Failure to provide a toilet for the exclusive use of women is sex discrimination

[afternoonoflife]

https://www.irwinmitchell.com/news-and-insights/expert-comment/post/102j048/failure-to-provide-a-toilet-for-the-exclusive-use-of-women-sex-discrimination

I saw this on Twitter. There was no female-only toilet. What happens if trans identified men are using a female-only toilet at work? I’m not a lawyer, does anyone know?

The pace of change is glacial because it relies on people bringing civil cases, and that only happens when things go wrong. There've been great wins on, essentially, freedom of speech (eg Phoenix v OU), but that only scratches the surface.

The David Lloyd case and Survivors Network case are the first (?) about women being discriminated against by taking away their derogated rights under the EA.

It makes me laugh when I read about the sinister groups funding the international anti-trans movement. When what we keep seeing is abused individuals having to resort to crowdfunders.

Quite right. But the successes have already had the effect of making the non-woo-woo people braver. And it seems to have influenced the RCGP (I think that's the right acronym) into not caving to the TRAs and cancelling a conference about care of gender-distressed children. I think where providers do take legal advice, it's starting to reflect the true situation.

@Snowypeaks
No my post was not a direct reply to you.
I completely agree that "It's pretty clear it is sex discrimination if no women-only facilities are provided."

My point was more that the male relies on reasoning that the woman can equally ( if not more ) rely upon - that women should not have to share a toilets with men.

If it's sauce for the goose it's sauce for the gander.

The reason my Dd was able to go to school is that she was ‘visible’ if she had a seizure. In her SEND educational plan it specifically said she should not be directed to the disabled toilet as it was not suitable for her needs. The girls toilets doors had gaps and were easy to access (climb over if she was collapsed) as you would be able to tell as you could see her on the floor. The ‘disorientation but feeling ill’ aura before a seizure meant she was disorientated.

If the school had made the toilets mixed sex - with the full length doors that go with that - then she wouldn’t have been safe at school unless someone accompanied her into toilet cubicle each time she felt ill.

Epilepsy affects 1 in 106 people. Then there’s all the other conditions.

Gaps in toilet doors are such a simple thing that keep medically vulnerable people safe.

Surely it is disability discrimination too to change once safe toilet blocks into more dangerous non-visible cubicles?

Good spot! The more protected characteristics the better...

I doubt such a case will ever happen though, so we are at the mercy of whatever the government decides to do.

I urge her to send this article in to the director of estates at her university (the person should be very easy to find an email address for)

Well I have just outed myself if it happens in future! Having had to revive someone who is blue on the toilet floor definitely puts ‘hurty feelings’ into perspective.

Strange how it's always the women's facilities which become "all gender", and never the men's, isn't it?

Personally, I'm not worried about walking past urinals (I've done it often enough in France!) as long as I can eventually get to a safe, lockable space free from men to do my own urinating in!

Couldn't agree more.

But that's not true for all women. Indeed, some women would be unable to use toilets like that. They have to work for everybody.

@NPET. Did you ever consider that the men using the urinals might feel uncomfortable peeing in front of you?

Well we wouldn't want women in the men's room, men can be dangerous—

I know, that's why I said "personally". I don't think many women if my age (20) would be worried.

I don't think they are in France. They are probably used to it from school, and in fact I know French girls who say it's a good thing because it stops them thinking they've something they can frighten us with.

I wouldn't have been worried at 20. As you get older and understand mvawg better, I think you appreciate the reasoning behind single-sex spaces.

Ah you're only 20. You'll learn.

know French girls who say it's a good thing because it stops them thinking they've something they can frighten us with.

You honestly believe that? 🙈

Oh the bravity of youth

I merrily used the men's loos when the women's queue was too long at that age. Because I hadn't been sexually assaulted by then and it felt relatively safe amongst uni mates.

I have the deepest respect for all of the clever and knowledgeable posters here.

But doesn't anyone just itch to take the common-sense approach...

'FFS Dave just go and pee and do your lippy in the men's toilets and leave women alone. No-one cares if you're wearing a dress anyway'.

Or some-such?

The serious point I'm trying to make is that I can't believe that we're tying ourselves up in knots about this... The only winners are the activists and the lawyers IMO. And the losers are women, every time. It's sad.

There’s also the issue that there can be single sex toilets but (male) employees who consider themselves entitled to because of their outfit choices, are allowed with management knowledge, to use the women’s toilets. Do female employees have a legal case against the employer there?

The law talks about employers providing toilets, and the assumption back whenever the law was made must have been, that employees wouldn’t ever use the opposite sex one.

The FWS 3 case clarified that they must have a GRC to use the opposite sex toilets. So yes, if an employer is allowing a male without a GRC to use the female toilets then the females have a case.

Thank you. Ok so that’s another set of reasons reason why GRA should be repealed. Firstly there’s the veil of legal secrecy around GRCs and who has them. So women who are made to feel uncomfortable at work are put on the back foot to begin with if their HR team are not allowed to confirm or deny whether the man in their work toilets has the GRC or not. That creates a chilling effect on feeling that they can complain at all.

Secondly it is entirely morally wrong and sexist that any women at work should have to put up with men in their toilet spaces, just because men have a piece of entitling paper.

And no, the answer here isn’t for employers to put in gender neutral toilets. I don’t think many women want to be clearing up our male colleagues’ piss before we are able to use the toilets at work..

I understand NOW the necessity for women-only toilets!

I ½ believe it! I know that it MIGHT just incite boys to do "nasty" things or worse. But it SEEMS to work in France, especially where the conveniences are patrolled. I've actually NEVER had "problems" using a toilet in France (not of the sort we're talking about here anyway!) but I certainly have in the UK.