New boss of EHRC on Laura Kuenssberg tomorrow (Sunday December 14)

[mzdemeanour]

Just noticed that Mary-Ann Stephenson is being interviewed tomorrow morning. Heard a brief bit on the news and she seems to be talking about following the law on single sex spaces/services. Should be interesting especially following the developments this week.

Thanks @mzdemeanour
Well timed!

Everyone should "follow the rules" when guidance on single-sex spaces is released, the new head of the equality watchdog has told the BBC.

Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said "things could be sorted out if there is goodwill and recognition that everybody has rights", and that "nobody is expecting there to be a toilet police.

"Nobody is expecting there to be a toilet police.

"But equally if there are situations where there are complaints about regular problems, then people might need to... improve signage, improve explanations, or make sure they have got alternative provision."

She said she expected both service providers and people using these services to "follow the rules".

Dr Stephenson was challenged on what facilities trans people should use if there were no alternatives, or what businesses should do if they did not have the space or resources to make extra provision.

She said: "There's often unisex provision and where there isn't, as I say, we need to think more broadly about how we make sure those that those facilities are available…

"If you've got, you know, two self-contained cubicles, one of which is labelled men and one of which is labelled women, then the most sensible thing in those circumstances for a service provider to do is to make both of those unisex."

Full article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpq4ydrprpgo

"If you've got, you know, two self-contained cubicles, one of which is labelled men and one of which is labelled women, then the most sensible thing in those circumstances for a service provider to do is to make both of those unisex."

Aye because who gives a fuck about women right? Hidden cameras and other things pervs might get up to in there doesn't even register does it? So fucking sick of this!

The most sensible thing in that circumstance is for everyone the bloody men to use the facilities set out for their biological sex.

So another woman who doesn't give a fuck about women.
FFS

What an awful end to 2025.

If you've got, you know, two self-contained cubicles, one of which is labelled men and one of which is labelled women, then the most sensible thing in those circumstances is to change the labels to male and female.

Any trans-identifying user is not going to be using them at the same time as another person of the same sex as them, so couldn’t claim to be frightened of or embarrassed by them. It’s not even outing, because most trans-identifying adults do not pass as the opposite sex, so everybody knows their sex, anyway.

"If you've got, you know, two self-contained cubicles, one of which is labelled men and one of which is labelled women, then the most sensible thing in those circumstances for a service provider to do is to make both of those unisex."

So the majority, both male and female sexes have to change what they want / expect, to suit a tiny minority.

As has been said before and restated on a recent thread, that is around 10,000 people.

I suppose it might be better to watch the actual interview as who knows how the BBC just might have edited her words in the article to imply something, that in total, she wasn't saying?

Not an unknown event, not just at the BBC but through out the media.

Anyone going to watch?

I will watch as I want to see what she actually says.

What jumps out to me is
"Nobody is expecting there to be a toilet police.
What does this mean, in these circumstances?

I assume she means that nobody will be inspecting genitals at toilet entrances, as TRAs would have us believe.

It looks to me like she's trying to do what everyone claims to be doing, which is taking the heat out.

But yes, the people who lose out are actual women.

It might be safe if you're in the toilet on your own, but only as long as a man hasn't put a camera in there right before you. And then of course, there's the mess.

And the fact it is only limited to small premises is fortunate on one hand, and fucking infuriating on the other.

Plus, as people keep pointing out, if it's all for about 10,000 people.

I think she is actually making a completely uncontroversial point here, just to illustrate the fact that situations vary and complying with the rules is not actually as onerous as the TRA doomsayers are claiming.

In my recent workplace, for example, there were two absolutely separate rooms next to one another (not cubicles,rooms) with all necessary facilities in each (toilet, sink, etc). One was labelled men's and one women's, which was absolutely unnecessary under the Workplace Regs, and under the Equality Act.

It was frequently annoying. If another woman colleague was on the loo I had to wait outside, ignoring the perfectly adequate other loo. (In fact, I didn't always wait - I went in the 'men's'.

The two separate loos had been labelled male and female for no legal or practical reason. Just out of social convention, or perhaps out of misunderstanding of the rules.

In circumstances like this, there is zero detriment to anyone from relabelling.

I started another thread, but have asked for it to be deleted as a duplicate. I suspect people are misinterpreting her remarks (the reporting doesn’t help) on single sex cubicles. I interpreted it as in the context of, say, a small café or restaurant with only two enclosed rooms which could be mixed sex for the purpose of flexible access. I know of at least two examples of this, both acceptably clean when I’ve used them.

I know of at least two examples of this, both acceptably clean when I’ve used them.

I know of one in a bar/music venue near me. Neither of them are clean. And they both smell.

I also think there are too many people using them, though, and there should be more provision, but that's a separate matter

Just to clarify my previous post, these were single-occupancy rooms.

You see this situation quite frequently, esp in small cafes. Many small employers and service providers are being manipulated into seeing problems where there are none.

I agree. I think we need to wait and hear what she has to say. I don't think she is advocating for the wholesale removal of single sex facilities and replacing them with unisex ones. I assume she is talking about a small business premises, such as a cafe, where many already have this arrangement due to lack of space.

Ah yes, but let’s not forget these ten thousands are the most vulnerable, the most at risk from actual harm, the most marginalised, the most persecuted and the most special

Who is the woman in the pink jacket who just said the government don't know what a woman is? 😄

I agree with @MyThreeWords ans @ItsCoolForCats that she’s most likely being unreasonably reasonable and pointing out that for small venues it’s a question of changing signage on existing self contained cubicles (one of which is probably living its best life as the worlds most inaccessible accessible (unisex) bathroom anyway) . It doesn’t solve the problem of men acting in bad faith and being perverts, but it does prove the point that it isn’t the horrendous complication that TRAs would have everyone believe

She's so clear and refreshing.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpq4ydrprpgo

Happily for me, bars and music venues are no longer places I frequent. But I can well imagine the state of such facilities.

I think she's just trying to give a real life, practical solution to a very particular type of situation to illustrate that this is not the huge headache that is being made out.

I thought it very telling that, when asked who was legally in the the right when a tw enters a female loo and a woman challenges, she totally fudged it.

I'm not sure why you are saying this? Her role is as an equalities one. She has to show and explain how everyone can have their rights protected. You cannot realistically and practically expect people with trans identities to only ever have the option of using the facility for their sex. You have to be reasonable.

Wer're looking for a solution to protecting the category of 'Sex', we're not trying to rub everyone's faces in it.