this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2025
67 points (91.4% liked)

United Kingdom

5648 readers
233 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 1 day ago

If you don't want to go in a bathroom with a trans person, go find a single user one. You're the problem here. Figure it out.

[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I believe it is still a criterion for changing gender to use the bathroom of the gender you are transitioning to for 2 years before the legal process can be satisfied. It sounds like the entire legal framework around changing gender is incompatible with requests like this.

For what it's worth the supreme court decision simply found that someone's sex could not be changed legally but that still shouldn't preclude changing gender. Forbidding people from changing gender is essentially what is being asked for by these groups and society at large does not seem to have an appetite for that.

In the immediate future sex based legal protections do have the legal apparatus to trump gender based rights but it's going to be implemented on an arbitrary, case-by-case basis. For example in the event that a trans person has a transphobic colleague of the same gender then the employer needs to provide facilities for both parties (as seen in a recent workplace dispute in Fife, Scotland). This is going to get messy where the NHS might have certain hospitals with this arbitrary need for extra facilities depending on people having the misfortune of transphobic colleagues.

[–] NickwithaC@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

TERFs when they realise the toilet in their house is gender neutral: 🤯

[–] Jrockwar@feddit.uk 26 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This is ridiculous. If it goes into effect, the same women will complain when they see a big trans man full of tattoos in the women's bathroom because the law has forced them to go there.

Purely and simply transphobia.

[–] Sternout@feddit.org 9 points 3 days ago

Trans men won't be accepted either. Neither will be women with short hair.

Conform or get beaten up

[–] FatVegan@leminal.space 4 points 3 days ago

That right there. I feel like when these pieces of shits hear or read about trans people, they think off a bearded guy with a wig. It's never the other way around.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

Ban the anti-trans from bathrooms? Seems like a win-win to me.

[–] BlackArtist@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago
[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca -3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Non/gendered washrooms with floor-to-ceiling stalls, cameras allowed in the handwashing areas. Problem solved.

Edit: only on Lemmy would people be more worried about bathroom throughput over shutting up assholes. 😆

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 11 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Not a fan of putting up more surveillance in general, even less so in public toilets. Also what happens to the urinals in this scenario?

[–] Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk 3 points 3 days ago

You either have a completely different section or just get rid of them altogether

[–] Denjin@feddit.uk 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Urinals are purely there to increase throughput and reduce cleaning time. Just get rid.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Increasing throughput and reducing cleaning time are both good things, though.

Increased throughput means less queuing and being able to quickly relieve yourself. In a shared toilet, this would benefit men and women alike.

Making cleaning quicker and easier means it'll happen more and be less disruptive when it does happen.

[–] Denjin@feddit.uk 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

But if you want to make true ungendered toilets (as was suggested) that are accessible to all, having a section where a bunch of guys all basically get their cocks out and piss in a trough kinda prevents that.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 1 day ago

Trans women can use urinals too if they want. Not sure where you're getting the piss trough thing from I've only ever seen one of those at boy scout camp 30 years ago. Most urinals are individual stalls and are great for not having to smell the horrendous dump someone just took in the toilet stalls.

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago

Sometimes gendered stuff makes sense - like urinals. As you mentioned they're efficient and I'd imagine a large part of why the gents toilets don't have big queues. I'm all for trans folk using whatever toilet they want, I'm more worried about the folk who are presumably checking everyone's genitals to make sure they're in the correct toilet.

[–] Apocalypteroid@feddit.uk 4 points 3 days ago

Just have one room full of urinals, one room full of stalls, both ungendered. So then anyone can use any facility they feel most comfortable with.