Centinaia di aziende avvertono nuove indicazioni sugli spazi sessuali singoli sono “inattuabili” e causerebbero “danni economici significativi”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/supreme-court-trans-single-sex-spaces-b2826924.html
di AlyssaAlGaib
24 commenti
Hey, we’re the nation that Brexited off our nose to spite our face! If anyone can inflict significant economic self harm by implementing nonsensical policies predicated entirely on delusional fearmongering, it’s us
You can have
-4 years where labour dont distance themselves from immigration and trans issues and stand firm on them
Or
-a chance in 4 years that reform don’t win in a landslide
You can’t have both
Of course it will. The goal is to make it unworkable so the businesses effectively have no choice but to push trans people out of public life.
Doesn’t matter, because this is about ideology rather than silly things like facts or empathy.
[removed]
[removed]
What happened to the unisex toilets, I remember in Scotland there were supposed to even be schools with them. Are they now the loophole for places to not have to police trans people?
>They also express concern that the proposals would put them at “constant risk of complaints and litigation from multiple directions”, as well as forcing **“business staff into the unacceptable role of ‘gender police’”.**
But but I was told this will never happen!! The TERFs told me we will never have genital inspectors in the UK!!
For those that don’t want to read the article / look into this, basically the issue it comes down to is:
1)You exclude trans people from the toilets of their gender and you then get sued for discrimination and invasion of privacy
i) You are not allowed to ask for a persons GRC as this is an invasion of privacy (Supreme Court specifically mentioned this) so how do you prove someone is trans?
ii) May also be a breach of the European Convention Of Human Right (there is a case currently in the works for this)
2)You don’t exclude trans people and you get sued by campaigners like For Women Scotland or J.K Rowling.
_______
Also want to specifically add the judges from the supreme court ruling came out after and clarified that you **”Can”** exclude trans people, not that you “must”.
So if it went back to them the ruling would likely (but who truly knows) that you can exclude trans people but you’re not forced to.
Well they could just change all the signs to ones that say open to all. The problem is that you can only deleiberately discriminate in certain areas such as single sex spaces, and toilets haven’t actually been single sex spaces. So just open em up to everyone.
Trans Women (it’s always women, because the crowd pushing all this shit are bitter, elderly, WASP’s) terrify the shit out of people despite them wanting to live mundane lives.
It’s utterly sad, and will inevitably hurt many, many, people, trans or otherwise.
It’s been workable for over a hundred years. This is excuse making nonsense.
Of course its workable. Its worked for hundred of years. It follows the letter of the law as it is laid out. Single sex spaces are exactly that, for single sex. Nothing has changed accept that the law has been clarified. As the courts said, this is amd has always been the law as it is written.
Unworkable in the sense they don’t want to implement them.
Ahh, but have you considered that the harm it causes trans people is in fact greater than the harm it causes the economy, and therefore the guidance must go ahead, unworkable or not?
Scrap urinals, floor to ceiling enclosed locked toilet cubicles for toilet and changing then CCTV covered sink areas. Separate additional needs cubicles for wheelchairs, assistance, etc. Any human being can use them. Pragmatism.
This country just seems to hang itself up on nonsensical arguments over quite fundamental things to people’s lives and nobody benefits from it.
Hundreds of companies “including ben&jerries, lush and small cafes”….
So basically all the companies who you would expect to push against any gender critical legislation, and who pushed for mixed changing rooms etc and will have to undo that.
No don’t you get it, you need to do this because a day drinking, bigoted children’s author who spends her entire day on twitter demands it.
I mean you either agree with single sex spaces needing to exist or you don’t. I’d prefer a single occupancy changing room and toilet every time
Plus you can’t say this male is good but this male is bad and now this male takes HRT they can’t possibly be a risk, if a space is segregated by sex it’s pretty clear cut.
But that doesn’t mean trans activists can’t advocate for facilities that work, for example like Women’s Aid. It’s a charity, there’s clearly missing refuge facilities for any male victims but nothing is stopping someone setting one up like what women had to do.
Of course its unworkable. To simplify the issue they are talking about lets imagine a real life scenario.
So if i as a man walk into a women’s toilet and state i was born a woman so legally i need to use the womens.
How does the establishment decide which toilet i can use? Do they stop me mid shit and throw me out or wait for me to finish?
Suddenly a bathroom situation that’s worked for generations is unworkable. Almost as surprising as leftists suddenly caring about economic hard to business.
Yeah but what’s more important, a functional country and a bit of empathy for a tiny minority who are marganalized, or that Wes streeting gets some hi-fives from a few telegraph columnists.
It’s also going to wreck a lot of peoples lives, but the economy? The precious numbers must be protected at all costs
In non public toilets it seems a pretty easy fix. If shops have a male and a female toilet for staff ie lush, make them lockable unisex ie one in one out and therefore no issues, same a b&j offices, they are a multi million company, im sure they could have an individual lockable toilet put in place for anyone