toilet design should look like. The debate around sex-based rights has become confused. Basic tenets of everyday life, such as the right to privacy in a single sex space, are framed as transphobic by a vocal minority of activists.

Women should have exclusive access to public toilet facilities reserved specifically for them. Men should have the same. Female loos must have cubicles, while male ones can have urinals. Transgender people should have privacy. The sign on the door should clearly tell you what to expect.

The Conservatives are the only party of common sense. <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/15i3m/www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/08/09/suella-braverman-set-firm-trans-guidance-schools/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">We won’t sit idly by as schoolgirls get infections because they feel uncomfortable using “gender-neutral” loos. We will never be ashamed of defending the right to privacy and dignity for all. No matter how trendy the opposition or how vocal the outrage, we will intervene where common sense disappears.

Extracts from longer article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/13/gender-neutral-lavatories-are-an-invasion-of-womens-privacy/

Also available via https://archive.ph

NB there is an existing thread about this proposal (from last year) because the Government have now published the guidelines. https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4870722-female-only-toilets-will-be-guaranteed-in-new-buildings So discussion on toilets is ongoing.

Just thought it might be interesting to have a thread to see what the response of others parties might be to this, if at all. Not to duplicate discussion on other thread.

Presumably this is more than KB making a leadership bid, but the Tories do seem to let her make public statements relating to "common sense" (eg EA article) in contrast to other Ministers who are still in the foaming at the mouth little englander mode when making statements / comments.

You don't say!

If you have a preference for gender neutral toilets in public places then you really should campaign for the provision of them - but you have no right to campaign to remove the current provisions for women and girls - most of whom are best served by single sex facilities - and who would actively choose them over mixed sex.

There goes the 'folk' again......its insidious.

Yada yada...not all men are paedophiles, stalkers, flashers.
Some women are domestic abusers, sadists, complicit with dangerous men.

Alright to assume a trans woman is automatically a threat but not ok to say ‘folk’ ‘people’ etc.

This poster is more concerned about wee on the seat than safety and privacy in public places, on the basis that heterosexual couples may only have one loo at home.

It is not about males necessarily being a direct 'physical threat, as you must know, but about the dignity and privacy of sex. Being free from the male gaze - the gaze that is born out of the very differences of sex. The same sort of feelings of dignity that you are claiming for males who 'identify as' women.

A bit more identifying with, rather than as - would go a long way to establishing empathy and respect.

I've come across men who are presenting as women in a variety of situations ( how would i know if they identify as a woman?) - and the feeling is always one of difference - they are clearly male, and the very presence of that 'otherness' causes a degree of discomfort in certain types of situation.

We have single sex spaces in certain situations so that women can feel comfortable and have some dignity and privacy.

And the 'folk' refernces have the opposite of the cosy effect that their now commonplace use is intended to convey.

I have a very close, long standing male friend who is gay. He absolutely identifies with women. He really does has empathy for the female situation. He wouldn't dream of imposing himself into women's spaces - certainly not when uninvited.

Folk/folks/folx...just more wantin post modern trashing of language.

Yes, we're all one human race, one set of folks, so to speak.

But at the sharp end/the boundaries/the necessary seperateness/...it's not folks anymore, it's men and women.

Folks used to understand this. Folks used to self police. Folks used to understand categories matter.

Folks don't seem to get this anymore.

Ah the old NAMLT/NATWALT trope wheeled out again.

How do we tell the difference between those who have bad motives and those who don't? If you know and can reliably do so what a boon that would be to crime prevention, no need for any checks could just call you and you could give the definitive answer - are you Layla Moran and can see into people's souls?

It is not all about safety it is privacy and dignity too, why are women not entitled to this most basic of considerations?

Rosie 😁

Nah, just if you want to think that

Reading stuff into things here.

The impression that something creates is not an act of will. It tends to be an effect of the wider context.

Furthermore, it is an Americanism..

Hmm, says a person who likely believes that language is actual violence, and misgendering is unacceptable.

Is that right that 'sex' in these regulations will mean 'biological sex'? I haven't seen that - I only saw 'sex' without qualification.

Without qualification or further clarification, presumably that means sex as per the Equality Act guidance on separate and single-sex services. As we all know, the exact meaning of that is under discussion.

Can @SuperiorM explain which female people are standing to pee?

Who are these women and girls? How the fuck does that even work?

I do not believe that the claim that any female stands to pee in a public loo is WORIADS.

It is quite amazing to see the lengths some posters go to when women and girls wanting single sex toilets come up.

And really? Which men are not using urinals? Because I never see any line up for the male toilets yet we are told men are not using urinals. Some very bizarre claims on this thread.

And the seriously lazy ‘you have gender neutral toilets at home’ got brought out too. Brilliant. Can you tell us superior M when was the last time you opened your house to the public and had a stream of strangers using your toilet please? If you don’t do this on an everyday basis you are using an argument you obviously thought was highly intelligent from the internet but never actually thought about. It is such a false equivalence unless your home toilet is listed as a public toilet free for all to use.

I would love to know the mechanics of how this works. Because this sounds amazing !!!

Imagine if we all can master this, WE could use urinals! How quick we would be ! We could just pop in, stand and pee and the lines would go. The cubicles would be for all the other needs we have but the lines would go!!

Either Superior knows something that I don’t OR is had no fucking idea about female toileting habits.

So please inform us how this is done superior. I am keen to go and try it.

And what do women and girls standing to pee do with their clothing?

Do they need to have exceptional pelvic floor muscles to empty their bladder so they don’t get infections?

So many questions!! I am so looking forward to finding out.

Well, I just tried and I call complete bollocks on women standing to pee. Either some posters have no fucking idea what women do in the toilet or…. Actually no other alternative comes to mind.

Men cannot become women.

It's really simple. It's science fact. It's common sense. It's the truth.

Indeed it's a fact that all toddlers, the middle aged and OAPs can agree on.

Incontrovertible, from time immemorial to the present day.

It just is.

And now this home truth is being subverted. And because the home truth is so truthful, the only way to attempt this subversion is to subvert everything.

Language. Science. History. Art. Politics. Ethics. Evolutionary instincts. Civilisational mores.

And by subverting everything, we subvert ourselves.

Eddie Izzard can dine out on a four decades old story that teenage girls trod on his human rights arguing with him in their loo.

Sportsmen allowed to rub women's noses in it...powerlifting, swimming, cycling

GCs can be cancelled and sacked with impunity...Maya, Allison, Jo, Glinner.

Women can be bullied and threatened with zero blow back from cultural elites...JKR, Posie, Riley.

Politicians are happy to put men in women's prisons...Sturgeon, Trudeau, Biden.

All, ALL because the trope "men can become women" was never challenged by the liberal elites.

The most anti scientific, antithetical statement was allowed to stand, be absorbed, and be reinforced in the culture.

It's not so much a Trojan Horse, as battering ram in bad make up and frilly frock, or most accurately, an iron fist in a velvet glove.

The moment "men can become women" was allowed to stand, and not stamped on by every politician, scientist, writer, ethicist, sociologist, psychotherapist, doctor, journalist...ironically as the self same groups don't allow Rachel Dolezal to "be" black and Elizabeth Warren to "be" Native American/Two Spirits...then the rot not only set in, but was encouraged to spread.

You could do it if you used a shewee but my small experience with one left me with a wet hand and leg from leakage.