Looking for a gym with female-only changing rooms by sex: a journey

[2021x]

I am trying to find a gym in my city (not UK) that excludes males from the female showering and changing rooms.

I was in my gym and there was a man in the changing room- no attempt to be female other than a sports-bra- and since then I was just stressed everytime I went.

I have emailed a gym who say they are trans-inclusive on a case by case basis and said I should use the accessiblity changing room if I am uncomfortable.

I have also put up a post on Reddit in the local page - that got auto-moderated, and then the same post on the national page that is going through normal moderation.

My post says this

I am looking for XXXX gyms that have female‑only changing and shower areas that are restricted by sex, not self‑identified gender.

I’m comfortable sharing these spaces with other females, but I’m not comfortable changing or showering in areas where males may be present.

If you know of any gyms in XXXX please sent me a direct message.

Wish me luck.

https://www.bsmhft.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Equality-Inclusion-and-Human-Rights-Policy-Extended-1.pdf

"The Trust aims to go beyond the law and also protect employees on the grounds of gender identity and gender expression."

An admission that the policy contains material that doesn't reflect the law. There were many more policy documents containing wording like this that have since been memory-holed.

The law hasn't changed. It's just been clarified that women can call this shit out without being fired.

This is hilarious. We assumed at least a basic understanding of one of the most significant SC judgments of the past year.

We were wrong.

🙄
Who made the previous misinterpretations of the EA that you think were the law?

It was Stonewall, and everyone went along with it in HR departments across the land, and women didn’t dare challenge it.

The interpretations of activists and HR managers did not “change the law.”

They were wrong. As soon as it hit the courts, the actual law was confirmed.

They make it up as they go along and then are ridiculously surprised when they are told 'No, that's not what the Law says or has ever said'.

The GRA is exactly as it was when it was laid. It always had exceptions.

Yes, once again as with the EqA they decided it said and laid down in Law things it never did.

The EHRC has effectively recreated its guidance in this area due to the FWS decision. From the early revision, I would say that it was a massive change in interpretation. The EHRC is not Stonewall, nor was it representing Stonewall.

It's not a new interpretation. It's a clarification.

The terms men and women always meant biology.

Nobody was ever in any doubt, whatsoever, that men were not allowed in women spaces, until Stonewall decided to set out a new grift.

I will never stop being gobsmacked that professional people, high up in all sorts of organisations, paid an extraordinary amount of money to a company telling them a load of unlawful bollocks, in order to be awarded gold stars by that same company!

As rackets go, it's unrivalled.

A clarification is a minor edit, specifying clarity. The new revision is an entire rewrite.

The "Code of Practice for services and public functions" is 15 years old and was published less than two years after EA was given Royal Assent. There were few, if any, court rulings om EA in those two years and little real-life experience of running services under the new law.

Do you really think that FWS is the only ruling informing that rewrite?

Do you think that 15 years experience of applying that law "on the ground" might perhaps also have informed the new guidance?

All of this whatabouttery concerning entities that aren't Parliament is not refuting the unanimous ruling of the SC judges that there is no other legally-coherent way to interpret the Equality Act. That EHRC got that wrong so soon after the law was passed doesn't change that there is no other legally-coherent way to interpret the Equality Act.

I don't believe it (eta: the substantial modification warranted by FWS) was mere coincidence, no.

I mean, if all a bloke can think of to do is come on a feminist board and try to argue with women and get his arse handed to him again and again, bless his little cotton socks, he must have a sad, lonely life. This is in general and not a comment on any particular poster of course.

I do wonder why he's here, it's not exactly going well for him.

True. In a battle of wits, he’s kind of brought a pencil to a tank battle. Poor poor boy. Spectacularly under armed 😀

Again: All of this whatabouttery concerning entities that aren't Parliament is not refuting the unanimous ruling of the SC judges that there is no other legally-coherent way to interpret the Equality Act. That EHRC got that wrong so soon after the law was passed doesn't change that there is no other legally-coherent way to interpret the Equality Act.

Some sort of masochistic streak, I imagine.

Don’t a lot of trans identified males have a thing about being humiliated and degraded? I know some of my ex’s friends were really into that and would deliberately do stuff to get humiliated in public.

🤮 Disengaging. I don't consent to being someone's wank fodder.

There's no whatabouttery. The entire topic of the speech I quoted above was "Judicial Law-making in the Common Law Tradition."

https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/speech_191028_a541d2331c.pdf

Me neither. I think it’s just best to ignore the me-railers. I’ve had experience of being lectured for hours by a TIM, so now I can just blank it out.

Again with the invention of motivations in others. Is this the key that binds all sex realists?

Mumsnet needs a Mute button for them.

If i want to be lectured by a man, I'll phone my dad. At least he's well informed and amusing while doing it.

This one is none of those things.

Wait, what?

Tell me more about your theory - I smell a conspiracy being claimed.

And it happens, with monotonous regularity, day in, day out. And they're all the same. And none of them realise they're exactly the same as the ones before and the ones after.

I wonder how many women go onto male websites and lecture men about being men and pontificate about why her personal existential crisis trumps everything.

I used to frequent a forum that had an 'ignore poster' option, so you saw only the line 'Post by ignored user' instead of swathes of circumlocutory nonsense. Very useful.

Wasn't there one of these on Mumsnet some years ago? Tbh, I'd rarely use it as it's important to read all opinions.
But every now and again there'll be a poster who uses Mumsnet & the women on it for their own entertainment and perhaps to fill what's missing in their own sad lives. I might use it for them?

Women share so many wise and intelligent thoughts on here that it'd be far more enjoyable to follow those without having to wade through tedious, self absorbed nonsense.