Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Next changing rooms- how should I respond?

69 replies

Mattressahoy · 04/05/2026 21:49

Looking for advice re how to respond to the following email. I recently contacted Next to let them know that on the last two occasions I tried on clothes in their Oxford Street store, there had been men in the changing rooms (at this point I thought they were single-sex). The first time a man was sitting in the communal area of the changing room, and the second time a man was in a changing room opposite mine. Both times I was trying on swimming costumes and felt really vulnerable being naked with a man directly on the other side of the curtain.

This was Next's response:

"Thank you for your e-mail and I am sorry to hear you have felt uncomfortable on your last couple of visits to our stores, due to the presence of male customers in the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

Just to explain, our position has always been that all fitting rooms, irrespective of which department they are situated on, are open to all customers to use, and they are not designated as a single-sex provision. Hence the signage above the entrance just saying 'Fitting Rooms', rather than 'Men's' or 'Women's' Fitting Rooms.

We want to encourage customers to be able to use whichever facility is most convenient for them at the time. For example, for customers placing orders online for delivery to store, the collection point in most of our stores is on Menswear so female customers may find it more convenient to use those fitting rooms to try items on and decide what they wish to keep or return while they are still in store.

We are continuously reviewing and updating our fitting rooms, for example, by attaching hook and eye fixtures to secure the curtains in fitting rooms in our existing stores in order to make customers feel more comfortable, and we are also looking at alternatives to replace curtains in fitting rooms when we re-fit stores or open new ones."

I feel really disappointed with Next and don't feel they're taking women's safety seriously. They have changing rooms in the women's section and in the men's, so in what way would it be detrimental to them to make one specifically for women and one for men? There is absolutely no reason for men to need to access the changing room on the women's floor as all the men's clothes are on the upstairs floor, with it's own changing room. And I can't imagine many women actively choosing to use changing facilities on the men's floor. What is the legal position here? I thought that under the Equality Act companies can provide a single-sex space where there is good reason to do so?

At the very least, I would want there to be clear signage stating the changing rooms are unisex so that women can be made aware that they do not have access to a safe single-sex space before they enter. Is that unreasonable? Is there anything else I could add?

OP posts:
womendeserveequalhumanrights · 05/05/2026 07:35

EvelynBeatrice · 05/05/2026 00:56

No. Men wait outside. It’s not an unusual complaint, believe me. Your belief that women uncomfortable with men in spaces where they have their clothes off is fine and dandy isn’t more important than the discomfort this causes huge numbers of other women.

I'm assuming religious women will also be unable to use this store or any like it - so they are excluding quite a number of women based on their religion.

This of course is why they're not putting up massive UNISEX signs over the changing rooms. They're hoping no-one who is in reality excluded by their cowardly policy will know - so they're essentially luring women into a space where they will statistically be less safe and where they may be forced - unconsenting - to both share with men and breach the rules of their religion.

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 07:36

@Mattressahoy send this:

Dear Next Customer Services,

I am writing to make a formal complaint about the fitting room arrangements in your Oxford Street store and to ask that this complaint is escalated to your Legal, Equality and Risk teams.

On my last two visits to the Oxford Street store, I used the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor. On both occasions, male customers were present in that fitting room area. On one occasion, a man was sitting in the communal area. On another, a man was using a cubicle directly opposite mine.

On both occasions I was trying on swimwear. I was required to undress behind only a curtain, in an area I reasonably understood to be the women’s fitting room, because it was located on the Womenswear floor. I felt exposed, vulnerable and humiliated.

Your response states that all Next fitting rooms are open to all customers, regardless of which department they are situated in, and that they are not single-sex provision. That response is not acceptable.

The issue is not merely whether the signage says “Fitting Rooms”. The issue is whether a reasonable female customer entering fitting rooms located within Womenswear would understand those facilities to be intended for women, particularly where women may be undressing to try on underwear, swimwear, dresses or other intimate clothing.

Your current policy appears to impose a provision, criterion or practice that all fitting rooms are mixed-sex, including those located on the Womenswear floor. That policy is applied to all customers, but it places women and girls at a particular disadvantage compared with men.

Women are more likely than men to feel unable, unsafe, distressed, embarrassed or humiliated when required to undress in the presence or proximity of male customers. This is especially so where the only barrier is a curtain, where there is a communal area, and where women may be trying on swimwear, underwear, dresses or other garments requiring significant undressing.

The disadvantage is not theoretical. It directly affected me on both visits. I felt vulnerable and exposed while trying on swimwear with male customers present in the same fitting room area.

This disadvantage is likely to be greater for women and girls with religious or cultural modesty requirements, teenage girls, older women, women with trauma histories, women with disabilities, women who are menstruating, women who are breastfeeding, and women trying on intimate clothing. It is also likely to deter some women from using the fitting rooms at all, returning items in store, shopping in-store, or using Next’s services on equal terms with male customers.

That is why I consider Next’s current approach capable of amounting to indirect sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, unless Next can show that the policy is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I do not understand what legitimate aim would require men to be able to use the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor when there are also fitting rooms in the Menswear department. Nor do I understand why any such aim could not be met by providing separate male, female and/or clearly marked mixed-sex facilities.

I therefore ask Next to explain how it has assessed this policy under the Equality Act 2010, including the risk of indirect sex discrimination. The Equality Act permits service providers to offer separate-sex and single-sex services where justified. Changing rooms and fitting rooms are an obvious context where privacy, dignity, decency and safety are legitimate aims.

I also ask you to explain why Next has decided not to provide a female-only fitting room on the Womenswear floor when the store also has fitting rooms in the Menswear department. If men’s and women’s clothing departments are already separated in-store, it is difficult to understand why Next cannot provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, with separate provision for men and/or mixed-sex use elsewhere.

At the very least, if Next intends these facilities to be mixed-sex, that must be made completely clear before women enter and begin undressing. Small or ambiguous signage saying “Fitting Rooms” is not enough. Customers should not discover that a fitting room is mixed-sex only after they are already inside and partly undressed.

Please treat this as a formal complaint and provide the following:

1. Confirmation of whether the Oxford Street Womenswear fitting rooms are mixed-sex.

2. Confirmation of whether Next provides any female-only fitting room provision in that store.

3. A copy or summary of the Equality Act assessment, risk assessment, or policy decision supporting mixed-sex fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

4. Confirmation of whether Next has considered the impact on women and girls, including those with religious modesty requirements, trauma histories, disabilities, older women, teenage girls, and women trying on swimwear or underwear.

5. Confirmation of whether Next will now provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, alongside any mixed-sex provision it wishes to offer.

6. Confirmation that, pending review, Next will clearly sign mixed-sex fitting rooms at the entrance so women can make an informed choice before entering.

If Next refuses to provide female-only fitting room provision, please provide your final response in writing so that I can consider my next steps. These may include taking legal advice, raising the matter with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and sharing my experience publicly and with the media. I will of course ensure that anything I say publicly is accurate and based on my own experience and your written response.

I am not asking Next to treat anyone unfairly. I am asking Next to take women’s privacy, dignity and safety seriously, and to provide clear, lawful and properly assessed single-sex provision where women are expected to undress.

I look forward to your substantive response within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

arethereanyleftatall · 05/05/2026 07:37

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

This is grossly misogynistic, on any board let alone the feminist board! She correctly complained about an entitled man. To suggest that is ‘making a fool of herself’ is what scares women in to keeping quiet when they absolutely should be speaking up.

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 05/05/2026 07:37

It's the 'no nuts' thing again. If they're going to include nuts in their changing rooms it needs to be clearly labelled as Unisex. Particularly if located in a department labelled 'womenswear' or similar.

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 05/05/2026 07:42

arethereanyleftatall · 05/05/2026 07:37

This is grossly misogynistic, on any board let alone the feminist board! She correctly complained about an entitled man. To suggest that is ‘making a fool of herself’ is what scares women in to keeping quiet when they absolutely should be speaking up.

Exactly, though the PP knows that, that's why the comment has been made.

Sadly for the PP most middle aged women on here have reached the point of no fucks to give, especially for people undermining safeguarding.

It says something about society that women's safety and the needs of religious and other women are belittled in this way. Not a good thing.

It's incredibly stupid and cowardly from a business point of view - the number of women who will be put off shopping there will far exceed anyone who wants unisex. Again, it's why it's a stealth thing and they don't have massive signs with UNISEX CHANGING ROOM on them. I suspect in a court case it may well be found that a changing room in a department labelled 'womanswear' could reasonably be expected to be women only unless clearly labelled otherwise.

arethereanyleftatall · 05/05/2026 07:42

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 07:36

@Mattressahoy send this:

Dear Next Customer Services,

I am writing to make a formal complaint about the fitting room arrangements in your Oxford Street store and to ask that this complaint is escalated to your Legal, Equality and Risk teams.

On my last two visits to the Oxford Street store, I used the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor. On both occasions, male customers were present in that fitting room area. On one occasion, a man was sitting in the communal area. On another, a man was using a cubicle directly opposite mine.

On both occasions I was trying on swimwear. I was required to undress behind only a curtain, in an area I reasonably understood to be the women’s fitting room, because it was located on the Womenswear floor. I felt exposed, vulnerable and humiliated.

Your response states that all Next fitting rooms are open to all customers, regardless of which department they are situated in, and that they are not single-sex provision. That response is not acceptable.

The issue is not merely whether the signage says “Fitting Rooms”. The issue is whether a reasonable female customer entering fitting rooms located within Womenswear would understand those facilities to be intended for women, particularly where women may be undressing to try on underwear, swimwear, dresses or other intimate clothing.

Your current policy appears to impose a provision, criterion or practice that all fitting rooms are mixed-sex, including those located on the Womenswear floor. That policy is applied to all customers, but it places women and girls at a particular disadvantage compared with men.

Women are more likely than men to feel unable, unsafe, distressed, embarrassed or humiliated when required to undress in the presence or proximity of male customers. This is especially so where the only barrier is a curtain, where there is a communal area, and where women may be trying on swimwear, underwear, dresses or other garments requiring significant undressing.

The disadvantage is not theoretical. It directly affected me on both visits. I felt vulnerable and exposed while trying on swimwear with male customers present in the same fitting room area.

This disadvantage is likely to be greater for women and girls with religious or cultural modesty requirements, teenage girls, older women, women with trauma histories, women with disabilities, women who are menstruating, women who are breastfeeding, and women trying on intimate clothing. It is also likely to deter some women from using the fitting rooms at all, returning items in store, shopping in-store, or using Next’s services on equal terms with male customers.

That is why I consider Next’s current approach capable of amounting to indirect sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, unless Next can show that the policy is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I do not understand what legitimate aim would require men to be able to use the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor when there are also fitting rooms in the Menswear department. Nor do I understand why any such aim could not be met by providing separate male, female and/or clearly marked mixed-sex facilities.

I therefore ask Next to explain how it has assessed this policy under the Equality Act 2010, including the risk of indirect sex discrimination. The Equality Act permits service providers to offer separate-sex and single-sex services where justified. Changing rooms and fitting rooms are an obvious context where privacy, dignity, decency and safety are legitimate aims.

I also ask you to explain why Next has decided not to provide a female-only fitting room on the Womenswear floor when the store also has fitting rooms in the Menswear department. If men’s and women’s clothing departments are already separated in-store, it is difficult to understand why Next cannot provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, with separate provision for men and/or mixed-sex use elsewhere.

At the very least, if Next intends these facilities to be mixed-sex, that must be made completely clear before women enter and begin undressing. Small or ambiguous signage saying “Fitting Rooms” is not enough. Customers should not discover that a fitting room is mixed-sex only after they are already inside and partly undressed.

Please treat this as a formal complaint and provide the following:

1. Confirmation of whether the Oxford Street Womenswear fitting rooms are mixed-sex.

2. Confirmation of whether Next provides any female-only fitting room provision in that store.

3. A copy or summary of the Equality Act assessment, risk assessment, or policy decision supporting mixed-sex fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

4. Confirmation of whether Next has considered the impact on women and girls, including those with religious modesty requirements, trauma histories, disabilities, older women, teenage girls, and women trying on swimwear or underwear.

5. Confirmation of whether Next will now provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, alongside any mixed-sex provision it wishes to offer.

6. Confirmation that, pending review, Next will clearly sign mixed-sex fitting rooms at the entrance so women can make an informed choice before entering.

If Next refuses to provide female-only fitting room provision, please provide your final response in writing so that I can consider my next steps. These may include taking legal advice, raising the matter with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and sharing my experience publicly and with the media. I will of course ensure that anything I say publicly is accurate and based on my own experience and your written response.

I am not asking Next to treat anyone unfairly. I am asking Next to take women’s privacy, dignity and safety seriously, and to provide clear, lawful and properly assessed single-sex provision where women are expected to undress.

I look forward to your substantive response within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

Brilliant

womendeserveequalhumanrights · 05/05/2026 07:45

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 07:36

@Mattressahoy send this:

Dear Next Customer Services,

I am writing to make a formal complaint about the fitting room arrangements in your Oxford Street store and to ask that this complaint is escalated to your Legal, Equality and Risk teams.

On my last two visits to the Oxford Street store, I used the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor. On both occasions, male customers were present in that fitting room area. On one occasion, a man was sitting in the communal area. On another, a man was using a cubicle directly opposite mine.

On both occasions I was trying on swimwear. I was required to undress behind only a curtain, in an area I reasonably understood to be the women’s fitting room, because it was located on the Womenswear floor. I felt exposed, vulnerable and humiliated.

Your response states that all Next fitting rooms are open to all customers, regardless of which department they are situated in, and that they are not single-sex provision. That response is not acceptable.

The issue is not merely whether the signage says “Fitting Rooms”. The issue is whether a reasonable female customer entering fitting rooms located within Womenswear would understand those facilities to be intended for women, particularly where women may be undressing to try on underwear, swimwear, dresses or other intimate clothing.

Your current policy appears to impose a provision, criterion or practice that all fitting rooms are mixed-sex, including those located on the Womenswear floor. That policy is applied to all customers, but it places women and girls at a particular disadvantage compared with men.

Women are more likely than men to feel unable, unsafe, distressed, embarrassed or humiliated when required to undress in the presence or proximity of male customers. This is especially so where the only barrier is a curtain, where there is a communal area, and where women may be trying on swimwear, underwear, dresses or other garments requiring significant undressing.

The disadvantage is not theoretical. It directly affected me on both visits. I felt vulnerable and exposed while trying on swimwear with male customers present in the same fitting room area.

This disadvantage is likely to be greater for women and girls with religious or cultural modesty requirements, teenage girls, older women, women with trauma histories, women with disabilities, women who are menstruating, women who are breastfeeding, and women trying on intimate clothing. It is also likely to deter some women from using the fitting rooms at all, returning items in store, shopping in-store, or using Next’s services on equal terms with male customers.

That is why I consider Next’s current approach capable of amounting to indirect sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, unless Next can show that the policy is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I do not understand what legitimate aim would require men to be able to use the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor when there are also fitting rooms in the Menswear department. Nor do I understand why any such aim could not be met by providing separate male, female and/or clearly marked mixed-sex facilities.

I therefore ask Next to explain how it has assessed this policy under the Equality Act 2010, including the risk of indirect sex discrimination. The Equality Act permits service providers to offer separate-sex and single-sex services where justified. Changing rooms and fitting rooms are an obvious context where privacy, dignity, decency and safety are legitimate aims.

I also ask you to explain why Next has decided not to provide a female-only fitting room on the Womenswear floor when the store also has fitting rooms in the Menswear department. If men’s and women’s clothing departments are already separated in-store, it is difficult to understand why Next cannot provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, with separate provision for men and/or mixed-sex use elsewhere.

At the very least, if Next intends these facilities to be mixed-sex, that must be made completely clear before women enter and begin undressing. Small or ambiguous signage saying “Fitting Rooms” is not enough. Customers should not discover that a fitting room is mixed-sex only after they are already inside and partly undressed.

Please treat this as a formal complaint and provide the following:

1. Confirmation of whether the Oxford Street Womenswear fitting rooms are mixed-sex.

2. Confirmation of whether Next provides any female-only fitting room provision in that store.

3. A copy or summary of the Equality Act assessment, risk assessment, or policy decision supporting mixed-sex fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

4. Confirmation of whether Next has considered the impact on women and girls, including those with religious modesty requirements, trauma histories, disabilities, older women, teenage girls, and women trying on swimwear or underwear.

5. Confirmation of whether Next will now provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, alongside any mixed-sex provision it wishes to offer.

6. Confirmation that, pending review, Next will clearly sign mixed-sex fitting rooms at the entrance so women can make an informed choice before entering.

If Next refuses to provide female-only fitting room provision, please provide your final response in writing so that I can consider my next steps. These may include taking legal advice, raising the matter with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and sharing my experience publicly and with the media. I will of course ensure that anything I say publicly is accurate and based on my own experience and your written response.

I am not asking Next to treat anyone unfairly. I am asking Next to take women’s privacy, dignity and safety seriously, and to provide clear, lawful and properly assessed single-sex provision where women are expected to undress.

I look forward to your substantive response within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

Yes, brilliant!

NancyBlackettt · 05/05/2026 09:22

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 07:36

@Mattressahoy send this:

Dear Next Customer Services,

I am writing to make a formal complaint about the fitting room arrangements in your Oxford Street store and to ask that this complaint is escalated to your Legal, Equality and Risk teams.

On my last two visits to the Oxford Street store, I used the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor. On both occasions, male customers were present in that fitting room area. On one occasion, a man was sitting in the communal area. On another, a man was using a cubicle directly opposite mine.

On both occasions I was trying on swimwear. I was required to undress behind only a curtain, in an area I reasonably understood to be the women’s fitting room, because it was located on the Womenswear floor. I felt exposed, vulnerable and humiliated.

Your response states that all Next fitting rooms are open to all customers, regardless of which department they are situated in, and that they are not single-sex provision. That response is not acceptable.

The issue is not merely whether the signage says “Fitting Rooms”. The issue is whether a reasonable female customer entering fitting rooms located within Womenswear would understand those facilities to be intended for women, particularly where women may be undressing to try on underwear, swimwear, dresses or other intimate clothing.

Your current policy appears to impose a provision, criterion or practice that all fitting rooms are mixed-sex, including those located on the Womenswear floor. That policy is applied to all customers, but it places women and girls at a particular disadvantage compared with men.

Women are more likely than men to feel unable, unsafe, distressed, embarrassed or humiliated when required to undress in the presence or proximity of male customers. This is especially so where the only barrier is a curtain, where there is a communal area, and where women may be trying on swimwear, underwear, dresses or other garments requiring significant undressing.

The disadvantage is not theoretical. It directly affected me on both visits. I felt vulnerable and exposed while trying on swimwear with male customers present in the same fitting room area.

This disadvantage is likely to be greater for women and girls with religious or cultural modesty requirements, teenage girls, older women, women with trauma histories, women with disabilities, women who are menstruating, women who are breastfeeding, and women trying on intimate clothing. It is also likely to deter some women from using the fitting rooms at all, returning items in store, shopping in-store, or using Next’s services on equal terms with male customers.

That is why I consider Next’s current approach capable of amounting to indirect sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, unless Next can show that the policy is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I do not understand what legitimate aim would require men to be able to use the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor when there are also fitting rooms in the Menswear department. Nor do I understand why any such aim could not be met by providing separate male, female and/or clearly marked mixed-sex facilities.

I therefore ask Next to explain how it has assessed this policy under the Equality Act 2010, including the risk of indirect sex discrimination. The Equality Act permits service providers to offer separate-sex and single-sex services where justified. Changing rooms and fitting rooms are an obvious context where privacy, dignity, decency and safety are legitimate aims.

I also ask you to explain why Next has decided not to provide a female-only fitting room on the Womenswear floor when the store also has fitting rooms in the Menswear department. If men’s and women’s clothing departments are already separated in-store, it is difficult to understand why Next cannot provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, with separate provision for men and/or mixed-sex use elsewhere.

At the very least, if Next intends these facilities to be mixed-sex, that must be made completely clear before women enter and begin undressing. Small or ambiguous signage saying “Fitting Rooms” is not enough. Customers should not discover that a fitting room is mixed-sex only after they are already inside and partly undressed.

Please treat this as a formal complaint and provide the following:

1. Confirmation of whether the Oxford Street Womenswear fitting rooms are mixed-sex.

2. Confirmation of whether Next provides any female-only fitting room provision in that store.

3. A copy or summary of the Equality Act assessment, risk assessment, or policy decision supporting mixed-sex fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

4. Confirmation of whether Next has considered the impact on women and girls, including those with religious modesty requirements, trauma histories, disabilities, older women, teenage girls, and women trying on swimwear or underwear.

5. Confirmation of whether Next will now provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, alongside any mixed-sex provision it wishes to offer.

6. Confirmation that, pending review, Next will clearly sign mixed-sex fitting rooms at the entrance so women can make an informed choice before entering.

If Next refuses to provide female-only fitting room provision, please provide your final response in writing so that I can consider my next steps. These may include taking legal advice, raising the matter with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and sharing my experience publicly and with the media. I will of course ensure that anything I say publicly is accurate and based on my own experience and your written response.

I am not asking Next to treat anyone unfairly. I am asking Next to take women’s privacy, dignity and safety seriously, and to provide clear, lawful and properly assessed single-sex provision where women are expected to undress.

I look forward to your substantive response within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

This is excellent 👏🏼

Mattressahoy · 05/05/2026 09:46

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 07:36

@Mattressahoy send this:

Dear Next Customer Services,

I am writing to make a formal complaint about the fitting room arrangements in your Oxford Street store and to ask that this complaint is escalated to your Legal, Equality and Risk teams.

On my last two visits to the Oxford Street store, I used the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor. On both occasions, male customers were present in that fitting room area. On one occasion, a man was sitting in the communal area. On another, a man was using a cubicle directly opposite mine.

On both occasions I was trying on swimwear. I was required to undress behind only a curtain, in an area I reasonably understood to be the women’s fitting room, because it was located on the Womenswear floor. I felt exposed, vulnerable and humiliated.

Your response states that all Next fitting rooms are open to all customers, regardless of which department they are situated in, and that they are not single-sex provision. That response is not acceptable.

The issue is not merely whether the signage says “Fitting Rooms”. The issue is whether a reasonable female customer entering fitting rooms located within Womenswear would understand those facilities to be intended for women, particularly where women may be undressing to try on underwear, swimwear, dresses or other intimate clothing.

Your current policy appears to impose a provision, criterion or practice that all fitting rooms are mixed-sex, including those located on the Womenswear floor. That policy is applied to all customers, but it places women and girls at a particular disadvantage compared with men.

Women are more likely than men to feel unable, unsafe, distressed, embarrassed or humiliated when required to undress in the presence or proximity of male customers. This is especially so where the only barrier is a curtain, where there is a communal area, and where women may be trying on swimwear, underwear, dresses or other garments requiring significant undressing.

The disadvantage is not theoretical. It directly affected me on both visits. I felt vulnerable and exposed while trying on swimwear with male customers present in the same fitting room area.

This disadvantage is likely to be greater for women and girls with religious or cultural modesty requirements, teenage girls, older women, women with trauma histories, women with disabilities, women who are menstruating, women who are breastfeeding, and women trying on intimate clothing. It is also likely to deter some women from using the fitting rooms at all, returning items in store, shopping in-store, or using Next’s services on equal terms with male customers.

That is why I consider Next’s current approach capable of amounting to indirect sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, unless Next can show that the policy is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I do not understand what legitimate aim would require men to be able to use the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor when there are also fitting rooms in the Menswear department. Nor do I understand why any such aim could not be met by providing separate male, female and/or clearly marked mixed-sex facilities.

I therefore ask Next to explain how it has assessed this policy under the Equality Act 2010, including the risk of indirect sex discrimination. The Equality Act permits service providers to offer separate-sex and single-sex services where justified. Changing rooms and fitting rooms are an obvious context where privacy, dignity, decency and safety are legitimate aims.

I also ask you to explain why Next has decided not to provide a female-only fitting room on the Womenswear floor when the store also has fitting rooms in the Menswear department. If men’s and women’s clothing departments are already separated in-store, it is difficult to understand why Next cannot provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, with separate provision for men and/or mixed-sex use elsewhere.

At the very least, if Next intends these facilities to be mixed-sex, that must be made completely clear before women enter and begin undressing. Small or ambiguous signage saying “Fitting Rooms” is not enough. Customers should not discover that a fitting room is mixed-sex only after they are already inside and partly undressed.

Please treat this as a formal complaint and provide the following:

1. Confirmation of whether the Oxford Street Womenswear fitting rooms are mixed-sex.

2. Confirmation of whether Next provides any female-only fitting room provision in that store.

3. A copy or summary of the Equality Act assessment, risk assessment, or policy decision supporting mixed-sex fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

4. Confirmation of whether Next has considered the impact on women and girls, including those with religious modesty requirements, trauma histories, disabilities, older women, teenage girls, and women trying on swimwear or underwear.

5. Confirmation of whether Next will now provide clearly marked female-only fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor, alongside any mixed-sex provision it wishes to offer.

6. Confirmation that, pending review, Next will clearly sign mixed-sex fitting rooms at the entrance so women can make an informed choice before entering.

If Next refuses to provide female-only fitting room provision, please provide your final response in writing so that I can consider my next steps. These may include taking legal advice, raising the matter with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and sharing my experience publicly and with the media. I will of course ensure that anything I say publicly is accurate and based on my own experience and your written response.

I am not asking Next to treat anyone unfairly. I am asking Next to take women’s privacy, dignity and safety seriously, and to provide clear, lawful and properly assessed single-sex provision where women are expected to undress.

I look forward to your substantive response within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

Wow, thank you so much for this! It is indeed brilliant.

And thanks for everyone else's comments. Interestingly, both times I complained directly to staff and they immediately went to tell the men to leave, so either they don't know about Next's policy or they don't agree with it either!

I feel that not being clear about the changing rooms being unisex means women customers are left to police the space themselves, which is really unfair. I don't have an issue with all unisex spaces, but I'd want the cubicles to have lockable doors, completely enclosed and not hidden round a corner but clearly visible to the shop floor.

OP posts:
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 09:56

Mattressahoy · 05/05/2026 09:46

Wow, thank you so much for this! It is indeed brilliant.

And thanks for everyone else's comments. Interestingly, both times I complained directly to staff and they immediately went to tell the men to leave, so either they don't know about Next's policy or they don't agree with it either!

I feel that not being clear about the changing rooms being unisex means women customers are left to police the space themselves, which is really unfair. I don't have an issue with all unisex spaces, but I'd want the cubicles to have lockable doors, completely enclosed and not hidden round a corner but clearly visible to the shop floor.

nearly two years of writing letters about all this and getting all the arguments and laws in one place has been pretty useful. I really think thats the best chance of getting any movement, and I would start sending copies of it to the EHRC anyway.

BettyBooper · 05/05/2026 10:16

What I really don't understand is why these companies who must be reliant on adult women constomers, keep prioritising a tiny group of men?

From a business perspective it's so dumb.

Helen Joyce said, after FWS, she initially thought companies would be grateful to have the clarification of the law. But no, they continue to shaft women.

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 05/05/2026 10:31

BettyBooper · 05/05/2026 10:16

What I really don't understand is why these companies who must be reliant on adult women constomers, keep prioritising a tiny group of men?

From a business perspective it's so dumb.

Helen Joyce said, after FWS, she initially thought companies would be grateful to have the clarification of the law. But no, they continue to shaft women.

it's both performative (we are kind) and cowardly (men will come and shame us, throw piss on the floor). Not to mention the women who have not thought through male access to female spaces and think male inclusion is a good thing. (I know plenty)

Politely, as I know you are almost all female and I am male, typically (and only slightly typically) females make less fuss. I know for sure that is turning with regard to trans issues and protecting sexed spaces. Please don't take it as a criticism, males are much more quick to anger for example, often to our detriment.

BunfightBetty · 05/05/2026 10:34

Great letter, it should help the penny drop for Next that pissing off their female customers - and potentially the EHRC - AND running a legal risk will be more of a problem for them than pissing off the TRAs.

Justme56 · 05/05/2026 10:53

Just to add the EHRC guidelines actually provides the example of changing rooms in their guidance.

Next changing rooms- how should I respond?
Newnamenancy90 · 05/05/2026 11:02

I’d hate it too. I remember trying on a bikini years ago and some twat tearing back the curtain to check if anyone was in there then laughing at my reaction.
another time a child pulled back the curtain. Bad enough exposing yourself to other women let alone men.

Applecup · 05/05/2026 12:54

OverlyFragrant · 04/05/2026 22:58

"Thank you for your considered reply.
I shall no longer be providing you with my custom, I cannot and should not be expected to put my safety and dignity aside for company profits"

…and most of the people on Mumsnet seem to agree with me.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 05/05/2026 13:34

Worth saying 'accessibility' and 'inclusion' to them. It's not only a thing for men with identities.

Where is their access for women who need single sex spaces to be able to use the facility? The Equality Act has nine protected characteristics, not one. Are they intentionally inaccessible to these groups of their customers?

Let's face it, all this is about the fear of having to say no to bloody difficult men and deal with the resulting tantrum.

Easytoconfuse · 05/05/2026 15:59

I'd suggest 'thank you for your views. I shall not be shopping with you again' Then don't. If we vote with our wallets we will be heard.

Does anyone know it it's actually true? Given how long Next have been trading I'm inclined to doubt it.

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 05/05/2026 17:17

Mattressahoy · 04/05/2026 21:49

Looking for advice re how to respond to the following email. I recently contacted Next to let them know that on the last two occasions I tried on clothes in their Oxford Street store, there had been men in the changing rooms (at this point I thought they were single-sex). The first time a man was sitting in the communal area of the changing room, and the second time a man was in a changing room opposite mine. Both times I was trying on swimming costumes and felt really vulnerable being naked with a man directly on the other side of the curtain.

This was Next's response:

"Thank you for your e-mail and I am sorry to hear you have felt uncomfortable on your last couple of visits to our stores, due to the presence of male customers in the fitting rooms on the Womenswear floor.

Just to explain, our position has always been that all fitting rooms, irrespective of which department they are situated on, are open to all customers to use, and they are not designated as a single-sex provision. Hence the signage above the entrance just saying 'Fitting Rooms', rather than 'Men's' or 'Women's' Fitting Rooms.

We want to encourage customers to be able to use whichever facility is most convenient for them at the time. For example, for customers placing orders online for delivery to store, the collection point in most of our stores is on Menswear so female customers may find it more convenient to use those fitting rooms to try items on and decide what they wish to keep or return while they are still in store.

We are continuously reviewing and updating our fitting rooms, for example, by attaching hook and eye fixtures to secure the curtains in fitting rooms in our existing stores in order to make customers feel more comfortable, and we are also looking at alternatives to replace curtains in fitting rooms when we re-fit stores or open new ones."

I feel really disappointed with Next and don't feel they're taking women's safety seriously. They have changing rooms in the women's section and in the men's, so in what way would it be detrimental to them to make one specifically for women and one for men? There is absolutely no reason for men to need to access the changing room on the women's floor as all the men's clothes are on the upstairs floor, with it's own changing room. And I can't imagine many women actively choosing to use changing facilities on the men's floor. What is the legal position here? I thought that under the Equality Act companies can provide a single-sex space where there is good reason to do so?

At the very least, I would want there to be clear signage stating the changing rooms are unisex so that women can be made aware that they do not have access to a safe single-sex space before they enter. Is that unreasonable? Is there anything else I could add?

Mattressahoy
"Just to explain, our position has always been that all fitting rooms, irrespective of which department they are situated on, are open to all customers to use, and they are not designated as a single-sex provision."

I don't definitely don't believe them. Their first shop opened in 1982, after Hepworths (Chairman Terence Conran) had bought a womenswear chain called Kendall & Sons. Mixed sex changing rooms would have raised a lot of eyebrows in the early eighties, particularly since at that time Kendall and Sons, renamed Next, was a womenswear shop. So no, they haven't "always" had this lack of facilities for women. They are simply not being honest. Surprise.

Manxexile · 05/05/2026 20:10

BaggyLongLegs · 05/05/2026 07:24

If we consider the guidance for unisex toilets in the workplace, unisex cubicles should have fully enclosed, lockable doors and recommend full height doors to ensure privacy. Toilets should be clearly labelled as unisex.
Therefore if Next are insisting on this position then they need to ensure that their changing rooms have lockable doors as opposed to curtains. However, this would require Next to spend money to alter their changing rooms.

The law distinguishes between an employer's obligations and those of a service provider.

AIUI an employer is required under H&S legislation to provide separate toilet and washing and changing facilities for men and women.

Again AIUI, the Supreme Court clarified that in this context "men and women" referred to biological sex.

But service providers (eg shops and restaurants etc) are not legally required to provide single sex facilities for men and women.

However, if they choose to offer single sex facilities, those must be based on biological sex.

The problem would seem to be that Next, M&S and JL have chosen NOT to offer single sex faciclities and they are free not to do so.

If you don't like that, boycott them and tell them why

Note: the supreme court did suggest that if a service provider did not offer single sex changing rooms etc that that might amount to indirect discrimination against women, but that wasn't actually part of the quite narrow judgment

Tichter · 05/05/2026 20:24

@Manxexilethis is exactly what I thought. It might be indirect discrimination.

hholiday · 05/05/2026 20:40

Brilliant, brilliant letter. I think I will file a copy of it just in case I need a version of it at some point.

missmollygreen · 05/05/2026 21:09

Tichter · 04/05/2026 22:01

I wonder if it could be indirect discrimination against women

It is not discrimination. The same thing happens with wives/girlfriends milling around the mes changing rooms.

Tichter · 05/05/2026 22:42

@missmollygreenIndirect discrimination against women occurs when a neutral policy, rule, or practice applies to everyone but disproportionately disadvantages women compared to men.

So women from conservative religious backgrounds may not use changing areas that are mixed sex for instance.

Atoxicsewerofhate · 05/05/2026 22:46

How many women are convicted of voyeurism, I wonder?