When Exclusion is Disguised as a Solution: Toilets, Intersectionality, and the Cost of Poor Practice

The right to access a toilet, a basic, human, everyday necessity, has become a site of tension, exclusion, and harm for some of the most marginalised communities in the UK.

In the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling defining sex as biological in certain aspects of the Equality Act, and the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) interim guidance, many trans people are finding themselves locked out of safe spaces.

Alarmingly, some policymakers and employers are suggesting that disabled toilets be used as a workaround.

This is not a solution. It is a symptom of a deeper issue: systemic exclusion and a failure to understand intersectionality.

Exclusion Disguised as Inclusion

The EHRC’s advice, which implies trans people should not use toilets aligned with their gender identity and instead use “third spaces” or disabled facilities, is being hailed by some as a compromise. But in reality, it places two already marginalised groups trans people and disabled people in direct conflict over inadequate infrastructure.

Disabled campaigners like Michaela Hollywood and organisations like Inclusion London have voiced deep concern and solidarity. Their message is clear:

“this is not about toilets; this is about dignity, safety, and the right to public life.”

Accessible toilets are not gender-neutral alternatives. They are necessities for those who need hoists, adult changing benches, space for carers, or access to medical supplies.

They are often out of order, locked, or poorly maintained. And now, they are being weaponised against another marginalised group.

Intersectionality Ignored Is Injustice Multiplied

One in three LGBT+ people is also disabled. These are not separate issues; they intersect.

Yet current discourse and policy ignore the realities of people who live at these intersections. It pits communities against each other in a fight for access, instead of addressing the structural neglect that underpins both their experiences: poor planning, underfunded services, and a lack of inclusive design.

Disabled women have long been excluded from public life due to inaccessible facilities. Now, trans people are being told to use those same spaces despite also being routinely harassed, misgendered, or denied access altogether.

The EHRC’s advice, rather than protecting rights, has created what Ju Gosling rightly called “a charter for people to bully you.”

What Does Poor Practice Look Like?

• Offering disabled toilets as a catch-all space for anyone who doesn’t conform to gender norms.
• Not maintaining accessible toilets, leaving them locked, broken, or misused.
• Failing to provide gender-neutral toilets, especially in public and commercial spaces.
• Allowing discriminatory practices that lead to harassment of trans and disabled individuals alike.
• Ignoring intersectionality when developing policies or consulting with communities.

What Does Good Practice Look Like?

Good practice is not only legally compliant, it is human-centred, rights-based, and inclusive by design. It includes:

• Universal design principles: Toilets that meet a range of needs without singling anyone out, gender-neutral, accessible, and safe.
• Consultation with lived experience groups: Trans people, disabled people, and those at their intersection must be involved from the start.
• Staff training: On rights, inclusion, and how to challenge discriminatory behaviour respectfully.
• Clear signage and communication: To inform the public and prevent harassment.
• A refusal to treat inclusion as optional or ‘nice to have’, it is a necessity and a right.

Key Actions Going Forward

1. Reject exclusionary ‘solutions’ like directing trans people to disabled toilets.
2. Invest in truly inclusive infrastructure: Build more Changing Places, gender-neutral toilets, and accessible facilities.
3. Develop intersectional policy: Work that considers the complex realities of those who live at the margins of multiple identities.
4. Challenge misinformation: Speak out when laws or rulings are used to justify discrimination.
5. Embed inclusion into procurement and planning: No new buildings should open without accessible, gender-neutral toilets.
6. Protect people’s right to exist in public space, without fear, scrutiny, or compromise on their dignity.

Conclusion: Public Spaces Reflect Public Values

When access to something as fundamental as a toilet becomes a battleground, it reveals how fragile inclusion really is. We must stop asking marginalised groups to compromise with crumbs and start demanding structural change that reflects the values of equity, dignity, and justice.

Exclusion is not neutral. Intersectionality is not optional. And dignity is not up for debate.