M&S apologises over trans employee in bra department (Telegraph)

[WimbledonWhites]

How many “cis” male members of staff do you suppose would approach teenage girls in the lingerie department?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/04/ms-apologises-over-trans-employee-in-bra-department/

https://archive.ph/nTDB9archive.ph/nTDB9

It’s like a set of scales. On one end are the feelings & wishes of men who claim to be women, & demand to be validated as such. On the other are the sex based rights & feelings of females.

Not even the recent Supreme Court ruling will tip the scales even slightly for some people, as regards female rights. The magic of trans cancels everything else out.

Determining ‘transphobia’ underpins an argument seems to have a labotomising effect whereby all capacity to engage in critical thinking is by passed.

Having said that, the labotomising effect seems to be influencing the determination that transphobia underpins rational argument - there is some kind of hellish loop.

I wouldn't make a safeguarding exception for a priest in a dog collar either. If he approached a child in a bra store then I wouldn't wang on for several paragraphs about how wonderful I am for not being very worried about his motives. He shouldn't be there, no man should be there.

Does that mean I hate Catholics?

Misogynists have found an easy 'out'. Just claim 'transphobia' and they can actually virtually erase women and girls needs and rights and lived experience as the female sex. What a loophole! They know how bad they will look if they claim we're 'men haters' or 'misandrists'. Claiming we "hate trans people" is the loophole these vile sexist pigs have always longed for. It gives their misogyny a veneer of respectability.

Don't forget that one of the underlying rules of being a good trans ally is that you treat the trans person as if they were your best friend of their preferred gender

Where did I say a man feeling uncomfortable is unacceptable? I know some people seem to think that but I don’t and have never said that’s what I think.

if you read my posts you’d see I’ve said I don’t think men or trans people should be employed in the lingerie department and this shouldn’t have happened.

the problem is the assumptions people jump to on here and how people start saying ‘he followed her into a bra store’ rather than what actually happened. And saying ridiculous things to try and support their argument like ‘ retail staff aren’t allowed to approach customers’. That’s what I object to. But people don’t want to hear that they just want to shout ‘he’s a filthy pervert!! And inflame the situation in any way they can.
anyway I should have known better than to try and inject a little sense onto a message board on here. I won’t try that again 😁 enjoy your evenings all. God it’s amazing that some of you seem to do this for pleasure!

They always had that out, this is just the latest incarnation. Like that poster, who tried to shut me down by saying I hate trans people (ie, a man hater) and then that I was just silly and irrational (smelling salts). It's precisely the same shit it's always been.

I give this flounce a B+. It's good on the hypocrisy and deluded self righteousness, but those are easy. The insults are trite and weak, and it lacks true grit and stage presence; there isn't enough power behind it to imagine a magnificent cloak flourish as the poster exits. More like a sad little parp. Actually, I give it a B-.

I’m assuming you are not a 14 year old girl who appeared to be on her own?

Why do you think it appropriate for a man to approach a 14 yr old girl in the lingerie section? A man who might well be wearing ladies underwear.

Can you honestly see no issue with that?

The hypocrite verbals us and tells us that we are anti trans despite our denials, but gets upset when they get the same treatment back. Injecting sense? Don't make us laugh! All you've done is smear, lie and verbal. Now you're running away with your tail in between your legs. Good bye!

if you read my posts you’d see I’ve said I don’t think men or trans people should be employed in the lingerie department and this shouldn’t have happened.

All trans people have a sex. The person in the M&S incident is a man. You seem to be struggling to articulate that. The ideology has removed your ability to say 'transwomen are men' out loud.

“the problem is the assumptions people jump to on here and how people start saying ‘he followed her into a bra store’ rather than what actually happened. And saying ridiculous things to try and support their argument like ‘ retail staff aren’t allowed to approach customers’. That’s what I object to. But people don’t want to hear that they just want to shout ‘he’s a filthy pervert!! And inflame the situation in any way they can.”

And twist.

M&S wrote an email stating that that day that employee was supposed to be on another floor. People have pointed this out.

People, including ex M&S staff, have pointed out the model of service on the shop floor that M&S generally adopts. Which you seem to have then twisted in to a general point about generic stores.

You have made much about accuracy yet your posts have lacked the very accuracy you seem to value. Including this twist of “But people don’t want to hear that they just want to shout ‘he’s a filthy pervert!!”

”anyway I should have known better than to try and inject a little sense onto a message board on here”

So, you admit that you have your own deep prejudice about posters on this board. Good to know that.

It's interesting that apparently the prejudice about posters on this thread seems to have moral superiority over a prejudice about a man approaching a teenage girl in a lingerie department, isn't it.

Says a lot. Very loudly.

Ooh, the misogynistic triad becomes a tetrad with the inclusion of smelling salts!

It is no longer a surprise that women are being told that they are allowed to have thoughts, but articulating those thoughts invites derision, name calling, shaming and monstering. We have seen this come out in at least two court cases. Women, you are free to think thoughts. Some people might even agree.

But if you articulate your thoughts you deserve to be demonised. Because anything you say will be hateful.

Not sure what to think about this. He shouldn't have been there but would there have been such a strong reaction to any other male employee, who wasn't cross-dressing, offering to help? What if he was a homosexual?

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
too busy foaming at the mouth

Do you normally use hyperbolic language or have you a vested interest in the event?

Me asking a simple question:

· Today 19:13
Of the multiple times you were shopping in the underwear department how many times had a male member of staff offered to help you locate a bra or other undergarment without you or anyone with you asking for help?

Your answer:

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
None. It was always women.

And then you with (imo) a rather random rambling thought process

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
Hence why I said I thought this instance was inappropriate.

Is this you :

Northofthebordermum · Today 18:47
Im not saying this was appropriate but the hysterical reaction and the twisting of facts to what was almost certainly an innocent retail interaction is awful.

saying that the event was inappropriate yet innocent?

That is a bit of a contradiction and a conflict as inappropiate actions are inappropriate for reasons but advocating that is was hysterical and awful to question the interaction.

Anyway

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
I’m refuting the suggestion that it’s a sackable offence for M&S staff
• to offer customers help,
• or approach them
which multiple people are saying is fact on here.

Can you point out where @MayaPinion suggested a sackable offence happened?

She wrote:

MayaPinion · Yesterday 06:57
M&S staff don’t approach customers to offer help so why would he be offering to help a teenager in the bra section. That’s awful for her. My DP avoids going into the lingerie department with me precisely because he doesn’t want the other women there to feel uncomfortable. That’s respectful behaviour. There is no need for any male to be there, and especially not talking to teenagers.

Why did you include MayaPinion in your "multiple people" group?

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
I’m refuting the suggestion that it’s a sackable offence for M&S staff
• to offer customers help,
• or approach them
which multiple people are saying is fact on here.
I’d like to see some evidence for that.

Have you tried directly asking a poster who stated that it was a sackable offence?

If you did have you been given an answer?

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
if you’d read my post properly you’d know that.

Can you point out where you believe I failed to read your post properly?

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
But too busy foaming at the mouth like most posters on here it seems.

Can you explain how the question below resulted in you using such emotive hyperbolic language?

(Me) · Today 19:13
Of the multiple times you were shopping in the underwear department how many times had a male member of staff offered to help you locate a bra or other undergarment without you or anyone with you asking for help?

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
So sad the debate around this is so devoid of critical thinking.

Can you explain what element(s) of critical thinking is lacking when seeking a specific answer to the question below?

Can you explain how the question below resulted in you using such emotive hyperbolic language?

My question: · Today 19:13
Of the multiple times you were shopping in the underwear department how many times had a male member of staff offered to help you locate a bra or other undergarment without you or anyone with you asking for help?

Anyway your belief

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
if you’d read my post properly you’d know that.

Your post quoted @MayaPinion

So I assumed that your post was promoted by what @MayaPinion wrote.

Please feel free to correct anything you believe not to be misread.

MayaPinion typed:

MayaPinion · Yesterday 06:57
M&S staff don’t approach customers to offer help so why would he be offering to help a teenager in the bra section.
That’s awful for her.

Your reply to her:

Northofthebordermum · Today 18:47
This is absolute disingenuous nonsense, I have shopped for nursing bras in M&S multiple times and always been approached by a member of staff to see if I need help.

You kindly confirmed that the staff were women

• • Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08 None. It was always women.

MayaPinion typed:

MayaPinion · Yesterday 06:57
My DP avoids going into the lingerie department with me precisely because he doesn’t want the other women there to feel uncomfortable.
That’s respectful behaviour.

Your reply to her:

Northofthebordermum · Today 18:47
And-shock horror, sometimes there are even men in the lingerie department!!

You did not expand on the word "men" but as you used the words "member of staff" I concluded that you were using the word "men" to suggest that male members of staff are assigned to work in M&S's underwear department and male customers.

Please feel free be more specific about the word "men".

MayaPinion typed:

MayaPinion · Yesterday 06:57
There is no need for any male to be there, and especially not talking to teenagers.

Your reply to her:

Northofthebordermum · Today 18:47
Im not saying this was appropriate but the hysterical reaction and the twisting of facts to what was almost certainly an innocent retail interaction is awful.

This is you advocating for a male employee who while in the underwear section decided with no prior interaction to approach a 14 year old girl who was not looking for help from any member of staff

Can you explain why you decided to advocating on this mans behalf?

Are you family or a friend or did you just decide to advocate for a total stranger whim you never met?

Can you explain why you think discussing his actions qualify as hysterical reaction ?

Can you explain if you think it is ever socially acceptable for a male member of staff to approach a 14 year old girl who was in the process of selecting underwear and offer to help when she has not looked for help from a member of staff ?

Can you explain why you decided to advocate that this* *was almost certainly an innocent retail interaction?

Northofthebordermum · Today 20:08
So sad the debate around this is so devoid of critical thinking.

You may feel that my questions are "too busy foaming at the mouth " but I am rather intrigued about the reasons you feel the need to* *advocate on behalf of this man (or any man) who choose to conduct himself in the way that the mother has described.

A non cross dressing man, gay or straight, wouldn't be automatically placed into a sacred caste by M&S and the barmy army, with everyone scrambling to downplay what happened and prioritise his self image over a child's privacy and safety. He probably wouldn't be emboldened by said barmy army to try it in the first place. Sacred castes in safeguarding are a terrible concept.

“would there have been such a strong reaction to any other male employee”

Yes. As people have repeatedly pointed out NO male person should think it acceptable behaviour to approach a teenaged girl in the bra section. Do you agree?

“What if he was a homosexual?”

What the fuck does that matter? A male person is a male person regardless of their sexual orientation and their gender identity. Female people deserve privacy and dignity away from ALL male people at times. This is one of those times - a teenaged girl deserved to have her needs respected.

So the flouncer didn’t address anything I said about the men who claim to be women claiming discomfort, the doctor, Roxy Tickle or the misgendered. All they selected was a response to my post, that allowed more where did I say that blah blah.

It was ever thus. It’s a belief system predicated upon a lie, that men can become women. Facts are therefore Kryptonite, because the slightest prod, any sensible discussion based around biological reality, sex based rights, sees the house of cards collapse.

So flouncing is inevitably the end result. We’ve had the scold, we’ve had the misrepresentation, followed by the bingo card characterisations & the you all hate trans people. It’s so boring & predictable.

Hmm. The issue probably would have been taken seriously by m&s in that scenario rather than getting to the point with journalists involved, such is the nature of matters where we treat males differently to other males even though they are all male and not female.

if you read my posts you’d see I’ve said I don’t think men or trans people should be employed in the lingerie department and this shouldn’t have happened.

So what is the problem you have with everyone else's posting then? You agree with us. Why are you trying to commandeer some moral high ground?

Yes I agree he shouldn't have been approaching customers in the lingerie section nor should any other male. If their store policy permits this then it needs to be changed. It's a safeguarding failure and, in commercial terms, bad for business.

But I do think there's a lot of assumptions being made about the intent of this man in particular - predatory, pervert, etc. - that aren't supported by the evidence. He may have been genuinely trying to help, unaware of how uncomfortable he was making her feel with his presence. Or he may have been a slithering creep. We just don't know.

Keep in mind that the outcome the mother wants isn't to get this person sacked.

They want a safeguarding policy to avoid males approaching children in the lingerie department.

If a male had done it, M&S probably would have thought it reasonable and done so.

The issue here is precisely their reluctance to adopt single sex, safeguarding policy and acknowledge the sex of this member of staff in this context as per exemptions under the Equality Act which allows for legitimate aims.

The thing with safeguarding is you have to start from a basic position of slithering creep. Safer all round.