Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
No, that is not good law. The guidance appears to give any man the right to enter a female toilet at work as long as they say they identify as female, and that any woman objecting to this is to be warned that it’s their behaviour that’s unreasonable and possibly even unlawful.
I suspect when this law was drafted there was too little appreciation of just how militant certain sections of the transgender lobby was getting. But it is now the case that women who have campaigned for equality, and safety for women, when they dare speak out on this issue, are at times slurred with the perjorative ‘TERF’ (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) by certain sections of the transgender lobby. You don’t have to look very hard to see that the (probably unintended) consequence of this law has actually been to give *men* licence to trespass on the hard-earned rights of women. That isn’t progress.
|
I'd agree with that rather than the "oh well I casually identify as what I like to go where I want" lobby which will be an inevitable consequence of militance, entitlement, and law allowing it.
In a workplace less so (as presumably someone casually identifying as what they like when they like to avoid waiting for the bogs would hit management radar eventually) but in public, the behaviour would become more concerning.
Specifically on the point of toilets, i'm probably missing something but I don't know why more places don't just have a load of rooms with self-contained toilet/sink (and actual rooms, too, not cubicles) accessible off a central / open atrium/corridor area, which are entirely gender-neutral and anyone can use them? I don't really like the idea of urinals anyway and it'd mean it didn't matter who used the toilet, and you wouldn't get say for example blokes having to queue to use 1 toilet when the ladies have 2 or 3 as they don't have urinals, or vice versa.