Eddie Izzard

Lathyrus

I suppose glorianny and violetsky will think I’m rather prudish but I find the idea of a man in the next cubicle wanking to the sound of me peeing quite off putting.

With their street knowledge I’m sure they know that many men find ‘golden showers” a big turn on.

?

Lol best joke on this thread so far

The criteria for using a toilet should be fulfilling a basic human function or using the mirror to make sure other human females won't judge your stray hairs or lipstick on teeth faux pars or hiding from small children while you update your social media status.

It's very simple

I suppose glorianny and violetsky will think I’m rather prudish but I find the idea of a man in the next cubicle wanking to the sound of me peeing quite off putting.

With their street knowledge I’m sure they know that many men find ‘golden showers” a big turn on.

?

The criteria for using a ladies' toilet should be 'no penis'.

And as no-one is checking genitals (thanks for that info G) the rule is 'no males', which it has been forever.

Female people don't want male people in toilets, however innocent any individual male night be, because it's embarrassing as well as creating unnecessary risk.

Glorianny

But VioletSky your home solutions will not solve the problem. We will need proper Equipment Inspectors at the entrance to any public loo. They will respectfully ask you to lift your skirt/drop your pants to inspect your equipment. Only those with the correct equipment will be admitted. Refusing to show your equipment or trying to keep your pants on will mean you are barred. And you'll have to join the wild wee-ers!

I'm not opposed to a wild wee but that does sound like a reasonable solution.

The only thing that worries me is whether I conform to vagina standards of beauty.

I've had 5 children and the woman doing my smear once told me that I could "have that put back together if I wanted too"

No man has ever judged my vagina so perhaps someone of the male persuasion would be better?

Glorianny

But VioletSky your home solutions will not solve the problem. We will need proper Equipment Inspectors at the entrance to any public loo. They will respectfully ask you to lift your skirt/drop your pants to inspect your equipment. Only those with the correct equipment will be admitted. Refusing to show your equipment or trying to keep your pants on will mean you are barred. And you'll have to join the wild wee-ers!

You have quite a fixation on this scenario, don't you?

And Eddie Izzard is very famous. Even I have heard of him. He doesn't need to expose himself for people to know that he is a man. Where dies that situation fit in your perennial 'nobody checks' defence?

VioletSky

Grannygravy

Of course I am the only one who invites males into my house.

I matter the most and anyone of the male persuasion doesn't have any right to invite people into a home we share just because they also live here.

My husband and children must apply in triplicate stating that to the best of their knowledge if anyone they invite in has a penis that penis has been on its absolute best behaviour.

I also conduct spot tests on anyone I deem not appropriately feminine by running over, shouting "yoink" and pulling their bottoms down.

Trades people may have a penis so they must perform all their duties through partially opened windows. Think keyhole surgery. There is nothing a plumber can't do with a spanner attached to a broom handle

VioletSky your post is just rather silly in my opinion and not helping towards Eddie Izzard’s presumed right to enter female only designated spaces.

So do we assume that EI prior to the engagement sent out a directive indicating that he would want to use the ladies facilities and require two female attendants to enable him to do so, which would indicate he had decided that on that day he would be presenting as female? Or was this a last minute (out of necessity) decision. Either way EI chose to do so, presumably as a celebrity! working on the premise that any and all publicity would be better than none.

Presumably you only invite people into your house that you know and trust violetsky

Or do you feel that your children should just take their chances with a free for all.

VS the pic was NOT taken in the toilet but outside it, when he was in full view of around 300 people.

But VioletSky your home solutions will not solve the problem. We will need proper Equipment Inspectors at the entrance to any public loo. They will respectfully ask you to lift your skirt/drop your pants to inspect your equipment. Only those with the correct equipment will be admitted. Refusing to show your equipment or trying to keep your pants on will mean you are barred. And you'll have to join the wild wee-ers!

I don’t think anybody objects to the single door, one in, one out being unisex Sky Bird. In fact it would solve a lot of problems f they all were.

The feeling unsafe comes when you emerge from the cubicle into the wash your hands area and there is just one other person there, not going to the toilet or washing their hands or brushing their hair. Doing nothing in fact except waiting for you to come out of the toilet.

Believe me, that’s scary.

Also fwiw, I think EI is doing trans people a disadvantage with his current behaviour

Grannygravy

Of course I am the only one who invites males into my house.

I matter the most and anyone of the male persuasion doesn't have any right to invite people into a home we share just because they also live here.

My husband and children must apply in triplicate stating that to the best of their knowledge if anyone they invite in has a penis that penis has been on its absolute best behaviour.

I also conduct spot tests on anyone I deem not appropriately feminine by running over, shouting "yoink" and pulling their bottoms down.

Trades people may have a penis so they must perform all their duties through partially opened windows. Think keyhole surgery. There is nothing a plumber can't do with a spanner attached to a broom handle

Interesting how these threads are ramping up

I's interesting how they are being moderated too. I've been instructed several times this week not to mention people with disabilities and women in care settings. Why does it make people feel so uncomfortable?

A Private Member's Bill?

Bum bum!

I would prefer not to have use unisex facilities. Asking for a third set is fine, but I think we have to realise that not all venues will have the money or space to provide them.

I have posted before about my friend who was assaulted in a Ladies many years ago, and was saved from rape instead of serious sexual assault because someone was concerned about a man heading for the Ladies - if men were able to go in and out legitimately the alarm would not have been raised.

Not only that, let's face it - many men wee on the floor, leave the seat up and never check that they are leaving the loo as they found it. Even the nice ones . I have no wish to have to share with them when I can't even shout at them and point them in the direction of the Toilet Duck.

I must say you're on form today, Violetsky, you're coming up with some cracking ideas.

Well worth considering, how do we get the laws passed??
A Private Member's Bill?

VioletSky

Male visitors to my house need to take their genitals off before they enter... they can store them in their shoes.

So what does Eddie Izzard do if he enters your house claiming to be a woman and wearing a skirt? Would you allow him/her to be exempt?

I can't see a problem with this. Lots of bars and restaurants where I live only have one restroom. The same with disabled facilities. I have yet to see one designated for females and another for males.
I don't approve of communal changing rooms. But surely we all close the doors whilst on the lavatory.

Ramping up? RTWT.
The basic message is men are not female and shouldn’t be in female spaces.
The harm is not necessarily a physical attack. It can just be making females feel unsafe.
(Side track à la mode de tri) The person following me along a dark empty road may have no ill intent at all, but makes me feel very unsafe.
Saying that one particular male means no harm, ignores the fact that he has no idea and/or doesn’t care how wrong he is or how uncomfortable his presence there makes even one woman feel and is totally unaware of the fact that his action is seen by other more aware males.
We’ve had the women can attack women in toilets as well ?? used as an excuse for letting men in female spaces.
If you’re male, use male spaces OR campaign for TIM and TIW spaces instead of taking female spaces.

VioletSky

Male visitors to my house need to take their genitals off before they enter... they can store them in their shoes.

Presumably you only have people in your home you have invited?

As you are fully aware this is not the case in Public Lavatories.

Your argument has more holes than a kitchen colander.

Male visitors to my house need to take their genitals off before they enter... they can store them in their shoes.

Whitewavemark2

I absolutely agree.

Non-binary lavatories are the way to go.

As a third category Whitewavemark2 ?

I cannot see having all non-binary facilities would help women feel safe, any women who have strong faith would be denied access to toilet facilities which in itself is discrimination.

VioletSky

I mean I would get it if the usual practise was to run around the restroom waving your bits about and going "woowooo" but we generally like a private cubicle.

Without the existence of trans people, men who meant harm could very easily walk into many ladies loos and they wouldn't even need a skirt or to be a dab hand at contouring to do so.

If however people start walking around restrooms taking pictures of others etc, do feel free to throw them out because that is very definitely disgusting behaviour and they should keep their phones in their pants.

Maybe you should actually read the article, VS?