The myth of 'bathroom bans' harming 'cis' women

[ItsCoolForCats]

What can we do to put this nonsense to bed?

Marie Goldman, the Lib Dem MP, has written to Bridget Phillipson about the leaked EHRC code of practice, and has posted this on her Facebook page:

"Imagine being turned away from a bathroom, a hospital, or even a cinema just for “not looking female enough”.

That’s exactly what the leaked EHRC guidance on single-sex services could lead to. Along with over 40 Lib Dem colleagues, I’ve written to the Minister for Women & Equalities to raise serious concerns.

The draft could have staff questioning anyone’s sex based on appearance and refusing access if there’s any doubt. That risks putting trans and non-binary people – and all women and girls – in unsafe, humiliating situations.

It’s confusing, unworkable for businesses, and a backward step for equality. We urgently need new, inclusive, practical guidance that protects everyone’s rights, safety, and dignity".

The comments under her post are pretty wild (with a smattering of common sense). And when you click on the profile pictures of some of the 'women' claiming this will harm 'cis' women and is unenforceable, it is apparent within half a second of looking at their profile pictures that they are male. And of course there are the usual compliant women saying it's "cis het" men that are the issue.

Why can't people see this for what is? Emotional manipulation and blackmail designed to allow men to keep accessing women's single sex spaces. I find it astonishing that intelligent people fall for this.

Anyone got any experience of being turned away from a cinema for not looking female enough?

Do the UK cinemas have women only events? Why else would women be turned away from the cinema for not looking like women?

I remember being challenged in a loo in 2018, when the GRA reform was still being discussed and there was a lot more "chilling" of free expression on the whole subject, and made a point of telling the challenger that I understood why she'd asked and I wasn't offended.

I'd rather be challenged every time I use a loo outside my house than have one woman or girl harmed by a man in what she thought was a safe, single-sex space.

Cobblers! 😂

I've never met a women who I thought was a man.

Or a man that I thought was a women.

How do these people think we've been 'policing' toilets until now? Do they think all toilets are currently unisex and anyone can use the womens so non feminine presenting women are ok because men are allowed in the womens anyway?

It doesn't make sense unless the argument is for all toilets to be unisex.

The desire absolutely isn't for toilets to be labelled unisex, it's for them to be in fact unisex while everyone pretends otherwise. Essentially this group of men would like women's facilities with women in there undressed being the props/NCPs and resources, and to have free access to go and use them. The needs, feelings, issues and consent of the props is of course meaningless; you don't ask a chair if it wants to be sat on.

Women who do not submit to this should be punished by losing all access to society.

This is apparently not incellism at all. Or sociopathic in any way.

A lot of trans identified men do seem to be exceptionally tall.

Astonishing, isn't it?

I wonder if some of that confusion may be down to the presence of males with certain DSD's - such as Caster Semenya, Imane Kehlif, who have been competing in women's events ( most often in track and field)?

Back in the 1970s when eastern european athletes were on masses of testosterone it was also not uncommon to wonder as to the sex of "that female athlete".

Exactly this!

I googled images of butch lesbians - for the purposes of serious research, of course😏and so many of them are immediately recognisable as women.

Of course, some go to great lengths to not look like women at all, and TBH, if that's you're thing, you should maybe do some thinking about how to deal with the reaction you're inevitably going to get when you go into a women's toilet...

One of the most famous butch lesbians in L&G history is Stormé DeLarverie, who, according to one version of L&G history, sparked the Stonewall Bar riots in NYC in 1969, which is seen as the origin of the modern L&G movement.

If she walked into a women's toilet in full drag, as in this photo, how long would it take you to realise that it was a women in a suit? Not long, I suggest.

I'd wonder why that very pretty woman had gone out in her larger brother's clothes. The effect is seriously marred by the suit being too big.

When asked whether she preferred to be called he or she, her reply was, “whatever makes YOU feel the most comfortable.”💪😍

www.dragkinghistory.com/1955-1969-storme-delarverie/

Also worth noting the human shield of possibly theoretically androgenous appearing women being deployed here. Because they're actually defending the access of the six foot two stubbled bloke who is frequently dressed in er, interesting ways, and is leaving no one in any doubt at all. Isla Bryson for example in his pink leggings with his package on display. And they will often be doing things such as waving swords and threatening to hurt any woman who displeases them, wanking with the door wide, peeing with the door wide, taking selfies with women in the background, or asking where the girls are with tampon strings on display.

They're not going to cause anyone confusion, they are really not.

If anyone was ‘wanking with the door wide’ open in a toilet cubicle, it would presumably be a sexual offence under the Sexual Offences Act (2003). Would wanking with the door shut be? If it has a door gap, I would say it was. If you can hear what’s going on a cubicle, I would say it was too. In a mixed sex toilet room that is enclosed? Would that conflict with Article 8? Certainly some were arguing in Parliament that adding the clause below was discriminatory:

71Sexual activity in a public lavatory
[F1(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)he is in a lavatory to which the public or a section of the public has or is permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise,
(b)he intentionally engages in an activity, and,
(c)the activity is sexual.
(2)For the purposes of this section, an activity is sexual if a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances but regardless of any person’s purpose, consider it to be sexual.
(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.]

Personally I would prefer the previous occupants to have not engaged in sexual activity in the toilets but I have often wondered how this clause relates to some toilets becoming enclosed. Out of sight, out of mind. Saves a lot of fuss, especially in places like nightclubs. And it is known that the Sexual Offences Act did not deter all people having sex in toilets particularly if they don’t think they are going to be prosecuted.

There is a serious side to this of course. There are sexual assaults in toilets of women and children. Public toilets that are targeted for sexual activity are more likely to intimidate others and then be shut down, so everyone loses provision. Loss of provision affects women more than men.

It also raises issues in that if men and women are expected to use toilets together, the part of the clause I have bolded really needs to be better defined. Some of the photos I see on social media would fall into this category. As far as I am aware ‘public lavatory’ does include the sink area behind the main door to the ladies. There could be some interesting test cases.

None of the Health and Safety legislation or Sexual Offences Act or building regs or British Standards was geared up for this. It all has to be looked at and changed if single sex toilets are allowed to be mixed sex.

There have been recorded incidents of it happening, I've seen several on Twitter, but considering the police don't do anything to protect women there have naturally been no arrests or interventions that I'm aware of and would be one of those laws that are an on paper only thing.

I have many times been in a gender neutral toilet block with individual enclosed rooms as intended, where men have been in a cubicle with the door wide open as they pee.

There’s a lot I know about that I really, really didn't wish to know about, after researching toilets.

I take exception to LD dafties trying to paint me as a victim in need of their & their equally daft mates' rescue efforts.

I'm 1.85m tall & not remotely feminine. Even as a kid people routinely mistook me for a boy (we could do a few bars on my quondam gender woes but meh).
It's not unusual for me to be challenged in female spaces, it takes mere moments to resolve, usually ends in mutual laughter & is a good thing.
I would far, far rather women & girls felt confident about challenging someone they think is male than that they be cowed into silence by the manipulative BS of Goldman & co, whose sole concern for women like me is how best to instrumentalise us in the cause of men.

Those very voluminous suits were a specific trend at the time. Can't recall the name for them but Dieworkwear did a thread about them on X a while back.

They will look tall when stood next to a trans identifying woman.

Yes, but I'm suggesting that lots of the men I have come across who are identifying as women are exceptionally tall by any standards ( taller than the average male height)

Zoot suits. I'd forgotten about those.

It’s very annoying that the rate of women challenged in toilets and changing rooms might go up, purely because men have been cosplaying their way in there. Pre trans madness there must have been some confusion occasionally, but any increase is entirely due to the impact of male entitlement. Annoying.

Were they Zoot suits?

"Imagine being turned away from a bathroom, a hospital, or even a cinema just for “not looking female enough”.

Skipping over the irritating use of 'bathroom', why would anyone be turned away from a hospital or cinema?

Also, while some women might find it distressing to have their sex questioned, it's really not clear what is supposed to have changed since women's toilets were introduced in the 1800s. The assumption seems to be that until April 2025 there were two kinds of public toilet, but anyone could use either facility.