Is it safety or separation?

[OneFlakyMaker]

When opposing transgender people in women's spaces, are you looking for safe spaces or separate spaces?

They may overlap but are not the same thing, and while a lot of the discussion is focused on safety, the tone and some arguments hint that addressing safety won't be enough for many people to feel comfortable. Instead, a place without males is sought.

I read one woman described it "At the club we used the women's bathroom to get a break from interacting with men".

I don’t know what you mean by this. Which is a No, probably. 🙂 My responses to you on this thread have been unusual for me, to be honest. I usually work really hard to give all posters the benefit of he doubt and show empathy to all. I feel a little awkward rereading them, as they show a wariness about your motives I usually try to resist, remembering that behind the screen and keyboard are real, and potentially vulnerable, people. I did find your early responses to Taztoy upsetting and unnecessarily visceral, so posted in defence of her. If these are a reflection of your own trauma, then I’m sorry for this and quite genuinely wish you all the best - but would ask that you acknowledge others‘ trauma, too, and maybe think about what the responses you get are both arguing and exemplifying: women do tend to be safer, and more respectful of and empathetic towards each others‘ needs, than men. Goodness knows, this is not to say always. I’ve suffered at the hands of bullies in a way that’s likely scarred me for life. But recognising how our perceptions of risk shape our reality can help us recover from such experience, as far as this is possible. Facts and stats are relevant here, and looked at from another perspective, could, perhaps, offer you some reassurance and comfort.

A solution that works for all women is single sex spaces with a mix of communal changing areas and cubicles, with no men being allowed in there, regardless of how they identify.

I agree that the behaviour of this poster is disturbing in regards to their reactions to other's needs. I also have not quite understood at all what it is they mean to achieve here because it seems to be just a replay of 'you can't expect 100% safety, so why bother'. The points raised so far have been inconsistent, rendering them incoherent.

Why can’t we have both as I have described?

I tend not to and as I've said many times, I've promoted single sex spaces with individual cubicles.

I hope people who are looking at why single sex toilets are so important for vulnerable people, look at threads like this with an open mind and think about the points raised.

For example Lady Hale when she mentioned gender-neutral toilets. People of influence, making decisions really need to see the arguments people use to try and promote a mixed sex space with completely private cubicles off them.

Some women are definitely a danger to their own kids. Therefore all children should be removed, at birth, and raised in Children's homes where they will be perfectly safe...erm!

Alternatively, we recognise that risk can be mitigated and take reasonable steps to facilitate that.

I'm embarrassed that individual, fully enclosed cubicles bring their own problems that had totally slipped my mind.

Eta Hello @Keeptoiletssafe I was just reminded of you 👋

There’s a reason disabled toilets - which are single sex enclosed single person - have the red string pull to alert of an accident.

And, as I read on… the tone‘s shifting again, leaving me unsure what to think about Lofty. This’ll learn me to RTFT before posting, snd not to post with bleary eyes and a muzzy head after an embarrassingly long Saturday lie-in. I’m going to follow my own early advice and bow out, but with heartfelt sympathy sent to all survivors before leaving.

to clarify. Single person or single person with a carer or assistant.

All cubicles is much more expensive especially as so many will need to be large enough for prams and buggies and a handful of kids

Maybe, but i'm not certain how it then follows that you think we should have mixed sex facilities, even if there are individual cubicles within? What would be the point or purpose of that?

Thank you.

Just a mention of this charity again:
www.euansguide.com/campaigns/safer-toilets/

and to highlight problems like this:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqjvnkzgr1no

What is actually weird is this suggestion. Nobody is actively promoting it.

Your intention and points seem really muddled and confused.

My work have just opened a new building, it is a brand new build so has only unisex toilets, they are the type that comply with the law with a sink and toilet in an enclosed cubicle.
But I haven’t spoken to one person, male or female, who likes them.
None of the women have said they don’t like them because they’re scared of sexual assault, they just don’t like them because of privacy and dignity reasons (same as the men). I am not scared my male colleagues are going to attack me, I just don’t want to share toilets with them.

We also have staff members with conditions such as epilepsy and type 1 diabetes, and it is statistically shown that floor to ceiling doors in toilet cubicles with solid walls are more dangerous during medical emergency type situations.

So my point is nobody apart from a tiny minority of trans people want unisex toilets, why should we all suffer?
Why is saying “I just prefer single sex spaces” not a good enough reason? I have no problem with them putting in male, female and unisex, but why unisex only?

I think everyone agrees on this thread, we all want to change completely separately from men, some of us would prefer to change in privacy from women also.
Its so hard to hear peoples experiences of sexual assault, it brings up such visceral reactions, I really send my sympathies to @Taztoy and @LoftyRobin and I hope you are supported by friends and family, no one deserves to go through what you went through.

Mmmm. Given their declared job, as a midwife to prisoners, @LoftyRobin might be expected to have slightly more awareness of the reality and impact of women's history and experiences.

My first experience of a 'changing village' was decades ago when our LA built a new pool. The mixed sex changing cubicles had big gaps top and bottom and benches. If you stood on the bench you'd be able to see into the neighbouring cubicles. Within a few days of it opening every single particle board walls had peephole drilled in them at about waist height. People tried to block them with gum and tissue, but these adhoc repairs didn't last. If the management tried to repair them they did a shit job.

Belatedly some cubicles were labelled male, some female but it wasn't policed.
The whole changing area was mixed sex, voyeurism was essentially designed into it.

Fortunately it was in the days before 'phone cameras, and gender. It never even crossed my mind to complain. I wouldn't say boo to a goose in those days.

I've not been there in decades. The gym I went to instead had separate changing rooms and showering areas for each sex. The changing room was communal with a couple of curtained cubicles. Individual showers with doors* and door gaps. I know which I preferred.

*my fella said there were no doors in the men's showers. We thought it was to stop the men from getting up to stuff!

If you personally are happy to change in mixed sex facilities no one is stopping you, please enjoy using the mixed sex spaces in addition to the sex based ones.

Women do not have to justify to anyone's satisfaction why they are permitted to say no to providing their undressed body to gratify a man's declared needs. Women's lives do not revolve around servicing the wishes of men.

Women's single sex spaces meet the inclusive needs of all women: not men. They are not there for men. The mixed sex spaces meet the needs of men who would prefer not to use men's facilities and of women who are happy to share mixed sex spaces.

This is all academic anyway: the law protects women's single sex spaces from men who wish to use them, and from women who wish to remove women's rights to choice, privacy, dignity, culture, safety and preference.

The arguments from those who feel women should not be allowed such rights when they inconvenience the wishes of men to use those women? Demonstrate exactly why women need those rights and protections in law.

New builds, of course, can choose what facilities to put in and one new build in my city - a performance venue - has installed a block of single sex female toilets, a block of male toilets, a disabled facility, and one labelled 'gender neutral'. This seems like a perfect and proportionate response to the active requirements of the general public.

It's because of the relentless transactivism to stop women having a single sex space, even if it's in addition to a unisex one.

Anything deemed for women only has been targeted as transphobic. Therefore many companies take the line of least resistance and only offer unisex.

To me, it's one of the worst possible solutions, because I'm sharing a toilet with all men. Albeit not at the same time. I'm guaranteed to have to sit on piss in these circumstances. And you can't really clean it up, wiping it only really serves to smear it further.

Agreed.

female spaces only for females and not for males who choose to identify and females - they are not biologically female. That also means females who identify as males continue to use that female space

Thank you for thinking of medically vulnerable people. I wonder if anyone could do an equality impact assessment for those with these health conditions?

The gaps were put into toilet doors for health and safety reasons. It’s well documented.
I have lots of examples of fatalities in toilets- it’s actually quite common as it’s the place people go when they are feeling ill. Also the process of elimination puts strain on organs like the heart. There’s millions of people in this country with undiagnosed heart conditions for example, and 11% of cardiac arrests are on the loo. It can be days before people are found, sometimes in very public places, because no one checks why the door is still closed.

This