Women uncomfortable with transgender employee in toilet

[Leylandeye]

I'd like some advice here.

A new employee has started at my brothers place of work who identifies as a woman but was born male.

She uses the ladies toilets and the majority of the female colleagues are uncomfortable with this.

Clearly the trans employee has a right to go to work and not be forced to use another toilet but do the women have any right to not have a trans female in the ladies?

Are the women being as unreasonable as someone would have been 100 years ago having to share a toilet with person of different colour?

Any suggestions on how to deal with this?

[Leylandeye]

It's about 90 employees.

[Leylandeye]

Brainpox said:

Why are they uncomfortable with it?

To answer this point, I think the females are uncomfortable with the idea of a once male being in the toilets at the same time as them.

Really appreciate the responses here. Thank you.

It also helps me better understand the situation.

I can see the way they need to move forward now.

[Leylandeye]

Countdown said:

MitchT said:

slipstream 1985 said:

make them all unisex

This.

This.

The women will then all start to use the "Disbabled" toilets because some men seemingly have aiming problems and piss all over the seat.

The problem with this is that the existing toilets don't lend themselves to just a change in sign.

The company already has difficulty in retaining staff as there is a shortage of people with the right skill sets and some of the women are already talking about looking to go elsewhere because of this.

I think the solution is to change the toilets to be unsexed - i.e. separate rooms with their own handbasin, floor to ceiling walls.

The staff also need to be asked to be understanding of working in a modern workplace where the law supports the transgender person's rights as they are a minority.

[Leylandeye]

designforlife said:

I'd be tempted to leave the toilets exactly as they are and send every woman who has complained on a gender equality awareness course.

The trans member of staff isn't the problem, they are.

In our society, many women feel uncomfortable about sharing a toilet with someone who isn't a woman.

I hear today that about 30 women have said that they are uncomfortable with the situation but what bothers them more is that there is nothing to protect how they feel when that feeling is a common response in our society.

Will a gender equality awareness course change the deep routed feelings that they have grown up with and have been surrounded by all their lives?

If anything, it is dismissing the feelings of the majority in the favour of a minority and the majority are being made to feel wrong.

Is that fair and reasonable?

[Leylandeye]

Munter said:

Leylandeye said:

In our society, many whites feel uncomfortable about sharing a toilet with someone who is black.

I hear today that about 30 whites have said that they are uncomfortable with the situation but what bothers them more is that there is nothing to protect how they feel when that feeling is a common response in our society.

Will a race equality awareness course change the deep routed feelings that they have grown up with and have been surrounded by all their lives?

If anything, it is dismissing the feelings of the majority in the favour of a minority and the majority are being made to feel wrong.

Is that fair and reasonable?

Yes I edited what you said. But this is the equivalent of what you are saying (pre-equality laws).

The ladies have to learn to grow up and join a free and liberal society. Or leave for Russia.

Yes - this is exactly what I was saying at the top of the post and I feel uncomfortable myself for having empathy towards their feelings.

The key difference is that a black person is black whereas a male identifying as a female is still a male so what place do they have in the womens toilets?

[Leylandeye]

bhstewie said:

What do they do if they go into the toilet whilst it's being cleaned if the cleaner is male?

I've gone into enough toilets in enough countries whilst there's someone in there cleaning and it really doesn't turn into some awkward "Hmm you're a woman could you wait outside whilst I pee" conversation.

I don't get people sometimes

For some people it is awkward and whilst you may not get it, that is how a very large proportion of the UK feel.

For what it's worth, I'm with you that it's not a big deal but the issue is that the situation has suddenly made the workplace uncomfortable for the majority of the female staff.

[Leylandeye]

irocfan said:

why would hand-basins need to be contained within the cubicle?

It takes away any need to interact with the person going into the toilet. Possibly OTT.

[Leylandeye]

Pothole said:

Maybe my colleagues are just nicer people than the OP's, who knows?

I don't know what they are like as a person but the indication is that they go to work, do their job and that's it. If there was any issues with conduct or behaviour, be it being pissing voyeurs or flange feelers, that would be another matter.

[Leylandeye]

DanL said:

Would be curious as to the age of those “uncomfortable” with this vs. those who don’t have a problem with the situation...

That was my question too - it appears to be a broad spectrum.

I expected it to be the older ladies but that shows how ageist I am!

[Leylandeye]

bhstewie said:

stinkyspanner said:

Surely if you have one person in the office making a sizeable proportion of the staff uncomfortable then the individual is the problem?

Replace this situation with someone black or gay.

Is the individual still the problem?

Sometimes people, in this case the group, need to just realise they are the issue.

Here is their point of view as I see it.

Using the ladies is something that the transgender person chooses to do. Being transgender is not a problem with them. If the women objected to the transgender person working there at all, then they would be a problem - their issue is that a person merely has to identify as female and they have access to the loos, changing rooms, showers etc. The law supports that action.

Only females should use the ladies loos - the transgender person is not female - this has been confirmed on their birth certificate.

So the transgender person has chosen to do something which the majority of people object to.

Now change transgender to black and see where the problem lies - it doesn't lie with the person being black but what they are doing.

[Leylandeye]

bhstewie said:

It's 2020.

Stop making excuses for poor behaviour.

I'm putting forward a point of view for discussion and the year isn't important but the accepted morals of our society are.

[Leylandeye]

bhstewie said:

The year is important because the accepted morals of our society change over time.

Women get the vote now but try having that conversation in 1900 and it would have been viewed very differently.

Times change.

Yes - that makes my point for me. I'm happy to be corrected but I suspect that UK morals have not changed widely on the view that males should not use women's toilets.

The law has quite rightly given rights to transgender people and I think most wouldn't want to see a transgender person disadvantaged as long as those rights don't impinge on the rights of others.

I think the argument is that the transgender person's rights have superseded the rights of the non transgender person if that permits a male to use the women't toilets.

Furthermore, there are some on here who would support the non transgender person giving themselves a slap for complaining that they're rights are being trampled on.

[Leylandeye]

bhstewie said:

Depends if you want to live in a world that's dictated by "rights" over simply what's kind and decent.

I get it that kind and decent is a bit idealistic and doesn't and can't always apply to everything.

But as I think I said before when you're basically sitting there thinking "This person's probably going through a really hard time already but I'm going to make their life a little bit worse by complaining because they're in my toilet" then I'm sorry but I think that's spiteful.

Yes, all those points are valid but are relevant to both sides.

It's possible to be kind and decent to someone but still be unhappy if they're behaviour causes you harm. The act of behaving in a manner which would reasonably cause distress is in itself causing harm.

It is human nature to become protective when your position is being undermined so I'm not sure if spiteful is too strong.

I don't know if all transgender people are going through any harder time than others but at least the transgender person has their position protected by policy and law.

What protects the 30+ women who feel the same way as most other women in our society would feel?

[Leylandeye]

DanL said:

The transgender person isn’t seen as a woman by the other women, from what you’ve written. They’re viewing her as a man in a dress.

.......... Reasonable people might think to meet somewhere in the middle...

It's difficult for me to be sure as this is being relayed third hand to me but the impression I get is that they see them as a transgender person. Just because they don't want a transgender person in the opposite sex toilet of the sex they were identified at birth doesn't make them complete transists.

[Leylandeye]

Piersman2 said:

Doesn't anyone make a ladies toilet door sign with a little deployable cock for when a trans person is using the loos? That would solve your problem.

I wouldn't bother filling in the application to get onto Dragon's Den with that one but interesting out of the box thinking.

[Leylandeye]

inabox said:

Yes it does. The birth certificate is irrelevant. They're trans now. The law says they are female. They can use the female toilets.

And I think - that closes the thread.

As said earlier, thank you for the great contributions. Some interesting views and good comments.

[Leylandeye]

Olas said:

The law is what protects them, same as everybody else.

What do they need to be protected from, apart from their own prejudice?

The one line quoted from my post needs to be taken in context of the entire discussion, not in isolation.

Most women in our society have been brought up to believe that only women should use women's toilets.

Seeing someone who looks male and who they know is transgender in the toilets goes against this.

The act of a transgender person using toilets of the opposite of their birth sex causes the majority of the women stress.

The transgender person could use the gents but chooses not to so their act is deliberately causing stress and the law supports them.

The women support the right of the person to identify as a female but identifying as such doesn't change their cromosomes and if you take away the assumption of prejudice and look a little closer, I can understand their view.

I'm not sure if this example works but let's try it.

A mother and son go to the supermarket, the son is 40 years old but has the mental development of a 10 year old, should they use a parent and child spot?

Would them using such a space cause stress to mum with a 10 year old?

Now if we bring in the subject of human decency, as has been mentioned before, a transgender person may well have had countless other issues to deal with and surely it is the decent thing to not make things worse for them by forcing them to use the gents but acts of decency work both ways so if the transgender person knows they are causing stress to the majority of the women, is it asking too much not to use the women's toilets?

[Leylandeye]

Jasandjules said:

What is interesting is a lesbian I know who campaigns quite aggressively for women to be treated equally says this type of thing (i.e. the posters saying the women are in the wrong) is just another example of men being treated better than women. Because in her view it is a male who is deciding they want to use the toilets over the fears of the women.

Surely in her view, women would never be equal as it's the men deciding women should be treated equally.

How does a reasoned mind argue with that kind of logic.

Sometimes one has to accept that those around you suffer with thinking different to your own as well as the majority of others.

[Leylandeye]

robsa said:

Leylandeye said:

Only females should use the ladies loos - the transgender person is not female - this has been confirmed on their birth certificate.

Many transgender people have a valid birth certificate saying they are female. Are you okay with it in that case?

quote=Leylandeye]

Here is their point of view as I see it.......

.......Only females should use the ladies loos - the transgender person is not female - this has been confirmed on their birth certificate.

I think you meant are they OK with it. I don't know but it seems this particular person is described as male on their birth certificate. Does it make any difference?