Are toilets still allowed to be cleaned by members of the opposite sex?

[PoisedRubyLion]

I see signs saying toilets may be cleaned by members of the opposite sex in a lot of places. Is this allowed after the supreme court ruling? If a male cleaner was in there it would be a mixed sex space.

Fucking hell, Keep.

I obviously haven't lived

This thread seems full of deliberate misrepresentation of the reality of toilet cleaners. For example, the nightclub scenario. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a club (or other nighttime venue for that matter) have male cleaners who come in during opening hours. Some have attendants, generally female for female toilets. Mostly cleaning is done after hours. Places that have cleaners that go in tend to be big, heavy traffic facilities. Shopping centres, airports, service stations. I’ve frequently seen signs placed in the doorway when male cleaners are present. Sometimes when there are multiple toilets they close for cleaning. I’m pretty sure this happens at Heathrow.
All of this is done because it is acknowledged that many women will be uncomfortable with a man in that space. Even one who is working. Something the “What about this then” posters seem to conveniently overlook. Although let’s face it, the whole thread is an ill thought out attempt at distraction.

That is very scary keeptoiletssafe.

And I agree that some posters don't seem to be able to understand what people refer to when they talk about using the female toilets as a place of safety. How that works etc. It seems disingenuous to me.

And in those scenarios, where a male cleaner is in the toilet cleaning, there is quite often other toilets near by if people can manage to get there.

There is a significant difference between a male person who is signposted to be in the female single sex space that may also leave if asked, and a male person who is demanding access to the space who will not leave and who may potentially react negatively to any perceived negative reaction.

The two really are not comparable at all.

It seems like they are parroting an experience they've never had, to me

Yes the running into the toilets got me as I was thinking about it and the two experiences I have mentioned, I just froze! I have listened to others stories and I think freezing and fawning are normal reactions rather than running.

Running into the toilet to escape boys isn’t something I’ve done since primary school back in the last ice age. When (as DH informs me) there was an invisible force field around the girls loo and a boy would not step over the threshold any more than they would fly over the playground. It Just Wasn’t Done, but then at that age we were mucking about, being silly and not fleeing from real danger.

In adult life, when I’ve had to escape from dangerous men, I’ve chosen very public places to seek sanctuary and help from others. In one case straight into the police station that happened to be 100 yards up the road (not a very clever flasher who followed us). Not that they actually did anything mind, just laughed and asked what me and my friends expected walking past the cemetery after dark. (It was November, 6 pm on a main road with loads of traffic. My first inkling that maybe the police aren’t always on the side of women.)

It looks like there is a tactic being used on this and other threads, which is called - you couldn't make it up, and I didn't😄'Flooding the zone'.

The tactic is to overwhelm with information and questions and responses and scenarios so the original issue is...er, submerged - in irrelevancies.

Simple questions like 'Are toilets still allowed to be cleaned by members of the opposite sex?' which are answerable, and quickly answered, morph into a long long succession of flimsy whataboutery.

I think it's related to the campaign to paint the Supreme Court ruling as having confused rather than clarified the law. Same sort of tactic - like chaff to confuse radar.

I suppose the wisest thing would be to recognise the tactic and stop indulging it with replies, but sometimes you just can't help yourself, can you, and before you know it, it's Page 16. Or possibly 17 by the time I finish this.🙄

'Flooding the zone'. Nice.

I think it is certainly being used to paint the SC judgement as being too problematic to be implementable, as you say. Portraying it as confused rather than clarifying.

Yes it’s a quandary. I also worry about dubious posters extracting stories from people for a thrill. Toilets seem to bring out weird behaviour.

I think it's related to the campaign to paint the Supreme Court ruling as having confused rather than clarified the law.

Yes, I think you're right @MarieDeGournay. ⬆This coupled with a complete inability to apply even a modicum of common sense to a situation. The need for every tiniest, minutest aspect to be spelled out. The tedious reluctance to acknowledge the meaning of words in context. It is painful.

“What about this then? Betcha haven’t thought about that have ya? Eh? Eh?!”

I think it just shows that one side of the debate/law has thought about it very deeply, considered it carefully, and in the case of the SC, written a thorough rationale.

And the other side hasn’t thought about it much at all beyond feelz. I expect there will continue to be a stream of gotchas, getting ever more fanciful, until they have to accept the law.

I expect there will continue to be a stream of gotchas, getting ever more fanciful, until they have to accept the law.

Yep, totally agree. As far as gotchas go, I've seen some real corkers on here and other social media. It's almost funny. Until you realise there really and truly are people who think things like a 6 year old boy is a threat in a women's toilet.

It's a bit like when DS went through the 'would you rather' phase it reaches the point where I say enough it's impossible to have legs instead of ears or an arm instead of my nose so I don't have to choose.

But what if humanoid aliens come to earth and their men look like women and their women look like men what would happen then? Arrggghhhh shut up, don't you have some homework to do?!

I look at these types of threads as one way that others can think though the false arguments being raised. When you see the whataboutery and fuckwittery it is sometimes helpful to see different approaches in the answering and rejecting it to better establish your thoughts.

See how the points land so to speak.

Indeed. It's also a consequence of these men never having heard to word NO before. So the nonsense idea that women taking male toddlers into changing rooms or male cleaners in women's toilets means that they're entitled to follw women in there.
Their lack of ability to comply with the law or respect women's rights to safety and privacy says something very grim about how they cope alongside others in a democratic society.

The reason I chose that example is because it’s one which has been used on here many, many times to explain why trans women shouldn’t be allowed in female toilets. I remember coming on this forum 5 years ago and people were even saying it then.

Now suddenly we’re not talking about trans women, the scenario ‘never happens’.

If it’s a false scenario, it’s not me that’s made it up!

That's funny, I was just thinking of a 'what if humanoid aliens came to earth and their men looked like women....' as a parody of the silly what ifs we've had on this, and other, threads.
And no, I don't have any homework to do, so there nah!😄

The reason I chose that example is because it’s one which has been used on here many, many times to explain why trans women shouldn’t be allowed in female toilets. I remember coming on this forum 5 years ago and people were even saying it then.

No.

Nobody has ever said they seek saftey in public toilets to avoid men actually chasing after them.

Women use toilets to avoid men, like in night clubs.

Its very different.

It is not a false scenario. I am sure it does happen and probably mostly in pubs and clubs where there will not be male cleaner in attendance at the time.

Your comparison of a woman entering a toilet to avoid a male person to one of encountering a male cleaner signed as being in that toilet is the falsity.

Oh good lord, I personally and only speaking for myself of course couldn't care less if a trans woman uses the toilets but this thread is beyond ridiculous. Got a headache just from reading it!

What if it’s a trans cleaner?

Is this the latest whataboutary now? We’ve had what about Black women, what about 8 year old boys, and now, what about male cleaners.

So what?

Also women with PCOS.