That this transgender person..

[ClassSize2022]

Should not have been in the ladies changing room? Especially if naked from the waist down.

I can imagine being very frightened in this situation as a biological woman having to share a changing room with a man.

NHS transgender worker wins payout after boss asked about underwear

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e15f7c2-0779-11ed-a986-fc91b4ad48f0?shareToken=b22ada0c3a8e04d703e4eb229fb47802

transgender worker wins payout after boss asked about underwear www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e15f7c2-0779-11ed-a986-fc91b4ad48f0?shareToken=b22ada0c3a8e04d703e4eb229fb47802 Times article

Yes, but they did not use the said cubicle. That point was not adjudicated on as far as I can see but they lost on most of the points they were claiming apart from two, one was bullying and the other was discrimination as a manager apparently questioned them too much on the circumstances of their nakedness, because a natal woman would not have been so questioned.
Never mind that it would have been unlikely because natal women generally don't wander around naked from the waist down.
In fact as a very, very long time user of women's changing rooms etc I have never seen this particular behaviour. Total (brief) nudity, yes, and nudity above the waist, but just from the waist down? No.
When women undress most of us do it from the top down, and we get dressed from the bottom up. I.E. pants off last and on first.

the TW had been “naked from the waist down in the changing room” (note, not seen naked from the waist down, and no mention of a penis).

😂😂😂😂😂😂You realise this makes you just look completely unhinged right?

It is a shame that these discussions can't be had in a logical or intelligent way. Neither @Discovereads or myself have suggested anything of the sort and it is disingenuous to suggest that those are the views we have expressed.

I'm not. You've simply jumped to that conclusion yourself. It's quite a jump to make.

OK, so you do see why women would have a problem with alleged naked male bodies in their changing rooms? Because you didn't actually give that impression, so I think it was a reasonable conclusion for that poster, to be honest.

She agreed to refer her to OH, and attached a consent form, and she confirmed that she would support the Claimant remaining on 3
days per week for the time being but said that she wanted to discuss it with her the following week. She said that she would be starting an investigation into the changing room incident

this was said in the same email after she had agreed to give the TW the day off.

So again the TW was not given time off while it was investigated as you claimed!

I know that some gyms have that culture. I find the cheaper ones don’t! I avoid anywhere with spa facilities

The 29 July email from the investigator to claimant
”She said that she would be starting an investigation into the changing room incident, and asked the Claimant when it had happened.”

First step in an investigation= ask the alleged victim for information.

What's illogical about "we don't want male bodied people in women's single sex spaces"?

Definitely! I much prefer my local leisure centre in that respect! It’s all individual cubicles.

I didn't say that was illogical. I was referring to the views expressed to justify making that statement. They are not the same thing. Which demonstrates my point.

Exactly.
It realllllllllllllllllly is that simple.

Those doing bizarre mental contortions to try and justify ANY instance where a male is in a private woman's-only space is highly questionable.

What ifs, whatabouts, and all the other excuses can just fuck off.

It is very simple.

How many women on here have been flashed? Sent unsolicited dic picks? Exhibitionists are 99.9% assigned male at birth. If someone is exposing their penis to other when everyone else using the room manages to keep their lower halves covered, is it really unreasonable to think that they’re getting gratification from doing so?

• It is a shame that these discussions can't be had in a logical or intelligent way. •

Well quite. No logic or intelligence to be found in certain posters assertions. We all know a penis was in sight. Certain people are making themselves look extremely foolish insisting there wasn't.

You might be surprised to hear that some people like to refer to evidence when they're forming their points of view and considering whether they are reasonable or not. Evidence is important

Would you apply your argument to race or sexuality?

There is plenty of evidence of women and children being attacked by males who claim to have gender identities. Why not look at the 'this never happens' thread?
The second any male steps foot in a female only space it becomes mixed sex which is proven to put females at greater risk of sexual assault.

Now ANY man can enter a female only space based on nothing but his feelings and if women dare question his motives THEY are the ones attacked or punished!

Can you offer any evidence to support the claims that transwomen are at greater risk using men's facilities? Where is the evidence of all the claimed danger? Where is the evidence that these males are at higher risk than women?

Why is it ok for women and girls who have been, and will be, attacked to just be seen as collateral damage to trans activists?

Race and sexuality are a false equivalence. But you already know that.

'Gender identity' is irrelevant to anyone but the individual. Their sex however is relevant to the spaces they access because humans can't change sex and we are legally allowed single sex provision which naturally excludes ALL males despite the nonsense Stonewall pushes.

The suicide stats are proven to be bullshit, and using them to tell women that we should be responsible for male people's mental health is nothing but emotional blackmail.

OMG you are desperate.

In the same email on 29 July she:
-gave the TW 30 July off as an authorised absence AND—
-stated she was starting an investigation into the incident- (which she initiated that same day by asking the TW for further details and discussing with Mr Swallow and Mrs Wilson.)

The TW then had 30 July off.

So 30 July was in fact during the investigation

I said the TW was given time off during the investigation. The TW was given 30 July off. 30 July was during the investigation.

There is nothing incorrect or untrue about my statement.

This!!!!!!

Me politely rebuffing a man:
Reaction: "why not? Are you married? What your boyfriend doesn't let you have friends? I'm a nice guy, you clearly want an asshole, you're a slut, why wear a top like that if you don't want men to talk to you, you're fat anyway, you accepted a drink, you owe me" etc etc etc

Me politely rebuffing a lesbian
Reaction "ah gutted you're not on my team, you're gorgeous, your boyfriend is lucky to have you, can I get you a drink anyway, no pressure, *generally pleasant chat and interest in my life, goodbye lovely to meet you, etc etc etc.

Could someone direct me to the second upheld complaint mentioned somewhat earlier in the thread. At the moment I can only see one upheld complaint in a very long list, relating to a conversation about complainant's underwear at a work meeting.

Anyway my battery is dead. So going to sign off. Said my piece. All I can say to newcomers to the thread is please read the full Tribunal judgement.
www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/v-v-sheffield-teaching-hospitals-nhs-foundation-trust-and-others-1806836-slash-2020-and-others

"I didn't say that was illogical. I was referring to the views expressed to justify making that statement. They are not the same thing. Which demonstrates my point."

No one needs to justify why they don't want a male bodied person in women's single sex spaces. Really don't get what semantic contortions you think need doing.

I can't imagine complainant would get a substantial payout for one upheld complaint, especially when of a relatively minor nature. I can't see any complaint upheld that the NHS Trust did not deal with the harassment appropriately.

Yes please do read the full tribunal judgement. It's very revealing of the character and reliability of the person involved.

@TheUnexpectedPickle exactly my experience.

Are you saying you agree that males with their penises knaked or not) should or shouldn't be in female changing rooms?

This is actually just depressing. There was a tiny glimmer for a while there, that things were genuinely changing for women, but they always figure out a way to put us back on our place. The last few years have felt like a total onslaught, with the bewildering bonus that I'm a big massive bigot for feeling that way rather than cheering in celebration.
Fuck this shit. Feel so sorry for parents of young girls.

I did. I suppose you missed the fact the Claimant is disabled with several disabilities that affect their reliability for work and functioning of their memory? So they cannot help being unreliable due to being disabled. Their character was not questioned, only the accuracy of their memory which again was recognised as being a symptom of several of their recognised disabilities.