Non Binary Gym Changing Rooms

[NevermindNelson]

I’ve just had an email from a gym I use explaining that their changing rooms are going to become gender neutral. I don’t even know where to start to reply. The email states that they’re proud to do this.

I want to reply with the reasons that I’m cancelling my membership, but all I’ve got so far is, “What, seriously?”

Maybe I should just send this - Just under 90 per cent of complaints regarding changing room sexual assaults, voyeurism and harassment are about incidents in unisex facilities. Because they have made the changing rooms unisex, haven’t they?

Edited to correct the term as ‘gender neutral’

I am in amazement at the thought that we are all ‘getting worked up’ about it.

Women are perfectly entitled to single six changing rooms. And companies can insist upon them. See Duncan Bannatyne.

Transactivism has convinced them that because gender reassignment is a protected characteristic, it trumps the protected characteristic of sex.

It doesn't.

The equality act was designed to protect people, in the fairest way possible. Sometimes there is a conflict. So the fairest way must be found.

Which is why it says that you can exclude men, even if they identify as women, if it is done as a proportionate means to a legitimate aim.

The 'proportionate means' would be, perhaps, not insisting a tw use the men's changing room, but find them an alternative provision, whilst maintaining the single sex provision for women, as the aim is to protect women's dignity, privacy and safety.

in terms of upholding the equality act, this would be seen as a fair balance that considers everyone.

insisting that women get undressed in front of men, would not.

And it doesn't matter if it's just one class. 'We only discriminate some of the time' is not a defence.

@limefrog Of course you can talk about/ discuss whatever you want, I'm just saying it was a bit preemptive when actually it's probably not the case that they are making women to get changed in front of men?

Don't be silly, she started the thread to ask for advice on how to query the original email which actually from the bit she c&pd seemed quite clear, that “During this period, we will be making our changing rooms into gender neutral spaces”.

It's only the subsequent backtracking communication (which may not be official from the sound of it) which now makes it unclear

I am waiting for the next update OP. Because for the very life of me, I cannot see what kind of specific class would involve the need for turning a space as you describe it into a mixed sex changing space. Is it a naturalists class? Where only naturalists attend the gym at that time?

Are no other users allowed in the gym at all during that time? As other correctly point out, unless they close the gym for that session, that creates a safeguarding risk for others. Well, to be honest, I cannot see how it isn’t a safeguarding risk during that one session either considering the set up you describe.

Looking forward to your update because so far this gym has very poorly communicated their changes. And no doubt you are not the only person concerned with the changes.

@Helleofabore I imagine what's probably happening is they are having a gender neutral session time at the gym, much like they might have women's only sessions etc?

But yes it does sound like poor communication although we haven't seen the original email so don't really know what they actually said?

Pound to a penny it will be the class that a man wants to do, and because he identifies as a woman, they think they have to let him in the ladies. So they're making it gender neutral because they think it sounds fairer.

OP, they may genuinely not realise that they can exclude a man, any man, from the female changing room, and still be compliant with the equality act.

Offering him alternative provision, that doesn't involve being in the women's, would be considered perfectly sufficient.

by which I mean you can tell them that. You could even tell them that Bannatynes does it.

'Gender neutral' class? You mean 'mixed sex' class? That's the default and doesn't require any special changing room arrangements.

And while I would love there to be specialist 'naturalist' gym classes, I suspect you mean 'naturist', Helleofabore.

And can you tell us how safeguarding might be managed in a facility that doesn’t have cubicles for changing. OP stated : “They’re small spaces with a small area for changing, three or four showers and one toilet at the end.” and “The space is really small, the showers are quite small, so a lot of changing happens in the small space behind the door.”

So safeguarding is being dismissed for a class or for a set time? Because some people should be less safeguarded?

It will be interesting to see the outcome.

I’m sorry but I don’t think it’s helpful for the OP to suggest that there is an entitlement under law to single sex facilities. If she starts claiming that women are entitled to single sex facilities, she is handing the gym an easy victory. All they have to do is bat it back, saying that she is wrong.

She is on much more solid ground if she sticks to the facts: the EA permits the provision of single sex facilities and gyms that don’t provide them are at risk of a claim of discrimination against the protected characteristics of sex and religion.

If they are proposing a session of a few hours a week which is specifically for people who want a gender neutral space (and those people do exist), then anyone who wishes to have a single sex space wouldn't come at that time.

It's no different to having a women only gym sessions during which men do not have access to the gym.

It is a session where people can go and not feel they are making anyone uncomfortable by being in the wrong changing room - that has its place and can actually be a good thing for both non binary people AND women, as long as the session time is communicated clearly.

Obviously it needs to be managed properly by the gym and that is what OP needs to clarify, but this amount of hype is really unnecessary until it's been established what they are actually doing and how they are managing it.

She's not wrong. Women have the absolute right to single sex provision.

The law permits it.

I suspect it's the word entitled which is the stumbling block. It's acquired negative connotations in its meaning of 'self entitled'.

The point I was making, is that yes, women have every right to single sex provision. Companies are under the impression that they don't, if it's a transwoman who wants access.

Companies, of course, have the right to say they only provide mixed sex facilities. The law allows both positions.

But, if it ever went to court, they would have to demonstrate that they were being fair to people with the protected characteristic of sex.

Which, in this instance, of course, they are not.

That means you have made a session for women and men who don’t like to be called women and men. These are usually teenagers, particularly young women. As anyone can call themselves non binary and this is advertised as a particular class, can you see the danger in this?

@Datun Valid point around access to single sex provision and of course, sex is a protected characteristic and it is important for women to have female-only spaces. I agree with all of that.

However, if a gym provide a session of a few hours a week where non-binary people can use gender neutral facilities, I don't think that goes against any of this.

Women will have access to the single sex changing space for the entire rest of the week.

And non-binary/ gender neutral/ trans people get to have a time where they can avoid making people uncomfortable by being in the wrong changing room (which can be a bit of a minefield for them).

To be honest, as long as it's communicated well, I can't see how that isn't a win for everyone.

I'd love to see Ben Cooper have a go at that one!

For two hours a week, the changing rooms become mixed sex.

Which would effectively exclude most women, and probably most men.

Being 'gender neutral' is not a protected characteristic.

I'm assuming women only sessions are used to give provision to women who, for various legitimate reasons, can only attend a woman only session.

Again, it's about being fair. But it's to do with protected characteristics. Gender neutral, mixed sex, non-binary - are not protected characteristics.

Being 'gender neutral' is not a protected characteristic.

@Datun Gender fluid and non binary people are protected under the Equality Act 2010.

I think it is very important to remember that these are open changing rooms. Not adaptable to mixed sex unless the people signing up to the sessions also signed up to being naked in mixed sex situations.

Under that situation, I consider the gym to be reducing their safeguarding for that group. If it was a bank of cubicles, it may not be an issue. It is the open space that is the issue.

Gender fluid and non binary people are protected under the Equality Act 2010.

That's dubious. They were never intended to be, and only one employment tribunal has suggested that they are and it isn't a binding decision. They are protected of course under other PCs that they have, sex, race, sexual orientation, disability, age, religion/belief etc.

Yes, they should not be discriminated against vs anyone else of their own sex.

It's a sort of variation of the third space argument.

But that's usually in terms of toilets and changing cubicles in shops. Not one room, where everyone is getting completely naked together! That would be a safeguarding nightmare.

But I'm sure you're right, loads of people would love it. And this is just a wild guess of course, but I suspect it would absolutely be dominated by one sex 😁

It's not dubious at all. There is a very clear statement on it which has come directly from the government.

https://www.brethertons.co.uk/site/blog/gender-fluid-persons-protected

Nah. I believe that's according Robin Moira Wrigjt.

Although, I have to say, I would absolutely love RMW to define gender fluidity and claiming not to be male or female in a court of law.

Perhaps a bit pre-emptive to start a thread

Not pre-emptive at all. The OP has been given several practical suggestions about how to query the gym's announcement and take it forward, along with pointers to information and a discussion about the legalities.

It was a reasonable question and plenty of sensible responses even though it's a touchy subject.

"very worked up and upset"

Silly women, hey! Always going in half cocked

'Loads of people would love it'

... Or be relieved that they finally have an opportunity, for a couple of hours a week, to simply use the gym without a minefield of a decision about which changing room to use?

Anyone who wants a single sex space can simply ignore this session and use the gym during any of its other opening hours during the week.

@Tinysoxxx I do see the point about safeguarding from the perspective of potentially vulnerable trans/ non binary young people going along to this session, however, there is an equal risk with female-male trans young people using male changing rooms at any other time of the week. A session like this makes little difference to that risk for young people which exists regardless.

What they really need to do is put cubicles in their changing rooms, regardless of whether or not this session goes ahead.

@limefrog -yes, that person absolutely should not have had to 'endure insults and jokes' for their clothing choices. (I'm gender critical so don't believe in 'women's clothes' and 'men's clothes' styles. ). On the question of toilets Another consideration is to designate gender-neutral toilet and changing facilities if space allows, engaging in employee consultation where appropriate.

What this doesn't say is that someone has carte blanche to use the facilities of the opposite sex. DH worked on a site where someone was transitioning, there was consultation and the agreed solution was to relabel one of the loos simply as 'toilet'.