Man using women's toilets

[Amonkeyisnotacitykid]

https://x.com/ChrisFalconer16/status/1918316039630405641

I will be asking Aberdeen City Council for their clarification on this.

SM also claims the Provost has given him and all males 'approval' to use Aberdeen Council female toilets.

I highly doubt this is true, but it could provide useful response from ACC.

Provost is fucked

thing is when someone does me a favour that might get themselves in trouble I keep my trap shut

i don’t broadcast it….but i do understand that in this case broadcasting is the whole point 😀

I am asking you to clarify. I have read your posts and I stated how they are coming across to me and asked you to clarify.

If you won't clarify what your post about risk meant, then it is up to others to assume what you meant.

So I will try again, what do you mean by 'personal safety risk as an inappropriate justification'?

Just like I was trying to work out what you were prioritising and what you were dismissing as not being a priority.

I call them Aberdeen City Council and I'm local

This looks like the Provost needs to clarify the official position very quickly.

Probably just to give them a heads up, a lot of blokes seem to unzip on the way in so they arrive at urinal cock in hand.

I had a glamorous career as a toilet attendant once upon a time. Average bloke in and out in about a minute could be less if they didn’t wave their hands under the tap.

Edit: how old is this man? What is with the bows and hello kitty shtick?

And wearing a skirt, shoes and ankle socks which looks like the school uniform which small girls in the younger years of Primary School wear. He also seems to habitually clutch a cuddly toy.

I'm guessing he probably calls himself 'a girl' while being being over 18 and a male.

It's all very creepy.

There is no woman on earth that stands with her legs that far apart.

This unemployed man has posted articles on social media about claiming PIP for mobility problems associated with dyspraxia.

The videos and social media posts of their exploits seem to contradict their claim. They seem to have a lot of energy for political campaigning that might be better channeled in employment.

The public can report concerns here:
www.mygov.scot/benefit-fraud

You don't seem to understand how politics works. This idiocy is a blatant political challenge.....and it must be met. You can't just let nutters like this do whatever they want.

All about Sophie. Every time, Sophie doesn’t care about other trans people either unless he can use them to further his own grift. If the provost has extended use of the women’s facilities to this man then the provost needs disciplinary action. Firstly he isn’t a woman and has no business letting men like Sophie use the women’s. Secondly Sophie is a man and as SC ruling is legally not allowed in those facilities.

Why is this not 'a genuine issue'?

Honest question.

Just because you don't see it as a priority doesn't mean you get to decide that and get to tell others to shut up.

They may feel it IS a genuine issue for all manner of reasons.

If the council have a representative who is
a) acting outside the remit of his power (he doesn't have the authority to say who can or cannot use the toilets). Doing this may harm the reputation of the council and may have financial implications
b) is encouraging unlawful behaviour and the intimidation and harassment of women (which includes the social media on this - it's not just the use of the toilet, it's then allowing the photo etc)
c) disregarding women's rights to speak for themselves and is trying to make them feel powerless against this

Then there's something that if women object they have an absolute right to say something regardless of how much it might cost the council. Cos democracy and accountability over use of power.

It's not the responsibility of women to think about how much it might cost the council and arguments that tell women to think about it are coercive and emotional blackmail.

It IS the responsibility of council staff to deal with issues responsibly and not act in a way which may mean that council funds have to be used to resolve an issue that has arisen due to their direct actions.

So take it up with the council if you have a problem. It's not for women's to justify their own actions in this case.

HTH

It thus was a political statement of breakingvtge law: if the council allowed this, they SHOULD be challenged, then the voters can challenge them for waste of funds

Just curious about why you want to know if I'm local or not?

Does it matter? I am concerned with the safety and dignity of females and as the Lord Provost is an elected official is answerable to citizens.

Does it matter if I call Aberdeen City Council by its official name? Or should I refer to them as 'The Council' or 'The Cooncil' or 'ACC'?

I think calling people, organisations etc by their official names is very important and shows respect and clarity.

There are only stalls, the men have more , er , porcelain available to them. So you have to open, close, lock the door.

Women also have morning sickness in toilets, for some women that hits in the evening
Have miscarriages
Have abortions
Change san pro and clean up if they need to
Readjust clothing
Hide from the creepy bloke who wants to take them home

You seem blissfully unaware that the 'situation' has evolved very rapidly in recent days. The time for such arguments has passed. The Supreme court has made clear that all workplaces must provide single sex facilities and 'single sex' means just that.

Exactly. Surely the right answer is use the facilities for your biological sex or the unisex facilities. 30 seconds job done. The reason this issue is being dragged out is the faux naïveté of what can this possibly mean , it’s all so confusing, it doesn’t apply to meeee.

I hope other councils are watching and formulating a decent answer for when they get asked.

I’ll happily clarify my point out risk.

The risk to personal safety is often used as a justification as to why it’s not ok for biological men to use women’s toilets.

In reality, there’s no direct increase in personal safety risk from someone who is biologically a man using women’s toilets. As is demonstrated by the toilets in most homes, small premises etc. A man using the same lavatory facilities as a woman does not have inherent personal safety hazards. For example, their use of the toilet does not leave it with barbs on it that then harm the woman who uses it next.

Whereas, there is very definitely a personal safety risk to a vulnerable person being in an isolated space with a predator.

The extreme example being in places that are predominantly male, and the toilet facilities reflect that. e.g. construction sites outside office hours. From a personal safety perspective a woman is safer using the large, busy men’s toilet located alongside a large, busy, open changing room; than she is using the single female toilet thats tucked away at the back of an admin block thats not occupied. The personal safety risk comes from being in an isolated space with a predatory individual.

(And yes, in an ideal situation that wouldn’t be the set up, but it often is - and it is an effective illustration on what the circumstances are that actually create the personal safety risks).

Privacy is a different topic. They're two topics that are challenging to address together as what’s good for one is often to the detriment of the other.

You know what effects every woman on this thread who doesn't live in Aberdeen?

The fact that there are idiots who tell us what we are 'allowed' to think are genuine political issues and what we are 'allowed' to have opinions on.

This might be Aberdeen but it's still relevant. If it's allowed to happen in Aberdeen then that's not Equality for all women - that's Aberdeen women who are being treated less favourably and that's not cool.

And if it's allowed to happen against the law in Aberdeen because it's being enabled by someone in a position of power, who is to say that someone else won't look at that and start doing it in their area and start trying to harass, intimidate and silence women elsewhere?

You don't get to try and emotionally blackmail and silence women because you don't agree.

Not anymore. That ship has well and truly sailed. Women are part of this democracy and have a right to ensure their legal rights are upheld rather than being told in whatever way, shape or form to "suck it up".

Women are constantly told to be grateful for what they have and not to make a fuss because there are more important issues. This means women's rights are forever left as something that's down the priority less and can just be ignored as no one complains.

Fuck that.

Complain, complain, complain.

Oh dear. You best quickly get some stats to back that up because there’s a lot of research that supports the opposite view. I expect you’re about to be given a list. [steps back and reaches for tin hat and popcorn]

As is demonstrated by the toilets in most homes, small premises etc.

So we let random men into our loos at home all the time, do we?

Let me think.... Maybe managing periods?

Great. Thank you for clarifying. And yes, what you point out has some relevance.

However, you are relying on the theory of constant flow as a protection device. For that to work it really does rely on a constant flow of people which is unworkable and not sustainable. And it only works if there is a presence of people who are also focused on protecting that person and not the presence of a group who will attack that person.

And I am going to ignore the very weak 'but at home' argument that is flawed on numerous levels.

And as you rightfully point out, it doesn't deal with what could be said as equally as important - privacy.

So can you explain why you felt it was relevant to the thread please.

You might.

I don’t.

The only men I allow into my home (being a quiet, isolated space) are ones I know well.

If I don’t know them, I ensure that it’s not an isolated space. Because I realise that the personal safety risk comes from being in a quiet isolated space with someone who could be predatory. Not from the genital configuration of the previous bum to contact the toilet seat.

Same reasons that meant that I’ve used the individual cubicles in busy ‘men’s’ locker rooms in some locations rather than trek off down a series of empty corridors to the ladies one where quite literally no one could hear you scream. Where thats the choice, I’m confident I’m safer with about 25 other people in hearing range even if those people are men, than I am where there is no one. Or even worse, one other person who has identified the as an opportunity rich location.
Best would obviously be a women’s locker room thats not isolated. But where the trade of is privacy vs personal safety, I’ll choose personal safety every time. And have been fortunate that my male colleagues have recognised and supported that and not claimed that their right to privacy trumped my desire for a feeling of safety. The fact a man had used that toilet cubicle before me didnt make me less safe.

I have found that the attempt to limit these discussions never works.

Because we will all watch what happens in Aberdeen and see how this plays out and will be noticing it in our local vicinity and have a greater understanding of what is happening, what can be done and what obstacles (such as the Provost) might be in the way.