We're so far down the rabbit hole I can't tell if this sticker is real or fake...

Realistically, it's "men who say they feel like women", not "men who feel like...".

No way to know what their actual feelings are - they may honestly think they "feel like a woman" (whatever the hell that means though), but they could just as easily "feel very sexually excited when using female facilities and being allowed to get undressed around actual women and girls, and watch them undress" but have just learned that the magic words they need to say to get this are "well, I've always felt like a woman inside".

All we - or David Lloyd, or anyone else with policies like this - have to go on is words that men say.

The 'female' bit was the whole movement taking it past the point of rationality though. That was the hand overplayed.

"I am a male self identified woman (with a lot of wangling about the social context of woman" .... yeah, generously, I may stretch a point and be kind about that. I was for years.

"I am a male female"

No. Let's not be silly.

Rule 3 of the rules of misogyny

1. Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish.

https://4w.pub/the-rules-of-misogyny/

The problem is that women referring to themselves is inherently offensive to some (misogynistic) people. Changing which words we use to refer to women can't solve the problem when the 'problem' is that we shouldn't be allowed to refer to ourselves, or be recognised as a type of human being that happen to have their sex in common.

So replacing women with 'female' only leads to them claiming female as an identity word too. 'biological women', 'natal women' etc. they passionately object whatever words are used

What is wrong with it is that it jars someone's preferred reality.

Why that is in any way your problem, I don't know.

There's nothing wrong with it.

It shouldn't' be necessary, though - 'man / men' used to mean adult human male, and still should.

But because some people insist that 'man / men' means any and all humans who call themselves men (see also 'woman / women'), for clarity we have to specify what kind of man (new usage) and say 'biological man / men'.

Eh? What's wrong with "biological man"? Jeez, I'm old.

Women pointing out that men are taking the piss is 'hate' is it?

No love. Women saying no to men and pointing out their abhorrent behaviour towards women is not 'hate'. I think you could argue that men invading women's spaces and excluding women from them is a bit 'hateful' though. Don't you think?

I mean compare 'hearing no' or 'seeing a summary of my behaviour that I don't like because it's not all fluffy and disguised' compared to 'lost use of any public facility'. It's not up to women to protect men's feelings while being abused by them. Get a grip.

Here we go
... yes its hateful to not want men in their dead mothers knickers using toilets and changing rooms with actual women and children

I agree. I'll remove the quotes!

Makes it more .... WTF!!

I think I'd take out the quote marks, as they are look sarcastic.
Women, girls, and males who identify as women.
Just stating the policy clearly and factually should be the aim.

Interesting that @DadJoke has come along to tell us off. Obviously the TRA side can threaten actual violence to women and that's fine, but we can't even express sarcasm lest we offend them.

So we will simply make sure we inform the general public of the facts.

And if merely stating the policy is "hate-mongering" then perhaps @DadJoke needs to have a little think about why the public might hate the policy, and why they think it's ok to make these changes without informing people.

Well the disabled toilet queue must be long in that case.

It’s transparent GC hate-mongering.

I agree @AdultLounge if GC Mners start doing this in gyms, shopping centre loos etc and base the language on the policies of the venues it really shines a light on the reality of the policies and gets people thinking. Also it is a little difficult for venues to wriggle out of given that it is their policy!!

@ProtectAndTerf

It was a joke, but I've been seriously thinking about it all morning!

Even checked to see how many David Lloyds there are in the UK - 130.

Print out and laminate an A5 poster with DL logo and say something like.

"Just a reminder as per our policy, this changing room is for women, girls and men who "feel like a woman".

If seeing a naked man makes you or your daughters uncomfortable please feel free to use the disabled toilets.

Please be kind."

Then a excerpt of their actual policy.

Would love to have 130 mumsnetters to stick them on the back of toilet doors in the same week.

The Daily Mail would love it!

David Lloyds wouldn't be able to back down quick enough.

I think it's brilliant. Absolute genius.

Whether written by someone who was asked to make a sign and doesn't agree with the policy, or (more likely IMO) someone who is aware of the policy and sneaked in a formal looking sign to spell out the reality, it's such a good idea.

We should do more of these, wherever we have receipts for it being the official policy of the place.

What is brilliant about it is that it spells out simply what is going on, without using piss-taking language. I know @AdultLounge was probably joking with her example sign, but anything referencing lady cock or "feeling like..." is too far. The power is in the subtlety, the bald facts stated politely.

We need to make this a thing!

I think it's real (both the sign and the policy) as someone above says it checks out as a shopping centre in Bedford that has just had a fancy refurbishment. I suspect women were complaining at the fact that they had unexpectedly encountered a man in the ladies loos and complained thinking that something would be done about it.

The 'compromise' has (I suspect) been that if that's what the policy is you should tell women that that is what the policy is. 'Our side' wouldn't approve of the policy 'their side' wouldn't approve of the language some poor shopping centre employee stuck in the middle getting an earful from unhappy women trying to defend a policy that is fundamentally indefensible has gone ahead and made these.

Sounds like a piss-take. I hope!

So the sticker is an accurate summary of the centre's official policy, provable from written sources.

I agree, it must be this. Most people won't read a full policy, so whoever's done it has lifted the relevant part (or part of an email response) and publicised it for all women and girls using those toilets.

Would love to know what happens next.

I suspect someone has receipts.

For instance, an email sent to the centre asking about its policy on transgender people in the toilets, a reply welcoming those who identify as female into the women's loos, a query about women and girls who are uncomfortable with this, a reply saying they should use the disabled toilet.

So the sticker is an accurate summary of the centre's official policy, provable from written sources.

It is parody/call to action if it is inside the cubicle door.

If it's fake and intended to get women complaining, I think it needs to be a bit more obvious. I agree the language isn't on point for gender identity ideology, but it could easily be taken as a company with incomplete understanding doing their best to follow what they think are the new rules without being on top of the approved-of terminology.

I think the clue is in the word self-identify. This person is warning women and girls to get out of those bathrooms if they feel uncomfortable. I think they are on our side.

Perfect!

I want to make some for the David Lloyd changing room!!!

These changing rooms are for women and girls as well as biological men who "feel like a woman" and want to display their lady cocks to your daughters.

It's actually a bloody brilliant sticker for StickerWomen to use as inspiration for future sticker campaigns - parodies of the policies of various places (and possibly may stay in situ for longer if they have the relevant logo on).