M&S changing rooms

[SweetChilliGirl]

Was I unreasonable to send this to M&S?

Good morning,

Having not shopped for lingerie with you for several years, due to your policy of allowing trans-identifying men into the women's changing rooms, can I now be assured that, in line with the judgement of the supreme court males will no longer be allowed to identify their way into your single sex changing rooms, thus preserving biological women's dignity and safety? I would very much like to be able to shop with you again.

I look forward to hearing from to to clarify this important matter.

Regards,

Sweetchilligirl

I’M not rewriting anything. Society throughout history operates by an organic process of changing mentality – that’s the way it’s been since the development of civilisation. It ebbs and flows back and forth but by and large trends towards more liberal over time.

In reality who will police it? What are people going to do? Ask people to show them what's in heir pants? I have a biological female friend who frequently gets asked if she is a trans woman as she is tall, broad shouldered with a deeper voice.

Photo 'gotcha' attempts are silly. The real experience of meeting this person will be completely different.

As a female, no problem with sharing changing rooms with them. Next question.

Everyone knows what sex they are and everyone needs to show some respect and obey the law.

We managed to police single sex spaces before, to a high degree, it won't be beyond us to do it again.

So because over the last few year's Stonewall lied about the law and businesses misapplied it you think that we should continue to let men into women's single sex spaces?

Nah, decent men stay out.

Including decent trans women.

Businesses will be idiotic to think that women will continue to keep quiet about this.

it is not bigoted to want equality for women. And by that I give the Supreme Court definition of what a woman is, to be clear this does not include trans women.

Exactly. Photos may show a filtered face and torso but rarely do they show the person standing beside an average man. An average sized woman at 5ft 4 would be an exceedingly short man. Now some men are that short but it’s rare. The same reason why most trans women stand out is not their face but their unusual height and larger build. There is so much focus on passing on a persons face but they forget the rest

How could they prevent a trans woman from using female changing spaces? My local M&S has individual cubicles, with locks. I don’t care if trans people use these spaces. It would be weirder if they used the men’s imo.

Just my opinion.

Why would it be weirder if they used the men's? They ARE men.

You seem to be confusing people simply reporting the way the world is and challenges likely to rear their heads with claiming how it ‘should’ be, which are two completely different things.

I have not said once on this thread what men or transwomen ‘should’ be able to do. Nor have I called you or anyone else bigoted. I have simply highlighted how real-world scenarios will likely clash with the law. You can’t unopen Pandora’s Box.

i said it should happen, not that I thought it would. Depressingly, I don't think we can count on men to do the decent thing here.

Mmmmm for a person who claims not to be advocating for the rights of men to have more rights than women you seem to be doing a very good job of it.

I was an employment solicitor at the time that the Equality Act was introduced. The verdict of the Supreme Court confirms the way that the Act was intended.

The law does not give any man the right to be in women's single sex spaces where they exist.

Employers and providers of services must not indirectly discriminate against a class of employees / service users who hold a particular protected characteristic.

If a service, like M&S ,provides a service which excludes women, which it will do if it doesn't provide single sex spaces which exclude all men (including trans women) I can't see how that can be defended using the justifiable or proportionate argument. They run risk of falling foul of indirect sex and possibly indirect religious belief discrimination claims if they do this.

Even if it can it will piss off it's majority customer base. Women can no longer be called bigots for complaining about this thanks to this week's judgement.

I don't suppose that M&S will take the risk. More likely they will provide male, female and unisex. All needs met.

There’s a significant amount of women who will also support them too.

Well those are the worst kind of women.

Putting the wishes of men ahead of the needs of women.

Who cares about sexual abuse survivors or religious minority women or women who, you know, just want a bit of privacy, right?

There is nothing in what I’ve said advocating for either the rights of men or women. Again, I’m just laying out real world clashes. What I’ve said about what M&S CAN do (eg, declare all spaces unisex) is true. And what I’ve said NEEDS clarifying (eg, implied or direct signage) is also true. What I personally think M&S SHOULD do or what I think they WILL do is entirely by the by. I’m not M&S after all.

If you’re going to get frustrated with someone for neutrally laying out scenarios of challenge that can and likely will arise, then good luck with that. Not every thread you read will be full of women describing an idealised society.

Would you not think it odd if someone presenting as a woman, was in the men’s changing area?

That’s for the men to work out. Nothing to do with women.

What does 'presenting as a woman' mean though? Men wearing dressing and lipstick will still invariably look like men.

It does if the pervy man is a trans woman

If a businesses the size of M&S doesn't respect the needs of female people then it lays itself open to an indirect discrimination claim.

You can argue until the cows come home that this is not a risk but you are wrong.

I am not talking about an idealised society. I'm talking about a fair society where women have equal rights to men.

Giving mixed sex spaces is not giving equal rights to women as it excludes some women.

If a business has the ability to accommodate single sex spaces and unisex spaces that is what it should do to avoid a claim and/ or disgruntled customers.

What does that mean-

a) biologically male person with beard but wearing a dress
b) biologically male person without beard but lipstick wearing a dress
c) biologically male person wearing full make up but wearing jeans and t-shirt
d) boy George - unequivocally a man but likes a bit of make up

At what point is someone definitely presenting as a woman?

if I turned up to the female changing room in no make up and jeans and a t-shirt - am I presenting as male as should I use the mens?

Nowhere did I say they won’t be at risk. What I actually said was that the guidance will be muddy until all policies are clearly updated.

What you have actually said is a lot more than that.

You've come up with a multitude of reasons why you think men should be in women's single sex spaces.

I'll leave you to it.

Literally nothing I have said relates in any form to what I think should be allowed or disallowed. Please quote directly if you are going to make claims.

More likely you are just annoyed that anyone dare type anything you disagree with.

It has never "ebbed and flowed" sufficiently to allow humans to change sex.

The "liberal trend" you are talking about here is women's loss of privacy over their own bodies! You talk about it as if it's a positive thing!

No
I would think they were a transwoman using the facility for their sex.

We want transgender visibility.. and this is the way to do it. Have them be accepted for who they are in the space designated for their sex. So that people see them and think " it's great that this person can wear a dress and not have other men blink twice"

Not attempt to hide and disguise them in another space hoping that nobody notices. That's INvisibility.