Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Gender-neutral lavatories banned in new-build restaurants and offices

154 replies

IwantToRetire · 06/05/2024 00:27

The new legislation applies to commercial properties as well as those undergoing ‘major refurbishment’

Bars, restaurants and offices will be barred from creating new premises with gender-neutral lavatories, under changes to the law to take effect later this year.

In a move which ministers said would increase the “safety, privacy and dignity” of women, new non-domestic buildings will be required to include separate male and female lavatories.

Those that cannot do so will have to install so-called universal facilities, which include a lavatory, wash basin and hand dryer behind a lockable door.

As well as affecting all new commercial buildings, the measure will also apply to businesses and hospitality venues undertaking “major refurbishment”

Article continues at https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gender-neutral-lavatories-banned-toilet-commercial-buildings-trans-zzsg826st
and can be read at https://archive.ph/FQlr2

I was thinking this means it will now be the law, but in fact means that a bill to achieve this will only be presented (this week?)

From the Government statement:

Changes to building regulations will ensure that:

  • Separate single-sex toilets facilities are provided for men and women;
  • Self-contained, universal toilets may be provided in addition to single-sex toilets, where space allows;
  • Self-contained universal toilets may be provided instead of single-sex toilets only where lack of space reasonably precludes provision of single-sex toilet accommodation.

Read full statement at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-lay-new-law-to-halt-the-march-of-gender-neutral-toilets-in-buildings

Gender-neutral lavatories banned in new-build restaurants and offices

The new legislation applies to commercial properties as well as those undergoing ‘major refurbishment’

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gender-neutral-lavatories-banned-toilet-commercial-buildings-trans-zzsg826st

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
endofthelinefinally · 06/05/2024 10:38

AccidentallyWesAnderson · 06/05/2024 10:22

I was in a distillery on holiday recently and the toilets were 'gender neutral'. All had enclosed hand dryers etc and quite fancy like the whole place, but the first three I went into (there were loads of toilets) all had the seats up with piss around the toilet/floor. It really irks me so much. I hate them.

Yes. It is the state of the toilets and the stench of male urine.

Truthlikeness · 06/05/2024 10:55

This legislation has been talked about for a while - it has already influenced a project at my workplace that had previously been proposing all-sex toilets to go back to single sex. The advantage of single-sex over the toilet/handbasin dryer all in one is that they are much more space efficient - if space and money are an issue.

HOWEVER - my workplace has a policy that you can use whichever toilet you like and if women have a problem with it they have to use the self-contained ones - so it still doesn't solve that problem and in fact might make it harder for women who can't share with men to find a toilet.

ErrolTheDragon · 06/05/2024 10:58

Trying to portray this as somehow a step backwards is surely a bit disingenuous.

It's a step backwards to not be considering the needs of families. Single sex plus proper 'universal' would be a step forward.

Truthlikeness · 06/05/2024 10:59

AccidentallyWesAnderson · 06/05/2024 10:22

I was in a distillery on holiday recently and the toilets were 'gender neutral'. All had enclosed hand dryers etc and quite fancy like the whole place, but the first three I went into (there were loads of toilets) all had the seats up with piss around the toilet/floor. It really irks me so much. I hate them.

I visited a bar recently that had a few single-sex self-contained cubicles, but they were all off the same narrow corridor and it was a dark and of course the men weren't bothered to find the correct toilet and were just using any cubicle. It is far better to have them in separate locations.

There is also a tendency in fancy bars to make the male/female signs as esoteric as possible, so you have to stand there for several seconds trying to work out what the symbol or words actually mean.

HoneyButterPopcorn · 06/05/2024 11:02

Harassedevictee · 06/05/2024 00:51

I am not convinced that this proposed approach is going to achieve the desired result.

I would prefer some gender neutral toilet provision alongside single sex facilities.

I think transwomen have a point when they say they don’t feel safe in male toilets. Gender neutral toilets as additional facilities resolve this and enable single sex toilets to be truly single sex. It also is inclusive for non-binary people.

I know transwomen argue this is othering but I see this as a compromise.

Men need to sort out their own issues and not take away resources from women .

Will this be retrospective and will Labour just trash it when they get elected?

Harassedevictee · 06/05/2024 11:03

@AccidentallyWesAnderson I agree urine splattered floors and seats are a very very big downside. I dislike using universal toilets in planes and disabled toilets for that reason.

DameMaud · 06/05/2024 11:14

MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/05/2024 08:23

The Telegraph have reported this. I particularly liked this comment from the housing minister Lee Rowley:

“I have no interest in fighting any war on social issues. I want an open, tolerant and welcoming society. My first instinct is always to live and let live wherever possible.
Yet, the ground beneath our feet on these issues is constantly shifting – pushed by unelected activists who try to move us in directions that the average person doesn’t support nor, often, which make sense. And, where it makes no sense, it is the job of a responsible Government to stop that happening. That is the exact opposite of a culture war.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/06/single-sex-toilets-compulsory-new-building-regulations-tory/

Thanks MrsO, for this sharing.
That quote from Lee Rowley is absolutely spot on!

RebelliousCow · 06/05/2024 11:16

IBelieveInFerries · 06/05/2024 10:18

As a previous poster has said, this is just a "dead squirrell" strategy to distract from the disastrous election results.

The conservatives have been in office since 2010. All of a sudden they give a shit about womens spaces

Nobody was even debating or discussing the issue until relatively recently.....Trans activists within parties such as Crispin Blunt and Maria Miller for the Tories, and many others in the Labour Party, Lib Dems and Greens were quietly going about the bidding of Stonewall and other pressure groups - in campaigning for Self Id and in pushing through gender ideology in our schools and other institutions and organisations.

However, since the debate has been forced - thanks to the grassroots movement of people pushing back - it is only the Tory party that has done anything to draw a line. At least be honest about this.

All of this tribalistic stuff conveniently disregards information which doesn't conform to the approved party line.

KnickerlessParsons · 06/05/2024 11:16

StealthSpinach · 06/05/2024 01:59

I’d be concerned that this would be taken up as a positive by TW, as the toilets are to be segregated by sex, then TW will assert that they are entitled to use female facilities (even if only those with a GRC - and as you can’t check/ask this, then it is a free for all).

This.

Transwomen don't use gender neutral toilets anyway as they consider themselves to be women/female.
I can't see any solution other than having a guard on the door checking people's genitals credentials before they go in.

RebelliousCow · 06/05/2024 11:21

KnickerlessParsons · 06/05/2024 11:16

This.

Transwomen don't use gender neutral toilets anyway as they consider themselves to be women/female.
I can't see any solution other than having a guard on the door checking people's genitals credentials before they go in.

Maybe, but it is evident 98% of the time that they are male.......public disapproval works wonders; and if there is now a facility especially created for those that don't feel comfortable with those facilities assigned for their sex, there is no real excuse not to use it.

BTW there are many TW who know/admit they are not really female...this idea that they really believe they are women doesn't wash.

Theeyeballsinthesky · 06/05/2024 11:23

Odd isn’t it how until a few years ago men even the ones who like to wear dresses could be generally trusted to keep the fuck out of women’s toilets and if they were there, ppl would tell them to get lost/call security/police

and now it’s “oh no we couldn’t manage it, I mean how could we tell we’d have to inspect what’s in people’s pants”

SwimmingSnake · 06/05/2024 11:23

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

RebelliousCow · 06/05/2024 11:26

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Surely the poltical statemnt is having Mixed Sex facilities which were not in demand/or wanted, and which are pretentiously called 'Gender Neutral' or 'All Genders' or some such rubbish?

Keeptoiletssafe · 06/05/2024 11:27

We hope they have done away with the suggestion that single sex toilets could be universal in design too. These universal ones have to be fully enclosed. Making sure there are toilets door gaps are important for everyone’s safety so that they can be seen and reached. Certain groups that have recognised disabilities, such as the nearly 1% of the population that have epilepsy, need to be catered for at work, school and travel. Diabetics, those whose drinks have been spiked, asthmatics, strokes, heart attacks, brain injuries etc are all more likely to be seen and rescued behind a door with gaps at the bottom and top. Particularly because the universal designs have doors opening inwards so the body could not be accessed.

Also, particularly for women and girls as the unisex toilets are the overriding locations where rapes and sexual assaults take place.

I hope Wes Streeting takes this on with the introduction of small gaps under hospital toilet doors. Those doors normally open outwards but it beggars belief that you have people who are ill anyway going into toilets where people wouldn’t be able to notice if you had collapsed. And yes I expect lots of assaults you hear about in hospitals go on in these toilets too precisely because they are private.

Bobbotgegrinch · 06/05/2024 12:10

StealthSpinach · 06/05/2024 01:59

I’d be concerned that this would be taken up as a positive by TW, as the toilets are to be segregated by sex, then TW will assert that they are entitled to use female facilities (even if only those with a GRC - and as you can’t check/ask this, then it is a free for all).

This seems to be how a few transwomen on the transgenderuk subreddit are treating it. Saying that they don't want gender neutral toilets as they don't want to share with men (Oh the irony!) and that noone can stop them using the female ones.

Keeptoiletssafe · 06/05/2024 12:15

IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine · 06/05/2024 09:03

In an ideal world, all public buildings would have female toilets (with baby changing facilities), male toilets (with baby changing facilities), mixed-sex toilets and disabled toilets. Realistically, not all buildings will be able to achieve this due to space constraints, but I think this should be the aim if at all possible. Then no one has any right to complain! (They still will, though.)

I would add to this. In an ideal world there would also be two more: single sex disabled toilets, accessed via single sex toilets.

This is because disabled people have the risks of their toilet being mixed sex already. A disproportionate amount of sexual assaults happen in disabled toilets as they are private and enclosed.

IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine · 06/05/2024 12:21

Keeptoiletssafe · 06/05/2024 12:15

I would add to this. In an ideal world there would also be two more: single sex disabled toilets, accessed via single sex toilets.

This is because disabled people have the risks of their toilet being mixed sex already. A disproportionate amount of sexual assaults happen in disabled toilets as they are private and enclosed.

Very good point- I'm happy to add this to my Ideal World Scenario!

Keeptoiletssafe · 06/05/2024 12:26

IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine · 06/05/2024 12:21

Very good point- I'm happy to add this to my Ideal World Scenario!

Thank you. An ideal world scenario!

Snowypeaks · 06/05/2024 12:38

I haven't read the article, but from the statement:

Changes to building regulations will ensure that:

  • Separate single-sex toilets facilities are provided for men and women;
  • Self-contained, universal toilets may be provided in addition to single-sex toilets, where space allows;
  • Self-contained universal toilets may be provided instead of single-sex toilets only where lack of space reasonably precludes provision of single-sex toilet accommodation.

So the regulations will not ban additional universal toilets. It will just mean that single-sex is the standard. For a bar or a restaurant or a shopping centre it will make sense to have an additional universal toilet. I don't think space is all that much of a problem in reality.
All we need now is a fines system for the venue if it allows men to use women's toilets. And also "potty parity".

ErrolTheDragon · 06/05/2024 12:40

The ideal mix varies according to location. It always amazed me when dd was young how few zoos, museums etc had family-friendly loos. I don't know if things have improved at all since then. But they'd be irrelevant in a nightclub.

Keeptoiletssafe · 06/05/2024 12:58

@Wincher @UnimaginableWindBird @TheMuskratOfDestiny @SwimmingSnake

Apologies for picking out a few names that like the idea of fully enclosed universal toilets. Yes they sound lovely in theory but in practice they are dangerous especially to all of us when we are medically vulnerable and particularly to girls and women. They are fully enclosed and the doors open inwards.

It makes logical sense that more medical emergencies like heart attacks, strokes, seizures, and collapses happen in the toilet cubicle as that’s where we head to if we are feeling ill. When there is no way of knowing someone is having a medical emergency behind a full height door, vital time is wasted. The roll-out of defibrillators around the country is pointless if no one is aware the person in the has collapsed. And even if you realised, they have fallen against an inward opening door and the body is in the way, the lock needs a special key, and you need tools to dismantle the floor-to-ceiling cubicle partitions and door. The chances of survival could be reliant on a gap in the toilet door so someone can see you, and a way of getting over the door to rescue you. There are known medical reasons for a disproportionally high frequency of cardiac arrests and strokes while an individual is in the toilet.

In any space that becomes private, more offences are likely to take place. In Parliament it was discussed there was at least 1 rape inside a school premises each day (over 600 in a 3 year period). The data, collected by the BBC, mentions an example occurring in a private cupboard. This was in 2015, before many schools decided to change their toilet designs to fully enclosed and mixed sex. There is no available data on these new toilet designs but, teachers and pupils are reporting many problems with drug dealing, dirt and sex. The toilet door gaps are vital for safeguarding to help prevent activities that stop pupils, especially girls, going to the toilet. There are known problems of girls avoiding toilets and getting urinary infections or missing school.

A quick internet search brings up the disproportionate number of sexual assaults and rapes that happen to able bodied and disabled women and girls in disabled toilets in this country which are obviously mixed sex and fully enclosed toilets, often in very public places such as stations and shopping centres. Women/girls/boys have been pushed or followed in.

Other problems with toilets with enclosed full height doors are:

  • Ventilation is decreased so there’s a higher risk of disease spread.
  • Evacuation times are greatly increased as a responder can’t tell quickly if stalls are occupied.
  • Hygiene is compromised as a mop can’t go underneath the doors nor floor be washed down. It is awkward to enter and wash down the cubicle with a mop and detritus ends up on the partition corners.
  • Doors are more likely to get stuck/warped and the cubicle out of action.
  • People are more likely to engage in illegal activities (drugs) or self harm if they are in a private space.
  • The length of time in a cubicle is increased, especially if the wash basin is in there so queues are longer.
  • Occupants can’t see if anyone is lying in wait outside their cubicle if they are feeling vulnerable.

The fully enclosed universal cubicle design should not be the recommendation for single sex toilets. Having fully enclosed toilets as standard would make it less safe for the many with common conditions such as asthma, epilepsy, diabetes (and the unknown like brain bleeds or cardiac problems) or those whose drinks had been spiked, all that carry a risk of collapse.

When you go to the loo you don’t think about all these scenarios but we need to prioritise overall safety for everyone.

Emotionalsupportviper · 06/05/2024 13:15

StealthSpinach · 06/05/2024 01:59

I’d be concerned that this would be taken up as a positive by TW, as the toilets are to be segregated by sex, then TW will assert that they are entitled to use female facilities (even if only those with a GRC - and as you can’t check/ask this, then it is a free for all).

I don't see how, when they have been banging on about "sex isn't gender". ("But we want you to give gender priority over sex because of reasons")

BloodyHellKenAgain · 06/05/2024 13:46

Harassedevictee · 06/05/2024 00:51

I am not convinced that this proposed approach is going to achieve the desired result.

I would prefer some gender neutral toilet provision alongside single sex facilities.

I think transwomen have a point when they say they don’t feel safe in male toilets. Gender neutral toilets as additional facilities resolve this and enable single sex toilets to be truly single sex. It also is inclusive for non-binary people.

I know transwomen argue this is othering but I see this as a compromise.

But there will be additional provision - mixed sex individual provision. Presumably TW would use this (they won't get any validation from using it, but that's a different matter).

BloodyHellKenAgain · 06/05/2024 13:47

I think it sounds like a good idea. Single sex provision and mixed sex individual provision.
I am however very disappointed it won't be covering schools.

Harassedevictee · 06/05/2024 13:48

@BloodyHellKenAgain the mixed sex provision is an option not a requirement.