The new guidance, external says that, in places like hospitals, shops and restaurants, "trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities". It also states that trans people should not be left without any facilities to use.

…the guidance says it is possible to have toilet, washing or changing facilities which can be used by all, provided they are "in lockable rooms (not cubicles)" and intended to be used by one person at a time. One such example might be a single toilet in a small business such as a café.

by Red_Brummy

34 comments

  1. For clarity, the BBC fails to mention in the guidance: “in some circumstances the law also allows trans women (biological men) not to be permitted to use the men’s facilities, and trans men (biological woman) not to be permitted to use the women’s facilities”

    As well as stating :”In workplaces, it is compulsory to provide sufficient single-sex toilets, as well as sufficient single-sex changing and washing facilities where these facilities are needed.”… Whilst also stating “However, it could be indirect sex discrimination against women if the only provision is mixed-sex.”. 

  3. It really is a fucking shambles. And let’s face it, if someone is going to attack someone in the toilet they’re not going to look at the little symbol on the door and not go in if it doesn’t apply to them.

  4. A decade ago, the UK was #1 for Lgbt rights.

    Now the UK, under a Labour government, is becoming an apartheid state.
    Segregation against trans people
    Cis women who don’t look femme enough will be attacked
    Gays and lesbians redefined by the state
    And lgbt groups aren’t allowed to exist.

    Presumably labour will start sending police to attack lgbt clubs to do genital inspections. Just like they did back in the day leading to the stonewall riots.

    But don’t worry, police just don’t have the resources to deal with unimportant things like rape cases.

    Labour need to be condemned for this war they have declared on the entire lgbt community.

  5. its an unenforceable law lol. they cant identify trans people just from looks so whats actually going to happen is the minority of cis women who are noticably gnc are going to be harassed and accused of being men.

    we did it guys, we made womens lives harder and more restrictive! thatll show those evil men 😈

  6. Why the fuck is the world becoming so authoritarian again? I hate this.

  7. Fucks sakes.

    [Heard Harriet Harman (was involved in Equality Act 2010) talk about this](https://www.globalplayer.com/podcasts/episodes/7DrqmiN/) and she was clear the 2010 act was written to give trans folk the right to use so-called ‘safe spaces’ unless there was a good reason not to, and that’s at the discretion of the organisation providing them.

    So the way it was written, trans folk SHOULD use whatever toilet or changing room suits them. ‘Good reason’ to deny them access is intended for places like women’s shelters, where women might be triggered by the presence of someone who appears to have masculine traits. Or keeping Isla Bryson away from female prisoners because she poses an obvious risk. Being scared that a trans women might touch you up in the toilets at Wetherspoon doesn’t count as a ‘good reason’ and is just bigoted.

    Denying trans folk the right to take a pish in whatever toilet matches their gender identity is the definition of discrimination. Plain and simple.

  8. Obsessive horse shit. Tagging (Biological Males) everywhere really shows where their priorities are.

    Also according to this, it could be unlawful to include bisexuals in gay or lesbian groups? The fuck is the justification for that?

  9. Seems consistent with the SC judgement- not seeing any obvious overreach or additions.

    As per the reasoning there this won’t be open to a *Goodwin* attack at the ECHR.

     It is good to see reference to the ’92 workplace regulations, if previous guidance had addressed this properly the NHS Fife case might have been avoided.

    Incidently this is probably the final nail in the coffin for that case.

    It’s shocking to think that one of the further reaching legislative legacies of Sturgeon’s premiership is to have accidentally cemented the gender critical position on womanhood into UK equalities and employment law in a manner which will take years or even decades to reverse- something the tory government in Westminster spent years trying and failing to accomplish.

    It will be interesting to see who challenges this. If Stonewall and other similiar organisations don’t then I think questions have to be asked as to why the public spent millions on advice from them on workplace inclusion and equality which was completely wrong and whether any of that money is recoverable.

  10. >The new guidance, external says that, in places like hospitals, shops and restaurants, “trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women’s facilities”. It also states that trans people should not be left without any facilities to use.

    So now we could have sex segregated faciltiies for Male/Female/Trans. No more ambiguity?

  13. Great to see EHRC and Labour are promoting a well though out solution to this. Equal but seprate is really the way to go here…

  16. When it comes to toilets there’s no such thing as trans, just people with nobs or vaginas, so everyone has somewhere to go

  17. I wonder if the LBGA or their minions will have anything to say about a bunch of straight boomer judges defining who gay men and lesbians can and can’t associate with

  18. The EHRC is weaponising a judgment which was explicitly restricted by the people who made it to the specific definitions in a 2010 piece of legislation

  19. Sounds like they’re saying the entire infrastructure of the country needs to be updated but in reality what they’re actually suggesting is trans people use the disabled toilet?

  20. I like those places where you have your own sink in with the toilet and dryer, but I don’t mind if a man/woman/anyine sees me washing my hands in a place where there are cubicles only.

  21. So what’s stopping a “biological” male from going into a women’s toilet and saying they are a Trans male ??? Who could tell. None of this has been thought through with even a minuscule amount of common sense.

  22. The performative bit at the end when they – including the Supreme Court – talk about protections on the basis of gender reassignment. What do they think this actually means in practice, because in practice they aren’t doing anything to protect that characteristic.

    But we all know this is a backdoor repeal of the GRA2004, with the goal of segregsting and excluding trans people from public life. It’s nothing to do with protecting women, so-called “single sex spaces”, etc. Biology in one place, how you look in another. It’s abhorrent.

    And the Supreme Court ruling really is mind boggling. This is not an instance of “misunderstood the judgment because it’s legalese”.

  23. [Here’s](https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/media-centre/interim-update-practical-implications-uk-supreme-court-judgment) a direct link to the guidance itself, hosted by the EHRC.

    2 main bits I’d like to highlight:

    > “It is not compulsory for services that are open to the public to be provided on a single-sex basis or to have single-sex facilities such as toilets”

    and

    > In workplaces and services that are open to the public:
    >
    > trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women’s facilities and **trans men (biological women) should not be permitted to use the men’s facilities**, as this will mean that they are no longer single-sex facilities and must be open to all users of the opposite sex

    So EHRC guidance forces trans men, who are visibily masculine into women’s spaces. This then normalises the presence of visibly masculine individuals in “women’s spaces”.

    This then makes it easier for a predatory cis man to enter women’s spaces, because they only now need to say “I’m a trans man, I’m supposed to be here”.

    So all these trans-exclusionary groups who argued for this on the basis of “protecting women”, how does this protect women?

  25. Forcing trans people to out themselves by using “other facilities” seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

  26. This really happened overnight, it seems. Amazing how quickly things can change..

  27. It’s heartening to see that common sense has prevailed over mass psychosis. How did we let it get this far in the first place? Regardless, at a time when my faith in this country was wavering, it is great to finally have some hope for the future.

  28. Trans guy here. Can I just say trans people just want to pee in peace? If someone wanted to attack someone they aren’t going to jump through the damn hoops a trans person has to just to do it. We really just want to live our lives.
    Also a big thank you to most of the Scottish population. Most of you seem like sensible, accepting people who I’m very glad to be part of the community of.

  29. What a complete fucking mess they’ve made, they’ve created a requirement for five separate toilets all in their never ending efforts to satisfy a bunch of wine drunk idiots on twitter.

  30. “*As part of the judgement, Supreme Court judge Lord Hodge stressed that the law still gives protection against discrimination to transgender people.***”**

    Making this ruling and then saying, in the same judgement, that it is not meant to discriminate against trans people is just the height of having their cake and eating it too. Woeful logic and a deeply flawed understanding of the nature of human sex and gender expression.

  31. BBC leaving out just enough to make the guidance sound reasonable.

  32. Guess I’ll just stop “outing” myself and continue using whatever the fuck I want. Oh well!

  33. The EHRC Guidance makes perfect sense in light of the Supreme Court’s decision. What trans activists are continuing to do is expect bodies that have to follow the law to ignore the law. It’s the same as if the Supreme Court made a decision in their favour and then the Government just ignored it because 50% of the population are biological women. They would have been in uproar.

    You either accept the Courts decision or you have chaos.

    Now if you want the law to change go out campaign, protest, write your MP and demand a change. I’ll support your right to do that.

    The EHRC are in a difficult position here because they have to uphold the rights of several different groups in accordance with the law. Prior to this ruling activists had been pressuring different organisations with their interpretation of the law which it turns out was wrong.

  34. Pure tragedy that men can’t go into the women’s anymore. They won’t be the same without the piss stains.

Comments are closed.