Michigan court concludes that trans women are NOT women

It annoyed the writer that the court persisted in using the phrase "men who self identified as women" and did not mention transgender once.

Good news

Again with the “assigned male at birth” shite.

There was another case where a judge ruled that it is legal to exclude trans women, where you would expect a space or service to be women only.

''In a final order filed last week, a judge wrote that in most circumstances — say, if Love had been denied a seat at a restaurant, a room at a hotel or an opportunity at her place of employment — her case could have merit.
But adding sex to the equation changes things, according to the judge.''

eu.pnj.com/story/news/2018/06/19/transgender-pensacola-woman-loses-discrimination-suit/711052002/

It's the obfuscation and lack of consent that is problematic.

Agreed.

This is good news. I expect to see similar court cases here.

I agree that businesses should behave in whatever way they think best WRT single sex facilities. So long as their policies are completely clear to consumers. 'Unisex' or 'single sex' will suffice. It's the obfuscation and lack of consent that is problematic.

Unfortunately they still used that phrase 'assigned biologically male'.
No one is 'assigned' male or female. They just are.

In other words, the court agreed with Cormier’s perspective that transgender women are notwomen and that she never should have been expected to understand that a locker room for women would include transgender women.

Yes, that's right Zack, well done. When you stop obfuscating and use a term like "men who self identify as women" the issue becomes perfectly clear. Language matters.

Excellent news!

Penis or no penis though? Can't get on board with that. Men and women works just fine.

Gyms in the USA will also be awake to the possibility of being sued by women, irate (etc) at finding male members in the women's changing rooms.

Money talks.

God no, Squirrel. That’s far too much in the vein of Men and Not Men. Just let’s stick with the knowledge that if there’s a penis about, it’s attached to a man.

Finally, good sense prevails! Let's hope this is the beginning of the end for this crap.

It would all be so much clearer if rooms were labelled Penis and No Penis, rather than men and women (although that in itself is pandering to the TWAW crowd).

Girl guides is a separate issue although I am not disagreeing with your point.

This is about paid for services (there is an argument GG fall into this category but this isn't what I am really talking about).

Gyms will have to advertise what they are doing. They will have to put up notices. If they decide to allow or disallow - either way they will have to make their position very clear or they run the deception/misleading risk as has occurred in the USA case above. Because the service offered in the original contract would have materially changed. If self id is introduced they will need to make this clear for all service users, whether they are trans or not. It would have to be overt otherwise mayhem will ensue.

This for them could mean big losses. Annual contracts will be null and void as the original terms have changed.

I would expect that women only gyms will see a surge in clientele as these will be the only ones that could probably maintain a proportionate exclusion. Others will struggle a bit more to justify it.

Great news

If you, as a business, firmly believe that TWAW and can use the women's changing rooms, then pin your colours to the mast and let everyone know that is your position. Let customers decide whether to use the business or not.

Don't obfuscate the issue

Girl Guides - are you listening yet?

There is a women only gym near me. Looking at their website and social media it caters for women of all ages but it appears to be particularly popular with the over 50's and Muslim women (we have a sizeable Muslim population).

They have a photo of their changing room. It's a small room with benches and lockers. No cubicles as far as I can tell. Being forced to admit members based on gender identity would probably shut this business within 12 months or less.

By not disclosing that it was taking the opposite position — respecting transgender people according to their gender identity — Planet Fitness was “failing to reveal a material fact” in an attempt to “mislead or deceive the consumer,

This is something that Girl Guides should be held accountable for as well. Their policy is to deliberately withhold material facts from parents when it comes to camps/sleepovers/washing & toilet facilities.

And this is where women have the stronger hand.

Because I have read on here about 500,000 trans people across the UK? Apols if wrong.

There are around 34 million women. Gyms that won't offer the 34 million what they want will cease to exist. The majority of business won't take that risk. Some will, depending on their target market, but it will be small numbers.

Yes but even buried in contract small print all it takes is one issue at that establishment and that gym will lose customers. Some will be more affected than others e.g women only gyms. That is their usp and will undermine their entire business model.

Thank goodness for common sense.

To change that will mean a new contract and potential loss of business if that business chooses not to retain single sex spaces.

Exactly. Let's find out exactly how many women (and men), will willingly sign up to a changing room that they know is mixed sex.

And then let's see what a 'legitimate aim,' suddenly looks like.

Maybe we should all ask our gyms what their policies are if we haven't already done so.

'Pretending that swapping your gender identity means that your sex is irrelevant, is basic gaslighting.'

Absolutely right, and now it seems a court agrees. Fantastic news. More of this please