The removal of ladies toilets

[Sparks654]

I like many women, have been really dismayed at the removal of separate sex public toilets - and also the lack of discussion and women's voices being raised and heard on this topic. I live in Somerset, and where I live the town hall, and all public toilets are mixed sex. Private businesses also seem to be either refurbishing their facilities to remove ladies and gents toilets, or new businesses directly are making all toilets mixed sex.

This is actually silently excluding women from public spaces, although I know anecdotally of men who've told me they feel uncomfortable with the mixed sex bathroom arrangement and that they are intruding on women's space. In fact recently I was visiting an art gallery and had no option but to use the facilities - which I discovered are now unisex. A man entered and saw a row of women and asked - "this is unisex isn't it?" He hovered awkwardly at the door.

I wonder if other regions are noticing the same thing? Polls seems to suggest that over 70 percent of the population want single sex toilets and yet with public money they are being removed? I feel this is actually silently excluding women and girls from public spaces we might have been able to access. Now I feel obliged to check in advance where I am going to know if there are ladies toilets available, and I am finding something that used to be a given, and a women's health service, is disappearing. Wonder what is happening elsewhere and if there is a free discussion taking place, or - if in my experience - a dose of cancel culture is stopping the question of women's rights being raised?

I’m not so sure about that.

Have you seen the list of men who pushed hard for mixed sex facilities in local councils and beyond and their list of convictions for sexual crimes?

It’s happened far too often to be a mere coincidence.

If the toilets are being refurbished to mixed sex then they should go with the universal toilet design as listed in document T.

Think about medically vulnerable people who are more likely to need assistance asap (heart attack, stroke, seizure, hypo, mental health crisis, spiked drink) and also women and children who are more likely to be sexually assaulted in toilets.

Now see the conflicts with the universal design:

· Universal toilet facilities provided in a fully enclosed room which contains a water-closet and washbasin and hand-drying facilities, and is intended for individual use by persons of either sex.
· Self-closer on door, if a fire door.
· A full-height door and full-height floor-to-ceiling partitions.
· Be capable of being opened from the outside if a person has collapsed against it while inside the toilet room or cubicle.
· If the door is inward opening, have an emergency release mechanism so that the door is capable of being opened outward, from the outside, in case of emergency, such as when a person has collapsed while inside the toilet room or cubicle.
· Adequately resist the passage of sound in toilet rooms.

Will the capability of being opened from the outside be abused? Yes. In nightclubs men have let themselves in to a private, sound resistant room.

Will the capability of being opened from the outside be too late? Yes. In schools, restaurants, council offices etc etc in this country in the last few years. If the toilet door is resting in the closed position and no one is aware because of the privacy, people have been left for days in toilets.

Are manufacturers pushing unisex toilets? Yes. It’s good business- all those extra fixtures and fittings.

Has anyone done a proper risk assessment on these designs compared to a single sex design with door gaps? No

What about schools? No

edit to say: the instances above are just a few of the examples I have collated.

Nobody wants this. The vast majority of women don't want it, and neither do most men, although they may perceive that it affects them a lot less. So why? The ancient question is always worth asking: cui bono?

30% by the statistic don’t have an issue and many of the 70% won’t actually care that much it’s just a poll was presented to them and they chose single sex because that was the norm
I am interested in knowing why you think you can mindread what women think when they respond to a poll. How do you know they didn’t choose single sex because they want single sex?

Well it hasn’t worked. The traditional set up was men’s, women’s and families, which worked fine. Now ours has gone all open-plan, mixed-sex and I can’t take my eyes off my kids for a second. It’s exhausting. And the rising trend of people shoving their phones under cubicles to film only makes it more so.

It doesn't really matter what the motive was, they don't work. Unisex facilities are disastrous for the safety of women and girls.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

I haven't been burgled but I still lock the doors.

We can't operate on the idea that because we have no personal experience of something it doesn't exist.

I don’t think it reasonable to want individual rooms AND separate male and female bathrooms-it’s one or the other.
Bumping into a male in the corridor is a small price to pay for private rooms

That doesn't change the fact that most women don't want to pay that price because they don't want them. I would much rather have single sex toilets for many reasons.

I agree that
'I don’t think it reasonable to want individual rooms AND separate male and female bathrooms'

I've long argued that it's unreasonable for transgender people, who are such a tiny percentage of the population, to demand their own toilet provision when the existing configuration of separate men's, women's and accessible toilets cater for 100% of the population

But whether it's 'one or the other' is a matter of legislation and regulations - building regs, workplace regs, health and safety regs - not personal preference.

Why would a business or public building to go to the trouble and expense of removing existing sex-segregated toilets, which are perfectly adequate and acceptable for the vast majority of the population, in order to replace them with unisex facilities?

Why would a business or public building to go to the trouble and expense of removing existing sex-segregated toilets, which are perfectly adequate and acceptable for the vast majority of the population, in order to replace them with unisex facilities?

The reason I was given (for our workplace - office, not open to the public) was that it enabled them to have fewer toilets overall. This seems a bit counter intuitive to me but I can't see why our architect would lie about it so I assume it's right. Not sure how the exact numbers work but apparently the minimum number we need for men plus the minimum number we need for women is a larger number than the number we need if everyone can use them all.

Edited - mixed up larger and smaller

Having a small gap at the bottom of the doors and partitions is a small price to pay for safe toilets when anyone is at their most vulnerable.

You do realise that these private rooms aren’t secure as they have a mechanism to open them from the outside, don’t you?

Edit: to add the mechanism is rightly there in the building regs to help people who have collapsed. People collapsing behind any door is the number one call out for the London Fire Brigade.

God no - no gap, thank you. I would hate to have to go to the loo with men I don't know standing inches away from the toilet door, hearing my loo noises. Add to that the potential for a phone to be snuck under there and photos taken - and as usual, women become more at risk and more uncomfortable simply to accommodate the arseholes with their xy's.

I was pleasantly surprised yesterday on holiday to come across a National Park centre which had 4 separate loos - one accessible, two M/F and one F. Seemed like an appropriate allocation of the available space according to need.

Don’t worry. Single sex toilets are the only ones under building regs and legislation to have door gaps.

Hidden cameras are more the thing now.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/27/secret-spy-cameras-voyeurism-uk

There are different requirements for numbers of toilets for men/women
Workplace health, safety and welfare. Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. Approved Code of Practice and guidance L24
presumably because urinals can be provided in the men's toilets, making them more efficient, and so there can be fewer.

It seems to me that having enclosed unisex cubicles for everybody removes the reason for having fewer toilets for men, as the speed of 'throughput' isn't going to be anything like a traditional men's toilet with urinals.

That would suggest that more toilets are needed if they are unisex, not fewer!

If this is a new building in England, they are in breach of the Building Regs, which state very clearly that sex-segregated toilets must be provided, unless there isn't enough space.
If it's an older building which used to have the required sex-segregated toilets, removing them for no reason other than to save money appears to contravene Workplace Regs.

All that bother, and potential legal challenges, for what? Saving money, and mistakenly claiming to be more inclusive?🙄

I don't want to risk being put in a position where either is possible - or, as I said, where my privacy and dignity are compromised. Hopefully the building regs at present will prevent this happening, but who knows.

The thing is trans women don’t want gender neutral any more than the rest of us. They want the excitement of going into a ladies toilet. So all the woke companies & councils are doing the opposite of what trans women want 🤷🏻‍♀️

I absolutely loathe mixed sex toilets. The smell, the wee on the seats, queuing up with men, the narrow corridors. Lack of any shared female space. I hate going into one after a random man. I definitely exclude from restaurants and bars that have them in favour of ones with proper toilets.

I work in a profession where about 13% in the top position are woman. Was 6% when I started.
Our professional organisation headquarters has had a recent hugely expensive refurb. And removed the ladies loos. I feel so pissed off any time I visit. There are a few mixed sex cubicles but they are tiny and the capacity is overall much reduced. Not exactly encouraging women! Quite a lot of younger women in the profession are Muslim and religious. I can only imagine how excluded they feel.

I have researched what people who don’t want to use the toilets of their sex want. I have found it is young women who don’t want to use the women’s (or men’s) that want mixed sex until they get them, then some go back to preferring the women’s if they get a bit scared or hate the reduced hygiene.

In a nutshell, there’s little enthusiasm from anyone to use the men’s.

Some men post on social that the sound of women urinating in shared loos arouses them.

Unfortunately my research has also indicated the number of websites with hidden camera footage in toilets. See The Guardian article I attached above for the scale of camera usage. I believe this is a greater problem now.

When I started this campaign it was about making sure medically vulnerable people had the safest design of out-of-home toilets. It quickly became apparent that there was so much misuse of toilets. All the convicted voyeurists and rapists I have found in my research are male. They are male crimes.

Toilet cubicles should be as clean and gadget free as possible.

Private cubicles give a man all the time in the world to set up a camera hidden in the various components you should have in enclosed toilets and the extra components (may include: hand dryer, sinks, pipe work, vents, fire alarms, smoke sensors) in a universal design.

I believe that making the toilet cubicle as simple and streamlined as possible is the best way to prevent and discover these. No visible screws etc. The gaps above and below doors, plus having the door rest in the open position, aid ventilation and prevent misuse in men’s and women’s. The sinks can be outside the cubicle. There’s no need for mechanical ventilation within this traditional design of toilet cubicle. Having single sex toilets means men don’t have a reason for being in women’s toilets so that reduces the chances in theirs.

I wish Mumsnet could start a campaign on this.

@Keeptoiletssafe I don’t think men want mixed sex toilets either. Women don’t want them & so it’s being done for a small minority who are making a big fuss. I’m now a bit unsettled by what another poster has put about men using cubicles to install cameras. What is wrong with men?!