Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Two gowns on his shoulder.

I’m guessing that Zara also fails to provide changing rooms based on astrological sign, or the colour of one’s aura.

A non-binary shopper said they felt ‘dehumanised’ and accused a fashion brand of being ‘transphobic’ after they were refused entry to a women’s changing room.

No, there’s no such thing as a “non-binary shopper.” Someone might claim to be “non-binary”, but that declaration does not change their sex, or remove it altogether. They might, at most, be “gender nonconforming”. But, being a beardy bloke, he should not be trying to access women’s changing rooms.

A clothing store specializing in women’s clothing can’t be expected to offer facilities for male crossdressers, or male crossdressers claiming to be “non-binary.” If he wants to, he can shop online, buy whatever he wants, using whatever name he wants, and nobody would be any the wiser. But that’s no solution, that’s part of the problem; he needs to be noticed. He’s special, and must be pampered, catered to, and validated. If he’s not sufficiently satisfied, he gets to pout in front of an audience. Not only that, he gets to bully and shame real, live people. Shopping online robs him of all of these pleasures; in cyberspace, no one can hear you whine.

As far as “dehumanized”? No. I’d say it’s more likely the other way around. Just as “bringing your whole self” to work doesn’t really help job performance or workplace morale if your fellow employees have to alternately genuflect and walk on eggshells because you’re so much more fucking awesome than they are, because of your invisible gender feels.

“Bringing your whole self” shopping doesn’t enhance the retail experience for those forced to deal with your fucking awesome invisible gender feels. For you, they’re a captive audience, doing their best to please customers in order to make a living. Making unreasonable demands of store staff, who are obligated by their positions to try to make you happy, is abusive. Your money gives you power over them. Your actions might cause problems for the company they’re working for (like bad publicity, when you go running in tears to the press with your non-story, on a slow news day). In fact, you’re counting on exactly that implicit threat in order to get your way. Depending on the employer, the clerk you’re pressuring might be sacked if the boss decides “The customer is always right,” even though sometimes, the customer is just an asshole.

Staff refusing to let you access women’s spaces which you are not entitled to enter, for the safety and dignity of their female clientele (let’s not forget them, shall we), does nothing to damage your “humanity”. It might make you confront the boundaries of your delusion, and the limits of your ability to force others to accommodate, and participate in it, but that’s on you, not them. Seeing your comfort as more important than women’s safety doesn’t make you the good guy, let alone a “victim.” Your interest in women’s change rooms makes you a suspicious man. A similar insistence on accessing a children’s area in which to change would also, correctly, raise a safeguarding flag. Claiming an NB “gender identity” does not change that. You are no less a man, and therefore, under prudent, and necessary, safeguarding rules, no less a threat than any other random man.

Tying your “humanity” to others’s compliance with your selfish, unreasonable demands is not a sign of good psychological health. Ditto investing so much (anything?) in a nonsensical “gender identity,” in order to be special or different for just existing. Everyone exists. You’re not that special. Get over it, or get help. Shop from home; leave the clerks (and the female customers) alone.