Women are a minority view so should be disregarded

Whitewavemark2

If I’m out and need a lavatory, I as happily use a uni-sex lavatory as any other.

No fuss, no bother. Other women don’t seem to have an issue either.

I can think of a number of these uni-sex lavatories. The doors to the cubicles all face the street in full view of the passing public, how is that less safe because they are uni-sex? It is nonsense to suggest that they are.

Arundel and Fordingbridge are examples. Google earth them and it is clear that they would pose no bigger threat to any female.

If all public toilets were as you describe then that would be one thing. Are you saying that's the only type of public toilet you ever encounter? Not the one down a lone corridor that's marked 'women' or 'ladies'? They're not designated mixed sex, don't have floor to ceiling single enclosures with their own hand washing facilities. I don't know if you're being deliberately blind to the dangers to women and girls in other situations or truly don't see further than the toilets you describe.

Of course it was the trans rights activists that reduced everything down to toilets, trying to obliterate the concerns about refuges, hospital wards, communal changing rooms in gyms and swimming pools, sports and a host of other supposedly single sex spaces. They weren't advocating for all men to be able to use these female only spaces just 'very special' men who declare they are in fact women. If people want truly mixed sex areas everywhere then declare that. If people see a need for single sex spaces then be prepared to keep all males out including the 'special ones'. We were lectured just a short time ago about our duty to use the vote other women before us fought so hard to get. They'd be the same women who fought for public toilets for women and girls so they could be freed from the 'urinary leash'. They'd be the same women who wanted recognition of the protections women and girls need because of their sex. Is it only the vote part of their struggle that is to be respected?

Galaxy

That's fine, it is actually fine for someone to say they won't vote for him because of his running shorts, there is thankfully no law saying otherwise. None of us as far as I am aware live in the constituency under question so in this battle, none of us have a vote anyway.

Nobody is saying (or suggesting) that there is a law against choosing who you vote for, for whatever reason . All I was doing was giving my opinion on the way comments made in very particular times are being weaponised, which is also fine, I believe.

And well said, Rosie.

ViceVersa

Whitewavemark2

If I’m out and need a lavatory, I as happily use a uni-sex lavatory as any other.

No fuss, no bother. Other women don’t seem to have an issue either.

I can think of a number of these uni-sex lavatories. The doors to the cubicles all face the street in full view of the passing public, how is that less safe because they are uni-sex? It is nonsense to suggest that they are.

Arundel and Fordingbridge are examples. Google earth them and it is clear that they would pose no bigger threat to any female.

I can only say that I've never seen these 'unisex' toilet cubicles - god knows it's getting harder and harder to find a public toilet these days anyway. But the issue is not with this kind of toilet - it is about biological men (who claim to identify as trans) asserting their view that they can use female single-sex spaces. The minute you let a man - any kind of man - into a single sex space for women, then it is no longer a single sex space. The law here in Scotland has been quite clear on the issue - but these men are quite vociferous in their assertions that nothing and no-one will stop them using female facilities.

I don't think I've ever seen one either. What I have seen is small places (usually petrol stations) where two existing toilets have been re-allocated to disabled and non-disabled. Both can be used by people of any sex, but only one person at a time, so I don't see that there's a problem. Do they count as uni-sex?

I'd probably balk if toilets were introduced like the ones which used to be quite common in France, where women had to walk past urinals to reach the individual cubicles.

WWM2 and Twaddle of course you're entitled to your own view, but like all supporters of
women’s rights don’t matter or are of little importance, you immediately make the wrongful assumption that
Housing, poverty welfare etc all get overlooked. How self indulgent and shallow.
IMO that’s a pile of twaddle.
^(and I'm as entitled to my view as anybody else).^😄

Google Earth - Mill Road car park public toilets and there they are😊.

''Burnham'' by name and ''BURN'' by nature! Another so-called ''male'' deciding what we women can and can't feel.

AGAA4

Trans women have been using female toilets for a long time. I haven't heard of any issues but I can understand there is some danger there from those with ill intent.
A trans woman came into the toilets I was using. I was alone in there at the time. Just used the toilet, hand washed and out quickly. Should I have confronted him/her and asked him to leave?
I'm not sure how to get round this problem?

Of course you shouldn't have confronted the person.

As a matter of interest, how to people know that somebody is trans?

I bump into somebody at an event I attend every week and I honestly don't know whether the person is male or female. To be honest, I don't care. She dresses like a female and is called Alex (which could be male or female). She's tall and has quite masculine features, but so do I - and I'm definitely all female!

I do know two trans women. One of them is very slightly built and I honestly don't think anybody would know that she spent her childhood as a boy. The other is taller and more muscular, but no different from one of the female instructors at my gym.

Unless people pull their pants down, how are people so sure that some people are trans? I live a sheltered life and genuinely have not come across males dressing as women to abuse women.

I agree with Burnham that the number of women who are involved is tiny.

TheWeirdoAgain60

''Burnham'' by name and ''BURN'' by nature! Another so-called ''male'' deciding what we women can and can't feel.

No he didn't! Exaggerating won't win any arguments.

I agree with you doodledog, people can vote on what they like, Whitewave can vote on issues important to her, other women can vote on single sex spaces, it is a great system, or at the very least the best one we have.

And yet Twaddle on pretty much every thread you demonstrate the ability to distinguish between the sexes, you have for example referred to Burnhsm as he, how can you possibly know for sure.

Floor to ceiling unisex toilets aren't really an issue, of course they're an acceptable option where space is limited. It's areas where women may find themselves vulnerable, areas that should be for women only, such as those for the purpose of undressing to preserve safety and dignity. I can only assume there are those here who don't object to having a man in what should be a woman only space, never use a changing room, never use showers where its common to emerge with just a towel around oneself, or to imagine how a very young female might feel to have a man in their midst in such a scenario. I really don't think that would be a minority view, especially relating it beyond ourselves to the very young, the vulnerable and women from strict religious backgrounds. Or to put young adolescents such as girl guides into potentially uncomfortable, embarrassing situations. That's not to say transwomen per se are dangerous, but one only has to look to prisons where there have been arch manipulators who identify as transwomen for one pupose. If the ruling had gone the other way I think life would become a lot more dangerous for women and girls. The vociferious element amongs the trans women community are very aggressive and thrive on confrontation. Show me their transman counterpart, strangely they remain quiet, invisible almost. Wonder why?

Unfortunately many politicians were falling over themselves to agree with the trans groups up to the court ruling.Even now a year later there’s still no reformed guidelines for institutions and firms.
Not all politicians agreed with the trans views at the time but too many did, it was alarming!
Now, expect all those who didn’t know what a woman was, including Starmer and Burnham to be backtracking madly.

As we’re getting bogged down by bogs, the main toilets I come across are those marked Ladies and I don’t want to find men in them.
There are very many other women’s spaces even more of a worry, wards in hospitals, any changing rooms , refuges and prisons.

Twaddle you assume that all men declaring they are transwomen really are.

Unfotunately there will always be men who take advantage of any opportunity they can to predate women. There have been a number of cases of men who say they are transwomen using the access this gave them to ostensibly female facilities to sexually assault and rape women. Even some transwomen, however genuine their gender change are still sexually men and can use access to female only facilities to offend.

Gender may be optional but physical sex isn't and physical sex stretches well beyond anatomy.

twaddle I agree that sometimes you can't tell if a woman is really a man but in this case I knew as 'Sandy' was known around the town as a trans woman.

I seem to recall a good many prominent politicians making similar comments a few years ago, presumably because it was a ‘fashionable’ stance to take.

Plus of course so many people, and not just men, and including plenty of otherwise highly educated ones, are clueless about the basic facts of biology.

Doodledog

No, I think it's from a while ago - before the ruling about sex being biological. It's been going the rounds on social media (including MN) to stir up bad feeling about him.

I don't agree with the premise, but I don't think he's saying anything like that now.

Exactly, it’s an attempt to stir up anti Burnham feeling because he’s popular

twaddle

ViceVersa

Whitewavemark2

If I’m out and need a lavatory, I as happily use a uni-sex lavatory as any other.

No fuss, no bother. Other women don’t seem to have an issue either.

I can think of a number of these uni-sex lavatories. The doors to the cubicles all face the street in full view of the passing public, how is that less safe because they are uni-sex? It is nonsense to suggest that they are.

Arundel and Fordingbridge are examples. Google earth them and it is clear that they would pose no bigger threat to any female.

I can only say that I've never seen these 'unisex' toilet cubicles - god knows it's getting harder and harder to find a public toilet these days anyway. But the issue is not with this kind of toilet - it is about biological men (who claim to identify as trans) asserting their view that they can use female single-sex spaces. The minute you let a man - any kind of man - into a single sex space for women, then it is no longer a single sex space. The law here in Scotland has been quite clear on the issue - but these men are quite vociferous in their assertions that nothing and no-one will stop them using female facilities.

I don't think I've ever seen one either. What I have seen is small places (usually petrol stations) where two existing toilets have been re-allocated to disabled and non-disabled. Both can be used by people of any sex, but only one person at a time, so I don't see that there's a problem. Do they count as uni-sex?

There's a difference between those single occupancy toilet cubicles and 'normal' single sex ones - the type described by Rosie51. And yes, in response to your other question, I do know some 'trans' people, but I'm not sure what difference that makes to the issue in question. The minute you allow a biological male - any biological male - into a female single sex space, then it is no longer a single sex space. That's the issue.

Even if the person has fully transitioned and no longer has a penis?

It's actually an issue which affects a very small number of people (Burnham was right), so why can't some kind of solution be found by sensible discussion which respects the rights of all people?

ViceVersa, The point of my question is that I genuinely don't know how people can always tell if another person is male or female/has a penis or not.

I don't think a woman is a man with his penis removed. I consider that as misogynistic as it gets.

As do I Galaxy
A man with a penis removed is a man.
A woman with anything removed or added is still a woman.

A trans woman is a man whether they have transitioned or not and I believe only a tiny percentage have transitioned.