Trans woman gym goer caught masturbating in women’s changing room

[LesbianNana]

I’ve included the NY Post article, the original TikTok video and an American police officer YouTuber video (Officer Tatum). This was in California (naturally) at a Planet Fitness gym.

In the beginning of the YouTube video you can see him clearly masturbating (along with his huge gross feet all splayed out), and if you want to avoid YouTube commentary jump to 4:30 for the confrontation.

I’ll transcribe some of the confrontation. It’s a few gym employees, the woman and her boyfriend.

BF: Bro do you go to the Taco Bell restroom and jack off? (Probably.) What the fuck is wrong with you bro? (AGP.)

Woman: Minors walking through here…(Probably the point.)

Trans: You guys, I was IN the stall. (Tip of the hat for not jacking off while at the bench press.)

BF: It does NOT FUCKING MATTER bro.

Trans: I’m not harassing anyone in the stall…I’m allowed to be in here.

Woman: You’re IN THE WOMAN’S BATHROOM.

BF: It doesn’t matter, you’re not allowed to jerk off in here! That is so fucking weird! We have video fucking proof!

Trans: Um are you allowed to video in here? (Attention women: Never video the actions of a man committing a lewd act in public lest it make a man look bad.)

BF: It doesn’t matter, you’re in the women’s bathroom jerking your fucking penis bro!

Trans: I’m transgender! (Here we go! The magic word. All take the knee and beg for forgiveness for your blasphemous ways at the shrine of Transgender!) I was drying off…(HAHAHA.)

Woman: That was you in the shower, too. (Feck’s sake.)

Trans: Right…

At this rate, we’re probably a mere 5 years away from the normalization of public masturbation.

Masturbation Story Hour coming to a library near you! Bring the whole family!

https://nypost.com/2026/01/05/us-news/trans-gymgoer-caught-masturbating-in-womens-bathroom-at-california-planet-fitness/

https://www.tiktok.com/@borderlinebimbo_/video/7591708460211866910

Do you count MPs and other politicians as not divvies on twitter? There are numerous who claimed that no males with a trans identity that would use womens spaces for nefarious reasons

Some of the TRAs threatening rape and violence have been platformed and supported by politicians.

They said...

I'm not demonising an entire minority on the actions of a few.

... which I think is a completely fair and reasonable statement, and...

Yet you can't seem to grasp that's not what people are saying - we can all demonise them*.

• 'them' referring to any person masturbating in public, as I read it. Then...

I can't even be arsed arguing any further. It's futile.
It's the exact same argument that sees people saying *keep all boat people out."
The same script, everything.

... which I took to be a likening the demonisation of all trans people as perverts to the stereotyping of all migrants as 'illegals' or 'boat people'.

I don't know what their views are, but I don't think anything they've said in this thread suggests they approve of trans people being able to access single sex women's spaces. I think their comment on another thread that was linked here claiming to be more bothered by someone filming in a changing room was quite silly though.

If toilets are going to be divided between male and female, it should be on lines of sex, not gender. You've got to consider why it's necessary to split them. It's largely to prevent certain males from behaving inappropriately. But men don't react well when women go into their toilets either. They don't want a female stranger to see them at the urinal. It's also about modesty.

A male person who claims to be a woman is still male and needs to stay out, precisely because he might act inappropriately and make the women feel uncomfortable or threatened.

That said, I feel like this incident, distasteful as it is, has been exaggerated. It should have been dealt with quietly and the male person banned from the female toilets in future.

They should absolutely be calling this behavior out if it's coming from people they're associated with, or it's happening in a discussion/forum they're involved in.

I couldn't say whether that happens or not. I expect most 'reasonable trans people' don't associate with those calling for the rape and murder of others. And in truth, do we really need anyone to point out that they don't condone raping/killing people? Can't we work that out for ourselves?

“But did you consider the people making those threats as serious people?”

WTAF!

So now men can make threats towards women and if they are from a specific subgroup people should not take those threats seriously?

fuck.

“And in truth, do we really need anyone to point out that they don't condone raping/killing people? Can't we work that out for ourselves?”

Well obviously not, that’s what the all the campaigns in the last few years have been about with ‘men doing better’ to call out other males.

But perhaps you haven’t noticed.

Yes I do take the people making these kinds of threats seriously 🙄

https://terfisaslur.com

Ffs

Can you even imagine if these kinds of threats were being deployed in the other direction?

and the male person banned from the female toilets in future.

The male person was already banned. What makes you think he's going to heed it this time?

As I said, anyone still in the trans community associates with those people, by definition. And they don't call them out because those tactics work. They intimidate people, stop them from speaking out, force them to comply with trans demands.

Whether there exists some kind of vast invisible body of "reasonable trans people" out there is ultimately irrelevant, because the immense majority of trans people who express themselves support the verbally (and sometimes more) violent ones.

There is something of a disconnect here I think.

When we have politicians having photos taken infront of decapitate terfs signs, politicians seem to be endorsing the campaigning efforts of Baker who rallies people to ‘punch terfs’ there is something disconnected in being told that obviously people aren’t condoning these threats

That said, I feel like this incident, distasteful as it is, has been exaggerated.

I wouldn't say that - When I think of exaggerated, I think of JK Rowling tweeting 'Its happened again" with that story of the guy who was arrested taking pictures in a women's public toilet.

She knew exactly what she was doing by framing it as yet another instance of a man accessing a women's space in order to commit sex offences by claiming to be trans, even though that wasn't the case at all.

She got the reaction she wanted and never corrected the misinformation.

It should have been dealt with quietly and the male person banned from the female toilets in future.

I don't necessarily agree with this either - I think causing a scene in a situation like this is quite a sensible reaction for your own safety in the moment.

And making it public is the best way to pressure the company into ensuring their single sex spaces are just that, rather than quietly banning one individual.

Has anyone seen a message from Stonewall, or any group of activists who have been campaigning for male people to access female single sex provisions, to stop with the intimidation, threats and violence from the male people demanding that access those provisions?

Any group telling Bash Back to back off because Bash Back have gone too far? Any trans group telling the urine protestors, or the protestors who drown out women’s voices to stop the intimidation tactics because it is making them look bad?

No? Yet there is a constant stream of people telling women that women need to stop protesting, stop publicising incidents. And people wonder why feminists point out the misogyny.

Sorry notterf, I don’t agree that women should not be videoing what they see in clear cut cases like this.

This man was not acting appropriately and the gym management didn’t act in any way to change the policy. Now maybe that is because the state laws prevent them from doing so, but therefore this needs to be publicised. How best do we publicise that this does happen when women are constantly told that it is rare and therefore not an issue?

We are being told that women aren’t complaining on one hand, and that these incidents are rare, while we had groups of influential men filming themselves going in and dancing in a female single sex toilet as an act of intimidation - because they knew they could get away with it.

I think this case was not over exaggerated at all. I remember seeing people tell us on FWR that the Wi spa incident didn’t happen, and that it was exaggerated too. But it really isn’t.

It is creating a public record that these incidents are happening and not enough people in positions of power are doing something.

You have not heard the term Rapist Gender?

What would you call the individual who came up with that term to excuse the policy of forcing women to provide companionship to a male rapist?

Would you class that individual as a trans activist?

How about the individuals who wanted to have a wording in law which allowed a male medic carry out a medical exam on a woman who asked for same sex care?

Would you class those individuals as trans activists?

Do you think that they would class a male individual who applied for the medical job under those terms as "a sick individual whose behavior is not representative of trans people"?

Then the politicians who supported the proposed change to the law how were they classing the males would be applying for the tax funded official State role as a person was
• "a sick individual whose behavior is not representative of trans people" or
• as something a male who IDed as trans would do as a normal career choice?

When we have been asked not to judge male people who choose to enter what should be female single sex spaces how far and for how long should we turn a blind eye to what is involved in allowing some males to break the social contract?

Why is it that women must forgive the initial support given by all males who break the social contract?

Why is it that such a choice and act must be ignored and excused?

The constant fall back has always been ‘just a few bad apples’ or ‘they are not transgender’, hasn’t it?

I don’t believe any campaign group has distanced themselves from those charged and convicted or even those just protesting using violence or intimidation.

The protest on Saturday had Unison support FFS! Unison members proudly drowning out the voices of women who want the gym to change the policy in line with the SC judgement. ….

The whole point of the “this never happens” thread is to point out all the times men do things like this, masturbate in women’s spaces, or worse, and trans activists, trans activism and its supporters have never once deviated from their ongoing goal of men in women’s spaces.

It doesn’t matter how many predators are exposed, how many dicks are pulled out, how many women or girls are assaulted, not one of the many, many prominent trans activists has ever ever admitted that maybe, yes, there might be a problem and women raising concerns might be right.

Not a single concession.

Not a single blip.

Not a single acknowledgement.

Worse, they double down.

I couldn't even tell you the name of a single trans activist. As far as I know, I've encountered two trans people in my entire life, so it's not an issue I follow particularly closely.

I call bull on this Kimura. The world is awash with trans activists. And you’re here on this forum defending trans people for the last few months and don’t know any of them? You haven’t seen or read any other the threads you haven’t posted on? About Beth Upton or Jolyon Maugham for recent examples? Sure.

Maybe you’d have heard of one of them if they’d criticised their own movement for facilitating the opportunity for men to masturbate in women’s spaces. They would have made the news for being ostracised by their own community.

I wouldn't expect an activist to change their views or message based on something like this though.

That’s the point isn’t it? Not matter how many men use trans activism as their gateway to carry out predatory behaviour, not one of them will ever change their view or their message. They are complicit.

Kimura what does 'For Beth' mean to you?
What does 'Rapist's hill' mean to you?

Canada

Male person who claimed to be a woman and contacted females to have his genitals waxed.

The women did not provide a male genital waxing service and as most of them worked in their own home or went to client homes they refused to provide the service to the [(edit) man who claimed to be a "woman"] .

The male person took multiple women to the State court system to sue them for refusing to wax his lady balls.

And he was very active on twitter before the case went public about his period fettish eg he publically stated that he took a ferry which he knew with young girls took from school in the hope he could strike up a conversation with one it the toilet.

Can you find any trans groups which objected to the women being sued?

Or who openly discussed the sexual harrassment involved in the State forcing a woman to defend her right not to touch the genitals of a man?

And the law in Canada debated and passed by your "reasonable person" allowed each of the women involved to be victimised and under threat of sexual assault by any male who choose to claim his male penis and scrotum were womens body parts and be at risk of being forced to pay the male for refusing to be sexually assaulted.

And while you are looking at Canada you should look at the history of the Vancouver Rape Relief Centre and why local politicians are happy to defund this womens service and turn a blind eye to the TRA "activism".

How can the business ban males from female spaces when the general public vote in politicians who are fine with women and girls being subjected to non-contact sex abuse in what should be a female only single sex space?

This will continue to happen while the lovies continue to claim "it never happens and its her fault that she was in the space, her fault for recording and publishing the sex offending she was subjected to"..

Baning a sex offender after the sex offender sucessfully sex offended against women and girls is a reactive policy which ignores why safeguarding is needed and why the social contract was based on Good Men stay out so Bad Men stand out.

Yes, people did and continue to make the claim that it would never happen. Which is why there are threads on here dedicated to examples of it happening again and again.

It's an absolutely standard claim that has been repeated so often that it is an easy tick off on a bingo card.

I've had friends use this argument to me as to why men should be allowed into women's spaces.

And the threats are also standard. Have a look at any trans protest and the threats are there for all to see on the placards. It's not remotely hidden.

I expect most 'reasonable trans people' don't associate with those calling for the rape and murder of others.

Funny how TRA with violent history get platformed at gatherings and speak of carrying out acts of harm against women and people stay but its not to boo or to demand the removal of the speaker and an apology from the organisers. 🤷‍♀️

Funny how womens gatherings and the women who attend are subjected to violent acts and the need to have police protections. 🤷‍♀️

Your "Reasonable" is the no true Scotsman argument. 👀

And in truth, do we really need anyone to point out that they don't condone raping/killing people? Can't we work that out for ourselves?

There have been a number of posters here on MN who have stated that the rape of a child or a woman should not count or be relevant to the issue of why single sex spaces are needed.

Plenty have told women with PTSD from sexual abuse that they should accept that the male wanting to be in what should be a single sex space is more relevant and important that their need for a single sex space.

There are a few posters who are likely wanking on their keyboards while reading and/or posting.

And whole threads about prople who defend their choice to risk killing their partner during sex for a thrill.

Killings for a ideology is just killing on another day ending in y.

So sometimes a question is needed to be asked and answered.

This entire post is the biggest “no true trans” I’ve very seen.

I doubt they did, because it'd be an utterly ridiculous claim to make, and no sensible person would take anyone making it seriously.

Once a person claims some men are actually women they have lost any right to be taken seriously. TWAW is such an utterly ridiculous claim to make that anyone making it is already in delululand.

Of course, there was that bloke (who identifies as a woman) who actually put a number on how many assaults on women and girls per year were acceptable as a cost for including males in female single sex spaces.

If anyone can remember his name, or has the screenshot of him stating what the number was, I'm sure that Kimura would like to see it.

The assymetry towards expectations on women and the ignorance of some people before making claims that women are behaving 'like those bad faith actors' is remarkable.

"Anybody threatening violence, rape or death over any issue is clearly not acting in good faith. The same goes for people weaponizing terms against anyone they disagree with - like bigot in this case, or calling anyone who voices a concern about immigration racist."

Women have been called 'bigots' by many highly lauded activists and some political entities for stating that male people are not 'women' and for campaigning to exclude male people from female single sex provisions. Of course they are not acting in 'good faith', yet these people have a wide sphere of political influence. They have already set the bar at that very low height and been applauded for it.

"If you choose to engage with people acting in bad faith, you're going to be accused of things that aren't true, insulted or worse. But doing so, then acting like those bad faith actors are representative of an entire movement is bad faith in itself."

This is a direct misrepresentation of women's actions. There is no symmetry between the actions of those people acting in 'bad faith' and the women campaigning and speaking. Which feminist political entities are calling activists similar names? When has any women's and girl's rights supporting protest been violent or intimidating?

The situations are assymetrical yet you continue to talk as if they are symmetrical. I don't believe that you actually have the depth of knowledge to be making the claims that you have been. Or is it that you are stuck in the mode of telling women to 'be kind' even when women are trying to get their very reasonable voices heard?