M&S changing rooms

Good on you OP, this has been an issue that has long put me off shopping in store at m&s.

The point is that many TW are self-id after committing crimes, including sex crimes, because they are predatory males. Many are also Autogynephiliac or fetishists. TM are unlikely to pose a threat to women - yes, I know there are cases of such, but they are very rare, unlike male violence against women.

I don't have the answers you're looking for but I do know that we will keep fighting. Women will not let this go.

How does it work then? The whole issue revolves around dignity of women

I’m not saying you should feel comfortable or think it’s justifiable. But that’s not the way ‘proportionate and justifiable’ works when applying it to an issue in court.

If there are cubicles that lock, TBH I don’t much care who might be in the next one. Cubicles with curtains are a different matter.

I can’t help wondering whether my David Lloyd has ever had an obviously trans woman trying to use the female locker room - where most women use the communal area to change in.
Preferring my privacy, I always use one of the (too few) cubicles.

But this is you coming at the issue from your own stance, or a certain group’s stance. That’s not real-world practice from other individuals coming at it from their stance. And the interpretation of the law, when held up in court, will indeed be grey and hazy, whether you agree with it or not. That may make plenty of people incensed, but it doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

if I am getting practically naked- eg getting changed into a bikini or a bra where I have to physically get my baps out, a flimsy curtain is not enough to make me feel comfortable if a biological man (however they present) was on the other side. A locked cubicle yes sure, but not a curtain that could be pulled back at any moment. I think of my 90 year old nanna and how uncomfortable and vulnerable she would feel.

I totally and utterly disagree.

The only time it would be acceptable is if there is no other option, i.e. the building is so small there is only one unisex facility.

Transwomen are men.

I think time will tell but companies will be ill advised not to offer a single sex option alongside unisex.

I can't see how it can ever be justified or proportionate not to offer a single sex space unless your business is so small it can only offer 1 mixed sex option.

Women who need single sex spaces for whatever reason should not be discriminated against in access to services.

The word woman, we now know, does not include men who identify as trans women for the purpose of provision of services which is governed by the Equality Act.

We agree then. Men should not be in female only spaces.

@lifeturnsonadime For example – if escalated to court, it very likely will not be ‘proportionate and justifiable’ to bar an individual transwoman from a space of curtained or doored cubicles because of the risk of them putting a camera between the partitions.

I’m not saying it is. I’m just laying out the likelihood of real world practice. Only time will tell and ‘likelihood’ can be relative.

You mean like Michelle Martinez (previously Miguel) who raped a 10 year old girl in a bathroom? Or Lexi-Rose Crawford who has been jailed for the SECOND time for a rape following a previous conviction of child sex abuse? Or Katie Dolakowki who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl in a toilet at Morrisons? ‘She’ also previously tried to film a 12 year old girl in the toilet at Asda. Or the teenager whose name escapes me who was harrassed and molested in a Sainsburys toilet by a transwoman? Want me to carry on?

Like fuck it doesn't happen.

Well this is interesting isn't it.

Men have 2 options depending on how they feel but women who need single sex spaces have none.

That's not proportionate and justifiable in a world where women matter.

I’m not saying it is. And I’m not saying not abiding by the rules is decent or good behaviour. I’m just saying in the vast majority of cases it’s not predatory. It’s just plain old entitlement to thinking your wants or needs exist above the law.

Thank you. I'm struggling to understand what's so difficult about that.

Absolutely any man who enters when he knows women might feel uncomfortable is a predator.

On first glance possibly, but unlikely.

On pictures, absolutely. Filters are amazing.

I don’t ever remember retailers having completely open plan changing rooms and not individual cubicles but there was still a male and female side. What was the point of the 2 sides originally?

I am definitely not a trans activist. However, I do think campaigns like this one don’t do other any favours.

Many retailers have unisex changing areas on the basis that there are individual cubicles. Whether there is a trans women or a biological man in the cubicle next door isn’t really relevant.

It’s hard to escape the feeling that some pro women’s rights campaigners are ideologically opposed to trans people existing at all rather than focused just on protecting female safety.

And if Marks and Spences take that course of action I think they can expect their customers to talk with their feet and not go there.

In the light of this judgement I would expect a company that cares about it's female customers to offer 3 options, female for women only, male and unisex.

That would be equality.

Anything else ignores the needs of female people.

Ok remove the word predatory. You asked how we keep men out of women's spaces. We mark them female only spaces. My husband wouldn't dream of entering a female only space. It's the same principle for all good and decent men. I'm really failing to understand why it needs to be the responsibility of women to police bad male behaviour.

It has to be proportionate and justifiable though, which is where in practice it will like all stop short.

I don’t need a list of classic ‘tells’. Again - breezing past people in busy places. Vast, vast majority of people won’t notice because they aren’t eyeing other people up. They are thinking about other things and just getting from A to B. There’s also a chasm between suspecting something and being sure of it. There’s a further chasm between being sure enough of something and reporting it. And yet another in that reporting escalating to action against. It’s simply not feasibly practical or likely.