EHRC suggestion on toilet facilities

Doodledog

What do you think a lesbian is likely to do that is 'creepy'?

Lesbians, despite what many TW would like you to believe, are women. Women are very seldom sexual predators, and nor do they get caught up in desire so compelling that they are unable to help themselves and they attack other women. I don't think I have ever even heard of such a thing.

A straight man, dressed as a woman claiming to be a lesbian, on the other hand. . .

Lesbians, despite what many TW would like you to believe, are women. Women are very seldom sexual predators...

A very valid point.

The physiological make-up of men and women is quite different.

Hence the need for the SC ruling...

The guidance they have released isn't just about toilets, it discusses changing facilities, organising as a group ( particularly important for lesbians and gay men), it does say it will address the implications for sporting bodies at a later date.

😄😄

Dickens

OldFrill

Dickens

Galaxy

The EHRC guidance covers all single sex facilities ( prisons, refuges, etc) and also ensures that for example lesbians can have organisations without the presence of men, it really is about more than toilets.

... it really is about more than toilets.

Hear, hear, Galaxy.

The particular guidance the EHRC has released is just about toilets.

The particular guidance the EHRC has released is just about toilets.

Yes, of course.

But the SC judgement is about more than just toilets, is it not?

There are other spaces / areas in the public sphere - apart from toilets - where a woman's privacy is involved.

Keep your hat on, the OP refers to the current guidance issued re toilets. The EHRC initially said they wouldn't make guidance until the summer. Speculate all you like on the wider guidance but currently they believe, fof whatever reason, that this the most important now.

Whitewavemark2

I do understand that it is more about lavatories, but it is all a bit of a nightmare imo.

What about lesbians who find the female body attractive?

I would find that very creepy.

I would find that very creepy.

I'm sure lesbians, like anyone else, are not automatically attracted to you (the collective 'you') simply because you are a biological woman.

I'm attracted to men in principle. In reality though, very few of them!

Purely anecdotal, but as a younger woman, I worked with two lesbians on separate occasions. Neither appeared to find me physically attractive...

What do you think a lesbian is likely to do that is 'creepy'?

Lesbians, despite what many TW would like you to believe, are women. Women are very seldom sexual predators, and nor do they get caught up in desire so compelling that they are unable to help themselves and they attack other women. I don't think I have ever even heard of such a thing.

A straight man, dressed as a woman claiming to be a lesbian, on the other hand. . .

One difference is that nobody is demanding that you find the female body attractive, or threatening you if you don’t.

I do understand that it is more about lavatories, but it is all a bit of a nightmare imo.

What about lesbians who find the female body attractive?

I would find that very creepy.

OldFrill

Dickens

Galaxy

The EHRC guidance covers all single sex facilities ( prisons, refuges, etc) and also ensures that for example lesbians can have organisations without the presence of men, it really is about more than toilets.

... it really is about more than toilets.

Hear, hear, Galaxy.

The particular guidance the EHRC has released is just about toilets.

The particular guidance the EHRC has released is just about toilets.

Yes, of course.

But the SC judgement is about more than just toilets, is it not?

There are other spaces / areas in the public sphere - apart from toilets - where a woman's privacy is involved.

Whitewavemark2

It is all a bit weird - I know of one trans man who works in a supermarket near me - and he/she is totally convincing as a man - very disconcerting if he/she walks into the lady’s and whose to tell if that person is a trans man or born male?

It is all getting a bit silly I think.

So many on here all know the tiny number who are trans and the even tinier number who are living quietly.
But this really puzzled me.
Has this person who is totally convincing as a man told you she is a trans man,
or can you just tell?
And if you can tell, who else might be able to do so?

Is she so convincing that she uses the male toilets? That’s now against the law.

As you say It is all getting a bit silly. But you can’t choose which laws you obey . . . or do you think you should be able to?

Yes if you tell people they can change sex, misrepresent the law for 15 years, it leads to all sorts of problems.

I suppose that the bonus would be that if the loos were unisex we wouldn't have to wait so long to use them, though presumably men would take longer to use a cubicle than a urinal?
I've been in large changing rooms with separate cubicles which were unisex and it didn't bother me at all, there is always going to be an assistant at the door so nothing untoward is likely to happen.

It is all a bit weird - I know of one trans man who works in a supermarket near me - and he/she is totally convincing as a man - very disconcerting if he/she walks into the lady’s and whose to tell if that person is a trans man or born male?

It is all getting a bit silly I think.

I think the point is that if a male goes into a women's loo he will have to behave respectfully (which of course most will) as the law now says he has no right to be there. I wouldn't challenge someone in the Ladies - I am not, and never have been transphobic - but if someone was making a nuisance of himself and security was called, the offence would be compounded by the fact that he shouldn't have been in there in the first place.

Posters on these threads have said from the start that it is the TW who are behaving aggressively who are the problem. Someone like India Willoughby shouting that he is a biological woman and refusing to use the so-called 'gender neutral' ones in order to make a point - that sort of thing should stop now. Hayley from Corrie will no doubt be just fine.

Problem is in the guidance, No problem at all.
Suitable alternative provisions may be required
That is a problem for the trans community to sort out. After all, they have access to their biological sex lavatories.

I’m not clear tbh how anyone will be able to distinguish between a woman born as female, and one who has transitioned to female, as the ones that I have met and got to know I simply can’t see anyone challenging them in a public loo etc.

Posted too early
The point being if the company cannot provide all these different facilities they may close all to the public.

I once returned with my friend to a shop we had been to before. She desperately needed to use the toilet but it was locked. She begged the assistant to allow her to use it but they said it was not for public use. However, they saw the situation and finally opened it. We believed it was closed to all the public because they did not have the money to make it usable for disabled users

Or if there is a Disabled loo, that is a third option, as they are usually unisex anyway.

I really think that the suitable provision is that there are toilets for males and others for females. Both sexes should use the ones designed for them. Third or fourth spaces will take up space, cost a fortune and be impractical in smaller premises. In airports or shopping centres they'd be fine, but in a small cafe or shop it just doesn't make sense. TW have been telling women for years that we are at no risk from men, so they can take their own advice, unless it is practical for 'trans' spaces to be installed.

Yes it will be awkward at first, but just as women had to get used to having men in our spaces, over time TW will get used to using the Gents, too.

I am of the belief that, anyone intending to break the law and harm women do not care what sign is on the toilet door. I don't think they think to themselves "Oh, that's rather too many laws to break all at once, I'll go vomit this crime somewhere else".

Wyllow3

Problem is in the guidance, it's clear what is now not allowed, fine, but says Suitable alternative provisions may be required without any guidance as to what that could be.

Perhaps there needs to be some investigation into what TW would consider suitable alternative provision.
You are in an ideal position to know what that might be.

Problem is in the guidance, it's clear what is now not allowed, fine, but says Suitable alternative provisions may be required without any guidance as to what that could be.

I have daughters and granddaughters and would not be happy for 'Trans' using the ladies facilities. I've known quite a few 'Trans' and gay men over the years and they've been ok. But, just because they say they are women doesn't meant they are! If they're intact males how can anyone be sure they're not using it as a cover to gain access to female spaces? Some have already been caught, and it is wrong! Don't know how many businesses will deal with this, but I don't want MEN in the ladies toilet however loud thy claim to be a woman. Too risky.

When travelling in France ,if the women’s toilets are being cleaned there is always a notice telling you to use the men’s and visa versa . I found it very strange walking into the men’s side with all the urinals lined up as you walk in The locals took it as the norm !1,