Thanks UpstartCrow.
I've made a start by plagiarising one of Datun's posts. Feedback welcome. It is not short!
"Thank you for your response however it is wholly unsatisfactory to suggest that women should find themselves in a state of undress in the women’s changing room with a man who is entitled to be there simply because he “feels most comfortable” using the women’s changing room.
It appears that your stance is facilitating the manipulation of the Equality Act to elevate the rights of one protected characteristic over another. The Equality Act is designed to be fair and all protected groups have equal value. But your approach doesn't feel like, is equal - Equality decisions must fairly balance the needs of everyone affected. This does not mean treating everyone the same. Because sometimes treating people differently is the least discriminatory outcome overall.
As a business your a policy must take into account how it will impact on all the protected characteristics and then work out the fairest and least discriminatory way to do it. Life doesn't happen in a vacuum. A rule for one will impact others too and the Equality Act has been designed to reflect this reality. It is perfectly legal to discriminate against someone if overall it's the fairest thing to do for all concerned. The key phrase here is 'a proportionate means to a legitimate aim'.
And in no-one's book does fairness mean men changing in women’s changing rooms (or for that matter, boys sleeping in girls' accommodation, beating them at sport, making girls uncomfortable or working in a rape refuge). There a lots of these legal exemptions written into Equality Law they have been put there to be used and to protect women. I suggest that you reconsider your approach because as it stands it potentially puts women at risk particularly given that your gyms are open late at night and a woman could easily find herself alone in the women’s changing room with a man taking advantage of your policy.
If a man wants to use a female changing room with individual lockable cubicles and no-one minds, then fine. The overall balance is fair. But if people do object, and for reasons of privacy, dignity and safety when they in a state of undress, and they don't feel able to use the changing rooms then the balance of fairness changes. I suspect that the majority of your female members would object if they were aware of your approach. The Equality Act does not say "oh well, too bad". You, as a business, must take into account the impact on other people too (women). If there are reasonable options available to the business that makes it fairer for all then they must consider them. Insisting all transgender people must use the facility of their natal sex would be unfair to them, but this doesn't mean the only fair option is to allow them into the facility for the opposite sex or to make the whole thing uni-sex and to hell with how the women feel. It could be enough to provide them with an alternative, just for them. This is a fair balance that considers everyone.
May I suggest that you look at this matter further by taking a look at the information here - fairplayforwomen.com/library/. Further you may wish to consider your potential liability if the impact of your policy is that women are assaulted in your changing rooms in the future as a result of your policy - www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html
I am cancelling my membership because I do not feel comfortable using changing rooms that purport to be for women but are in fact open to any man who feels comfortable using them. Further I object to the impact of your policy which will effectively exclude women who are not permitted to use them by their culture or religion, and women who are recovering from assault."