Thread by @LordLucasCD

I have a debate on 24/2 in the House of Lords “What plans does HMG have to ensure that at least half of the communal changing or toilet facilities offered in public buildings are reserved for women only”. This thread explains why I am asking the question. All comments appreciated

Some public buildings have converted their ladies and gents communal toilet facilities to gender neutral. What is the reason for this change?
Who does this change advantage, and who does it disadvantage, compared to offering separate toilets for men and for women?

Disadvantaged: women who do not, for reasons of discomfort or religion, wish to find themselves in an enclosed, unobserved space with men. Men (like me) who do not wish to spook such women. Women who are unappreciative of an occasional lack of toilet hygiene among men. Who else?

Advantaged: Women when there is a queue for the ladies and not for the gents. People who feel or are made to feel uncomfortable using a communal toilet where their presence can be questioned on the basis of their apparent gender. Who else?

Women commonly experience much more sexual harassment in enclosed public spaces than men do A recent YouGov survey re tube trains had the figures as 55% of women and 21% of men It seems to me reasonable that many women should wish men not to share their toilets and changing rooms

Some women, for entirely acceptable religious and cultural reasons, are unable to use gender neutral communal facilities.
Men commonly experience much shorter queues for communal toilets than women do.

It seems to me unreasonable that we should be taking actions that are liable to reduce women’s access to toilets that they feel comfortable in.

I do not see the justification for causing all that disadvantage for so much less advantage when we can, I think, offer all the advantages of having gender neutral toilets without the disadvantages if we convert the gents to gender neutral, but leave the ladies alone.

A civilised society should provide separate communal toilet and changing facilities for women, and not force them to use communal gender-neutral facilities. Where communal gender-neutral facilities are required, they should replace provision currently allocated to men.

Will HMG please ask the DfE and other public organisations who have gone full gender-neutral to reinstate women-only provision?

Though it is a side issue for the question I have asked, I should also be interested in listening to your thoughts on the issue of who counts as a woman for the purpose of using a woman’s communal toilet or changing facility.

All sides of the debate have arguments that deserve a respectful audience, and I see no justification for verbal let alone physical violence.

I would like to see Stonewall lay aside its kimono and baseball bat, and Fawcett hear the call to courage, and sit down together to sort out a commonsense solution.

My starting position in this debate is that it is not possible to separate humanity into two genders. It is in the nature of our species that some people who are biological males will have many female-typical gendered characteristics (by which I mean characteristics that ...

… show a strongly bimodal distribution with biological sex) and visa versa. It is in our nature that some biological females will appear to be men, and visa versa. Where someone is in gender space should be a matter for them – we should not restrict or discriminate.

I cannot see how any fair determination can be made of a person’s sex in circumstances where they are fully clothed – as I assume that women usually are in the open areas of ladies’ toilets.

I cannot imagine how, in a pleasant and civilised society, a group of women in a toilet can practically determine that one of their number should not be there.

It would be weird and unpleasant for people to be challenged on the basis of their dress or their looks, and made to feel unwelcome just because someone else thinks them insufficiently feminine.

Anyone who is known to be male and to identify as a man should not use the ladies, and male sexual behaviours should not be tolerated there (they are not much appreciated in the gents, either). That seems to me to be enforceable and reasonable.

Communal changing rooms are in some ways safer than toilets – more open – but on the other hand genitals may be exposed, and it is clear to me that exposed male genitals do not belong in women’s public changing rooms – though what a private institution allows should be up to them

The current law expects integration but allows discrimination when justified. I like that balance, though the language needs to be clearer, so that those in charge of applying it feel confident in doing so.

Safeguarding children and vulnerable adults should always outrank integration, and the government should state that clearly.

Serious competitive sports should be segregated by sex, not gender, wherever male physical advantages mean that females could not, without segregation, hope to win consistently on a par with males.