Locker Room Backlash: Women Confront Democrats on Trans Policy Failures

Paul Riverbank, 12/10/2025Locker room access clashes spark fierce debate over women's rights, inclusion, and shifting legal boundaries.

Her frustration seemed to resonate with several women in the audience—visible, tense—who nodded as Hyman recounted the lack of action from gym staff, despite their formal reports. “Why isn’t state law protecting us here?” she asked, flipping the script on elected officials’ broad promises. Hyman didn’t mince words, bridging her specific experience to a broader grievance: “Trans are not women. They are men,” she declared, her tone unapologetic. It was jarring, deeply personal, and unmistakably political—even if she claimed otherwise.

Congressman Ro Khanna, who’d found himself the focal point of this impromptu grilling, responded carefully, weaving legal obligations and civil rights into his reply. “Anybody harassing or committing violence should face prosecution,” he said. But, he continued, the right for transgender women to access women’s spaces, so long as they identify as such, stood on different footing. “That is their right,” he insisted, drawing a clear but controversial line.

The exchange encapsulated a cultural fault line that many in the country are either gingerly tiptoeing or charging across. The uneasy question—where do transgender women belong in the fabric of public life, from sports teams to locker rooms?—is fueling heated debates in statehouses, courts, and, as seen here, rooms packed with ordinary citizens.

The tug-of-war hardly stops at locker rooms. Just as Hyman’s words were making waves, headlines pivoted to the world of pro tennis. Aryna Sabalenka, known for her powerful serves as much as for her candor, weighed in on a British talk show. “I have nothing against them, but… I feel like they still have a huge advantage over women,” she said, cutting to the chase. For Sabalenka, letting transgender women compete meant pitting female athletes against “biological men… which is just not fair.” This view isn’t a loner’s cry. Legends like Martina Navratilova echo it, and Nick Kyrgios—never shy himself—backed her up.

Sports organizations and social groups are feeling the squeeze. The Women’s Institute and Girlguiding, both with generations of tradition, recently ended long-standing inclusive policies after a Supreme Court decision refocused the definition of “sex.” Suddenly, institutions fearing legal exposure braced for lawsuits—not just from advocates of exclusion, but also from those demanding inclusion under equality laws. Jess O’Thomson, who knows her way around courtrooms, calls the legal landscape “clear as mud.” The Equality Act may set a baseline, but after recent court decisions, “biological sex” is front and center. However, the law still leaves enough wiggle room for organizations to take different paths, so long as they can justify their choice—if, that is, they’re willing to defend it all the way.

For many groups, the threat of a lawsuit isn’t some abstract boogeyman—it’s a daily headache, especially for organizations without legal war chests. O’Thomson suspects some are throwing in the towel out of sheer exhaustion, figuring it’s safer to change policies now than risk a costly court battle later. No easy answer is on offer.

And yet, inside many organizations, the debate rages on. Not everyone is ready to exclude—plenty of volunteers and leaders push to remain welcoming, seeing this as a stand for fairness, not just compliance. “Bravery in standing up for what is right” is how one insider put it, summing up the emotional charge in just a few words.

Tough as it is to find common ground, what comes through is a messy, unresolved reality. Women like Tish Hyman are raising alarms. At the same time, public figures and grassroots leaders are digging in, trying to work out who gets to draw the boundaries—and on what grounds. So far, the lines keep shifting, and neither side is surrendering quietly. Whatever tomorrow brings, this is a controversy with no sign of fading, and, for many, the real stakes are yet to be settled.

On an anxious evening in California, Tish Hyman—better known for her music than anything political—stood in front of a crowded room, her voice steady against the nervous shuffle of feet. This wasn’t a performance, and she made that perfectly clear right off the bat. She introduced herself simply, as a woman and a lesbian, then dropped a story that left a hush hanging in the air. According to Hyman, her repeated complaints to gym management had been ignored. “There’s a man in our women’s locker room,” she told the crowd, “and he’s not just any man.” The details, shared first online and now echoing off town hall walls, were stark—a man convicted of domestic violence, the kind that shatters a jaw and leaves wounds deeper than headlines ever show.Her frustration seemed to resonate with several women in the audience—visible, tense—who nodded as Hyman recounted the lack of action from gym staff, despite their formal reports. “Why isn’t state law protecting us here?” she asked, flipping the script on elected officials’ broad promises. Hyman didn’t mince words, bridging her specific experience to a broader grievance: “Trans are not women. They are men,” she declared, her tone unapologetic. It was jarring, deeply personal, and unmistakably political—even if she claimed otherwise.Congressman Ro Khanna, who’d found himself the focal point of this impromptu grilling, responded carefully, weaving legal obligations and civil rights into his reply. “Anybody harassing or committing violence should face prosecution,” he said. But, he continued, the right for transgender women to access women’s spaces, so long as they identify as such, stood on different footing. “That is their right,” he insisted, drawing a clear but controversial line.The exchange encapsulated a cultural fault line that many in the country are either gingerly tiptoeing or charging across. The uneasy question—where do transgender women belong in the fabric of public life, from sports teams to locker rooms?—is fueling heated debates in statehouses, courts, and, as seen here, rooms packed with ordinary citizens.The tug-of-war hardly stops at locker rooms. Just as Hyman’s words were making waves, headlines pivoted to the world of pro tennis. Aryna Sabalenka, known for her powerful serves as much as for her candor, weighed in on a British talk show. “I have nothing against them, but… I feel like they still have a huge advantage over women,” she said, cutting to the chase. For Sabalenka, letting transgender women compete meant pitting female athletes against “biological men… which is just not fair.” This view isn’t a loner’s cry. Legends like Martina Navratilova echo it, and Nick Kyrgios—never shy himself—backed her up.Sports organizations and social groups are feeling the squeeze. The Women’s Institute and Girlguiding, both with generations of tradition, recently ended long-standing inclusive policies after a Supreme Court decision refocused the definition of “sex.” Suddenly, institutions fearing legal exposure braced for lawsuits—not just from advocates of exclusion, but also from those demanding inclusion under equality laws. Jess O’Thomson, who knows her way around courtrooms, calls the legal landscape “clear as mud.” The Equality Act may set a baseline, but after recent court decisions, “biological sex” is front and center. However, the law still leaves enough wiggle room for organizations to take different paths, so long as they can justify their choice—if, that is, they’re willing to defend it all the way.For many groups, the threat of a lawsuit isn’t some abstract boogeyman—it’s a daily headache, especially for organizations without legal war chests. O’Thomson suspects some are throwing in the towel out of sheer exhaustion, figuring it’s safer to change policies now than risk a costly court battle later. No easy answer is on offer.And yet, inside many organizations, the debate rages on. Not everyone is ready to exclude—plenty of volunteers and leaders push to remain welcoming, seeing this as a stand for fairness, not just compliance. “Bravery in standing up for what is right” is how one insider put it, summing up the emotional charge in just a few words.Tough as it is to find common ground, what comes through is a messy, unresolved reality. Women like Tish Hyman are raising alarms. At the same time, public figures and grassroots leaders are digging in, trying to work out who gets to draw the boundaries—and on what grounds. So far, the lines keep shifting, and neither side is surrendering quietly. Whatever tomorrow brings, this is a controversy with no sign of fading, and, for many, the real stakes are yet to be settled.