The City of London Corporation’s executive team has published its report on the future of the Hampstead Heath bathing ponds and has sent it for discussion and agreement by various committees during May and June.
This last week a lady made a post on one of the local pages about The Village hotel chain local to us breaking the law in this regard.
She had been either swimming or to the gym(can’t remember which) and had been approached and propositioned by what she called a transvestite with their junk hanging out.
She’s complained to the hotel manager telling them they were breaking the law by not enforcing women only spaces, she also reported it to the police.
Now I’ve only been to this place once as a guest when my daughter had a three month membership offer so I know apart from a few tiny changing rooms that are also badly lit the ladies locker room is an open space with no privacy.
This lady was instantly jumped on as being a bigoted transphobic even asking would she have responded the same had it been a lesbian propositioning her and this person was a trans regardless of having or wanting surgery or not.
The whole thing was bizarre as even when she explained that not only was it illegal she felt unsafe and in danger as a five foot women propositioned by a six foot plus man in the changing rooms.
Why people didn’t see the danger issues is beyond me as it’s bad enough to get unwanted advances in pubs and clubs but now you can’t even go exercise in safety.
I think the only way to send business like this a message is by not giving them your money as I know the monthly membership isn’t cheap and if they don’t care about women’s safety then they can do without our money as well.
What I do find interesting is I use one of the local council sports center’s that does have communal changing rooms for swimming but unless it’s heaving with the children’s swimming lessons, then the male’s/ female’s gravitate to changing rooms next to each other in separate sections.
It’s like witnessing some unwritten rule with most above 30 plus following this pattern as people like to feel safe and comfortable.
I want every person who spews this “inclusion” bullshit, every “trans ally”, if she’s a female, to be accosted and threatened by a cockfrocker in a women’s restroom or locker room, and if he’s a male, to have one of his female loved ones be accosted and threatened by a cockfrocker in a women’s restroom or locker room.
I sincerely want this to happen. It’s the only way such people will ever learn. #NotMyFaultTheirs
Their decision is bonkers and totally against the law. The whole thrust of the Supreme Court’s clarification is that men are men and they don’t belong in a female category. They CANNOT call something the ladies pond and then allow men to come in
Although your points are reasonable and fair-minded, a laissez-faire approach does not protect women and girls from voyeurism, which -- like exhibitionism -- is a crime of sexual predation. (That's why it is bad policy to allow members of the public to lie about their sex on official IDs.)
Even more worrying, we live in an age of image-based sexual abuse. Predators bring cameras into private spaces to photograph women and girls in states of undress, photographs that can be uploaded to the internet and cause no end of horror.
At first glance, your idea makes sense, except it would institute a dangerous version of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy US president Clinton once established as a cowardly half-measure for accommodating gay and lesbian service members. It didn't work well.
Of course, lying about being the opposite sex is not like being gay.
The more important question for front line staff is to whose aid should they come in cases of conflict.
It's certainly true that they can't do full checks at the door. But if a woman or girl comes to the front desk and says "there is a man in the shower, I'm uncomfortable"
the policy HAS to be siding with the woman or girl complaining. As it is, the effective policy is: tell them to fuck off, because men get what they want.
This means that if men really do pass as much as they say they do, or are as modest and etc. etc. as they claim to be, they won't have a problem. But yes, women and girls do have to have veto power and when these men are clocked and complained about, staff knows whose safety and comfort to prioritize: that of women and girls.
Because grown ass weirdos are more important than children
This last week a lady made a post on one of the local pages about The Village hotel chain local to us breaking the law in this regard.
She had been either swimming or to the gym(can’t remember which) and had been approached and propositioned by what she called a transvestite with their junk hanging out.
She’s complained to the hotel manager telling them they were breaking the law by not enforcing women only spaces, she also reported it to the police.
Now I’ve only been to this place once as a guest when my daughter had a three month membership offer so I know apart from a few tiny changing rooms that are also badly lit the ladies locker room is an open space with no privacy.
This lady was instantly jumped on as being a bigoted transphobic even asking would she have responded the same had it been a lesbian propositioning her and this person was a trans regardless of having or wanting surgery or not.
The whole thing was bizarre as even when she explained that not only was it illegal she felt unsafe and in danger as a five foot women propositioned by a six foot plus man in the changing rooms.
Why people didn’t see the danger issues is beyond me as it’s bad enough to get unwanted advances in pubs and clubs but now you can’t even go exercise in safety.
I think the only way to send business like this a message is by not giving them your money as I know the monthly membership isn’t cheap and if they don’t care about women’s safety then they can do without our money as well.
What I do find interesting is I use one of the local council sports center’s that does have communal changing rooms for swimming but unless it’s heaving with the children’s swimming lessons, then the male’s/ female’s gravitate to changing rooms next to each other in separate sections.
It’s like witnessing some unwritten rule with most above 30 plus following this pattern as people like to feel safe and comfortable.
I want every person who spews this “inclusion” bullshit, every “trans ally”, if she’s a female, to be accosted and threatened by a cockfrocker in a women’s restroom or locker room, and if he’s a male, to have one of his female loved ones be accosted and threatened by a cockfrocker in a women’s restroom or locker room.
I sincerely want this to happen. It’s the only way such people will ever learn. #NotMyFaultTheirs
Their decision is bonkers and totally against the law. The whole thrust of the Supreme Court’s clarification is that men are men and they don’t belong in a female category. They CANNOT call something the ladies pond and then allow men to come in
I am so sorry these demented perverts are gaslighting you women so badly. This is insanity, but you are sane.
These Patriarchy Ultras really have a thirst for power, don’t they. Make Perverts Ashamed Again!
Although your points are reasonable and fair-minded, a laissez-faire approach does not protect women and girls from voyeurism, which -- like exhibitionism -- is a crime of sexual predation. (That's why it is bad policy to allow members of the public to lie about their sex on official IDs.)
Even more worrying, we live in an age of image-based sexual abuse. Predators bring cameras into private spaces to photograph women and girls in states of undress, photographs that can be uploaded to the internet and cause no end of horror.
At first glance, your idea makes sense, except it would institute a dangerous version of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy US president Clinton once established as a cowardly half-measure for accommodating gay and lesbian service members. It didn't work well.
Of course, lying about being the opposite sex is not like being gay.
The more important question for front line staff is to whose aid should they come in cases of conflict.
It's certainly true that they can't do full checks at the door. But if a woman or girl comes to the front desk and says "there is a man in the shower, I'm uncomfortable"
the policy HAS to be siding with the woman or girl complaining. As it is, the effective policy is: tell them to fuck off, because men get what they want.
This means that if men really do pass as much as they say they do, or are as modest and etc. etc. as they claim to be, they won't have a problem. But yes, women and girls do have to have veto power and when these men are clocked and complained about, staff knows whose safety and comfort to prioritize: that of women and girls.
There should never be a conflict because no males should be allowed in
Sure agreed but front desk staff require pragmatic rules for real life situations