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.

"Additionally, the study was not focused on investigating criminal behaviour, was drawn from a small cohort in one country, and only indicated a statistically significant increased risk of conviction for trans people who ‘underwent sex reassignment before 1989’:[3] a time when fewer opportunities and resources were available to trans people in Sweden, which may have resulted in increased criminalisation in a similar manner to other stigmatised groups. The authors therefore conclude that the best outcomes occur when individuals also receive long-term health and social care support in addition to any hormone therapy or surgery that they might require."

Funny how one date can change everything.

Seriously? You actually believe 'getting off lightly' only applies to trans people?

Exactly what part of "except homosexual males" don't you understand???

Exactly what part of that bar graph do YOU not understand? 4.6% of same-sex attracted men charged with violent crime, compared to 2.4% of same-sex attracted women. I also note in that quote that you keep posting over and over

Among females, lesbians (including only a few females with exclusively homosexual preferences) were generally more criminal and violent than heterosexuals, although they were still less so than males (except for homosexual males)"

It states criminal and violent, rather than just violent. The majority of these criminal lesbians could be committing tax fraud for all I know. You are also ignoring that the majority of trans women are not homosexual. According to surveys carried out among the trans population the majority of trans women are either bisexual or exclusively attracted to women, so the crime rates of gay men are neither here nor there. Also you keep stating that prison stats are not good enough to suggest that this particular subset of males are just as much (or more) of a risk as other males, yet provide no evidence at all that they are a significantly lower risk. Your whole argument seems to boil down to women should just take these men at their word when they insist they're no threat.

Keep digging.

"This study explores gender differences in victimization and perpetration experiences of gays and lesbians in intimate relationships. A sample of 283 gays and lesbians reported on their experiences both as victims and perpetrators of gay/lesbian relationship violence by completing a modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980). General results indicate that 47.5% of lesbians and 29.7% of gays have been victimized by a same-sex partner. Further, lesbians reported an overall perpetration rate of 38% compared to 21.8% for gay men. Other findings were as follows: (1) lesbians were more likely to be classified as victims and perpetrators of violence than gay men; (2) lesbians were more likely to report pushing or being pushed than gay men; (3) lesbians reported experiencing a greater number of different victimization and perpetration tactics than gay men; and finally, (4) when items were weighted to create an indicator of severity, no significant differences between lesbians and gay men were found."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9403987/

Next: The Patriarchy made me do it!

So now we're getting into domestic violence between romantic partners specifically? Well luckily that's something I don't have to worry about as I'm not a lesbian nor am I in a relationship. You've still ignored that fact that according to the evidence you provided yourself, lesbians are less likely OVERALL to commit violent (or any other) crime than either gay or straight men. You still haven't addressed the male propensity to commit sex crimes, or the fact that most trans women are not homosexual so the crime rates of gay men are irrelevant. Or even the fact that we cannot tell just by looking whether someone is gay/straight/bi, but we can tell with a very high degree of accuracy what sex someone is, so all males need to stay out of female spaces.

So now we're getting into domestic violence between romantic partners specifically?

You asked for a direct comparison regarding violence & now that data is 'inconvenient' to your narrative you casually wave away violence to 'just something between romantic partners'?

Let's just be honest now, this was never about violence was it?

You've still ignored that fact that according to the evidence you provided yourself, lesbians are less likely OVERALL to commit violent (or any other) crime than either gay or straight men.

You quibbled the word "criminal" as being vague remember? So I generously provided you with the details of which you are attempting to divert from.

You still haven't addressed the male propensity to commit sex crimes,

Indeed I have by making the point that sub groups differ in offending patterns which makes using 'male' offending an over simplified inaccuracy.

"or the fact that most trans women are not homosexual so the crime rates of gay men are irrelevant."

The broader point you are missing is it's not in terms of potential variables that might conflate offending levels of males. Variations in group behaviours clearly exist that impact offending. Transgender people are clearly distinct from normal male/female behaviour so its entirely possible that their offending levels might vary from the norm because of this. In any case, we don't actually know their offending patterns nor if we did would they be statistically significant enough to draw meaningful conclusions about their offending patterns.

Well no it was never about violence, or at least not just violence. You were the one who insisted that lesbians are more violent than gay men. Now you have provided some fairly weak evidence that lesbians MIGHT be more violent than gay men in certain circumstances (I would like to see the details of that study to see the ratio of lesbians to gay men). It still doesn't address the fact that lesbians still appear to be less violent and criminal overall. Why are you ignoring that? Yes I agree that men of certain demographics will commit violent and sexual crimes at lower rates and others commit them at higher rates. But we cannot know just by looking at or talking briefly to a man that he is of low risk, but we can tell pretty reliably that he is male, a member of the sex that commits the vast, vast majority of sex crimes. You say that transgender people are 'clearly distinct from normal male/female behaviour', but I've seen no evidence of this beyond the clothes they choose to wear.

Emily is a man. He’s only there for the young women.

Wee @EmilyinEverton every time you add something I just wonder how you manage to mangle everything.

As you know - the Supreme Court confirmed they were stating the law as it always had been. Woman means biological woman. It did in 1970, 2000, 2010 and 2020.

For the minority of cross dressing men who may get a certificated sex status - the only thing they have in common is that they’re men. All ‘trans women’ are men.

I want to ask , when we know that allowing men access to spaces where women are likely to be isolated or in a state of undress, that it puts women at an increased risk of not only assault, but becoming victims of voyeurism, why do you prioritise the inclusion of trans women over the safety of actual women? Why not campaign for separate provisions to be made available for trans women, no matter the cost or inconvenience. I completely understand that men who present in a stereotypically feminine way might be wary of using men's spaces. But that doesn't mean they should just be allowed into women's spaces.

But a lot of males with a trans identity are not homosexual males. There seem to be an awful lot of “lesbians” in that cohort…. It doesn’t matter what they call themselves though. They are male and do not belong in female spaces. Tell men to #budge up, be kind and accept some men present differently.

Lord 😁. How many times do we see men desperately try to assert they're absolutely no threat by positively bombarding unconsenting women with post after post of dodgy stats, reams of made up, misinterpreted bollocks, and endless 'see! now you've got to cave' comments??

Jumping up and down yelling I'm no threat, I'm no threat, whilst attempting to force women to comply 🤣

Score!

And no, Emily, it's always been unlawful for you to try and get into women's spaces.

Stay out.

Is anyone else seeing any similarity by the TRA posters and people like Andrew Tate and other inhabitants of the manosphere. I mean AT believes women are inferior to men, and their needs, wants and opinions are not worth anything unless they are aligned with those of men. Both groups seek to control women.
Both groups believe they deserve access to women’s bodies (albeit in different ways), and get upset and abusive when they are denied.

"Might be" in terms of domestic violence? Are.

Whether or not is "over all" is missing the point that's being illustrated here by this example is behavioural differences between sub groups impacts offending. That's undeniable. And it's not just being gay that changes the results but age & economic status. And again, in any case we don't know the offending rates of trans women & if we did their statistically insignificant low numbers as a community make any conclusions about their offending impossible.

But we cannot know just by looking at or talking briefly to a man that he is of low risk, but we can tell pretty reliably that he is male, a member of the sex that commits the vast, vast majority of sex crimes.

Nor do we about men in the workplace or those dating but crickets regarding employment segregation or chaperones where the violence overwhelmingly happens. Why is that?

I "campaign" for locked cubicles. Seems to work just fine in millions of restaurants, bars, cafes, airlines & shops globally.

Again, you have ignored the points being made.

The intensive mental health support is NOT part of the UK’s treatment plan for a male person who chooses to have extreme body modification. And the results were not showing that the group had ‘female’ pattern, the study actually just showed they had a lower range in the male pattern.

The first point about mental health support makes the study irrelevant in the UK.

You can keep posting what she said in that interview, but the conclusion in the study is not clear. In fact, because of the very small number of violent crime being committed, the results table shows ‘NA’ for the adjustment the did in analysis.

So, perhaps this researcher should be making disclaimers as to how she now has given a stronger conclusion in relation to violent crime than the team’s results has shown.

However, it then comes back to the first point that the intensive mental health support is not given to this group of male people in the UK unless they are paying privately for it.

Quite a lot of the usage of female toilets happen outside the locked cubicle if that locked cubicle doesn’t have an hand drier in the cubicle, even if that cubicle lock works. And if a hand drier is in the cubicle, other users are going to be none too pleased by the time that woman takes drying herself off.

Plus, there is also a massive difference between a toilet that fits a pram in versus a toilet that doesn’t fit a pram in when a woman has a pram with her. Or a wheelchair if there is no accessible toilet operating.

Many female people know and understand this from personal experience.

No. They commit sexual offences at a higher rate than men who don't identify as trans.

Sexual violence tends to happen, as you admitted yourself, in spaces where the perpetrator and victim are likely to find themselves isolated from others, that generally doesn't apply to workplaces. When it comes to dating that is a matter of personal freedom. I personally would never willingly put myself in a situation where I was alone with a man I don't know very well, other women make different choices. All of us however have to participate to some degree with the rest of society, we don't really have much choice in that. I think that when I go out and I have to sit on a toilet with my knickers around my ankles, or take my clothes of in a public changing room, I should be able to do so safe in the knowledge that a no man is going to be in there.
It really doesn't matter how rare trans women are, I couldn't give a toss. Men with six toes on each foot are rare too, they also don't get to use women's spaces. Even if there was definitive proof that men who truly wholeheartedly believe they are women were less predatory than other men (and there isn't), They should still stay out of women's spaces because women cannot mind read. Fully enclosed cubicles have their own issues which another poster knows much more about.

Where the hell are you working where workplace violence is rife? Maybe reconsider your career choices. You’ve just made the point though that no men belong in female spaces however they present. If some men feel unsafe in male spaces, take it up with men. Not women’s circus, not women’s monkeys.

BTW. You’re coming across as a bit AT now. Just a hint….

Therefore your attempt at discrediting the prisoner stats is weak and unsubstantiated and requires an intense amount of disconnected thinking that a sub group of male people who have shown the same male criminal pattern behaviour in the prison statistics will not show that pattern in the ‘offending’ statistics if they could ever be collected.

You and others can continue to attempt to discredit the prisoner statistics with that distraction of trying to say offending rates might be miraculously lower despite the conviction and incarceration rates saying it is not. And people can point out that your point is not logical and you can describe no reason at all as to why the offending rate would be lower than the pattern of the prison figures indicate. Then get back onto pointing out the pattern in prisoner statistics which also is not solely a UK statistical pattern.

Oh. Look at that … Howse it goin’ eh.

'Nor do we about men in the workplace or those dating but crickets regarding employment segregation or chaperones where the violence overwhelmingly happens. Why is that?Nor do we about men in the workplace or those dating but crickets regarding employment segregation or chaperones where the violence overwhelmingly happens. Why is that?'

Consent.

You have now pivoted into an area of discussion about situations where female people can give consent to be in a workplace alone with a male person if they feel safe with that person. Dating? Well, that generally takes place in public until a female person can make a risk assessment about that male person.

These situations have no relevance to the discussion about male people demanding access to female single sex publicly accessible provisions where female people do not consent to that male person's presence.

oh well. Remember, we had an entire thread about this very same attempt of a false comparison last year.

Strange isn't it? I don't believe that it is a widely used argument because it shows the immediate weakness that the person using it has no fucking idea about how safeguarding or consent works. As was pointed out on that thread last year.