Pink News claiming 7000have written to Phillipson about the importance of not banning TWs from womens loos.

[Treaclewell]

After a period of re-publishing articles supporting women, MSN has popped this up on my desktop. Grrr. It's as if the ladies are non-existent, as if, like Australia, the loos are terra nullius, an empty place being denied to the poor dear frilly TWs for no reason, where the 51%, taxpayers, have no stake in maintaining them as they are supposed to be.
The 7000 are people who have downloaded a template to use, so will have less impact than individually composed letters, I would hope.

PN has always had only a very vague relationship with the truth where numbers and statistics are concerned, so I'd be fairly confident that the real number is somewhat less than 7,000!!!

7000 people my arse

This is far more likely to be the poor Pink News staff who have been chained to a desk and made to press a button over and over all day to try to pretend that it's still 2018.
In reality the public now knows that men who claim to be transwomen do not belong in women's spaces.

It’s neither here nor there, the law is the law and unless the government is willing to legislate (not that there is any available time) and which i very much doubt.

then it is all just a boo hoo fest (yawns)

And this is why women need cast iron legal gatekeeping to their spaces.

Because no one respects them. No one is going to allow women the access, equality and resources they need without a gate that cannot be forced by misogynists who will never see women as anything other than resources to be used and abused by the more important sex.

And a lot of very stupid people still believe that this is an episode of Strictly and their brigading the vote will stop women's rights.

The men who want to force non consenting women to submit to them can fuck off. The women who want to pee with men are free to do so in the mixed sex facilities. The job of the government is to protect the women who can't and don't. Their consent is no one else's to give away, their bodies are not to be pimped out to men.

It would not surprise me if 7000 people had written in. Many thousands of people wrote into the consultation for document T as Stonewall and others coordinated a campaign. The government received thousands of very similar responses.
https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/toilet-provision-for-men-and-women-call-for-evidence/outcome/toilet-provision-for-men-and-women-call-for-evidence-analysis-of-responses-received

This is when I started looking in more depth about what was going on. My views, and those of a charity that had written in, were ignored. There’s no mention that door gaps have saved lives and can help prevent misuse, and the health aspects too. I had lots of evidence where people had died and other evidence where women and children had been raped in private designs. This was all verifiable. None was mentioned.

The Stonewall guide from 2018 was brought up by 67% of all responses. I looked at the guide for the safety aspects. It was regarding people feeling uncomfortable, verbal abuse being told to leave, and an incident of two women pushing a man out of the ladies. 48% of trans people felt uncomfortable using public toilets which compares favourably to other surveys which say 80% of the public who feel uncomfortable in public toilets.

I want everyone to be safe, but Stonewall et al skewed the results so badly, the analysis could be read as suggesting that only 2% of respondents were supportive of disabled persons’ toilets.

I think that’s why AI was used in the EHRC commission, because there will be a lot of cut and pasting going on. It will be picking up certain phrases. They had about 50,000 responses I think?

I am hoping civil servants are well versed in coordinated campaigning and now look further, critically analysing what others are saying.

I am presuming that the 7000 have something to do with the Translucent report or TransActual? The former had trigger warnings for rape at the front. I can not find any incident of anyone being raped in their report. The worst case was a man flashed another man in protest that he should not go into the ladies. These incidences can not have been nice and there are lots more incidences of people telling others they shouldn’t be in the toilets they are using.
There’s a similar range of responses TransActual have picked up on which they theme in their October report under ‘safety’:
4.8 EMERGING SUB-THEMES

• Fear of Violence or Intimidation: Staring, threats, or perceived danger of assault
• Privacy Concerns: Lack of locks, surveillance or design flaws
• Absence of Staff Support: No intervention or fear that staff would side against them
• Requests for Gender-Neutral or Private
• Options: Calls for safer, single-occupancy, or gender-neutral facilities

The problem is that they need to understand the health and safety implications of design. Public toilets can’t truly be completely ‘lockable’ because so many incidents happen in loos when it’s the place you go to when you feel ill. There are very few places that have toilet attendants now - staff support is uneconomical. Private does not equate to safer or healthier.

As I said lots of times before, I have lots of evidence to show single sex designs are safer when they can be single sex.

I suspect Pink News are using porn inches