GLP are suing Virgin Active

[ByGreatGreenWriter]

https://goodlawproject.org/were-suing-virgin-active-over-their-transphobic-rules/

“So we’re taking legal action. We are representing two claimants who are members of Virgin Active gyms and who have been subject to discrimination solely because they are trans.

According to Virgin’s new policy, both of them can no longer use facilities like the pool and sauna because they can only be reached by going through either the men’s or women’s changing rooms.“

If true that sounds like discrimination?

No the same argument cant be made as men in women's single sex spaces are a danger to women and a violation of our right to dignity and privacy.
Wheras men however they identify in men single sex spaces is not a threat to safety nor a violation of their right to privacy or dignity (nobody has a right to hide their sex and being made to use the correct sexed space is not undignified before you try that bs line)
The legal position has not changed the lies that stonewall and the TRAs pushed for years have mearly been proven to be lies, if people chose to listen to stonewall rather than actually reading the law and based decision around their misrepresentation and their own failures to do due diligence then tough luck

No, I don’t ‘see’ them that way, they just are that way - they’re men. End of.

‘but they don’t feel that way’ Ok, but when it comes to men in women’s spaces so what how these men feel? They can feel how they like. The material reality is that they are biological males, and the law says they stay out of women only spaces.

‘why would you expect them to feel comfortable sharing with men?’ I don’t care about how they feel about sharing with other men, not my issue, not my problem to fix. What 100% isn’t the solution is for them to break the law and use women’s spaces.

Women are supposed to be kind and caring and fling the doors open to men? Doors that we fought to keep closed for the reasons that everybody knows & understands.

I cannot say enough times that I do not care one iota about the feelings of a man who doesn’t want to use men’s facilities. His problem.

Whether they are comfortable or not is irrelevant.
How they see themselves is irrelevant.
The only relevant thing is that they are male

from a legal perspective the VA are relying on the EQA, lawful discrimination on the grounds of sex, (schedule 3)

the question as to wether services have a duty to provide third/fourth fifth or whatever provisions for persons not wishing to use the service that aligns with their biological sex has not been tested.

At first instance an application would need to be made to the County Court.

This must be done within 6 months of the act of alleged discrimination, which was in August 2025 i do believe.

At first glance i thought It would be a pretty bold move by the GLP, but as someone said up thread a good grift as the case could drag on for years through the courts up to the Supreme Court.

but it is actually a good question that needs answering.

Should service providers be compelled to have gender neutral facilities?

obviously that would have severe cost implications for businesses.

And then we have the government sitting on the very same question.

The Supreme Court dealt with gender reassignment and GRCs in its decision;

The ruling was that the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 (the Act) should be interpreted as ‘biological’ sex only. This means that, for the purposes of the Act, a person’s legal sex is the one that was recorded at their birth. According to the ruling, obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) does not change your legal sex for Equality Act purposes.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/our-work/uk-supreme-court-ruling-meaning-sex-equality-act-our-work

When are GLP going to launch a case they actually have a chance of winning?

OP did you give a damn when Virgin let TW in the women's changing rooms ? Or is it only men's feelings you care about ?

With the fox-bludgeoner at the helm, fixated on his own personal crusade no matter what the law says? No time soon, I wouldn't have thought.

The SC ruled that the individual remains of the same sex that they always were.

I'd say that rather than relying on your own powers of interpretation, you should take the Supreme Court decision in For Women Scotland as your reference.
For the purposes of the Equality Act those males with the PC of GR remain male & their correct comparator is any male who happens not to share that PC.

Agreed. Ideally there would be third spaces. But if there aren't, then trans women will need to use the men's changing room for access to the sauna. They can't use or go through the women's changing room as all trans women are legally men under the Equality Act 2010.

I strongly suspect this is the case as the Good Laff Project has written its announcement in such a weaselly and confusing manner. GLP know if their complaint were written in clear simple English then the public would know it's all nonsense and they are about to lose yet again in the Courts.

Trans women are men. So they'll be safe with all the other men in the Male Changing Room.

I care about all trans people, male and female, that now don’t have access to an appropriate space. This isn’t just a male issue

So that's a NO then

I don't think the aim is to win- unless they're even more delulu than I'd thought.
It's PR, the aim is to create a false consensus that FWS is somehow in doubt & its application contingent on the antics of the fox batterer & his ridiculous cohorts.

What precisely made you imagine that the female changing room was ever an appropriate space for males?
Please be specific.

You've just answered your own question - male and female.

Males go this way.

Females go that way.

And adhere to the law in the process.

Then look at it that way.

As of now, transmen are perfectly safe in women's spaces.

Should gender-neutral fourth spaces (third spaces are disabled spaces) be created, transmen would be expected to use them, and would thus potentially come into contact with the bad apples among transwomen, or even with men who would choose to use them precisely to access said transmen.

In short, gender-neutral fourth spaces would make transmen less safe than they are now. Doesn't that matter too?

Never, as if tgey did they'd lose their most oppressed title

In the UK gender neutral spaces are only allowed to have one person using it at a time, so it would be perfectly safe for everyone.

The Supreme Court ruling said trans men can be excluded from female spaces. Where do you expect them to go when that happens?

I would ask why Stonewall et al's definition of trans is different, whether they are referring to the same group of people and whether trans people who think physiological sex determines if you're a man/woman, and those trans people who disagree, have the same needs and priorities, and if not, what can be done about it?

Perhaps that should be agreed before demands are made, as we already have trans people who are very uncomfortable/ put at risk when one group tries to talk for all "trans" people.

It becomes very hard to discuss productively when trans can mean either believing that women are female or hating people that say women are female.

But a female who really looks and dresses and sounds like and acts like a male could cause a lot of distress to naked women and girls in there. I wonder how staff get through. Only via changing rooms or another corridor

The males and females all have access if they are prepared to follow the law and accept that VA are fillowing the law.

Chicks with dicks, or more correctly, men - abusing women and women's rights. Again.

My understanding of the bit of the EA that you quoted, is that the PC of Gender Reassignment means that a person can't be discriminated against because they declare themselves trans.
But it does NOT mean that they should be treated as if they were the opposite sex in all situations - because they are not.

So if the male changing room was only for the use of men and TW were excluded, that would be discrimination on the basis of gender reassignment.

I might be mixing my legal cases here, but wasn't that also what was decided in the Supreme Court? That regardless of whether a person has the PC of Gender Reassignment, or has the legal fiction of a re-issued but now wrong sex birth certificate, Sex means the biological reality of being male or female.

Therefore, Virgin Active are now correctly following the law, rather than allowing individuals who declared a trans identity to make demands as to where they should be allowed to go.

In the UK gender neutral spaces are only allowed to have one person using it at a time, so it would be perfectly safe for everyone.

In that case, it would be fine.

The Supreme Court ruling said trans men can be excluded from female spaces. Where do you expect them to go when that happens?

Only in cases where their presence in the female spaces could prove problematic to some of the women there. Other accomodations must be provided then, and I can't imagine why they would include men or transwomen, so it wouldn't present a safety problem.