It's you guys that keep bringing it back to toilets, which is the easiest issue to resolve.
No, it was yourself that introduced the toilets, later using the disabled to try to prove your points. And yourself who said you'd be willing to stand outside them and "police" who could use them.
That simply isn't true. You can't practically police who you give a bed to in a shared room at a women's refuge? You can't police who your counsellor is when you ask for a female one after being raped? You can't police which sex the police officer who is going to perform an intimate search on a woman is? You can't police who attends a lesbian group in order to exclude men? It's so difficult to work out whether someone is a man or not that we have to take it on trust? This is nonsense.
There's set procedures in place for treatment in police custody. But you're generally going to be seen by a female nurse**, regardless of how you present yourself.
There's only yourself that keeps repeating that piece. As you try and present your view, as though it the only one that anyone should care about.
It's not about toilets. This is the stuff it's about.
I doubt you think it's too impractical to discern someone's entitlement to be there when it comes to things like whether your GP is qualified or your kids teachers aren't sex offenders. Do you manage that on an honesty basis?
If it isn't, why do you keep on returning to the subject of their use?
It's never been about the practicalities, but the legalities of demanding proof to the level of satisfaction that you seek that's a bigger issue.
You don't like one particular group of people, so you want them nowhere near you. Hiding it, always, behind another matter that affects everyone.
I've been seen, and examined by female doctors. On what some might consider to be a male only examination. Never once was the thought given to demanding that the doctors doing the examinations, and explanations, be male. I did ask once if she was okay in doing the examination, but put treatment received ahead of anything else.
Taken, as you've put it on a "honesty basis" that they were qualified.
The same as the nurses, be they male or female. Their job is hard enough, without someone demanding special treatment.
My last named GP was male, but that 13 years ago now. It was easier talk to him, and not many liked him. Ex forces and probably heard every excuse already. I believe that the named doctor I'm listed with at present is female, as was the one she replaced. I've never asked either to prove they're qualified, or that they were actually born female. Wonder what the result of me asking them that, and for proof, would be?
I've been treated on a mixed surgical ward, where the ones asking what I'd had done, were the women on the ward. Looking at what was in the sealed specimen bottle on the small cupboard at the side of the bed.
And, if I felt I couldn't trust the doctor/specialist in charge of treating me, I have simply got them denied access to my medical records. For any reason.
Currently stands at six. Five male, one female*. But then I've only been seen by two female neurologists over the years, so five to one isn't as skewed as it firsts appears. None of these six are currently on the UK medical register.
*I'd to check before posting that figure.
**Female nurse used because women nurse/nurse who will be a woman degrades the work they do. And sounds stupid.
