Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Council being sued for transflag crossings

173 replies

lcakethereforeIam · 06/07/2025 15:54

Apologies if there's already a thread but I've not found one

https://archive.ph/dCRzW

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/06/camden-council-pedestrian-crossing-legal-action/

'Unlawful political messaging'. Is this a thing? If it is and the complainant wins then it could have a wider implications regarding flag flying, possibly even pin badges and lanyards.

I did indulged in a small eyeroll at this statement from the Council

A spokesman added: “Camden is ‘no place for hate’ and we have a strong and continuing history of respect and support for everyone in our borough. We fight discrimination in all its forms, and this includes being an ally to our trans residents.

'Everyone'!? Clearly not the complainant or anyone else who doesn't buy into this divisive ideology. But, the statement implies those people are hateful.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
TomPinch · 07/07/2025 04:43

Dwimmer · 06/07/2025 17:35

This isn’t about discriminating; no LGB person is discriminated against by not having a pride flag painted on the road in contravention of traffic codes.

I don't recall there ever being religiously-themed road crossings ever.

In fact I think the Middle Ages was the last time it was normal for a belief system to be depicted on public infrastructure and architecture though I might have missed something.

MoreChocPls · 07/07/2025 06:05

Good. They are a complete waste of money, aside from being dangerous it seems.

Shellyash · 07/07/2025 06:20

It's like a discrimination against straight people - having them - i mean if they are supporting trans, why not support straight also? Just get rid of them and go back to good old black and white.

TorturedParentsDepartment · 07/07/2025 08:08

I just don't see why we need to have road crossings, with their uniform, universally understood design, fucked about with for this - if you want a nice piece of rainbow art, or trans flag coloured art - why not a nice mural on the wall near the crossing?! Cheaper for paint I'd bet too, plus keeps some artists in work producing it. Then Doris isn't going to risk being knocked over and Dave the Confused Police Horse doesn't need to go on an extra training day.

Helleofabore · 07/07/2025 08:24

Greyskybluesky · 06/07/2025 17:44

Could you miss the point any more spectacularly?

Even better, those crossings are not 'temporarily' that colour. They remain that way for years and years. In that way they are said to be permanent as it is a durable coating used on the road.

CassOle · 07/07/2025 08:33

ScholesPanda · 07/07/2025 01:47

That should say tyranny of the majority

I read the original and thought that 'Tyranny of the Minority' described the RSOH very well.

BeeSouriante · 07/07/2025 08:41

lcakethereforeIam · 06/07/2025 15:54

Apologies if there's already a thread but I've not found one

https://archive.ph/dCRzW

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/06/camden-council-pedestrian-crossing-legal-action/

'Unlawful political messaging'. Is this a thing? If it is and the complainant wins then it could have a wider implications regarding flag flying, possibly even pin badges and lanyards.

I did indulged in a small eyeroll at this statement from the Council

A spokesman added: “Camden is ‘no place for hate’ and we have a strong and continuing history of respect and support for everyone in our borough. We fight discrimination in all its forms, and this includes being an ally to our trans residents.

'Everyone'!? Clearly not the complainant or anyone else who doesn't buy into this divisive ideology. But, the statement implies those people are hateful.

"The NHS administrator, who is an Evangelical Christian"

Cool, we'll go after any religious signage (particularly around Christmas) if you're going after the queer celebrations. I'm sure your ADF funders would be super happy about that.

As per usual, it's social progressives vs social conservatives

BalladOfBarryAndFreda · 07/07/2025 08:49

BeeSouriante · 07/07/2025 08:41

"The NHS administrator, who is an Evangelical Christian"

Cool, we'll go after any religious signage (particularly around Christmas) if you're going after the queer celebrations. I'm sure your ADF funders would be super happy about that.

As per usual, it's social progressives vs social conservatives

Have you missed the safety issues around non-standard crossing colours, @BeeSouriante?

BalladOfBarryAndFreda · 07/07/2025 08:50

There is nothing "socially progressive" about reducing accessibility for disabled people.

Helleofabore · 07/07/2025 08:52

Gosh.... we are all still waiting for our cash drops from the ADF. It has been years and years.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 07/07/2025 08:55

She's absolutely right but I wish the focus of the argument was on political neutrality, wasting taxpayers' money and the impact for people with disabilities and assistance animals, rather than on her being a Christian. As soon as you see the word "Christian" the article hits differently.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 07/07/2025 08:57

BeeSouriante · 07/07/2025 08:41

"The NHS administrator, who is an Evangelical Christian"

Cool, we'll go after any religious signage (particularly around Christmas) if you're going after the queer celebrations. I'm sure your ADF funders would be super happy about that.

As per usual, it's social progressives vs social conservatives

The fact that she is a Christian is irrelevant.

She's right about not wasting taxpayers' money on political statements which most people don't agree with, and let's all stop ignoring the impact of this silliness for disabled people and their assistance animals.

We don't need any more trans awareness at this point. We are all pretty fucking aware now. And it's not even in your interest anymore because the more aware people become of trans people and what they want, the less they agree.

givingitupok · 07/07/2025 08:58

What are the crossings for? Do cars HAVE to stop at them? I always thought the black and white were high contrast so everyone could see them and they were visible at night (also a bit of a psychological cue as we all know to slow down for black and white). What is the purpose of the rainbow ones?

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 07/07/2025 09:04

givingitupok · 07/07/2025 08:58

What are the crossings for? Do cars HAVE to stop at them? I always thought the black and white were high contrast so everyone could see them and they were visible at night (also a bit of a psychological cue as we all know to slow down for black and white). What is the purpose of the rainbow ones?

This is a really good point. Does painting them pink and blue make them less safe for pedestrians using them for their intended purpose?

SionnachRuadh · 07/07/2025 09:05

The rainbow ones, legally, aren't crossings at all. The problem is that they look like crossings, and the unsuspecting punter might walk out into the middle of Tottenham Court Road assuming that they are crossings.

That's why the regulations say that you can have street art, but you can't have street art that looks like a zebra crossing.

Shedmistress · 07/07/2025 09:14

BalladOfBarryAndFreda · 07/07/2025 08:50

There is nothing "socially progressive" about reducing accessibility for disabled people.

It is socially progressive to run people over now, dont you know.

WomenShouldStillWinWomensSportsIsBack · 07/07/2025 09:16

POWNewcastleEastWallsend · 06/07/2025 18:10

The Dept of Transport are useless on this. They say that because "Art Crossings" are not actually official crossings, despite pedestrians and some other road users thinking that they are, they are not covered by Traffic Sign Regulations:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/rainbow_crossings_traffic_sign_r/response/2391420/attach/html/4/22573.pdf.html

Rainbow Crossings: Traffic Sign Regulations and General Directions 2016

14 August 2023

Dear M Panton

Freedom of Information Act request – F0022573

Thank you for your information request of 16 July. You requested Information
regarding rainbow crossings and other types of road art.

All formal pedestrian crossings are regulated by the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD). This includes zebras, puffins, toucans,
equestrian crossings and pedestrian facilities at junctions. TSRGD prescribes the signs, signals and markings that must be used to create the different types of crossing. A ‘rainbow crossing’ is not a specific crossing type and the term has no agreed definition, but it may refer to the use of coloured surfacing within the studs of a formal signal controlled crossing. It may also refer to the use of coloured surfacing to create an informal or uncontrolled crossing, at which as with a pedestrian refuge, there is no priority in law for pedestrians over vehicles.

It is a long-standing position that in the Department’s view, coloured surfacing is not considered a traffic sign or road marking and therefore does not come within the scope of the TSRGD. It has no legal meaning and therefore could be placed within the crossing studs at a formal signal-controlled crossing, or pedestrian facility at a junction. I attach a copy of the current standard line used in response to queries on the use of coloured surfacing at formal crossings.

You asked: ‘if “Rainbow Crossings” are not considered by the Dept for
Transport to be traffic signs or road markings under the Traffic Sign
Regulations and General Directions 2016, are they therefore exempt from
Rules 191 – 199 of the Highway Code?’

Rules 191-199 apply to formal controlled crossings, whether or not coloured
surfacing is present.

You asked: ‘if “Rainbow Crossings” are not considered by the Dept for
Transport to be traffic signs or road markings under the Traffic Sign
Regulations and General Directions 2016, are they therefore also not covered by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, Part III, Section 25 “Pedestrian crossing regulations”?’

The status of a ‘rainbow crossing’ is described above. TSRGD contains the
regulations made under section 25 of RTRA 1984. Section 25 applies to zebra and puffin crossings, both of which are prescribed in TSRGD. There are no other pedestrian crossing regulations.

Technical advice on designing formal and informal crossings is given in Chapter 6 of the Traffic Signs Manual. Under section 21 of the FOI Act, we are not obliged to provide information which is already reasonably accessible to you. Chapter 6 can be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/traffic-signs-manual 

Has anyone re-submitted these enquiries to the Department of Transport for updated advice in line with the fact that pedestrians have priority since the law change? Because AFAIK they can't fall back on "it's an informal crossing/pedestrians don't have priority" anymore, the legal position has changed.

Britishtrees · 07/07/2025 09:20

Interesting that the Telegraph publicise this when there has been a rainbow one in Godalming Surrey (MP Jeremy Hunt) for years…

MyQuirkyTraybake · 07/07/2025 09:31

MoProblems · 06/07/2025 15:57

They’re not good for partially sighted people either, the crossings are standardised for a reason.

also not great for foreign drivers on our roads.

Is this a crossing? As a new driver I would not have realised. It's not zebra.

Greyskybluesky · 07/07/2025 09:38

BeeSouriante · 07/07/2025 08:41

"The NHS administrator, who is an Evangelical Christian"

Cool, we'll go after any religious signage (particularly around Christmas) if you're going after the queer celebrations. I'm sure your ADF funders would be super happy about that.

As per usual, it's social progressives vs social conservatives

Oh Bee. This lame comeback is all over social media. You should know better than to bring it here!

Christian religious signage at Christmas isn't disadvantaging people with disabilities.

As per usual, it's those who consider other people in society vs those that don't.

Greyskybluesky · 07/07/2025 09:40

Britishtrees · 07/07/2025 09:20

Interesting that the Telegraph publicise this when there has been a rainbow one in Godalming Surrey (MP Jeremy Hunt) for years…

I wouldn't be drawing any more attention to Pride in Surrey if I were you...

Dwimmer · 07/07/2025 09:41

givingitupok · 07/07/2025 08:58

What are the crossings for? Do cars HAVE to stop at them? I always thought the black and white were high contrast so everyone could see them and they were visible at night (also a bit of a psychological cue as we all know to slow down for black and white). What is the purpose of the rainbow ones?

No they don’t, car still have priority unless they have painted the road of a pelican crossing then the traffic lights are the important bit.

MarieDeGournay · 07/07/2025 09:44

Christinapple still hasn't answered several posts about the safety of blind and visually impaired people's safety being at risk, according to the RNIB.

In fact Christinapple seems to have bowed out of the discussion rather than explain why the safety of blind and visually impaired people is less important than rainbow-coloured crossings - which may not even be crossings.

This morning BeeSouriante joined in with something about Christians and funding from ADF - is this more right-wing funding that I'll never see? Like all the funding from the American Christian right that has never shown up in my bank account?

As per usual, it's social progressives vs social conservatives
It's not very socially progressive to set back the rights of people with disabilities, is it?

Dwimmer · 07/07/2025 09:46

WomenShouldStillWinWomensSportsIsBack · 07/07/2025 09:16

Has anyone re-submitted these enquiries to the Department of Transport for updated advice in line with the fact that pedestrians have priority since the law change? Because AFAIK they can't fall back on "it's an informal crossing/pedestrians don't have priority" anymore, the legal position has changed.

Edited

The Position in that response is ‘they have no impact on priority’ and that remains the same.

Dwimmer · 07/07/2025 09:49

BeeSouriante · 07/07/2025 08:41

"The NHS administrator, who is an Evangelical Christian"

Cool, we'll go after any religious signage (particularly around Christmas) if you're going after the queer celebrations. I'm sure your ADF funders would be super happy about that.

As per usual, it's social progressives vs social conservatives

I see Bee has found a protected characteristic he think it is ok to hate. Christophobia is all the rage these days.

Swipe left for the next trending thread