During an interview with trans journalist and writer Izzy Dine, published online on Tuesday (21 October), the women and equalities minister was asked what bathroom she thought Dine and other trans women should currently be using.
In September, Phillipson, who is currently running the Labour deputy leadership candidacy, was handed the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) code of practice on single-sex services, which could result in a bathroom ban for trans people.
[…]
Asked what bathroom trans women should currently be using, Phillipson appeared unable to give a clear answer, instead simply restating the ruling, the full impact of which remains unclear: “As Minister for Women and Equalities, I set out the policies responding to the Supreme Court judgement. The Supreme Court were clear that, uh, for the purposes of the Equality Act, sex is biological sex.“What’s now happening is the Equality and Human Rights Commission have, uh, have consulted on a code of practice to me as the minister. I’ll then be going through that line by line to make sure we get that right. It’s a 300-page document so it will take some time.”
Dine then pointed to interim guidance from the EHRC, which included a clause banning trans women from men’s toilets as well as women’s. The guidance has since been repealed.
While I fully agree with who cares.
On an entirely logical basis. The existence of unisex toilets is not an arguement against others interpretation. It’s entirely a labelling issue. Most homes have unisex toilets as well. No oneusing them has any expectations of gender use.
While those arguing against trans use. Logically (although not morraly or scientifically) have an argument that the room is labelled to limit sex if not gender.
Personally I think all public toilets should be unisex. It has multiple advantages.
cubical provide privacy. And in a world where sexual orientation is accepted. Considering privacy an entirely gender related issue is overtly Victorian as an idealism.
Ignoring the lack of evidence of men possing as trans to attack women in a single sex bathroom. Such a threat if it existed would only be unique to such areas due to the lack of expectations of male use. Having both sexes expecting to use the room. And to provide each other with privacy and respect. would provide normal public oversight on any activities.
All gender users should be more likely to have a desire to show an attitude of minimal cleanliness. The use and abuse of single sex public bathrooms, both male and female. Seems to be a unique behaivior invoked when people do not expect to be judged by the opposite sex.
And yet there was some legislation (to be fair, I think it was when the Tories were still in charge) which was trying to remove gender neutral facilities from (workplaces? Local government? Can’t remember)
I’m not too surprised by that. Personally, I’ve found lavatories/bathrooms to be pointlessly gendered. Unless, of course, one considers gender as a part of a social hierarchy (e.g. patriarchy), then it becomes a simple matter of segregation.
Personally I think it is a Victorian idealism. As in the common refusal to accept same sex relationships existed.
The whole idea of separating sex somehow providing privacy. Completely misses the point. While also allowing reduced funding in care and provision of bathroom spaces.
As such while almost every other issue has been discussed or addressed at some point by politicians. The idea that all bathroom and change spaces should be privacy provisioned to allow all genders to share with no embarrassment at all. Has been ignored as an inconvenience not worth addressing.
I remember small groups of terf MPs calling for legislation. But no legislation actually being pushed in parliament. I’ll search when I have time. As an older fart my memory may be going ;).
The only interpretation im considering is the supreme courts. By theirs, the concept of a biological sex defined space for toilets doesnt work.
Agreed. But the court dose not make laws. They only get to interpret it.
Be sure to remember it is parliament that can and must fix this. Unfortunately laws will and always have been written in the accepted Lang and ideals of the time. As such they will always need updating to pass evolving ideals.
Unfortunately that has always taken effort from the public to sell and force politicians and in evolved arseholes to accept changes are needed.