Gender-neutral changing rooms aren’t safe — they just appease the trans lobby who won’t accept you if don’t conform to their views

TOPSHOP’S decision to make changing rooms gender neutral has sparked heated debate.

The switch, publicised after “trans feminine” Travis Alabanza accused the store of barring the performance artist from trying on women’s items, was welcomed by some though others plan a boycott.

Here Miranda Yardley, 49, who transitioned ten years ago, explains why she thinks the move is part of a worrying bid to appease a minority.

I find it astonishing that Topshop and ­Topman have made this decision.

Here we have a major High Street store changing its policy to accommodate a minority of people, arguably at the expense of their ­target market.

I can quite understand the outcry, especially from parents uncomfortable at the idea of their young daughters undressing in a cubicle separated from a man by just a flimsy curtain.

Women of all ages must be able to feel safe in areas like changing rooms. This policy doesn’t feel safe to me.

Topshop has become another victim of the trans lobby, jumping into action to appease the demands of a minority.

(It’s interesting to note that women have been asking Topshop to bring in larger clothing sizes — they only go up to size 18 — and the store hasn’t done anything about those demands.)

It might surprise you to hear me talking like this. After all, I am transsexual.

But that doesn’t stop me being concerned about the way society is changing in the name of so-called trans rights.

I want proper debate, not knee-jerk reactions to satisfy some idea of ­political correctness.

The issue is set to take centre stage this autumn as the Government publishes its consultation on the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

At the moment, a person can legally change their gender if they satisfy three requirements:

• They have lived in their chosen gender for two years.
• They have obtained a medical diagnosis showing they have gender dysphoria — a condition where a person experiences distress because their gender identity does not match their biological sex.
• If a panel of experts agrees.

To me, this makes absolute sense.

It means that the transitioning ­person is 100 per cent sure of the life-changing decision and also their desire has been verified objectively.

However, the equalities minister, Justine Greening, has proposed changes to the Act which could make it possible for a person to change their gender ­simply by declaring themselves as such. So if you were born Simon and want to become Sue, all you need to do is declare it and sign a piece of paper.

A large section of the transgender ­community is campaigning for this, but I am absolutely against it.

Changing gender should not be taken so lightly. If all you have to do to change gender is say so, it takes away ­whatever authenticity trans people can claim.

It will base your reassignment on mere thoughts and feelings rather than an accepted screening process.

It’s tough enough to go through what we do in society without our sincerity being questioned.

Making it easier to legally change gender will inevitably result in a greater number of people doing so — and the flip side will be a larger number of people de-transitioning after deciding they don’t want to be that gender after all. How is that going to help anyone?

There is also a campaign to lower the legal age of transition to 16, and that is very dangerous. I believe children have become the collateral damage of transgender rights.

The number of children wanting to transition is at an all-time high.

I am very wary of some adults who are aggressively pushing children to transition. Among them are grown up trans women who have — in many cases — had families and built careers before they transitioned and have nothing in common with the children going through this.

They’re doing it for validation for themselves and to broaden access rights for trans people at the expense of not just women but those children they support transitioning.

What they’re arguing is that being transgender is a medical condition and that we should be treating it medically.

Yet there is no “medical” test to back this up. Indeed, no one is agreed on what makes people transgender.

I am not popular for my views. Unlike many people in the gender non-conformity community, I don’t believe a trans woman is a “woman”.

I wouldn’t dream of calling myself such because I haven’t had the same experiences as a woman.

During the black civil rights movement, black people didn’t demand to be called white. And no lesbian or gay man I’ve met has demanded to be called heterosexual. So why are we jumping to give trans people equality at the expense of equity?

My views go against those of trans activists who won’t debate whether trans women are or aren’t considered “women”. If you can’t have a debate about such a basic idea, how can you move forward?

The trans community makes out it is very welcoming and accepting, but if you don’t conform with their views then they can make life very difficult.

I have been dubbed a TERF, a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, a derogatory term aimed at dehumanising people.

This dehumanisation results in the most horrific verbal abuse and even physical violence against people who have a different opinion to the transgender dogma.

I believe in transgender rights, but I don’t believe we should be so quick to appease the minority.

And I certainly do not believe we should bring in a law that negatively affects the privacy and safety of girls and women.