Can we lay this to rest, once and for all?

[HelenaWaiting]

I'm disabled. I have MS and a congenital heart condition. I'm wheelchair dependent. Only if you are disabled or a carer do you understand how difficult it is to find a disabled toilet (there is always just one), how disappointing it is to find that toilet occupied, and how infuriating to discover that the occupant was some twat trying on a dress. So please, please stop saying "trans people can use disabled toilets". I've been fielding that particular curve ball for years but now we have Kemi Fucking Badenoch saying it. (No, she's not great. No she's not on our side. She's an entitled, vacuous, talent-free zone. She just happens to be a gender critical entitled, vacuous, talent-free zone). I can't wait for the loo as long as you can. I don't get as much warning as you. I can't hold onto it as efficiently as you. And I have no desire to piss myself in a shopping centre because some hulking great bloke in an ill-fitting dress is touching up his make-up. Disabled people campaigned for years for accessible toilets. There still aren't enough of them. Please don't hand them over to a group of people who have chosen to have a problem.

You are proving my point. What is more simple and cost effective than a door with a gap at the top and bottom. It makes it much easier to clean. If someone vomits/poos/bleeds/wees/litters on the floor then it isn’t collected by the door. Nicer for the cleaner to start cleaning without having to enter. The door doesn’t warp or get jammed so less maintenance. Much less expensive than extra ventilation systems, alarms for each cubicle, etc. They are much more effective for public toilets where you have a group of strangers in close proximity.

The reason I am talking about the different designs is they are the ones in building regs. Look at Document T (2024) it’s got ambulant toilets in. I have studied what public buildings have to have if they are new or doing a refurbishment. It doesn’t have disabled or changing places that’s a different section of Part M. You don’t need to change anything is you don’t need to.

The reason I go on about it is that door gaps were ‘missed out’ in the specifications of Document T. The HSE say that single sex toilets can have door gaps, they are just not mentioned and I realise it’s an oversight now. The document says unisex ones have to be enclosed. However, as I keep saying, the group that was paid by the government and supposed to look designs for safety for disabilities and long term health conditions didn’t even consider diabetes, epilepsy, heart attacks, heavy periods etc. which would have brought the gaps in doors to attention. They based their evidence that toilets should be enclosed on the opinion that transactivists in ‘trendy nightclubs’ in New York preferred them. They talked about non binary crotch heights which is not in their remit. Periods were only referenced at the back in terms of transmen. It’s all there in the documents. I have come to find that anything that says ‘inclusive’ design means private design. There are certain architects who are pushing this and it’s changing the manufacturers output. Typically you will get a document saying the reasons we have door gaps is for safety but we are going to enclose them so they are gender neutral. This is all fact. I haven’t got an agenda other than keeping toilets safe. The toilets designs in Doc T were scuppered as everyone was focused on one ‘group’. The design company, that didn’t look at the most common long term health conditions, won a Stonewall award.

What needs to happen, is to analyse health and safety v privacy to get the optimum solution. It is incredibly frustrating that transactivists are now getting vocal about disabled toilets when I can show what happened with Document T. Why are toilets so important that a health and safety measure for everyone is ignored?

Why do you think people in trendy nightclubs in New York should be so influential for the design of toilets in this country? I can imagine the attractiveness for the enclosed nature of the toilets there as American toilets are much more exposed for things going on in trendy nightclubs. They have never done safety assessments on these designs.

Yes agree one toilet in a cafe is the situation mentioned in Doc T. This is much less a risk as people would realise it someone was in there too long.

I think I am realistic about what state toilets are left and how often (!) they get cleaned. I am knowledgable about what goes on behind closed doors in toilets historically which has been interesting and means I have got a good idea about how this will go.

qnd i have visited venues in the uk where there have been well thought out facilities but thinking that is going to be standard is for the birds.

”They based their evidence that toilets should be enclosed on the opinion that transactivists in ‘trendy nightclubs’ in New York preferred them. They talked about non binary crotch heights which is not in their remit. Periods were only referenced at the back in terms of transmen. It’s all there in the documents.”

🤯 Just when you think you’ve heard every insane influence of transactivism, along comes another one to blow your mind!

Have you published your research into all this anywhere?

No but I let both main parties know, the HSE and other government departments last year. No MPs got back to me. I have written to many organisations and a couple of journalists too. And a safety group who are looking at it.

Where would I publish it? If anyone wants the information it’s all searchable. Happy to give to a journalist with all the links now that toilets seem to be in the news.

I’ve sent you a Private Message xx