Hundreds of firms warn new guidance on single sex spaces is ‘unworkable’ and would cause ‘significant economic harm’

[IwantToRetire]

More than 650 organisations have urged Bridget Phillipson to ‘take immediate action to prevent these proposals from moving forward’

“We, the undersigned businesses and organisations, are writing to express our deep concern at proposals seeking to enforce blanket, mandatory exclusion of trans people from gendered spaces and services.

“The proposals made in the EHRC’s draft Code of Practice under the Equality Act would have serious and far-reaching consequences for UK businesses, our employees, and our customers.

“Many of us have spent years building inclusive environments where all customers and staff feel safe and welcome. These proposals would tell us to act in ways that directly contradict those commitments; undermining trust, damaging reputations, and risking the loss of valued staff and customers.”

They also express concern that the proposals would put them at “constant risk of complaints and litigation from multiple directions”, as well as forcing “business staff into the unacceptable role of ‘gender police’”.

“Such practices are not only deeply invasive, but likely impossible to implement without breaching Article 8 of The Human Rights Act, which protects rights to privacy, and risking discriminating against valued trans customers and colleagues”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/supreme-court-trans-single-sex-spaces-b2826924.html

So women's rights are less important than commercial compliance.

Surprise surprise- so many students unions on that list
And bloody lush can get in the bin- boycotted years ago - too smelly and staff that 'pounce'

One last try, then I'll take it that you have no answer..
It was just 🔼up there a bit, you don't have to go back through pages to find my original posts.

Oh, Louise.

We already know the answer.

So perhaps you need to stop telling us about Spain and start listening to us about Spain, because we are clearly better informed about Spain than you are.

Spain is wonderful for some things but not for others, just like the UK.

yeah Lush products are v bad

snag tights on the other hand make good tights. But Better Tights also make good tights and don't appear to be twats, so that's where my upcoming winter restock will be done

At my work place (large corporate place) we have mens, women's and unisex toilets (separate cubicles with lockable doors and the sinks hand driers etc inside) that way everyone can choose where they feel comfortable.

Surely most places could just do something similar.

Thanks for this OP.

There's no one on this list I can boycott. I have only ever knowingly bought anything from two of them: Ben and Jerry's and Lush.

I can't boycott Lush because I stopped shopping there over a decade ago when their mediocre products became prohibitively expensive.

And I boycotted Ben and Jerry's when they threw their toys out of the pram after the Supreme Court judgment. Haagen Dazs is nicer anyway.

I would genuinely love to know why Kate Rostance, a self-employed wedding and funeral celebrant, thinks it will be unworkable to comply with the Supreme Court judgment. She doesn't even have business premises. I assume that she has a unisex toilet in her house.

I have a couple of thoughts:

If all of these "businesses"were forced out of business because of the EHRC guidance, would anybody notice? Not that any actual business is really dependant on it's ability to let men use womens loos.

Secondly, how many of these organisations were at the forefront of the demand for disabled/accessible loos? I thought not.

Knob off with your pathetic virtue signalling.

Well, quite.

I imagine that businesses such as Ben and Jerry's and Lush are more than big enough to provide additional gender neutral toilets for their blue haired staff members.

The rest of them appear to be the kind of small businesses that would most likely only have one staff toilet anyway, or in some cases, not businesses at all (i.e. the student unions).

I've just realized that Better Tights do fleece lined tights so will also be doing my restock there!

Lush products are horrible (and the smell from the shops is an olfactory assault) and then there's the binder stuff, leaflets to children, staff forced to be naked to promote products shite as well. I'm surprised their overpriced, thrush inducing products are still manufactured.

Last year, I came face to face with a man coming out of the women's facilities in my local Sainsbury's, and he actually crossed himself when I pointed to the sign!

It's workable.

They are just choosing not to.

The end.

I am a little confused vegetarianlouise I was on the thread about Charles Kirk where you said you were an American living in the UK?

Looked through the list, pleased to say I don't visit or buy products/services from any of them.

I'm sure it is. My point is, if you're going to come on here and tell the women of MN that we're all wrong about this, and look how marvellous Spain is, you'd better have your receipts lined up. Otherwise you'll get your arse handed to you.

That list is quite the Who's That of the UK's business community.

I suppose adding their name to this list of women haters might increase their visibility. You do wonder how well it will age though.

Thank you for posting. Unfortunately that letter and link appear to be unsearchable. I am a mature UK student and had searched for student - but no results found. I'll look through slowly.

And for the poster posting about Spain - good for you. Start your own thread please. Spanish and EU legislation is not the same as the UK. It really needs its own thread, if you care that much.

I see vegetarianlouise has declined to answer my question. Oh dear never mind.

Actually I think I have some kind of hidden skill - this is not the first time that I put a direct question to one of our slightly scold-y visitors, and got blanked.
I could be offended, but I prefer to think of it as an ability to ask hard questions😄

I just don’t get the psychology of posters like Louise. If we take them at their word - I try to, and I do think some are True Believers -

she’s a staunch feminist

she doesn’t mind women’s loos becoming significantly less hygienic in the name of „inclusion“ (in fact, she finds this something to joke about)

she doesn’t show any interest in exploring issues raised including stats re. male violence against females, males in prison and abortion provision

she believes we inhabit a utopian reality in which men and women share intimate spaces with unfailing mutual respect and care…

Hm. Maybe I shouldn’t take such posters at face value.

I live half the year in Spain, I have a house there. I have genuinely not noticed this anywhere.

Even if it were true, why do you think you get to impose your views on everybody else?

It's strange, but the women who support toilets being made universally mixed-sex or unisex, only ever seem to use public toilets to urinate.

No defecation, no menstruation, and certainly never to change clothes due to leaking sanitary protection. I must admit, I envy such command over one's bodily processes.

Its the fluffy "Oooooo! I am [(delete as required ) progressive / the best type of feminist] and [(delete as required) moved to this backwater / would never move to that backwater ] and never seen problem that" is more amusing than the driveby scolding.

But one would hope that some would realise that the (majority of) poaters who post on here (and MN in total) come with the ability to break down problems and find data and to look for solutions.

Lush : if they could just hide the fact that people with a penis still get paid more :

Whilst these report will be expressed in binary gender terms, we wish at the outset to acknowledge that Lush is made up of a vibrant and diverse group of people who don’t always fit neatly into conventional pigeon holes.

https://weare.lush.com/lush-life/equity-diversity-and-inclusivity/gender-pay-reports/

Ben and Jerry it appears choose not to do a wage gap as its only a brand

After reading about all the gang rapes and the total lack of punishment for the perpetrators, I suspect laws in Span are not really on woman's side, so I guess there isn't much else you can do!

I think an appropriate reply would be
’we recommend you engage some expert advice to understand the terms involved here. Firstly, there are no gender police required. The guidance is gnostic to people’s gender and does not require you to determine it. It does require you to differentiate by sex. This is not a new requirement as there has long been a law against sex discrimination. If you are not able to tell what sex your staff are it is difficult for us to understand how you can be complying with the law on sex discrimination, and we are considering if this is a widespread issue and needs a broad crackdown or limited to a few challenged companies such as yourselves and needs more targeted investigations.

new guidance on single sex spaces is ‘unworkable’ and would cause ‘significant economic harm

Even by trans standards (as I presume this has been dictated by transactivists), this is ridiculous. The language is hyperbolic: single-sex provisions risk undermining trust, damaging reputations, and risking the loss of valued staff and customers.

There are no proposals seeking to enforce blanket, mandatory exclusion of trans people from gendered spaces and services.
No one is excluded; they simply have to use the correct facilities for their sex.

Up till recently, no one seriously questioned women’s right to single-sex toilets and changing rooms. An exception was made for toilets in places so small that they could only fit one, but not for open changing rooms.

It did precisely no harm to the economy or to workplaces or services — why would it?