The furious reaction to the EHRC’s guidance reveals a movement unable to accept legal and biological reality.
By: Andrew Doyle
Published: May 22, 2026
Schadenfreude is the most ignoble of instincts. The English are so ashamed of it that they have left it to the Germans to invent the term. It is of course a perfectly natural impulse, albeit one that we should strive to curb. But who doesn’t feel that warm interior glow when our enemies finally get their comeuppance?
If we’re honest, plenty of us are feeling this way following the publication this week of guidance by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on single-sex spaces. The meltdowns from those who have consistently attempted to obliterate women’s rights have been predictably melodramatic. The collision with reality has left them smarting, and justifiably so.
‘In a world’s first,’ wrote one activist on X, ‘the United Kingdom moves to make it illegal for trans women to pee. Welcome to 2026 where laws discriminating against and segregating minorities are now commonplace again.’ We have grown accustomed to the trans lobby indulging in fantasies of their own oppression, but the extent of the hysteria is still difficult to fathom coming from grown adults.
Over on Bluesky, that toxic haven for bigots and bedlamites, the wailing has been deafening. The violent activist group Bash Back has vowed ‘further mass resistance’. Professional troll India Willoughby has called it ‘trans apartheid’ and asserted that he intends to continue breaking the law. Others have compared it to the era of Jim Crow, or taken it as further evidence of ‘trans genocide’.
The infantilism of activist culture has prevented many from calmly accepting the law. Trans-identified people have precisely the same rights as everyone else, and nothing about this guidance has changed that. We need to ask serious questions about what has happened to our society. How is it that a sizable minority now believe that human beings can change sex, and that this pseudo-religious belief ought to supersede women’s rights in law?
Much of the blame has to lie with groups such as Stonewall that have misrepresented the law to public bodies and businesses. For years, campaigners have insisted that men who identify as women must be allowed to use toilets and changing facilities of the opposite sex. Since last April’s Supreme Court ruling clarified that this is not legal, activists have nevertheless continued to deny it. The collective meltdown we are now seeing is the result of this misinformation. If activists wish to direct their ire anywhere, it should be towards those who have lied to them and claimed that they have a special privilege to override women’s rights.
Bridget Phillipson, the Minister for Women and Equalities, has hardly helped matters. The guidance from the EHRC has been languishing on her desk since last September, while companies have claimed to be too ‘confused’ to implement its directives. This is disingenuous, of course, since the Supreme Court ruling could not have been clearer. But it just goes to show how adherents to genderism are committed to living in their own make-believe world.
The hysteria is completely unnecessary, given that the guidance explicitly states that trans-identified people should be offered a space of their own to change or use toilet facilities wherever possible. The EHRC has simply reminded service providers that single-sex spaces cannot exist where both men and women are permitted entry. This should not be difficult to grasp.
The tantrums we have seen over this basic restatement of the law suggest that, for some, it will be difficult to restore any semblance of sanity. Following the example of Stonewall, many people are determined to cling to the view that defending women’s rights is inherently ‘transphobic’. Civil disagreement is always preferable, but meaningful debate becomes impossible when one side insists on treating ordinary legal boundaries as expressions of hatred.
==
It will be hilarious to see hulking 6ft tall Colin "Katy" Montgomerie get arrested.
OMGGGG it's so crazy that you can communicate with a wild hyena to get their thoughts and feelings on gender...is that a radfem specific delusion, or do you have bonus ones?
You realize this also applies to you and your crazy thoughts that a hyena would identity as non binary somehow because you decided that a muscular female isn't a female. Like, you do realize how stupid you sound right? How do /you/ know a hyenas "thoughts on gender". You don't. Y'all just love making your fave things agree with everything you think and believe because it's impossible for you to tolerate someone not believing your specific dogma. It's in the same vein as people making their favorite blorbos regurgitate "twaw" even if they'd have 0 idea what the hell that is or care.
Gender is a man-made social construct, why in the world would animals know what the fuck it is. And even if they did, why do you project that they'd have the exact same modern human interpretation of gender and transgenderism?
A woman with an enlarged clitoris is still a woman.
A woman with ambiguous genitalia is still a woman.
A man who is infertile is not a woman. A man with no beard is not a woman. A man with a micro penis is not a woman. A man with internal tests is not a woman. A man with low testosterone is not a woman.
Biological sex is binary, but people are not, and tryibg to make them enter boxes too rigid for them is harmful. But pretending someone is less of a man or woman because they have sex variations is harmful too.
The guidance was published on Thursday following the landmark Supreme Court ruling last year.
By: Alison Holt and Nick Triggle
Published: May 21, 2026
Single-sex spaces - such as changing rooms and toilets - must be used on the basis of biological sex, new guidance from the equalities watchdog has confirmed.
This means, for instance, that a trans woman - a biological male who identifies as a woman - should not use female toilets or changing rooms, according to the code of practice.
The guidance, produced by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and now approved by ministers, makes it clear that transgender people should instead be offered a third or a gender-neutral space.
The code states that leaving a trans person without access to any services or facilities would be unlikely to be proportionate and could be discriminatory.
The guidance was published on Thursday following the landmark Supreme Court ruling last year that the definition of a woman under the Equality Act should be based on biological sex.
The code of practice sets out how associations, businesses and services open to the public should organise their facilities. It covers a wide range of settings from shopping centres and gyms to hospitals and restaurants.
Women and Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson said the aim was to allow people to live free from discrimination and harassment.
"Our focus has always been making sure organisations have clear, accessible guidance on how to implement the law," she said.
Within the guidance, it was recommended that gender neutral toilets or changing rooms should have self-contained lockable areas with floor-to-ceiling walls and wash basins.
The watchdog said it did not think the requirements would be too onerous as services could decide to let trans people use toilets for disabled people, for example.
The EHRC also said if a service just had two toilets - one for men and one for women - they could be changed into unisex facilities.
With the guidance now before parliament, MPs and peers have 40 days to raise any concerns. If there are no objections, the guidance becomes statutory.
The guidance, which is more than 300 pages long, was first sent to the government in September 2025.
The EHRC said it expected ministers to spend six weeks examining it before either asking for revisions or placing it before parliament.
Instead, the government said it would deal with the issue "thoroughly and carefully", and took eight months to release the guidance.
EHRC chair Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson said she hoped people would read the code with an "open mind".
"I think we do need to broaden out the debates, and we need to start from a point of saying, how do we make sure that everyone has access to the services they need, and that will be different things for different people," she said.
At the Watershed arts cinema in Bristol, chief executive Clare Reddington said they pride themselves on being inclusive.
She said it had taken too long for the guidance to be published which has led to confusion and misinformation.
Reddington described the impact on trans people as "toxic", and said they had been waiting to hear what the guidance meant "for their ability to live a full public life".
The Watershed has gender neutral toilets, which won a Loo of the Year award in 2024.
The brightly coloured cubicles have floor-to-ceiling doors, and some have sinks inside. They also have separate male and female toilets.
"I would say that designing toilets for everyone is great for business," Reddington said.
'Fewer rights'
Maya Forstater, of Sex Matters, a gender-critical women's rights group, said: "Finally, there are no more excuses for the many public and private sector organisations that said they were 'waiting for guidance' before fixing their unlawful policies.
"The government's long delay in placing the updated code of practice before Parliament was seized on as cover by organisations that preferred to break the law than enrage trans lobby groups.
"The new guidance is long and detailed, but at its heart is a simple principle: 'sex' means what it says – male and female. What people call themselves and how they dress doesn't change their sex.
"Any business, charity or public service provider that took a wrong turn and started letting men who identify as women use women's spaces or vice versa must now urgently fix its policies."
But a spokesperson for TransActual, a trans rights campaign group, said the guidance left trans people with fewer rights.
"Not only does this new guidance fail to protect the rights and dignity of transgender people, but appears to have weakened protections for the LGBT community as a whole," they said.
"TransActual will continue to fight for equal access to public life for all trans people, and will publish our full thoughts on the new code once we have had the time to properly scrutinise it."
Joanne Moseley, of Irwin Mitchell Solicitors, said she is being regularly asked to provide advice to business and services on what they need to do.
She believes that good signage and, where appropriate, ensuring that a gender-neutral space is available are important.
She said some businesses and employers made changes to their facilities immediately after the Supreme Court judgement, but others are putting off doing anything until the EHRC guidance comes into force.
However, she warned the guidance was not "a silver bullet" and that if someone made a claim of discrimination against an organisation it was not a defence to say "we're waiting for the guidance".
––
Sophie Raworth: Long-awaited guidance on single-sex spaces in Britain has confirmed that a service, such as a public toilet or a changing room, must be used on the basis of biological sex. The code published by the Equalities Watchdog has been written after the Supreme Court ruling last year which said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex. Alison Holt reports.
Alison Holt: Public toilets and changing rooms, vital for many people's busy lives, are now an everyday battleground for what is meant by a single-sex space under equality law.
Today, after eight months of waiting, the government has published guidance which aims to help service providers and associations navigate what that means for transgender people.
Mary-Ann Stephenson: If you are providing a single-sex space, that has to be on the basis of biological sex. But what we've also said in our code is that you need to make sure that that doesn't leave trans people without services that they can use.
Holt: The guidance has been updated following last year's Supreme Court ruling that in the 2010 Equality Act, the term sex refers to biological sex, not gender. It says in practical terms that means, for instance, a trans woman, a biological male who identifies as a woman, shouldn't use women-only spaces or services.
But the 300-page long guidance, which covers England, Scotland, and Wales, also says to avoid discriminating against a transgender person, a third or gender-neutral space should be offered. Campaigners who won last year's Supreme Court clarification on biological sex say this guidance is important.
Maya Forstater: I'm sure that lots of organisations that have held on to their previous policies have been breaching the law, and that there really is no reason to delay, and that includes both employers and service providers. This code is about service provision, but lots of employers have been holding on to their old policies and using it as an excuse.
Holt: But trans rights campaigners say it is marginalizing trans people who just want to get on with their lives.
"Blake": It's going to have an impact on my day-to-day life and my ability to participate in activities with friends, in sports centers, having to check restaurants, places, bars, pubs, anywhere I go to see if there's facilities I can use. It simply means I can't use the spaces where I feel the most comfortable.
Clare Reddington: We opened up these new inclusive toilets just after COVID…
Holt: At the Watershed Arts Cinema in Bristol, they already have toilets everyone can use.
Reddington: So for this, it means that we have floor-to-ceiling cubicles, so you can really have a moment of privacy within them.
Holt: They pride themselves on being inclusive for trans people, but the chief executive says the long wait for guidance has been confusing, toxic, and any changes needed will be costly for some organisations.
Reddington: Whether you're a charity or whether you're an arts organisation like us, there hasn't been really clear guidance on what to do. And of course, really, the law hasn't changed for people like us, but the level of confusion has been really dangerous.
Holt: The government describes the code as practical and proportionate. There's separate guidance for schools. Alison Holt, BBC news
