A Trans Woman Was Asked To Leave The Women's Changing Room At A PureGym

[OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon]

A Trans Woman Was Asked To Leave The Women's Changing Room At A PureGym

Exclusive: The woman was told that "no men are allowed" in the women's changing room after gym staff received a complaint from another member.

www.buzzfeed.com/laurasilver/puregym-trans-woman-changing-room

How long until the backlash forces a change in policy do you think?

If this continues I can see a move to a women’s only gyms.

I go to one at the moment, men have arrived & asked to join but sent on their way. The owners rationale is that women have different bodies & need to train in different ways to men.

Current case in New Zealand, the male born person has presumably the same level of 'rights' accorded by the GRC in UK.

There has been comment in NZ about how many other gyms were in a small radius.

"Wellingtonian Penelopy Mansell, who is transgender, was recently declined membership by a women's gym despite her birth certificate stating she is a woman.

Mansell was after a WINZ quote at Revive Fitness and the gym happened to be close to where she was living, but when she inquired about joining she was asked about her gender.

"She remained silent for a moment and then said, 'I'm sorry dear but I'm going to have to ask you this question, are you transgendered?'" Mansell said.

"She stated that it was the gym's policy not to let any person into the gym until they've had surgery."

"I informed her it's not possible in New Zealand [as] there's a 30 to 40 year waiting list for surgery, so I'd be 89."

Mansell showed the staff her birth certificate, which states she is female, but that wasn't enough.

Certificates are only changed if the person has undergone surgery or in Penny's case medical or hormonal treatment.

Felix Desmarais, a writer who covers local trans-discrimination said the gym does not need to be asking about surgery.

"I'm sure they don't check every other woman's pants situation," he said.

The gym apologised to Mansell a week later but Desmarais said it's hard to lay too much blame with the owners.

"They obviously made a mistake, but it's pretty hard to blame them when the government isn't taking any leadership on trans-issues themselves," he said." (continues)

www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/most-read-wellington-transgender-woman-denied-membership-female-gym-opens-up-q?variant=tb_v_1

recent thread re 'Trans Facts'
(extract)
"MYTH Transwomen have surgery to transition.
REALITY 80-95% of males who identify as transgender keep their penis. Source: Sex and Gender Ethics Society, from evidence given to MPs at the Women and Equalities Select Committee inquiry in 2015.
sages.org.uk/publications/sages-factsheet.html

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3448982-Trans-Fact-Checker?pg=2

why women (adult human females) might wish or need single sex spaces seems never acknowledged. By those males intent on exercising what they believe are their 'rights' to access them , those advocating for them to access them, or many of those reporting

                     <strong>safety, dignity & privacy</strong>

I got a commented deleted by MNHQ for saying this person actively wants to be in the room where women are changing.

But - they were offered a third space and refused it. What other conclusion is there, than "this person actively wants to be in the room where women are changing?" We know it's not just a question of their safety, it's because they want to be in the women's changing rooms. I'm trying to find a different way to phrase it that's not offensive and uncivil, but I can't, because it's simply a fact, and apparently this fact in itself is offensive and uncivil.

What I wrote was absolutely factual. Facts that make trans people look bad are still facts. This person actively wants to be in the space where women change their clothes, regardless of whether women are uncomfortable with it.

ROwantrees I posted on the women only gym.

Muslim, orthodox Jewish women train there. Do you could claim exemption due to religion? As in it’s the only place they can train?

We have individual locking showers in our unisex changing village, I always get showered and dressed in one, no need to wander round in a towel and I've never heard of any problems.

I asked my male partner last night what he would do if he accidentally walked into a female changing room where women were semi-naked.

I got him to open a door as think sometimes people's body language is telling.

He immediately turned his head, then his body as he apologised and closed the door.

I asked him why, he said simply 'I shouldn't be in there', they (the women) wouldn't want or expect me seeing them

He has lived in Germany so used mixed saunas etc.
HIs comment, 'everyone there knows beforehand.'

I mean this in the nicest way, but the definitions in your head aren't the definitions woman are having to deal with. There are lots of male transpeople who don't have GRC and/or gender dysphoria who use women's spaces.

I know. But reality is the GRA / Eqality Act is for TS people only not this new TG nonsense.

I know. But reality is the GRA / Eqality Act is for TS people only not this new TG nonsense.

The Equality Act 2010 is not just 'for transsexual people.'

Woman's Place UK:
"The 9 protected characteristics are

Age
Disability
Gender reassignment
Marriage & civil partnership
Pregnancy & Maternity
Race
Religion or belief
Sex
Sexual orientation
A WPUK spokeswoman said, “So far we have found many policies that fail to comply with the Equality Act 2010 and ignore that sex should be protected by equality law. The reason we feel strongly about this is that it particularly impacts on the perception of what legal protections women have and the extent of the duties organisations have towards women. Some organisations are implying they will protect the concept of gender which most feminists think is a stereotypical notion of what being a woman is. The Equality Act protects those undergoing gender reassignment but this is a different category than that of sex.”

Whilst doing the audit of public sector equality policies WPUK found that the Equality and Human Rights Commission utilise the term sex/gender interchangeably which WPUK said, “This is worrying in that they make the climate for other organisations to follow and if they do not understand the importance of ‘sex’ as a protected characteristic how can others?”

Other organisations have acknowledged and apologised for their error and have begun changing their policies. Woman’s Place UK said “We are pleased by those organisations being willing to change. We hope this starts a national discussion about why the Equality Act 2010 exists and the importance of ‘sex’ as a protected characteristic. Women still have a long way to go before we have equal rights”.

#sexmatters"

womansplaceuk.org/grassroots-womens-pressure-forces-local-authorities-to-comply-with-the-law-over-sex-and-gender/

We have individual locking showers in our unisex changing village, I always get showered and dressed in one, no need to wander round in a towel and I've never heard of any problems.

That's lovely for you - but I've been using gyms for 30 years and have never encountered that set-up. It might exist in a few, but most are not like that and the cost of changing the set-up is going to be prohibitive.

In the meantime, men are trying to get into women's changing rooms...

We have individual locking showers in our unisex changing village, I always get showered and dressed in one, no need to wander round in a towel and I've never heard of any problems.

19 November 2018

'Harrogate man jailed for filming girls and women as they got undressed in bathrooms and cubicles'
(extract)
"A man who took covert video footage of young women in a state of undress has been jailed for six months and placed on the sex-offenders’ register.

Jonathan Thomas Watson, 21, from Harrogate, videoed one woman as she was getting changed in a cubicle at Knaresborough Swimming Pool. York Crown Court heard that he placed his mobile phone on the top of the cubicle in a unisex changing room.

The woman, in her thirties, was unaware she was being filmed until she saw the phone perched on top of the cubicle, said prosecutor Matthew Collins.

Watson videoed six other females at a property in Knaresborough using similar covert means. The teenagers were said to be distraught after discovering they had been secretly filmed while using a bathroom.

Mr Collins said the woman at the swimming baths, who was half-naked, was “angry and shocked” when she realised she had been filmed after showering. Police were called and arrested Watson at the baths. They then went to his home and seized computer equipment and his iPad on which they found intimate video footage of the young women." (continues)

www.harrogateadvertiser.co.uk/news/crime/harrogate-man-jailed-for-filming-girls-and-women-as-they-got-undressed-in-bathrooms-and-cubicles-1-9451417

Women choose and need single sex spaces for safety, privacy & dignity

I think what isn't talked enough about is that this is about consent.

The teenage girls and women filmed by a male were 'distraught, angry and shocked' because they hadn't given consent to be filmed naked.

How is this different to not giving consent to being seen naked by a male?

Other people can't give consent for another to be filmed naked so why should this be different to being seen.

Those who choose to used mixed saunas in Germany, go topless on a beach or attend naturist campsites are giving consent to being seen by anyone there of either sex. Its their choice & they also have the option to withdraw that consent by putting on clothes or leaving.

Our David Lloyd gym has about 3 changing rooms and huge open areas where women of all ages wander about naked.

There would be a massive uproar if a male person was allowed to change there.

If they can't change with other males then third spaces will have to be the way forward.

Female only spaces must be preserved.

The moment I see a male bodied person in a female space I become nervous because it is an act of dominance, a statement that his needs whatever they may be are more important than those of the women, including me. A line has been crossed already.

"That would mean that a biological male is able to go into a mens changing facility, change into a swimsuit, apply makeup, plait their hair, wear a dress etc. without being targeted for verbal, physical and sexual abuse".

Women shouldn't go out alone at night, wear revealing clothes, argue back with or criticise men, etc. Again, women must change their behaviour, and have their rights taken away, to suit men and their misogyny/general lack of respect towards anyone who dares to be feminine . Why isn't society more worried about fixing the root cause of these problems (male entitlement, attitudes and behaviour)?

R0wantrees,

I still maintain that the Equality Act although used extensively by TG people is intended for TS people. The protected identity is Gender REASSIGNMENT not Gender IDENTITY.

If you go to the Equality And Human Rights Commission it says this...
^The Equality Act 2010 says that you must not be discriminated against because you are transsexual, when your gender identity is different from the gender assigned to you when you were born. For example:

a person who was born female decides to spend the rest of his life as a man
In the Equality Act it is known as gender reassignment. All transsexual people share the common characteristic of gender reassignment.

To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one.

You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it. ^

Another important point that EHRC makes is quote
A wide range of people are included in the terms ‘trans’ or ‘transgender’ but you are not protected as transgender unless you propose to change your gender or have done so.

Protection is about gender reassignment. By that definition sexual arousal from cross dressing up is NOT covered for example. Just because someone says they identify as the opposite gender doesnt give them that protected characteristic but unless there is an intent to transition then the Equality Act doesnt apply.

Indeed the act itself Part 2 / Chapter 1 / Section 7.3 says:
^In relation to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment—
(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a transsexual person;
(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to transsexual persons.^

The Equality Act is often quote but its being misused. The TG crowd rely on the statement
To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender.
The context of this is intended to refer to a dysphoric person awaiting reassignment but from whom treatment has not had started. Sadly it is taken out of context.

By the letter of the law someone that sticks on a dress and walks into the ladies is NOT protected by EA. The problem of course is that no-one is going to challenge them because were they to be TS then they are protected.

Why isn't society more worried about fixing the root cause of these problems (male entitlement, attitudes and behaviour)?

Because the people in power to fix the problems are the people who cause the problems!

The men who dominate society arent motivated to want to change because they are happy the way things are.

History tells us that the onus has always been on the oppressed to stand up against those who oppress them; waiting for the oppressors to want to change just isnt going to happen.

it is an act of dominance, a statement that his needs whatever they may be are more important than those of the women

Well put.

I still maintain that the Equality Act although used extensively by TG people is intended for TS people. The protected identity is Gender REASSIGNMENT not Gender IDENTITY.

That's true and there was a grass roots campaign started by women to correct where it had been misquoted to include either gender or gender identity.

Women also found that the protected characteristic 'sex' was often not included.

THis is in breach of legislation that exists.

There are issues with how the Equality Act might work in relation to the different protected characteristics and the guidance has not been tested.

In the meantime it is still worth checking Local Authority 'Diversity & Equality policies', public services (including schools etc), charities and businesses.

The error will likely have been made in good faith and policies copied from what are believed to be trusted sources.

The first step must surely be to ensure that the Act as it is written and exists is correct so that it might then be applied.

That understanding how the Act is applied will be a neccessary future focus.

What is important to recognise and respect is that the removal of 'sex' as one of the protected characteristics came very close to being removed.

The Conservative Government have assured this will not now happen.

What the other parties might do is not clear and there are influential lobbyists (including Stonewall who are clearly committedto the removal of sex in favour of gender / gender identity)

It behoves anyone concerned to do what they might.
Simple emails advising organisations & services of the legislation and that they have misquoted it have resulted in changes.
There are many errors still in place as this is a widespread issue
Awareness is important.

womansplaceuk.org/grassroots-womens-pressure-forces-local-authorities-to-comply-with-the-law-over-sex-and-gender/

James Kirkup documents how the Equality Act was nearly ammended to remove 'sex', and then not:
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1004635839480164352.html?refreshed=yes

I am not as sure that it is "an act of dominance, a statement that his needs whatever they may be are more important than those of women" .

It may be. It may be that that is not the INTENTION. The intention may be simply part of a process of gender identity change.

The EFFECT of the action, though, is to harm others. Others who have the right not to have to put up with alarming behaviour.

It is not uncommon for the distress of rampant GD to cause people to put their own perceived needs ahead of their responsibilities to others.

'dominance

noun
power and influence over others.'

it is an act of dominance, a statement that his needs whatever they may be are more important than those of the women

Im sure Im going to get shot down here but please don't. I know the feelings I would just like to make a point here without being blasted!

In the vast majority of cases I AGREE. Modern transgender ideology has an awful lot of abuse of power, exhibitionism, fetishm etc..

However there still exists a very very small number of diagnosed, dysphoric, transitioning transsexual people. The reality i, as I know first hand, that my presence in a male only facility subjects me to sexual abuse, physical abuse and verbal abuse. I am made a target on a regular basis for men who seek sexual relations with TS people.

Men are not accepting at all of TS identity. Its one thing to be putting on womens clothes but when you put on a bra because you need to thats a whole new matter.

Personally I dont want to use womens spaces and I very rarely do - "fortunately" I am also disabled so disability spaces are fine for me and always a preferred solution. Without a disabled space I am force to chose between a space where I am unsafe OR a space where those around me feel unsafe. I shouldnt have to make such a decision because its not fair on either side.

The one thing I can categorically say, at least for myself, is that on a very very rare occassion I would use a female space its certainly not about dominance but about self preservation. As I said earlier but was criticised for it is easier to go without so that I dont find myself in that situation.

I think what isn't talked enough about is that this is about consent.

That why the definition of female and woman needs to be clear and understood by all. If I undress in a woman's open plan changing room what exactly I'm a consenting to?

a person who was born female decides to spend the rest of his life as a man
In the Equality Act it is known as gender reassignment. All transsexual people share the common characteristic of gender reassignment.

To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one.

Hopefully those transsexuals and seeking 'common cause' with women, will increasingly recognise the significant difference and conflict of rights between a male, 'deciding as a personal process to change their gender identity' and women who as 'adult human females' are such from the point of their conception.

THe Equality Act will need to be strengthened and its application reviewed. There is a great deal of misinformation and misapplication.

However there still exists a very very small number of diagnosed, dysphoric, transitioning transsexual people. The reality i, as I know first hand, that my presence in a male only facility subjects me to sexual abuse, physical abuse and verbal abuse. I am made a target on a regular basis for men who seek sexual relations with TS people.

I understood you used unisex facilties predominately and only occasionally female spaces if needed?

I understood you used unisex facilties predominately and only occasionally female spaces if needed?

I do now and thats why - abuse in male facilities in the past ! I tried it.

thank you for clarifying.

As a hypothetical question, there will be other males who experience frequent sexual, verbal and physical abuse by some men in some single sex spaces. Should they also be accorded the safety of using female single sex spaces?