GLP are suing Virgin Active

The SC ruled that the individual remains of the same sex that they always were.

With the fox-bludgeoner at the helm, fixated on his own personal crusade no matter what the law says? No time soon, I wouldn't have thought.

OP did you give a damn when Virgin let TW in the women's changing rooms ? Or is it only men's feelings you care about ?

When are GLP going to launch a case they actually have a chance of winning?

The Supreme Court dealt with gender reassignment and GRCs in its decision;

The ruling was that the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 (the Act) should be interpreted as ‘biological’ sex only. This means that, for the purposes of the Act, a person’s legal sex is the one that was recorded at their birth. According to the ruling, obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) does not change your legal sex for Equality Act purposes.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/our-work/uk-supreme-court-ruling-meaning-sex-equality-act-our-work

from a legal perspective the VA are relying on the EQA, lawful discrimination on the grounds of sex, (schedule 3)

the question as to wether services have a duty to provide third/fourth fifth or whatever provisions for persons not wishing to use the service that aligns with their biological sex has not been tested.

At first instance an application would need to be made to the County Court.

This must be done within 6 months of the act of alleged discrimination, which was in August 2025 i do believe.

At first glance i thought It would be a pretty bold move by the GLP, but as someone said up thread a good grift as the case could drag on for years through the courts up to the Supreme Court.

but it is actually a good question that needs answering.

Should service providers be compelled to have gender neutral facilities?

obviously that would have severe cost implications for businesses.

And then we have the government sitting on the very same question.

Whether they are comfortable or not is irrelevant.
How they see themselves is irrelevant.
The only relevant thing is that they are male

No, I don’t ‘see’ them that way, they just are that way - they’re men. End of.

‘but they don’t feel that way’ Ok, but when it comes to men in women’s spaces so what how these men feel? They can feel how they like. The material reality is that they are biological males, and the law says they stay out of women only spaces.

‘why would you expect them to feel comfortable sharing with men?’ I don’t care about how they feel about sharing with other men, not my issue, not my problem to fix. What 100% isn’t the solution is for them to break the law and use women’s spaces.

Women are supposed to be kind and caring and fling the doors open to men? Doors that we fought to keep closed for the reasons that everybody knows & understands.

I cannot say enough times that I do not care one iota about the feelings of a man who doesn’t want to use men’s facilities. His problem.

No the same argument cant be made as men in women's single sex spaces are a danger to women and a violation of our right to dignity and privacy.
Wheras men however they identify in men single sex spaces is not a threat to safety nor a violation of their right to privacy or dignity (nobody has a right to hide their sex and being made to use the correct sexed space is not undignified before you try that bs line)
The legal position has not changed the lies that stonewall and the TRAs pushed for years have mearly been proven to be lies, if people chose to listen to stonewall rather than actually reading the law and based decision around their misrepresentation and their own failures to do due diligence then tough luck

First off humans can not acquire a sex
• females remain female
• males remain male

Why should there be an obligation on a service provider to add an extra mixed changing area when the service provider has a female and male area?

Can you explain what added dignity a male user gains if he rejects the male provision and demands to have access to an area which is to used by both females and males?

Can you explain what added dignity a female user gains if she rejects the female provision and demands to have access to an area which is to used by both males and females?

Why should I be expected to feel comfortable undressing in front of strange men. I don’t care how they identify. I have a right to single sex spaces, occupied only by natal females.

Out of interest, what toilet facilities do you think trans identified men and trans identified women should use?

As a transman, my biggest concern would be that I might temporarily scare some women into thinking a man has come in. Other than that, I'd honestly feel much safer among the women than among the men.

I actually agree that the GRA is a bit of a pig's ear, and from memory it does talk about 'acquired sex'. It certainly includes enough exemptions to make it clear that people can't actually change sex, and the Supreme Court reached the conclusion that the PC of sex refers to biological sex. If it didn't, the PC of sex would evaporate.

Legislation often uses sex and gender interchangeably because until recently people used those words interchangeably. However, the more you push at the idea that people can actually change sex, the more you risk pushing over the house of cards that led to the GRA.

My solution is repeal the GRA

What’s your solution?

Umm…. Because males with a trans identity are men. If they’re uncomfortable using men’s facilities, that’s on them to deal with.

Surely we need to go back to basics and remember what the purpose of having single sex changing rooms is?! It’s not just about feelings and changing with people you identify with it’s about physical safety. There’s no evidence that I know of that trans identified men are at any great risk when using male facilities. However, there’s plenty of evidence that women are in real physical danger when men are allowed into enclosed spaces with them where they’re in a state of undress.

Of course everyone experiences discomfort sometimes, I don’t particularly like open changing rooms even when it’s only females in there. But I’m at a much lower risk of actual danger when there’s only women allowed and I’m allowed to call out any men entering the space without fear that they’re “actually a woman”.

I think you can put forward that argument, but it's odd that this isn't the argument the GLP is making.

In my VA you can access the pool sauna and jacuzzi through the unisex family changing area which is now relabelled as inclusive changing. But there are 2 steam rooms - one in men’s and one in women’s changing and women do use topless witn just a towel so not sure how that would work??

If trans people are not allowed to use the spaces of their acquired sex

They don't acquire a sex. That's not a thing.
They change gender identity.

And single-sex spaces are gender-neutral.

Because you can be female and any gender, or male and any gender.

I don’t see how a trans man or woman would feel comfortable sharing a space with someone of their sex when they’ve going to such lengths because that don’t identify that way

If a trans person who believes gender trumps sex shares a space with someone of their own sex, it would be hypocritical, and possibly transphobic, of them to assume the other people were a man or woman because of which sex they are.

It really doesn't matter if some men claim to "feel like" women, that Umwelt is entirely closed to them for the simple & inescapable reason that they are men.
The strongest claim a trans-identified male can make with any degree of honesty is, "I feel like a man who pretends to be a woman".