My employer has just removed single sexed toilets to be more inclusive!

[Dhama]

In light of the SC ruling. Wtaf

Previously we had men, women and a unisex accessible toilet. They have now, in the guise of being inclusive, removed all signage and all are mixed sex.

The toilets are all individual, lockable with washing facilities included but that’s not the point. I hate using a toilet after men have been in there fgs.

We are a LA so unsure what the provisions are in other offices across the county.

I have emailed the head of facilities but not sure if I can do anything else.

am so cross

What has that got to do with the OP? She is talking about three single sex individual self contained toilets.

you have invented a trans boogeyman where there isn’t one.

you cannot ban people you don’t like from the public sphere. No one is arguing here that they should share a single sex space with you.

I believe it does yes. Children of both sexes of deprived backgrounds particularly.

you have invented a trans boogeyman where there isn’t one.

You need to get on X and follow Libs Of Tik Tok and Graham Linehan, they're very good at bringing this kind of material into the glorious sunlight.

Employers forget women are very vulnerable when using mixed sex toilets, not least because men can put cameras in them. I’d feel very vulnerable using toilets that allow men in them and that’s before we start talking about the wee everywhere!

Lockable cubicles don’t protect us.!

They’re lockable but not secure.

(new designs at least)

Are you sure?

I rarely see the seat lifted in single sex facilities.

Men are more likely to leave it up.

Nice. Maybe you can use this op

Even if they are a completely modern lovely self contained rooms with an integral whb if men can use them they can just as easily install cameras.
You can even get cameras that look like screws these days.
So short of going into a toilet with a detection device we have no way of knowing if there are cameras watching and recording us

That’s at home, this is work.

We have a seat down thing at home but obviously the op is posting about work.

"Even if they are a completely modern lovely self contained rooms with an integral whb if men can use them they can just as easily install cameras."

The type of man inclined to put a camera in a toilet will not be dissuaded from doing so because of a sign on the door.

You have no idea....my daughter has epilepsy and is quite likely to have a seizure. We don't let her use disabled toilets on her own because they are fully enclosed. Medical incidents are not that uncommon.

You can try and make the design as streamlined as possible to make even a ‘screw’ noticeable. But yes I agree.

If you are worried about a criminal man putting cameras in the loo then don’t use any public toilet. A women’s sign is not a barrier to criminality. It just guarantees all the videos will be of women.

it could be done by a male cleaner, handyman or plumber. A colleague who comes in early or late or just slipping in unnoticed.

This is a conversation about her work Loo. Not a public toilet. And lineman is an unmitigated weirdo.

They are more likely to be caught if they are seen coming out of or going into the ladies though. They are also less likely to give it a go.
We can’t protect ourselves from everything but we can at least have a damn good try.
Sharing toilets offers 0 protection

I am not worried for myself. It’s just very unpleasant.
I think it’s most unpleasant in say a work office situation when it’s a colleague.

This is really important as disabled people in the workplace are supposed to get reasonable adjustments for toilets. With 1% of people having epilepsy, it is likely that there will be at least one person who will need door gaps for safety reasons in a large workforce. And in schools. Which mean single sex designs.
Thats not even factoring in all the other medical conditions like diabetes, heart conditions etc. There’s a great emotional load families carry with them when a member has a health condition and there’s extra barriers to their safety that could be avoided. It’s not just the event itself, it’s the anticipation and factoring in risks.

I agree tbh. So many toilets now are accessed by workmen/male cleaners etc anyway. Outside of an all female work place I'm not sure completely single sex bathrooms really exist anymore. Never mind accessible bathrooms are all mainly mixed sex facilities.

Obviously noone is disputing that men can carry a level of risk towards women, we all know that. But I do think some of the language used when it comes to trans women in particular is just intentionally inflammatory and it shuts down any chance of a genuine and constructive conversation about women's safety which is what this really ultimately comes down to rather than being about trans women at all.

But they were always single sex self contained units. There was never an option for raised cubicle type doors.

there are group toilets on different floors so in a work scenario a person with epilepsy would be placed on that floor not this one as it’s not accessible

I am discussing what employers (including schools) should be doing.
For example secondary schools in England have to justify to the DfE why they are not having the new standard full height doors, even in single sex toilets. This makes no sense when there’s around 9 children with epilepsy and several more with diabetes in each school. There’s not a safe toilet for them.

There’s also the question in the school design brief which asks whether your school toilets are going to be unisex or single sex. So that’s why some schools justify having all unisex toilets.

Design guidelines are all over the place. Document T attempts to sort this out from 2024. Schools are under different rules but are still employers.

"I am discussing what employers (including schools) should be doing.
For example secondary schools in England have to justify to the DfE why they are not having the new standard full height doors, even in single sex toilets. This makes no sense when there’s around 9 children with epilepsy and several more with diabetes in each school. There’s not a safe toilet for them"

Bit strange to be talking about schools as employers in the context of children though....

I would have thought it self evident that dozens of men using a loo (anonymously) are more likely to lead to this than one (traceable) cleaner or a man taking a chance of sneaking into the ladies.

To me your post has tones of “why bother to try to safeguard women”. Was this your intention?

It’s in relation to The Health and Safety at Work Act (1974). A lot of toilet legislation doesn’t apply to schools but this one still does. It discusses a duty to safeguard and provide a safe environment and adequate facilities.

A lot of my research is from schools as they’re the canaries in terms of new loo designs.

It's not just about safety, if by that you mean the risk of sexual assault. It is about dignity and privacy and feeling safevtoo.

The Health and Safety at Work Act (1974).

Surely this applies to teachers and school staff rather than pupils though?

I'd imagine separate legislation covers arrangements for pupils...