IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Transvestites & Transexuals - Use of Toilets
Rank: New forum user 
|
I have been asked to prepare a policy covering the use of toilet facilities by tansvestites and transexuals in a public place of entertainment. Although not strictly as safety issue, there is the risk of violence if other toilet users object, as has happened before - hence the need for the policy. My thoughts are that transvestites use the relevant toilet for their gender (as they were born), whilst transexuals would use the relevant toilet for their adopted gender. I don't want to turn the policy document into war and peace and
I wondered if anybody might have suggestions of what to include in the policy, and how to word it?
Never a dull moment in this job!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Is this a common scenario then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Could you mark one set of toilets as "other" and let people take their pick?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Not at the venue in question - but there is an event planned where it is a reasonably foreseeable occurence, due to the nature of the event which will appeal to all sections of the community - herein lies the problem which will be clashes of culture between attendees
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
We have a transsexual in our office and the scenario you have said of using the toilet relevant to their adopted gender is what we use, it has caused no problems that I am aware of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I use the gents loo Monday to Friday
At the weekend I'm Rachel ........ so use the other facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sdkfz181 wrote:I use the gents loo Monday to Friday
At the weekend I'm Rachel ........ so use the other facilities
Rachel ?
What happened to Suzie ?
Or Tracy ?
What sort of name is "Rachel" ?
Don't you find it bothersome storing the footwear in different places ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
JohnMurray wrote:Sdkfz181 wrote:I use the gents loo Monday to Friday
At the weekend I'm Rachel ........ so use the other facilities
Rachel ?
What happened to Suzie ?
Or Tracy ?
What sort of name is "Rachel" ?
Don't you find it bothersome storing the footwear in different places ?
It's easier to say than PzkpfwVI
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The chap who lives next door is know to dress in womens cloths and what a sock that was to me one Saturday morning, but my wife knew about it for ages before that. He is a nice chap who speaks whenever he is out of his house and has a young daughter who is nice although a little plump shall we say. He is a doting father although his partner has left but calls every day to check he is OK. He work as a hospital porter and does no one any harm. I'm sure he uses the gents like any other male person and does not dream of going in the ladies. So what is wrong with this sort of life style?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I'd have more of an issue with you calling someone "a little plump"? What's wrong with being a little plump?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
bob shillabeer wrote:... a young daughter who is nice although a little plump shall we say...?
Bob, you seem to have drifted off-topic here a bit!
CanI suggest that you have a look at the equality section of Direct.Gov.Uk and see what that has to say. Although a little unusual it is bound to have been addressed already. Another option is to phone some of the entertainment venues in Brighton as they cover this kind of issue and more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I find it difficult finding Stileto style high heeled, steel toe capped boots for the weekend to go with my little black number....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Safety Smurf
Only my best friends call me Tiger
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
While some might find this subject amusing and an opportunity to make fun, I feel that the original question deserves a proper response from so called professional people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Go for the complete answer and make all toilets unisex. I am recently finding that disabled toilets are being located within the ladies toilets which leads to some unexpected surprises on some faces when I come out of my cubicle. It was not long ago the Manchester University adopted a similar gender neutral policy. I think the Equality Act 2010 could push us more this latter route. Corporate America went this way many years ago a la Callista Flockhart if you remeber the series.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The point I was making is the father who cross dresses shall we say has a little girl and was in a long term relationship with his female partner and everything was gouing along quite nicely and they seemed a very happy little family group. The only faul was the little girl was being rather overfed on the wrong food, nothing I or anyone else can do abouit that but perhaps it is a little too much info. The fact remains the father has a different way of living that affects no one else. As for him using the toilet he uses the gents like any other man. I used to be a secretary of a social club and we spent rather a lot of money putting a disabled toilet in and that is unisex and causes no problems at all. So a little thought and an open mind can work wonders and meet the vast majority of people involved and those who are still unhappy must realise one can only do what one can do in a situation such as this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I am enjoying the WW11 AFV banter though! I personally think the Panther was best - although they nicked all the best design bits from the Soviet T34.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Moderator 
|
To Forum-users:
Please remember that this is a professional forum, and please avoid trivialising other people's posts
Please carry on, with sensible posts that relate to the original poster's request.
Moderating team
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Temporary unisex toilets - Job done!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
IOSH shows its usual lack of humour
Rachel
xx
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
boblewis wrote:Go for the complete answer and make all toilets unisex.
In our head office building we have one floor with what were unisex toilets (the other floors have normal gents/ladies split). After complaints (from, I think, only one person) we ended up with pictograms on each cubicle door so it's now unisex toilet with specified gents cubicles and specified ladies cubicles.
I don't understand the substance of the complaint (surely it's not that much of an imposition to put the seat down if it's up when you enter the cubicle?) but it seemed the path of least resistance.
So some people are apparently really uncomfortable with the idea that a member of the opposite sex might have seen the toilet they are using.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
That'll soon diminish when you're busting to go!
I'm sometimes reluctant to use the site gents toilet during audits!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Dear all
Many thanks for your helpful (and some not so helpful but entertaining) comments!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
philatkinson,
Before this thread ends, does this issue really warrant a policy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Phil,
Have a look on the following link.
http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/
I don't know if this will be of any use but it does have alot of info surrounding the Equality Act.
I am finding that more often I have to ensure that Equality is included in many of the assessments and associated safe systems (in a separate document) to ensure that the organisation is not being discriminatory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Sense of humour failure it seems by the powers that be.
One could add, the whole topic should be locked/deleted as its not a true h&s issue anyway.
More a general discrimination issue and how to deal with a delicate issue.
Other than than some people getting upset and possible aggressive/verbal - dealt with by normal HR procedures, please what specific h&s guidance/regulations are relevant.
At best, the Welfare Regs which require adequate numbers of loos etc for men and women (or 3 genders?).
Lets not get side tracked into 'gender equality issues' or whatever is the current PC language to discuss such things.
Not really a significant risk.
In my view, I would have nothing to do with this and hand it all over to HR to sort out.
Just glad I'm a safety engineer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
On the contrary Sdkfz 181 - if that is your real name? Toileting is part of welfare which is part of health and safety so you as a safety engineer (professional H&S role) have a duty to ensure good welfare. That includes SAFE welfare for all.
I would suggest that all contributors remember there is an Equality Act in force right now and everyone at work, or visiting a workplace should be considered as equal.
No exceptions?
"Sense of humour failure" just take care in this modern PC world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Chris
Did I say the provision of welfare/toilet facilities wasn't a h&s issue? Don't think I did.
What I did say, was that discrimination isn't an h&s issue and should be dealt with by HR.
The possible consequences of discrimination are an h&s, in terms of verbal abuse/violence/mental bullying etc - which I again addressed in my last post as an HR issue and even possible criminal offence.
Please read a post properly before commenting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Unfortunate turn of phrase but 'handbags' gentlemen!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I think this thread has run its course; time to lock now mods?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Just before the thread gets locked, many years ago in a very trendy club in central London there were three toilets to each rest area
There was a Gents, a Ladies and a "other"
This was a good way to give people who required it privacy, people who didn't wish to share their bathroom activities with a differing gender privacy and for those of a differing gender a place to use and to maintain their privacy, dignity etc
I have found that although the continentals are very keen on "gender neutral" toilets we Brits are a little more reserved and the older we get the more privacy we require
Some one mentioned the equality act and that as welfare is a provision for the H&S of persons using it perhaps we should ask why are mixed hospital wards being returned to single sex use and where does the jolly old Human rights act come into it?
The three Loo scenario was back in the eighties and was in a club owned by a chap called Steve Strange, maybe worth a go !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Contrary to some of the replies that do not see equality/diversity issues as truly H&S I would suggest that they reflect on the fact whether they want HR to be involved in their risk assessment process for work
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sexual Orientation is a Protected Characteristic under the equality Act 2010.
Writing a policy is the correct thing to do as these people need to be protected against discrimination from anyone, not just employer/employees but members of the general public as well.
Any person who does discriminate against these people should be reprimanded - and that includes anyone that writes on this forum in any way negative towards these people.
In a premises occupied by members of the public there should be means provided by the people in charge of the premises to ensure health and safety rules are obeyed. If necessary Security personnel should be briefed on how to manage a situation involving discrimination of any type.
As far as I can see it is health and safety legislation therefore anyone in a H/S position should take this on board - not HR. HR should only become involved when there is a discrimination action by an employer or employee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
If there is a risk of violence has been identified during the course of a risk assessment, then control measures MUST be considered.
If someone has come on here seeking advice and guidance from professional people who may have encountered this matter previously, surely others should abide by the rules of the forum and assist the person in reaching a resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Some of the comments here, among those hidden by the mods, demonstrate very clearly why the Diversity Working Party was set up by council. It is personal attitudes that also make a competent professional and we cannot afford any member to be dismissive concerning ANY protected group as set out in the Equality Act. In fact any person who shows this tendency and who is chartered needs to reflect seriously on whether they are in fact in breach of the code of ethics. The next step will be to develop new attitudes within this area or recognise their overall lack of competency to act as a Chartered Safety and Health Practitioner.
I see it as seriously as this because I understand very clearly the devastating consequences of the plethora of direct and indirect discrimination that occurs within society. These range from the simple stealing of blue badge bays in order to make parking easier by the able bodied to institutions who create rules such that the a protected group is specifically held up to public gaze. My personal experience is physical disability and believe me life is hard enough without jumping through numerous hoops to get assistance to do those things the able are capable of doing without assistance.
Soapbox now away (temporarily)
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I think you will see I agree with Bob.
I have been asked about carrying out some equality Act audits and can do that from the point of view of wheelchair user as I have a scooter. Since that purchase I have come to realise exactly what the wheelchair user has to contend with in everyday life.
It it difficult for some people to fully understand other scenarios but it is so important for all safety professionals to just accept this Act and its requirements without question and without the unnecessary comments that may bring our profession into disrepute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
boblewis
I hate to disappoint you, but as an ex member of IOSH (Chartered), there are loads of people who make a healthy living out of being safety consultants/advisers/engineers etc with out being members of IOSH - so the 'stuffed shirt', PC correctness attitude is likely to have limited effect.
So if mine and other postings don't impress you, making a bit of humour about life's situations unfortunate. Neither am I breaching the IOSH code of ethics - as I'm not a member.
I have no problem with equality in any of its forms and for all UK citizens to be treated equally, but there is a danger of 'blaming h&s' for situations where people are getting discriminated against - when its is n't (in the first instance a h&s issue).
There are enough bad press stories around about h&s, with out getting side tracked into Equality law.
IOSH and its members should stick to issues that fall within the remit of HASWA and subsequent Statutory Instruments.
I repeat, where discrimination spills over into personal bullying (physical or mental) then it is an h&s issue and should be dealt with in co-operation with HR and HR policies etc. Even possibly the police.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sdkfz181
I am only too happy to see you among the ex chartered as this is not yet a matter for levity UNTIL such time that there is a truly behaviour among society as a whole that accepts ALL difference without discrimination. This means the 12th of Never will arrive first.
It is not about PC but it is about treating people as they are ie Human Beings and not putting obstacles in their path simply because they are different in some way. The Equality Act has some bad points, but not that many, and I would rather see IOSH lose those chartered members who see it as none of their business or simply PC nonsense than be associated with such people.
This thread was inititially about a relatively straightforward diversity issue but it has shown that IOSH has a serious problem with the attitudes of certain members. IOSH was founded with the prime intention of protecting people at work, this includes all those who are in some way different. We are here to assist such people to work safely just anybody else - no question of exclusion because of difference.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
If equality is a h&s issue, then instead of calling it the Equality Act or whatever it is, why weren't the rules/requirements written as the Equality (Safety) at Work Regulations i.e. secondariy legislation to HASWA?
Maybe because equality issues, in the strictest sense are not deemed by brighter legal brains than you will get on the forum, as safety law.
However I repeat, it can be, as outlined in previous posts - but maybe even then if pressed, treated as a crime if physical violence is involved.
It seems some people choose to read something into my posts, that I haven't said.
IOSH might not have a problem with certain members - I'm no longer a member, and I don't have a problem with equality law in the UK. Just the attempt to hang it on to h&s when in many situations (that I have seen) ,don't actually raise h&s queries as no h&s law or good practice is/has being broken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sdkfz181
If you were still a member and up to date with CPD you would have picked up that the EU has already made clear statements in this area. Competent professionals always take note of regulatory and OTHER REQUIREMENTS when dealing with issues otherwise how are we ever to improve standards?
The constant emphasis on the need for regulation before anything is done drags us back constantly to the pre 1974 era and attitudes that only improved or changed things once legislation required such changes. Thus people were maimed or died because there was no regulation preventing such things occurring.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Transvestites & Transexuals - Use of Toilets
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.