EHRC code on single sex spaces comes into force on 5th August 2026

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2026/788/pdfs/uksi_20260788_en.pdf

You again - as you've been told at least 87 times, transwomen are men and therefore like all men pose a risk which is why we keep them out

The Supreme Court clarified how the terms "man," "woman," and "sex" are to be interpreted in the Equality Act 2010 for the purposes of that legislation. That is a legal interpretation of a specific Act, not a statement that transgender people don't exist or that gender identity is meaningless.
The judgment also didn't say that every transgender woman must always use the men's facilities in every circumstance. It addressed the legal meaning of sex under the Equality Act. The practical application of that ruling, including how services should operate, depends on legislation, statutory guidance, and individual policies.

It really hasnt been 87 times. But I like the drama you bring.

Yes, and the EHRC guidance, which is based on the Equality Act says service providers should provide toilet facilities based on sex as defined in the Equality Act.

Thats a good question! But appears mumsnet have decided the answer is just to ensure transpeople feel really awkward about peeing.

@Mum2boys01 the biggest threat to anyone at their most vulnerable in a toilet is if they can’t be seen or heard. Being trapped, having a medical emergency etc.

A single sex cubicle in a single sex environment is materially different in design because it is permitted to have door gaps for supervision in emergencies, ventilation, cleaning and prevention of misuse. These are big advantages for women and children and those medically vulnerable.

Toilet rooms in a mixed sex environment are private. Because of male voyeurism. 100% of voyeurs in prison are male. No one wants door gaps in a mixed sex environment.

If both sexes are in the area in front of the toilet, then single sex designs can’t exist anymore. We all have to use individual mixed sex rooms called the universal design (often called unisex).

My research is evidence-based on real life incidents and shows that well designed single sex toilets do indeed save people’s lives and prevent assaults. Conversely unisex toilets are scientifically proven to contain more pathogens so much so that academics have discouraged their use in hospitals.

I agree what you say here:
Everyone deserves to feel safe in public spaces.
Policies should be based on evidence, not fear or stereotypes.
We should be able to discuss safety seriously while also recognizing that transgender people deserve the same respect, privacy, and protection as everyone else.

I don’t just want people to feel safe, I want people to be safe in toilets.

However, if you want ‘to discuss safety seriously’ for transgender people I am listening to your suggestions for toilet designs. I have spent a lot of time researching and listening to what transgender people want - and what they need. Do you want to discuss this seriously?

Being transgender isn't about believing women wear dresses or act a certain way; it's about a person's gender identity.

Is there a way to tell the difference between a man who is pretending to be a woman and a man who is actually a woman?

You still haven't answered my question. I would be very grateful if you would. Thanks.

@Mum2boys01

Thats a good question! But appears mumsnet have decided the answer is just to ensure transpeople feel really awkward about peeing.

Is it worse than a lot of women feeling unsafe, or being outright unable to use the service that is supposedly set apart for them?

Ah, so you think if you pretend not to see where your beliefs end up then they don't end up there?

Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

If you believe TWAW then yes, you do believe that the female half of humsnity neither has nor needs its own rights, its own name and any political, legal and social existence, because if you are including trans women in the definition of "woman" you are unavoidably changing what the word woman means. You are deciding it is justified to take it away from the female half of humanity and use instead of a different group, what from your reply appears to be a nebulous one based on nothing more than self definition and a desire to use the word "woman" for oneself.

If you disagree, don't just say I'm wrong. Prove me wrong. Tell me:

what is the name for the female of half of humanity?

what is the difference between men and women such that we need those names at all?

what qualities should I regonise in myself and transwomen but no other male people that makes us "women"?

what is the connection between the people we used to think of as women ie adult human female humans, and the people you now consider women that means it makes sense to use the original name of the forner for the latter?

Because again, you have decided this "woman" thing, whatever it is, is so important that not only does it need a nane and recognition, it needs to have specifically the name that originally meant the female half of humanity, because the female half of humanity aren't important enough to need naming. I think the least you should be able to do is explain why you think that.

Always up for a serious discussion. In my work I support trans people in the daily lives and im sure they would love to feel heard in the design of safe spaces. I agree. I dont want people to feel safe but be safe

They're not pretending? How can you tell?
They're not going into women's spaces to cause harm (aka "They just want to pee"? How can you tell?

Exactly! It doesn't matter if they're pretending to be women, wombats or ufos, they're still men and need to stay out of women's spaces

Let me know if you get an answer to that question! It's important, and I think @Mum2boys01 might actually finally be the one to tell us what it's all about!

ed. spelling sorry

Good. So you realise they are best being kind to everyone, including those more vulnerable than themselves, by using the correct options for their sex?

@Mum2boys01

Sorry to butt in, but you've answered lots of other posters' questions, so I wondered if you could answer mine please?

You said: Being transgender isn't about believing women wear dresses or act a certain way; it's about a person's gender identity.

And I have asked you a few times:
Is there a way to tell the difference between a man who is pretending to be a woman and a man who is actually a woman?

You still haven't answered my question. I would be very grateful if you would. Thanks.

Men already commit violence against women without pretending to be women. If a man wants to harm a woman, a sign on a toilet door or a policy about who can enter isn't what's stopping him—because he's already willing to break the law.
So do you really think excluding people you believe are "men pretending to be women" will prevent male violence? If someone intends to assault or harass women, they'll do it regardless of whether they're following the rules about who should be in a particular space.

It is a really good question.

Have you considered trying to answer it instead of snarking about toilets?

Has it ever occured to you that if trans people hadn't decided that the words "man" and "women" have to align with our self image rather than simply our actual bodies, the whole "I can't cope with the distress of having my identity denied by having to use the facilities for my actual sex rather than my gender identity" would not even be a thing? It really is a problem entirely of their own making.

If they'd just picked different words, new words to describe this "gender of the mind that is a different thing altogether to the sex of the body" none of this would be a problem at all.

It's this frankly daft insistence that "gender is different to sex, but we need to call it the same thing as sex because reasons" that causes all the problems they now face.

They can use the loo. Who said they can't?
What an odd thing to say

"Transwomen are not men" is also an odd thing to say. What are they then? Because they're not women according to the law as defined by the Supreme Court and by biology too.
it's a head scratcher all right

I suspect Burnham might deal with this by changing the law - he is quite pro trans. I hope I'm wrong.

Brilliant! Let's just not bother then eh?

let's make every single space mixed sex and open to everyone then

i mean if men are just going to go around attacking women anyway why bother? No more single sex prisons - let's just lock the women and men up together, single sex intimate care for won't with dementia? Why bother? I mean if it's all do impossible to stop men let's not even try

it's the same reason I always leave all my doors and windows wide open when I go out - I mean it's not like we can stop burglaries is it

You're asking a question as though it's some kind of "gotcha", but it actually misses the point.
No, I can't look inside someone's head and tell you whether they're genuinely transgender or lying. Neither can you. But here's the question people in this group seem to be ignoring do you honestly believe a man intent on assaulting a woman is going to stop because a sign on a toilet door says "Women"?
If a man is prepared to commit a violent crime, he's already prepared to ignore the rules. So your entire argument rests on the idea that predatory men respect toilet policies but would draw the line at pretending to be transgender. That simply doesn't make sense.
If your concern is dangerous men, then focus on dangerous men. A determined predator isn't stopped by a door sign, and treating every transgender woman as a potential predator doesn't solve the problem you're claiming to address.

If transwomen are women why do they call themselves trans? A process or something, like a transition in their heads? So they are men then. Got it.

We lock our doors because there's good evidence that physical barriers deter opportunistic burglars. But do you really think a man willing to commit sexual assault is stopped by a sign on a toilet door? If he's prepared to commit a serious crime, why would he suddenly become law-abiding when it comes to which toilet he's "allowed" to enter?
No one is saying abolish every sex-separated space. Prisons, intimate care, refuges and public toilets are all different situations and deserve different policies. You're lumping them together because it's easier than addressing the actual point: does excluding transgender women from public toilets stop predatory men? I haven't seen evidence that it does.

Sorry, scratch that. Thanks for responding. I'll read your response.

So why on earth let them in?

Burglars gonna burgle - so do you not bother to reduce the risk by shuttting your door?

Trans-identifying men are not the risk to women - male human beings are the risk to women. What do all trans.identifying men have in common with each other and with all men, which they do not have in common with ANY women?