AIBU to think naked males shouldn’t be in the women only section of a spa?

[HermioneWeasley]

A different case from Wi Spa in LA. A naked male got into the hot tub with a woman and her 6 year old daughter.

Can those of you who think this is fine, and trans people are an a oppressed minority please explain to me why this is ok, and how we safeguard women and girls from the predators that will take advantage? Please, someone who endorses this please explain why it seems fine to you, because I just cannot see it.

motogogo
Yanbu for a women's only section but the spa could save themselves heaps of issues buy simply copying Germany, everyone in together, no clothing, saves so much hassle. And never had any issues at all 
Someone from Germany will be along in a bit, to say that's not how it is. Happens every time.

Can't quote a post with a quote in it, but for the Netherlands this is often true: both sexes share facilities and nothing is single sex. Difference is that it is very clear it is mixed sex, you know it is mixed sex when you go and you chose to go. And no kids allowed. Oh and leering gets you banned very quickly.

What this spa did wrong is that they said it was single sex and it wasn't. That is wrong. Single sex should mean single sex, no ifs, buts or maybes.

As the US is reputed to be a litigious society, could the mother sue that male for exposing himself to her child? I despair of the current situation and my heart is sore for that child - if it had been me at that age (now long past) I would have never forgotten it and would have been left traumatised.

@BadGherkin

As the US is reputed to be a litigious society, could the mother sue that male for exposing himself to her child? I despair of the current situation and my heart is sore for that child - if it had been me at that age (now long past) I would have never forgotten it and would have been left traumatised.

Seemingly not, no. Apparently it's entirely legitimate.

It would appear that the crimes of voyeurism and indecent exposure instantly stop being criminal if the person perpetrating them says a specific set of words out loud.

I foresee any number of these spas setting up all over the shop. It would appear that the only thing to stop people like the male bodied individual in question, is women refusing to go to any of the spas. Anywhere. For ever. Although, laws in Scotland, were inclined to make female avoidance of these sorts of situations also a hate crime.

Would the creation of private spa clubs get around this, or only maybe for the wealthy? Any wealthy woman wanting to be a benefactor of her sex could set up such a club and have a sliding scale of fees. The are spas I know of which have members committees which vet each prospective new member and reserve the right to deny anyone membership without giving a reason.

It's perfectly possible to ban penises and facsimile penises both.

The rules don't have to be symmetric. Women's need for male-free spaces because they are potentially at risk from males, and have instincts arising from relative vulnerability, is different from men's desire for female-free spaces because they might feel embarrassed. Though both may have religious reasons.

You can also ban former penis havers on the grounds that when not currently nude in front of you they are often indistinguishable from current penis havers and very distinguishable from never penis havers, so may make women feel uncomfortable.

Though really the demographic of females with pseudo phallus is a tiny one. And the subset of those who would want to be in a nude women's spa is quite possibly exactly noone. Particularly where mixed sex alternatives are available.

I would imagine most trans people would be up in arms about this too Willis it doesn't exactly cover them in glory does it?

I don't mean to come across No True Scotsman but I think it takes a certain type of a person to do a thing like that, I think they were testing the waters, and I don't think this has anything to do with trans rights.

@TheWeeDonkey

I would imagine most trans people would be up in arms about this too Willis it doesn't exactly cover them in glory does it?

I don't mean to come across No True Scotsman but I think it takes a certain type of a person to do a thing like that, I think they were testing the waters, and I don't think this has anything to do with trans rights.

You would imagine that wouldn’t you. Yet strangely a deafening silence. The few trans identifying people who speak up on this sort of thing also get huge amounts of flack from trans rights supporters.

[quote Datun]@MNHQ

Of course this should stay in AIBU.

This is a parenting site. And this issue is entirely about child safeguarding.

The laws governing that spa are allowing any rapist, paedophile, sex offender, creep and pervert to pay to strip off, sit amongst children and gaze at their naked bodies.

It's also informing all other like minded individuals that, as a business model, it's entirely legitimate.

This is not something mumsnet should be considering 'debatable'.

For the love of god, if publicising this to as many people as possible affects the site's revenue or their business relationships, then they need to stop calling themselves a parenting site.

If you are viewing the fact that men can pay to get undressed and sit next to naked children as a 'sex v gender debate', something is very wrong.

Please reconsider.[/quote]
Very well put 👏👏👏

Looks like I might have had a point then!

I will say this here, too, because I think it's important.
I am sick of seeing male genitals referenced, whether to lionize or critique.

The problem with men is not their genitals. Their reproductive organs form part of their risk profile, but we do not bar men from single sex spaces because they might show them, or indeed because they possess an appendage.

We have to move away from this relentless focus on the most over rated bit of skin on the planet.

Men are a statistical risk factor as a class, and predatory men do not need to be intact to be predatory. It is an extra weapon in their arsenal, but they also possess fingers, fists and generally stronger physiques with which to harm. They have eyes which disregard and transgress boundaries. They have minds full of the pornography they consume at terrifying rates. And they use their words, influence and privilege to tear down the rights and protections of women who are then left vulnerable to those of their number who will use their genitals to harm.

We have to move this away from the idea that we are trying to fend off the penis, and we're only concerned about the flashers and perverts.

We're not, and it doesn't matter anyway, because it's very clear from the reaction to this shit that the overton window has shifted so that enough people think indecent exposure is a neutral act.

Please, can we shove it back. Because most of the men who are defending this wouldn't actually reveal their genitalia in public, but they are using every other means possible to subjugate and oppress women and children.

Let's relegate the dick back to the unimpressive lump of irrelevance it really should be in the grand scheme, and elevate the importance of a woman's No.

What FloralBunting said, yes exactly all of that.

Yes. What Floral said.

I agree with @FloralBunting and @Datun

When did allowing any man near naked children ever stop being creepy af?

Exactly, Floral.

Yeah, what Flora said. I'd be uncomfortable with any man in a female only space.

There are a lot of men who may pose less of a threat than some who have uniquely been given carte blanche (by agenda pushed by men) to access female spaces. I still would feel uncomfortable. When 9 years old, my son went to male only or family spaces (mixed sex).

Yessss Floral!

@littlbrowndog

Agree with thecatonthemat

It’s a safeguarding issue and we on Mumsnet should know that this could happen here

That a strange man can look at our children’s and our own naked bodies whilst being naked himself

And he doesn’t get told to bugger off by management or police called

It’s a show of power by some men

Look women you can’t protect your children or yourselves

We the men we can do what we want wherever we want

You can’t stop us

Sunday Times

'After Sarah Everard’s murder, police must take flashing more seriously'

(extract)
"Police will be told to take offences such as indecent exposure and street harassment more seriously in the wake of Sarah Everard’s murder. (continues)

It has since emerged that officers were warned about Couzens, 48, six years earlier. In 2015 a male motorist reported Couzens for driving naked from the waist down, while days before Everard’s disappearance he is alleged to have exposed himself to a female staff member at a McDonald’s restaurant.

A Home Office source last night said that officers would be told to clamp down on “non-contact sexual offences”, which can be a gateway to more serious crimes.

The Conservative peer Baroness Bertin, whose 18-year-old cousin, Christine, was murdered in France by a stalker, warned: “Police forces have to make sure they do not have a culture where so called ‘low-grade’ sex crimes are routinely dismissed”. (continues)

Emily Spurrell, police and crime commissioner for Merseyside, said officers should be trained to “spot signs of misogyny”. When it comes to street harassment or kerb-crawling, they do not have laws they can enforce, she warned.

“I speak to so many women, and I myself have had so many experiences where we get to the point where we just normalise it as part of being a woman in this country,” Spurrell said. (continues)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/094992e8-e1b8-11eb-8372-0d41497c3283?shareToken=a1d0842637a21f16c84ccd5f7b0e1206

I don't know why it would be more terrifying to have a bearded trans man in a woman's space than a bearded male. Or a clean-shaven male male in make-up with long fingernails, for that matter. Trans men are still women. Trans women are still males, and males are generally larger, more powerful, and more violent than women are.

@EndoplasmicReticulum

You are not allowed to discuss this subject in AIBU.

@EndoplasmicReticulum I can understand their reasons for it, but part of me thinks 'Yeah, because God forbid anymore women knowing about this'.

Mumsnet might also be scared. They've already been under fire regarding all of this and keeping communication channels open for us, so I think the last thing they want is it spilling over into other sections of the site so that it becomes more common for women to talk about it on their forums.

I see this thread has been banished to the naughty step...

Never and third spaces.