Houses of Parliament refuses to ban trans women from female lavatories

[IwantToRetire]

A spokesman told The Telegraph that the House of Commons would be waiting for guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission before changing its rules.

He said they wanted to ensure that all are treated in an “inclusive manner”. The House of Lords said it would be adopting a similar approach.

“Like many organisations, we are awaiting full guidance from the EHRC on this issue.

“However, in advance of that we are reviewing the facilities that are available on the estate and providing support to colleagues where needed. We are committed to treating all those who work in or visit Parliament with respect, and in an inclusive manner.”

Asked why the Commons had decided not to follow the EHRC’s interim guidance, the spokesman said there was no comment.

A spokesman for the House of Lords said the Upper House was “taking a similar approach to the House of Commons”.

From a much longer article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/05/20/houses-of-parliament-refuse-ban-trans-women-female-toilets/

Can also be read in full at https://archive.is/0jQK3

Neither did Sandie Peggie.

Yes peer review consistently show thag women don't care or are supportive of trans rights. They won't be getting on board in droves to support this. More men do.

I take it that means that you've also skipped over my two posts asking you what you think this means:

The objective of this requirement is to require toilet accommodation in non-residential buildings to be separate single-sex toilets, with single-sex shared or individual hand-washing facilities.
in HM Government's building regulations, which may be as irrelevant to you as a Supreme Court ruling seems to be.

Of course everyone at work knew because they have eyes and can tell a man from a women.

BTW did you just misgender him?

Okay. I'm telling you what Upton meant by "outing". Not saying that Peggie should have. You see how you try and twist the conversation?

So, just to confirm, you work for a transgender supportive organisation and the research you use is biased towards supporting transgender people not a broad range of information sources? And you then make claims that don't reflect the attitudes and the needs of the broader population but insist that your claims do reflect the attitudes and needs of the broader population?

That's not how it works though.

The Equality Act doesn't work on the basis of opinion polls...

Neither does parliament.

We live in a representative documentary. You might want to do some research into how that works.

Neither do building regulations!

I'm not.

Beth Upton is a man.

Men are not legally allowed to use women's toilets in the workplace.

This is relevant to the court case. It is in the public interest for us to know this.

Please post it. Let's see.

Because I reckon that the research shows absolutely that women support trans rights- until it comes to needing single sex spaces, sports and other provisions. So, post it and let's see exactly what you are referring to.

Olive, I wonder if you’re a student - sixth form or university? There are a number of potential „tells“ in your posting style & content. This issue, & the associated law, ethics, research methodology etc. - they’re all complex, & take time & experience to get to grips with. A lot of the posters on here have that - relevant professional positions, research degrees, medical expertise etc., and always, always intellectual curiosity - it’s one of the things I most like about it. If you’re going to continue to engage, it may be worth trying to do so with the detail of their responses rather more. We learn a lot from each other in this way.

Uh huh. Loads of businesses and services will be saying they won't be complying with the law. Right up til their insurers find out about it, and say yes you fucking will you idiots.

Supreme Court judgement Para 171:
'Read fairly and in context, the provisions relating to single-sex services can only be interpreted by reference to biological sex.'

Here's the thing.

If you want to change the law you need to get MPs to rewrite the law.

If it has popular public support then you'll get lots of MPs signing up to change the law cos it'll be good for them and help them get votes.

Trying to find iniatives to get around the current law, will just lead to more expensive court cases in the meantime. If there is a glut of successful cases, then you'll get two effects: one there will be an effect on insurance and two the no win no fee lawyers will smell blood.

HTH.

Nope, Upton was on rotation, he was only in that post for a few months, and stated under oath that he'd been using the women's changing rooms in his previous rotation. And he claims to be a biological female and a lesbian (also under oath). So how did his work colleagues know he's trans? Making your earlier post:

How would you force your employer to reveal whether another employee is trans or not? Can you imagine having to stand there and list the reasons you suspect they are and why you should have access to their records to know for sure? If your boss wants to make you look like a weirdo, they can. What you going to do? Try and get the courts to reveal the truth?

Obviously nonsense. People know Upton is a man claiming to be a woman because they've got eyes.

That's a polite way of phrasing it.

🦈🦈🦈🦈🦈

I tried…

Female single sex spaces don't exclude trans people. They exclude men.

That is important to keep pointing out .

Correct. Transwomen are men for the purposes of the Equality Act. Therefore they can use the mens.

No. My place of work has single sex loos, individual loos and accessible loos. They also have an instruction in our T&C's that we are to use the loos appropriate to our biological sex or an individual loo unless we require an accessible loo. I complain about the behaviour of my colleague. It is then in their hands. They will only take action if they believe that my colleague is acting inappropriately. If they do and my colleague objects then it is for my colleague to prove that they aren't. Not me and not my employer.

No one is twisting here except you.

At some point you are going to have to face the fact that you are out classed and outgunned by the ineffectual chatting mummies. We know more about this than you do.

While you were taking selfies of your euphoria boners in the women's toilets, we were organising and learning. We know all sorts - building regs, definitions of rare DSDs, legalese, H&S regs, brain scan research, history, q angles, feminist theory, and loads more besides. And we share what we know with each other and we donate to crowdfunders.

And that's how we got here , with the highest court in the land ruling that sex means biology not feelz. If I were a gender ideologue I'd probably tell you to cry harder, or to enjoy ur erasure, but I'll just go with another classic- educate yourself and do better.

Fuck yeah!

So what?

Oh look Clown Fish are getting smaller. Fascinating factoid.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c629z4y762xo

Just a reminder to readers that yes, indeed, the research DOES show that when polled female people are broadly supportive when a question is asked about 'transgender rights'. However, the moment the boundaries of what those rights mean, the answers change to be supportive of female people's single sex provisions.

This happens in multiple countries not just the UK. When women are asked direct questions their answers tend to support female people's single sex provisions.

Here are the UK YouGov tracking results as an example of this.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5247162-results-of-yougov-survey-dec-24-for-sex-matters?page=1