While I fully agree with who cares.

On an entirely logical basis. The existence of unisex toilets is not an arguement against others interpretation. It's entirely a labelling issue. Most homes have unisex toilets as well. No oneusing them has any expectations of gender use.

While those arguing against trans use. Logically (although not morraly or scientifically) have an argument that the room is labelled to limit sex if not gender.

Personally I think all public toilets should be unisex. It has multiple advantages.

1. cubical provide privacy. And in a world where sexual orientation is accepted. Considering privacy an entirely gender related issue is overtly Victorian as an idealism.

2. Ignoring the lack of evidence of men possing as trans to attack women in a single sex bathroom. Such a threat if it existed would only be unique to such areas due to the lack of expectations of male use. Having both sexes expecting to use the room. And to provide each other with privacy and respect. would provide normal public oversight on any activities.

3. All gender users should be more likely to have a desire to show an attitude of minimal cleanliness. The use and abuse of single sex public bathrooms, both male and female. Seems to be a unique behaivior invoked when people do not expect to be judged by the opposite sex.

Yeah, the first couple times I felt confused/surprised, but these bathrooms are so much better - the ones I've been in have had the most excellent stalls.

Exactly this. The job of parliament is to maintain and update laws as society understanding changes.

Refusing to address an issue because a tiny paranoid section of society is scared with zero evidence of the risk they fear. Is just refusing to do that job.

But (and ,oat know this but it needs pointing out.) younger people not voting allows politicians to delay addressing issues. Hence why so many laws have taken so long to change.