this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2026
301 points (98.4% liked)

United Kingdom

7048 readers
376 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
tom@feddit.uk
GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
301
Gateshead woman with alopecia accused of being male while using female toilet at Tesco (www.chroniclelive.co.uk)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by Quokka@quokk.au to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
63 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The 37-year-old, who has had the hair loss condition since she was a child, said she was left shocked when a cleaner at the Trinity Square shop asked her "Are you aware you're in the female toilet?" She said she became distressed and burst into tears.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BuyEU@lemmy.ml 33 points 3 days ago (2 children)

"I can understand the cautiousness from a business point of view but they’ve also got to be aware of diversity and people being different. They should not make assumptions on visible differences.

Isn't that exactly what the law forces though? To somehow decide based on looks alone who should be in which toilet?

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Couldn't they also just not do that? Surely the law doesn't require them to hire someone to police the toilets.

Gender neutral toilets could also get around it surely. Worked in multiple places with them and no one has ever cared.

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Surely the law doesn’t require them to hire someone to police the toilets.

It pretty much does. Not specifically to have someone dedicated to check everyone, but they have to take reasonable measures and a member of staff speaking up would fall under that.

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why though? Its a toilet. Couldn't they just say the sign is only suggested genders. Women can clean men's toilets still.

[–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Point is, there are malicious people, both men and women. I think there have to be security measures in order for it to be impossible (or at least, highly difficult) to do things as spying or putting hidden cameras. But of course, that shouldn't be done based only in the looks, but mostly in the behaviour. Anyone with a suspicious behaviour should be policed, but that's like something that should be taken for granted in the first place.

Women can clean men's toilets still.

About this, I ask rhetorically: would you also say that "men can clean women's toilets still"? I personally doubt it given a lot of previous experiences on this topic, and I believe that in such a case one must be consistent: either both or neither.

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

would you also say that “men can clean women’s toilets still”?

Yes. I don't even see why we need to have gendered toilets in the first place. No one has one at home. Seen a fair few places with a single toilet that is obviously not gendered. Never seen a gendered disabled toilet either.

[–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 1 day ago

Well, that's fair.

In a gender-neutral bath we can have the double of good people to stop any bad person that wants to abuse others while they're vulnerable, so, yeah, I don't know either why there is a separation. If anything, there could be gendered baths only for people that feel really uncomfortable in gender-neutral ones, but that's only to have more options (which is always good).

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Exactly what the law enforces will differ by jurisdiction

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 4 points 2 days ago

This is in England.

[–] theo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is not devolved and I believe the law being refered to is the one that has been clarified in the recent guidance after a supreme court decision.

Health is normally devolved, but this is counted as "human rights".

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sire but most of "the world" OS not in the US

[–] theo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sorry I think we are misunderstanding each other. I was talking about the UK as this is a UK specific story and community. I assumed that you were talking about the constituent countries in the UK that have different laws in your previous comment.

May I ask how it is you got here? - I am curious seeing as you're on a PieFed instance.

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 1 points 2 days ago

My bad. I only ever really browse the top / unfiltered feed, never by community. Fediverse is small enough that there's only a few active communities and the content is fairly homogenous.

I'm from Australia and am used to explaining to Americans in the fediverse that other jurisdictions exist I guess.

Not sure what you mean about piefed? quokk.au is the dweeb fork of piefed I think?