Womens sauna is for 'those who identify as women'

[Pigriver]

Hi everyone,
I have spent the last year or so quietly reading and can only discuss these issues IRL with a few select friends as many are flag flying allies.
A local community enterprise has opened a community sauna with a range of sessions. Mainly mixed sessions with special session options of
*Unclothed
*Trans friendly
*Female (for anyone who identifies as female)

But no actual female only.

I would like to contact them but it will clearly 'out' me as GC in a community I work and live in and have friends and acquaintances that may have connection with this community group. I hate that speaking out about a matter that is important for me could be social and career suicide. Options to contact at the moment seems to be an online contact form that needs my name and email.
So WWYD?

The OP set this thread up as a WWYD- what would you do?

She did not ask for advice on how to complain.

I am posting what I would do in the same situation, which is look for a women only health centre that has a sauna. Problem solved.

It’s a mixed sex health centre so it is highly unlikely OP will get anything but stress and poor treatment by staff if she pursues attempts to change this mixed sex centre to be women only for pool and sauna for certain time slots.

So that’s why I bothered. Sometimes it’s better to pay membership dues to a health centre that caters to you and what you want, than it is to pay for a health centre that doesn’t fit your needs and expect complaining is going to somehow change their entire business model by alienating a significant portion of their current customer base.

Especially since I believe OP that her fears as to retribution for complaining are valid and could negatively impact her:
”I was reticent as I'd be speaking out in a way that may hurt me professionally (and socially) as I am well know from working in the local community for over 20 years.”

But I guess it’s too late because she’s hit the send button on an email.
Quiet boycotting, as in taking your business elsewhere is usually the most powerful solution with the least risk of social and professional repercussions to a situation like this.
Especially since we know certain activists enjoy harassing and doxxing women for wanting real women only spaces.

She did not ask for advice on how to complain.

Re read the OP. She said she wanted to contact them.

If you think she should just look away and not take a stand that's one thing.

Let alone saying everyone in Germany or wherever are just chilled.

She wants to say something, how to do that?

Are there legal grounds to complain?

Its hard enough for women to feel they are able and have a right to coplain, and asking on FWR is one way of getting feedback on how to do it.

Not to be told just chill out.

It’s never unlawful to expand inclusion.

This isn't true.

The sauna can lawfully offer special sessions for females ... on the basis of gender.

Assuming that by gender you mean self-identified, then that's not true either, at least as we believe the law to be. The Girl Guides understand that they cannot "expand" inclusion to include trans-identifying boys in their girls-only organization.

To draw the parallel - Girl Guides are not obliged to exclude boys - they could become a genuinely mixed-sex organization. But they cannot lawfully include girls and only trans-identifying boys.

Similarly the sauna is not obliged to have a female-only session, but a female-and-trans-identifying men session is unlawful.

Re read the OP. She said she was reticent to contact them and asked wwyd? At the time she was undecided.

You’re confusing me with another poster. I never told her to chill out. I never mentioned Germany.

There is more than one way to take a stand. Boycotting is arguably more powerful than continuing to give money to the company you have filed a complaint with.

Please do not delete half of a statement to misquote me.
The sauna can lawfully offer special sessions for females only on the basis of sex and for women including trans women on the basis of gender.

Is what I said. Which has a completely different meaning from what you misquoted and attributed to me:
“The sauna can lawfully offer special sessions for females ... on the basis of gender.”

on this
It’s never unlawful to expand inclusion.

It is true when we look at legal precedent. Men’s clubs, expanded to include women. Whites only spaces expanded to include nonwhites. Marriage laws expanded to include same sex couples. Civil partnership laws expanded to include opposite sex couples. The right to vote, hold office, sign a contract, serve in the armed forces, …all expanded inclusion.

The girl guide articles are all quoting a letter that claims inclusion is discriminatory. That’s not been tested in any court of law.

The legal advice in response to the letter was that excluding trans girls would be lawful and would stop the threatened court filing in its tracks- thereby avoiding the expense of a court case.

It is by no means is an admission that the letter is correct and that the complainant would have won in court.

I didn't misquote you.

You wrote: The sauna can lawfully offer special sessions for females only on the basis of sex and for women including trans women on the basis of gender.

We expand your conjunctive structure ('and') into two parts.

The sauna can lawfully offer special sessions for females only on the basis of sex

This is true.

And:

The sauna can lawfully offer special sessions for females only including trans women on the basis of gender.

This is not true, as we understand the law to be at this time.

Men’s clubs, expanded to include women. Whites only spaces expanded to include nonwhites.

Men's clubs that expand to include women have to include all women, not a subset of women. It's not lawful to have a club for men and (e.g.) tall women, or women who identify as men.

"Whites only" spaces: it's not clear whether you consider a 'space' to be a service or an association. But white-only associations have never been legal, as colour is excluded from the list of PC's for which single PC associations are legal. And there is no schedule that allows exceptions to the prohibition on discrimination by race in the provision of services. It's a silly example.

I don't think you understand the structure or operation of the Equality Act 2010 very well.

..It is by no means is an admission that the letter is correct and that the complainant would have won in court.

When an organization has staked quite so much time, energy and publicity on being "trans inclusive" as the GG's have, to fold like that is very much an admission that the letter is correct and the complainant would have won in court.

It isn't in a health centre. It's a community enterprise on a piece of community owned farming land. It was set up using grants, fundraising and lottery funding.
I attend a council run leisure centre that has women only sessions for swimming and gym. This is fairly normal and even when I attended a private gym they had these sessions.

I repeat, this is my choice and it's not an uncommon one.

No the law does not expect that. My point was that the 'women's' session is for people who 'identify as women', so it includes men (who are trans identified) but it excludes other men who are not trans identified, and that is indirect discrimination because some men (those who are trans identified) are allowed in but other men are not. Trans identified men are a subset of men, not women and that's where the discrimination lies.

”women including trans women on the basis of gender” is not a protected characteristic and not covered by the Equality Act. If a service is for women only and men are excluded that means “trans women” would be excluded, given that they are legally and factually men.

The pp deliberately used a silly analogy to suggest that there is something progressive about allowing a self selecting group of men into women’s spaces.

Reminding the centre of the law is a good way to go. GG and WI have had to change already.

You’re right in that if it’s advertised as a mixed sex sauna then anyone can attend any session. However, if it advertising some of the sessions to be for women only, then they have to be just that. No men, however they identify, are included.

She used an old email address.

I think there is a difference between somewhere where women only (or men only) is a session where you can be without swimwear (or for women, topless) and one where all of you have to wear swimwear and there are enclosed individual changing spaces.

Does not resolve the issue for those of certain faiths where single sex means exactly that.

Brighton's sauna on the beach requires swimwear and you have private changing spaces.

Personally, I'd drop the timid little woman schtick and play the community centre 100% straight.

Email using your persona of "Big Baz" and make an enquiry about the sessions saying you are looking to arrange a session for yourself and your trans mates, and you are worried about whether the sauna steam contains anything that could corrode your Prince Albert (other intimate male piercings are available I am sure).

Then see what reply you get, and run with it.

Be ready to threaten transphobia at the faintest suggestion of insincerity.

If you want to spice it up, ask about storage lockers for your wigs and big breasticle costumes that you require in order to live your life "as a woman".