To think this journalist from the independent is rather deluded ?

[JifNtGif]

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/m-s-trans-employee-teenager-bra-fitting-rowling-b2802822.html#comments-area

In those days (as I’m just about old enough to remember) goods were kept behind a counter, and the salesperson brought them out and showed them to you. I can still remember a saleswoman in a large dept. store showing handbags to my DF - he was buying one for DM for Christmas. He told the saleswoman one was ‘too grannyish’ - it was! - the price was 32/6d.

He bought a really lovely one that cost three guineas, so you can tell how long ago this was! I knew it was a lot, probably rather more than he could afford, but DM loved it and used it for years.

Because that is what big companies do automatically. They issue an apology. If you read what M&S actually said in their letter they make no reference to the gender of any staff. They just apologise in general terms.

“We deeply regret the distress your daughter felt during her visit to our store.
“We understand how important this milestone is for her, and we are truly sorry that it did not go as you had hoped.”

Where does it say the stuff member didn't work in the "lingery" department?

I've read several articles and none of them say that at all. The closest reference is "The staff member is said to work across various parts of the shop and is not involved in bra fittings."

I.e. as in most shops for the last few decades all sales assistants can work on every floor, there aren't specific "menswear sales assistants" "lingerie department sales assistant" "footwear sales assistants." They are rotated on where cover is needed. No evidence that that employee would be less (or more) knowledgeable than anyone else.

The salami one might have been an issue

According to the mother, the child was looking at underwear and appeared to be alone (mother out of sight) when she was approached from behind by the employee - who she said they both knew was a man - asking the girl if she needed help. The mother seemingly showed herself to say “no, thanks” or similar and the employee quickly walked away with no response. The mother said the girl was upset to be asked by a man if she wanted help with underwear. These additional details were given by the mother on X. She emailed the company asking for a new policy whereby male staff don’t approach children about underwear and was given an apology and was told this particular staff member should have been in a different area of the store and does not work in the lingerie department. The underwear section in this store is on a different floor to the sections where the staff member works. Obviously many responding comments are centred around the fact M&S staff don’t approach customers - even in the departments they work in. This employee broke this policy to approach a young teen girl who wasn’t seeking help in the (obviously more sensitive) lingerie department, where they don’t actually work. Their response was unusual when the mother appeared. The devil is in the detail in this case.

A man who worked on another floor and was not a lingerie assistant, approached a teenage girl who appeared to be alone, while she was looking at bras.

Be honest with yourselves, no man with innocent intentions would approach a lone teenage girl looking at underwear.

I’ve been buying bras for 40 years. No male staff member has ever approached me in the lingerie department of any store.

Regardless of this man’s intentions M&S should still offer an apology because he should be trained to understand that his actions were entirely inappropriate.

Seems to be similar to John Gummer feeding his DD a burger during the BSE crisis.
Do we even know if the journo has a DD? And if so do we know what she thinks about it?

Whether she has a daughter or what the daughter thinks about it is irrelevant.

Teenagers aren’t best placed to decide sensible store policy.

Maybe not store policy.
But they are old enough to consent and old enough to be uncomfortable.
And given that the journo brought up her DD in the first place its entirely relevant.

So much BS on this story.

Have a look at this from a live M&S advert for a customer assistant in clothing and homeware. One of the tasks is to: "Proactively engage with customers to understand their needs, make recommendations and deliver remarkable service throughout their visit to store." (emphasis is mine). So this employee was adhering to what M&S expects their customer service staff to do.

There is no suggestion that the employee offered to, or wanted to, or was even qualified to do a bra fitting as has been claimed.

The mother claims that she was stood close to her daughter. So the employee approached an adult and her child to ask if they needed help. In line with the expectations of M&S for their employees. And when they said no thank you, she left them to it.

Oh and the claims that the employee only worked in a different Department is also wide of the mark. M&S have confirmed that “We have written to this customer and explained that our colleagues typically work across all departments in our stores and customers can always ask to speak to the colleague they feel most comfortable with.”

Let's park the fact that it's not been confirmed that the employee was trans. That is besides the point. The point is that a trans employee approaching an adult and her teenage daughter to ask if they needed help (which can be anything from advice on products, directions, facilitating booking a fitting), in line with their employer's job description, and accepting it when they said no, is behaving entirely appropriately.

@PlanetJanette the wording ‘proactively engage customers’ in clothing and homeware is not the same thing as ‘approach people who are browsing lingerie’ - much less go up to question a young teen in the underwear section. Even if M&S was reversing its decades long policy of not approaching browsing customers, yours or the Pink News response here doesn’t appear to give any consideration that a child looking at bras is not the same as an adult customer shopping for lamps or asking for different shoe styles. It’s like suggesting the wording of a job advert greenlights a child being approached by a male staff member to discuss her underwear needs.

I think it’s important to listen to the mum here. You’re saying the mum was stood next to the child - not according to the mum. The mum also never said anything about the employee offering a bra fitting. The employee also turned away without a word and left the area when the mum said no thanks, because they hadn’t realised the mum was there. No proactive engagement of the adult customer there.

M&S emailed the mum apologising and confirming that the employee not only doesn’t work on the lingerie floor but should have been in home or womenswear on a different floor. Later M&S ‘confirmation’ to press that staff “typically” work across all departments may be true, but its first response to the customer about this specific store interaction indicated an atypical situation.

Its newer line also leaves it up in the air whether children in its stores may be approached by its male staff to discuss underwear - hence a lot of pushback on the retailer. The mother wants a policy in place where male staff don’t approach teenage girls in the lingerie department. Seems odd that M&S can’t just say, obviously none of the men who work for us will approach teenage girls in the underwear department.

Actually there’s no record of M&S saying anything about where the employee works. The only thing on the record is them saying their practice is that employees do not work in just one section.

The mother’s story is also riddled with contradictions - she says with certainty that the employee didn’t see her. But yet she saw the employee coming towards her, and was close by enough to hear the employees query and answer on her daughters behalf.

Asking a customer if they need any help isn’t ’questioning’ them. It is offering them help and withdrawing when the offer was declined.

On record…by that do you mean covered in the Telegraph report? The entire incident has been reported to the paper by the mother, she says it’s on CCTV that they won’t release and has the emails apologising etc. If you mean the M&S response to the press, yes they didn’t disclose the store.

I didn’t see any contradictions, the mother seems to just want a reasonable policy implemented. I saw that she said she was browsing a gondola of bras near her daughter but not visible to the employee who approached from behind - they both heard a man’s voice and turned around - she offered to draw a diagram.

Well, “to question…” the employee approached the child to ask her a question while she was looking at bras.

“Withdrawing when the offer was declined” is notable in this instance for its contradictory nature to the approach. The worker has walked over to a girl quietly considering underwear, going out of their way, in a section they are not assigned to, to pull her out of the moment she was in. Then this arguably helpful and eager approach to customer service suddenly disappears when an adult surprises them. Not a word in response as acknowledgment as they walk away goes against basic manners, never mind proactive engagement.

It’s important to focus on the child’s status in this situation. That a young teen looking at bras isn’t the same as an adult in other sections of the shop.

The Indy is much, much worse than the Guardian (which has shown a few green shhots lately from individual writers, but I don't think the editorial line will change under the current leadership).

If the shop assistant was a man who presented as a man, this wouldn't ever hit the papers. The mum and daughter would have said no, and moved on. Male shop assistants in clothes stores surely ask women of all ages if they need assistance all the time, including in lingerie or bra sections.

Especially as in many stores, assistants are told they HAVE to offer assistance to anyone who looks lost.

If a man who looked like a man who was obviously a shop assistant came up to any of us in the lingerie section and offered help, we'd just say no and (likely rightly) assume he was just doing his job, and understand that he must not have realised we were there for a bra fitting (because how could he? Ime lingerie sections have bras, pants, socks, pyjamas, night gowns, all sorts unrelated to bra fittings )

That's the transphobia and what's irrational here. People arnt all up in arms because a male employee offered assistance in the lingerie department. No one would give a flying fuck about that. They're up in arms because a trans employee offered assistance in the lingerie department .

If that young teen girl was more scared of the scenario than she would have been going to a male doctor/having a male lifeguard at the pool/any other manner of things that involve men, then that's because she's been taught to fear trans people specifically - and, as far as I know, men who are not trans ("cis") are way more dangerous to girls and women than trans people.

It's more likely that her strong reaction was because first bras can be embarrassing and nerve wracking... And pearl clutching mum has just made it worse.

Men who want to prey on women and girls don't put on a wig and dress to do it. They just bloody do it. Surely we all know that.

There is a lot of supposition in your post.
And no need to slide "Cis" in like you have done.

Absolutely shocking piece in the Insependent. Imagine caring so little about your daughter's boundaries?

Journalist doesn’t know about euphoria boners.

Yes. It’s the same journalist featured in this stiry where she mentions an older sister.
www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/passport-renewal-child-uk-12-weeks-b2086029.html

The thing is, the girl was distressed because a man approached her in the lingerie department. Nothing more needs to be said.

We all make snap judgements when strangers approach us - do they seem safe and calm, is this an appropriate approach, do they have those 'shiny eyes' that suggest over-interest/some creepy intention etc.

This girl assessed the situation, and felt alarm. And that is fine.

Because a man (no matter his fashion choices or internal feelings), approaching a child in the lingerie department and offering help already sets off a couple of alarm bells, without taking his unknown demeanour into account

edit. I've spent my fair share of time browsing the M&S lingerie dept. I don't think I've ever been asked if I need help, let alone by a man. And yes, as a grown woman, if a male shop assistant approached me there, I would immediately be on guard in a way that I wouldn't be if a woman did. His trans status would be irrelevant. It's his sex that makes me wary

Men who want to prey on women and girls don't put on a wig and dress to do it. They just bloody do it. Surely we all know that.

Who says the person was in a wig and dress? Female M&S employees also wear trousers.

And no, they don't have to put on a wig and dress to do it - but - if putting on a wig and dress makes them feel good (euphemism) then the next step is to escalate to involving women in that.

Which is fine in a way. With staff being almost non existent in many shops they have to cross areas. But personally I, as a man, feel uncomfortable with the idea of a man working in the lingerie department whether trans or not. I feel uncomfortable in entering the area in case a woman thinks I'm checking out what sort of underwear she wears... for a biological man to approach a teenage girl in such an area makes me very uneasy

No, male shop assistants do not approach women in the lingerie department.

If a male M&S staff member approached me while in the lingerie department I would complain to the store. It’s not in any way appropriate.

It is highly inappropriate for a man to approach a teenage girl in a lingerie department. You are being disingenuous to suggest that it is not.

People absolutely are up in arms because a man approached a lone teenager in the lingerie department.

Regarding what the mother has “taught er daughter to be afraid of”. I’m would assume like all good parents she has taught her daughter that men can be very, very dangerous and to treat men approaching her in inappropriate ways with extreme caution.

The fact that the man was presenting himself as a woman does compound the problem. Again you are disingenuous (or terribly naive) to say it does not. There are men who present as women who find sexual thrill in forcing women and girls to participate in their fetish.

That may not have been the case with this man, but he should be more aware than most about why he should have stayed well away from this customer.

And for the previous poster who asked how the mother could be far away enough for the girl to seem alone but close enough to hear. This is not a unique scenario. This is something men do.

By on the record I mean quoted from the M&S email. Because what the mother is claiming is contrary to how M&S says it operates.

As for the offer to draw a diagram I’m not sure how that changes the basic contradiction between the mothers certainty that the employee could not see her but also her statement that she could see the employee come over. Also she needs to get her story straight - she simultaneously claims she saw the employee approach and that the first perception of the employee was hearing their voice. Which is it?

Of course this is all beside the point. What is not beside the point is that an employee - regardless of sex - asking an adult and her teenage daughter if they need help and withdrawing when the help is declined is perfectly normal customer service.

It's the independent(irony much) so the term journalist is moot.