80 year old woman banned from pool for standing up for little girls

@Didimum sorry if my last post was a tad unpleasant in tone.

I agree the legal v moral argument is separate.

As to conflation of incidents - that's not how the laws are written though, are they? They cover the worst case scenarios.

That scenario would be a naked male with full erection, staring or not (hard to prove the latter, v few cases go to prosecution in UK based on the clause you mentioned), legally allowed in all and any space previously provided ONLY for females.

So do we want these same laws here? I'd say no, but that's just my opinion.

The endgame of transactivism is men's sexual rights. There are men who are enjoying telling women that they can walk in on us when we are naked and there is nothing we can do about it, even if they don't intend to do it themselves. They know the threat alone has power. These men have been waiting for a way to crush women out of public and political space for decades, and trans ideology has handed it to them.

Luckily, in UK, you can come complain to the service provider and quote latest EHRC guidance.

However, until statutory EHRC guidance (under review I believe) is published, and/or the Equality Act is strengthened, you may not force those service providers to ensure single-sex provision without the court case (see posts by IamSarah for an egregious example).

And your assertions on my "knowledge" and comments being "pointless", are your opinion – not fact. I already said I was unfamiliar with the Wi Spa incident, that I would read into it, but that I would not conflate it with this thread. And yes, I support any claims and legal/moral judgements to be incident-specific and not conflated with unrelated incidents.

Who knew it was a competition? I thought it was a conversation…

@Didimum Well, nobody's saying what you should or should not be arguing or debating, that's your choice.

The scenario I described was not hypothetical, but based on Wi Spa incident in LA (although the erection was described as 'partial'). Your lack of knowledge is your issue.

Many women on this board, however, appreciate that in this country we're not in the same position, although trans rights organisations would like us to be.

Your comments on this thread are incredibly incident-specific and pointless. There were no laws broken, no safety issues to report, but it is morally indefensible. You're trying to wriggle around that.

The laws apply to all, and the discussion is about what should be happening here, legally and morally.

Please feel free to not engage further, if you're not prepared to discuss wider issues raised by this incident and/or lack knowledge to do so.

Clementine is definitely and very obviously a man

if you are in a women’s changing rooms and Clementine joins you, it is completely legitimate to challenge them. I can’t tell by looking at a man how he identifies. I’d ask any man why he was in the women’s changing rooms

unless anyone can explain a fool proof method for identifying men who are trying it on and fancy intimidating some women (as happened to me recently in Waterloo station public loos), versus men who sincerely believe themselves to be women, what am I to do?

'No nudity'

So what was he doing in the changing room? If he was changing into a swimming costume or out of one then nudity would be involved. If he wasn't changing then we are left with a man in the female changing room doing nothing but watching young girls get changed.

Thank you for saying that. Respectfully, so as also not to be combative, I am not here to debate and defend proposed theoretical wrongdoings. Do those incidents exist? I'm sure they do – and I will comment on those specific threads if I choose to.

'Transition' means nothing at all. You cannot even ask someone if they identify as a women. So if you say TW can enter female changing rooms then ANY man can do so without making any changes to his appearance or clothes regardless of whether they identify as a TW or not. Hardly a barrier for paedophiles if they can walk through the door unchallenged?Not like training to be a teacher, entering a seminary or leading a scout group every week.

I am absolutely not arguing theoretical wrongdoings with you. There was not nudity, there was not an erection. I responded to this thread on the basis of a specific incident, and I've made it overwhelmingly clear that that is all I am talking about. I don't care if you think I should be debating or defending any other scenario you'd like to propose.

@Didimum *any evidence. And apologies, you don't have to provide the evidence, that was unnecessarily combative - just illustrating that that is a very male behaviour, and would not be typically something that happens in female changing rooms.

@Didimum I'll be extremely surprised if there's a single female who has ever been prosecuted for the 'intrusive staring of a sexual nature that causes harassment, alarm or distress' in UK, please find me an evidence of that, but I'm aware of that law, thanks.

So OK, if that male person was fully naked and with a full erection, but not staring, that would be just fine, nothing to see here, nothing to worry about, is that your proposal for UK?

I've read a fair few tales lately of transwomen who've felt perfectly entitled to question lesbians about their genitalia to ensure they're not accidentally attempting to cop off with a man - complete with a penis. Because, in that situation transwomen, apparently, AREN'T women enough.

I find it quite sick that biological males are so desperate to get into women and girls safe spaces.

Actually you can mandate for that. Intrusive staring of a sexual nature that causes harassment, alarm or distress is classed as a Public Order Offence in the UK. I don't know if US law covers that. Perhaps it should, and if it doesn't, then that's a failing of that state's lawmakers.

@Didimum 'Again, if she disagreed with the TW's presence in the area, that's to take up with the pool or whatever local council or authority there might be in the area which reviews policy. If she perceived wrongdoing/safety issue, then she should have reported it to the necessary authority. That is to protect her as well as any others.'

It's the law of the state, as clearly stated in the article.

There is nothing to report, no 'wrongdoing/safety issue'.

If you accept that males should be in women's spaces.

Do you accept that?

@Didimum If you allow males in, you cannot start mandating where they look, or whether they are fully naked, or the state of their arousal.

That male could have full erection, be naked, stare at the girls from respectful distance and be fully within the law, in that particular place.

Is this what should happen here too?

Anyone should report a safety concern whether the suspected individual has a 'right' to a space or not. The law may not be able to direct human gaze, but it can appropriately investigate claims that someone may be a harm or potential harm to others.

From this case and the Wi Spa incident we've seen that 'reporting the incident to someone in authority' is useless because men have been given the Orwellian right to pretend their way into women's spaces and any woman who does complain is trolled all over the internet as a right-wing bigot who deserves to be ostracised, sacked and prosecuted. The ideology has rendered women even more powerless. How do you complain about sexual predators when flashing and voyeurism is effectively legal?

So what?

If anyone is in a what is supposed to be a single sex facility where they should be able to expect to only be with people of their own sex above the 8, contortions to not expose themselves would be unnecessary.

And if a male was being expected to do this as well, well that is just a sign that they should not be in that space at all.

If a female is expected to do it to hide from male gaze, in a supposedly single sex space, then that is akin to victim blaming. It is like saying, well you were in there, if you didn’t cover up properly that is your own fault.

Same with my dad when I was little and we went swimming. He wouldn't have dreamed of taking me in the men's changing room.
Also think it's worthwhile to note that little girls are much more likely to be sexually abused than little boys. Even most paedophiles aren't indiscriminately targeting "children".

Again, if she disagreed with the TW's presence in the area, that's to take up with the pool or whatever local council or authority there might be in the area which reviews policy. If she perceived wrongdoing/safety issue, then she should have reported it to the necessary authority. That is to protect her as well as any others.