Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Dads using female communal changing room

712 replies

Strawberrryfields · 23/01/2026 15:50

Not sure how I feel about this so looking for opinions and whether I should do anything.

A couple of times recently I’ve been changing my child after swimming and a dad has come in to change his child in the communal female changing room. It’s after lessons so only children changing. There are communal female, communal male and a number of individual cubicles. It gets very busy at peak times so at times you may need to wait for an individual cubicle.

It feels weird to me a grown man being in there and my instinct is that he should use the private cubicles, though he is clearly there with his child helping them get ready. I also understand him not wanting to take his child into the men’s communal changing rooms with random men in there but to me, he is a random man.

Should I say something? Would you? Chances are it’s just a normal dad changing his kid but I don’t feel entirely comfortable with it but not sure if IABU?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Theeyeballsinthesky · 24/01/2026 09:40

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:37

Most likely? No harm at all. And with one man and a large group of women, it is much more likely that one of the women has paedophilic tendencies - simply based on statistics.

I find it fascinating however how preconceived opinions are so hard to shake. I don't think the behaviour of the father was sensible - but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking.

It is incredibly unlikely that this person causes any harm (and Equality Act and Supreme Court Ruling are not as clear cut as you think) - but discomfort is of course also not ideal. So yes, he should not be hear. But I don't think it's really justifying a lynch mob.

And that some people would deliberately traumatise the daughter for the sins of the father is an interesting idea - I would say that you are a much bigger risk to your children and society.

lol didn't take long for your mask to slip and your MRA to show through did it 🙄

RedToothBrush · 24/01/2026 09:41

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:37

Most likely? No harm at all. And with one man and a large group of women, it is much more likely that one of the women has paedophilic tendencies - simply based on statistics.

I find it fascinating however how preconceived opinions are so hard to shake. I don't think the behaviour of the father was sensible - but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking.

It is incredibly unlikely that this person causes any harm (and Equality Act and Supreme Court Ruling are not as clear cut as you think) - but discomfort is of course also not ideal. So yes, he should not be hear. But I don't think it's really justifying a lynch mob.

And that some people would deliberately traumatise the daughter for the sins of the father is an interesting idea - I would say that you are a much bigger risk to your children and society.

It's not just about safety.

Privacy and dignity are legal rights too which you see fit to tell a bunch of women that girls don't deserve because you know better.

No.

Men don't think get to decide this. Every one of us women has been an 8 - 11 year old girl and fucking hell I wouldn't not have changed in your presence and yes you'd have upset me.

Entitled men like this can fuck off out the changing room.

RedToothBrush · 24/01/2026 09:42

Theeyeballsinthesky · 24/01/2026 09:40

lol didn't take long for your mask to slip and your MRA to show through did it 🙄

Absolutely. 100% who think women and girls are lesser and he knows best.

TheNightingalesStarling · 24/01/2026 09:43

From preschool age girls understand the "No Daddies in the Girls room" rules.

spannasaurus · 24/01/2026 09:44

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:37

Most likely? No harm at all. And with one man and a large group of women, it is much more likely that one of the women has paedophilic tendencies - simply based on statistics.

I find it fascinating however how preconceived opinions are so hard to shake. I don't think the behaviour of the father was sensible - but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking.

It is incredibly unlikely that this person causes any harm (and Equality Act and Supreme Court Ruling are not as clear cut as you think) - but discomfort is of course also not ideal. So yes, he should not be hear. But I don't think it's really justifying a lynch mob.

And that some people would deliberately traumatise the daughter for the sins of the father is an interesting idea - I would say that you are a much bigger risk to your children and society.

The Equality Axt says you cant discriminate on the basis of sex unless you use the single sex exemptions. Where single sex exemptions are applied that means on the basis of biological sex. If a facility offers a womans changing room it can only do that by using single sex exemptions. Children under 8 can use the opposite sex changing rooms without being in conflict with the single sex exemptions.

Which bit don't you understand?

Taztoy · 24/01/2026 09:48

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:37

Most likely? No harm at all. And with one man and a large group of women, it is much more likely that one of the women has paedophilic tendencies - simply based on statistics.

I find it fascinating however how preconceived opinions are so hard to shake. I don't think the behaviour of the father was sensible - but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking.

It is incredibly unlikely that this person causes any harm (and Equality Act and Supreme Court Ruling are not as clear cut as you think) - but discomfort is of course also not ideal. So yes, he should not be hear. But I don't think it's really justifying a lynch mob.

And that some people would deliberately traumatise the daughter for the sins of the father is an interesting idea - I would say that you are a much bigger risk to your children and society.

how are the daughters traumatised?

IsItSnowing · 24/01/2026 09:50

TheNightingalesStarling · 24/01/2026 09:27

Decent fathers know they don't go in female changing rooms for the protection of their own child and others.

Its a simple as that.

A man who doesn't understand that is unsafe around children.

This.
I think it's a deliberate choice.
If you have a dd who is too old to go in the men's with dad and cannot change on her own, you need to find another solution. Violating the privacy of other girls is not the answer.

Taztoy · 24/01/2026 09:51

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:29

What actual harm does he do? His presence?

But it is good to know how many mothers don't seem to care about the wellbeing of children if they can attack men.

I'm quite fortunate that IRL my experiences have been very different.

His presence does me actual harm. I’m a rape and sexual assault survivor and his presence does me actual harm

so he should fuck off out of thr single sex space where he is not allowed to be as per equality act 2010.

RedToothBrush · 24/01/2026 09:59

Taztoy · 24/01/2026 09:48

how are the daughters traumatised?

The only one traumatising a dad who insists on using the female facilities is the father who puts himself in a position where he is embarrassing dad.

Him then being told that he's a perv due to him breaking the law and violating the privacy dignity of girls is his fault and of his own making. His behaviour is that of a pervy man using his daughter as a human shield and then trying to guilt women into silence.

It still violates the privacy and dignity of those other girls regardless of intentions.

If you don't want to be called a paedo in front of your daughter, you don't display behaviour that a perv might have.

It's simple safeguarding protocols that apply equally to adults who have no intention of being a perv precisely to prevent pervs from manipulative behaviour.

You treat anyone who demonstrates unsafe behaviour as a perv regardless of whether they are as a front line defence against paedos.

Otherwise all the paedos would just invade the women's and get a hardon whilst changing their daughter's claiming it was somehow necessary.

It's abusive behaviour to then gaslight women by accusing them of harm when they say no and demand the man leaves. None of them have created the situation. It's a situation where the entitled male is entirely responsible.

IsItSnowing · 24/01/2026 10:00

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:26

Excellent idea. If there is an accident and no female paramedics are available, we just let people die?

Don be ridiculous

Taztoy · 24/01/2026 10:00

RedToothBrush · 24/01/2026 09:59

The only one traumatising a dad who insists on using the female facilities is the father who puts himself in a position where he is embarrassing dad.

Him then being told that he's a perv due to him breaking the law and violating the privacy dignity of girls is his fault and of his own making. His behaviour is that of a pervy man using his daughter as a human shield and then trying to guilt women into silence.

It still violates the privacy and dignity of those other girls regardless of intentions.

If you don't want to be called a paedo in front of your daughter, you don't display behaviour that a perv might have.

It's simple safeguarding protocols that apply equally to adults who have no intention of being a perv precisely to prevent pervs from manipulative behaviour.

You treat anyone who demonstrates unsafe behaviour as a perv regardless of whether they are as a front line defence against paedos.

Otherwise all the paedos would just invade the women's and get a hardon whilst changing their daughter's claiming it was somehow necessary.

It's abusive behaviour to then gaslight women by accusing them of harm when they say no and demand the man leaves. None of them have created the situation. It's a situation where the entitled male is entirely responsible.

Exactly.

DannyDeever · 24/01/2026 10:10

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

WutheringTights · 24/01/2026 10:12

It’s tricky because no one would bare an eyelid if only 3/4/5/6 year olds were changing, but once girls get to around 9/10/11 they understandably start to not want to get changed around random men. That shouldn’t overridden for obvious safeguarding reasons. I’d speak to the club.

Taztoy · 24/01/2026 10:14

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Just fyi. Troll hunting is against the rules here.

DannyDeever · 24/01/2026 10:16

it’s obviously the clubs responsibility to create and stick up signage not mine.

Safeguarding is everyone's responsibility.

ZeldaFighter · 24/01/2026 10:17

As part of swimming safeguarding in primary school, when I supervised children changing, it was strictly sex-segregated. Only women were allowed to supervise the girls changing room although women could supervise boys. Two men could not be rostered on together. If a man needed something from the girl's changing room, he had to knock and wait in the corridor for a supervisor to come out to him. He was not allowed to just walk in or 'pop his head round the door'.

op, please report. Not only is this totally inappropriate and disrespectful, it's also now illegal sex discrimination against the other girls to deprive them of a single-sex space.

DannyDeever · 24/01/2026 10:19

Taztoy · 24/01/2026 10:14

Just fyi. Troll hunting is against the rules here.

Thanks, unfortunately I can't edit the post, but I won't express doubt again.

RufustheFactuaIReindeer · 24/01/2026 10:21

but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking

yes, he may well not have thought it though (cos he is an idiot) but that means he should be told he is in the wrong by the swimming pool people so he doesn't do it again

RufustheFactuaIReindeer · 24/01/2026 10:21

but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking

yes, he may well not have thought it though (cos he is an idiot) but that means he should be told he is in the wrong by the swimming pool people so he doesn't do it again

ZeldaFighter · 24/01/2026 10:22

namechange272727 · 23/01/2026 16:20

This is a very interesting thread. I posted an almost identical thread as a mother, asking when children only are changing whether I should take my son in the men’s or the women’s, and the replies were that it didn’t really matter, and I now take him in the men’s. Interesting that the advice isn’t the same the other way around.

Might depend on how old your son is. The cut-off is either 8 or 10. After that age, your son should change alone in the men's changing room. If he is disabled, there should be facilities available.

RufustheFactuaIReindeer · 24/01/2026 10:22

That was not important enough to post twice

Tigger18 · 24/01/2026 10:30

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:25

I tried to explain why this is not so easy. He might even feel uneasy.

How does he know that there is no Rose West in the changing room?

A completely understandable fear, I suggest if he's worried about being murdered by a female serial killer he's best off in the men's 🤣😆

Strawberrryfields · 24/01/2026 10:36

DannyDeever · 24/01/2026 10:16

it’s obviously the clubs responsibility to create and stick up signage not mine.

Safeguarding is everyone's responsibility.

Oh stop it. I honestly don’t even know why you think I’m trolling but you’ve obviously made up your mind and are making silly suggestions because of that.

I shouldn’t have to be in the position of policing the changing rooms and confronting random men and potentially getting pushback (as others in similar situations have experienced). Good for you if you’re comfortable doing that. I clearly wasn’t in the moment, hesitated, questioned myself and then regretted not doing anything. Surely you’ve been a situation like that before?

It was two different dads I’ve said that above - not three that you’ve just made up - in the space of two weeks. I don’t know how concerned anyone else was, maybe they were maybe they weren’t. I didn’t discuss it with them and I’ve already made clear I wasn’t in there for a long time after spotting the men. I’ve explained in my OP about my uncertainty but it obviously niggled at me which is why I’ve posted here. I’ve said I regretted not saying something at the time but there’s nothing I can do about that but am trying to rectify that by contacting the club.

OP posts:
ThePieceHall · 24/01/2026 10:47

This is why Dry Robes are brilliant. Straight on over the swimming gear for the journey home and into your own clean shower or bath that has not been urinated in by other people’s children and/or their parents.

ZeldaFighter · 24/01/2026 10:48

Alex122022 · 24/01/2026 09:37

Most likely? No harm at all. And with one man and a large group of women, it is much more likely that one of the women has paedophilic tendencies - simply based on statistics.

I find it fascinating however how preconceived opinions are so hard to shake. I don't think the behaviour of the father was sensible - but from experience, I know how one can get into a situation like this without much thinking.

It is incredibly unlikely that this person causes any harm (and Equality Act and Supreme Court Ruling are not as clear cut as you think) - but discomfort is of course also not ideal. So yes, he should not be hear. But I don't think it's really justifying a lynch mob.

And that some people would deliberately traumatise the daughter for the sins of the father is an interesting idea - I would say that you are a much bigger risk to your children and society.

That is a mistake or a lie. A man in a large group of women is still much more likely to be the one with paedophilia tendencies as 98% of sex offenders are men. Some women do offend. But they are vanishingly few and far between compared to the massively overwhelming majority of male sex offenders.

You are either innocently mistaken or deliberately lying.