GLP are suing Virgin Active

What lengths? There is no requirement to go to any lengths. Are you not familiar with the law on this matter?

Why do you think it's women's duty to worry about the "comfort" of men with identity problems? Why do you think such males matter more than the dignity, privacy & safety of female gym-goers? No point defaulting to "I don't mind", your consent is not transferrable,
They're male, whatever they or their falsified bureaucratic markers say. They belong in the male facilities. They forced their way into female spaces via emotional manipulation & lies about the law, now they're rightly being removed from places where they should never have tried to impose themselves.

I think you're confusing sex and gender still.
To a genderist, the male changing room will have male people, who may "really" be women inside due to their gender identity.
Both changing rooms are for men and women. One is for male men and women and one is for female men and women. The genderists believe sex is irrelevant and gender id is what determines where you're a man or a woman. They have made this very clear. Therefore, if they're genuine in their claims, then there will be no reason not to go in the changing room for their sex, because it is for both men and women (gender).

It would be absurd for these men to claim they should be allowed to change in the women's changing rooms because they identify as a 7 year old but if they claim to be a woman then somehow that's fine 🤷‍♀️

The law is not 'men can be excluded from a women's changing room unless the man wants to use the women's changing room'. That would make no sense.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

Single sex services are permitted where:

• only people of that sex require it;
• there is joint provision for both sexes but that is not sufficient on its own;
• if the service were provided for men and women jointly, it would not be as effective and it is not reasonably practicable to provide separate services for each sex;
• they are provided in a hospital or other place where users need special attention (or in parts of such an establishment);
• they may be used by more than one person and a woman might object to the presence of a man (or vice versa); or
• they may involve physical contact between a user and someone else and that other person may reasonably object if the user is of the opposite sex.

As you can see from the legislation, it is lawful to exclude a man from a women's changing room.

The legislation clearly takes into account the perspective of the woman objecting to the presence of a man.

Like those drag queens at the Not All Gays event who ignored the mixed sex facilities and went in the women's instead.

Edit: I don't actually know if they were drag queens, or some other kind of trans-identifying males, just that they were men and they looked like drag queens!

No its not discrimination. Nowhere in any law does it say men with special identities cant be told to use the men's because they may be uncomfortable or that they must have special facilities to prevent discomfort.
The law says that they are men and should access the male single sex facilities.
The law does not recognise non binary identities.
Thr law does say that mixed sex facilities can be offered as an extra but does not mandate them

It’s not our job to make them feel comfortable.
It’s been well proven that facilities provided especially for trans women are not what they actually want. They want access to women’s spaces.

It sounds like lawful discrimination on the basis of sex.

No! Stonewall misrepresented the legal situation and got ahead of themselves and advised everyone else that their desired option was already the case.

No, it is a fairly decent size room with a shower, toilet and a load of lockers. It could be used by more than one person at a time.

I assume it's a single, self-contained cubicle? Given the tiny percentage of trans people this does seem like a possible solution, although obviously it's not ideal that disabled people would have longer wait times.

Maybe they need to retain a dedicated cubicle with a keycode for disabled members, and build a second "whatever" cubicle for everyone else (the trans, shy, non-binary) that can't use the changing rooms for their sex.

So you think that their wish to feel comfortable overrides women's wishes to feel comfortable?

Why?

It is not all about the individual and their personal feelings though. Public spaces, services and so on are often arranged according to common and consensual methods of categorisation, rules and boundaries which respect broad groupings.

Regardless of how someone feels about themselves, the material reality is that transwomen are a subset of men.

I'm interested as to why you think the desire of TW to use female only spaces trumps the desire of women to retain a single sex space for privacy, dignity and in line with the law

It is vanishingly unlikely that thse trans-identifying males are new to men's facilities; they will have had plenty of experience of them already. Unless they went in the loos/changing rooms with their mums, up to age 8, and then continued to impose themselves on non-consenting women and girls by using the women's ever after, it's not new territory for them.

No its not discrimination.
These members will be able to access the pool etc through the changing room of their biological sex. The fact that these people dont want to use the correct sex facilities is irrelevant, the ability is there, if they chose not to take advantage of it because its not gender affirming or giving them the ability to change with the opposite sex then its tough luck, as other people have rights too.

People who declare trans identities are othering themselves. Making an exception of themselves from what amounts to common, universal methods of categorisation and recognition.

We all know when a male person is in our presence in a female only space, and they know it too...which is why it is so incongruent and uncomfortable.

Let’s not forget that legal situation was different when most people transitioned.

Was it? Because the Supreme Court didn't make any new laws. It just clarified and confirmed that the meaning of 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010, and in legislation prior to that, was always biological sex.

Let’s not forget that legal situation was different when most people transitioned.

Sorry, but that's wrong. As the Supreme Court clarified in its judgment last April, the legal position has always been that single-sex spaces, services and sports are allowed and are based on sex, not gender identity. Sadly, thanks to Stonewall's hard work, far too many employers and service providers came to believe what you just stated, but they were always wrong.

it's not a question of seeing them like that. They ARE men. They are biologically male, not female. That matters.

Each individual adult in our society has a responsibility to manage and regulate their own emotions. That's not something that can be outsourced to others. Anybody who's struggling with their feelings or sense of identity would probably benefit from psychotherapy.

If I am in what should be a Woman Only Space and a man enters I am on notice by his choice that he has no respect for the social contract nor UK law so my "comfort level" is never going to be a relevant factor in his choice to transgress.

And men have never had lawful right to access womens spaces in the UK the hint is in the word womans space.

they don’t feel that way so why would you expect them to feel comfortable sharing with men?

Why would you expect women to feel comfortable sharing with men?