05-08-2025
‘I was sunbathing topless when I heard a male voice': The trans row over women-only swimming
Janice Williams was first taken to the Kenwood Ladies' Pond on Hampstead Heath in the 1990s by a group of single mothers from a community project.
'Many were survivors of domestic violence, prostitution, trafficking etc and, for these women particularly, the single-sex status of the pond meant that it was not just a sanctuary, it was the only sanctuary, a place of freedom, healing and community,' says Janice, 69, a former training consultant who lives near the ponds in North London.
'We could picnic on the meadow, remove bra tops and – for the few who had learnt to swim – dip in the water while another mum watched our kids. There were women from all different backgrounds – Muslim, Jewish, Afro-Caribbean – it was pure and beautiful to be immersed in nature.'
Today, the sign on the iron gate at the pond – the only natural women-only bathing pond in Europe – still reads: 'Women Only. Men not allowed beyond this point'. And for almost a century, since it opened in 1925, this rule was respected by the large majority of visitors.
But recently, another sign appeared which reads: 'Those who identify as women are welcome to swim at the Kenwood Ladies' Bathing Pond.' The Ladies Pond is open to biological women and trans women with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment under the Equality Act 2010. The City of London Corporation is preparing a public consultation on the future admissions policy at the Ladies' Pond.'
It seems that The City of London Corporation – the multi-billion-pound local authority that manages the site, and governs the Square Mile – is doubling down on its 2018 decision to update its 'Women Only' policy to include trans women (men who self-identify as women).
When that update became public, protests ensued. One grassroots women's group took to wearing fake moustaches and went to the nearby men-only pond to raise awareness of the hypocrisy of the policy (they were thrown out).
But in April, when the Supreme Court ruled that 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 meant biological sex and that even men with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) could be excluded from women-only services, the protesters hoped their fight was over.
They were wrong. The City of London Corporation says it is 'currently reviewing its access policies'. It means that for now at least, it will still allow men who identify as women to swim at the women's pond.
Campaign group Sex Matters is planning to make a £50,000 legal claim over the Corporation's failure to comply with the Supreme Court ruling.
'The Corporation has said this is not a single-sex service because it already lets trans women in,' says Maya Forstater, executive director of Sex Matters. 'They're basically saying that although the Supreme Court defined what 'man' and 'woman' means in the Equality Act, the words 'man' and 'woman' mean something completely different on their sign and therefore they don't need to use the Equality Act rules at all – which is extraordinary.
'We suspect that's what all other councils who are saying 'it is complex' are thinking as well. They're all biding their time while sticking 'to the pack' because they don't want to be sued.
'We've heard a lot from women who say they don't swim in the pond any more. They're self-excluding or changing their behaviour, such as going first thing in the morning when they believe fewer 'trans women' go because they feel it's safer.
'There are other women who say they have had bad experiences when trans women are there – one told us of an elderly transsexual asking young girls to do his bikini up for him and whether he could go naked into the female showers.'
Forstater, who has campaigned for clarity on sex in law and policy since winning her own discrimination case in 2021, says that the law is clear and that the City of London is breaching the Equality Act 2010.
'We feel we have a clear-cut case,' she says. 'The ponds are already using sex discrimination because a mother can't take her five-year-old son to the Women's Pond yet a man claiming to be a woman is being allowed access.
'The City of London is a public body providing a public service and so we are bringing this as a public law case to show that here is an organisation breaching sex-based rules. It's irrational and we think it puts women at risk of harm.
'The ponds are an iconic space and the only outdoor women-only amenity in the country. But there's also a male pond and a mixed pond so there's no sense that anyone is not allowed to swim and between those three options, everyone is included.'
In a statement, a spokesman for the City of London Corporation said: 'In line with other service providers, we are reviewing our access policies, including those at Hampstead Heath's Bathing Ponds.
'In doing so, we must consider the impact of current and potential future arrangements on all visitors, while ensuring we meet our legal duties and provide appropriate access.
'This summer we will engage with our service users and other stakeholders to ensure we understand their needs and can take properly informed decisions.
'In considering the way forward, we have taken, and will continue to take, specialist legal advice. The current arrangements remain in place during the review.
'Our priority is to provide a safe and respectful environment for everyone.'
Hairy bodies in bikinis
The reaction to the news that biological males are still allowed in the Ladies' Pond is mixed. One woman who asked not to be named says she has felt as though her privacy has been breached since the rules changed.
'I was sunbathing as usual, topless,' she says. 'I suddenly heard this male voice next to me and he said: 'Do you know what time the pond closes?' Even though I consider myself a broad-minded person, it really freaked me out because I heard a male voice. The idea that someone was there when I was not being modest or protected by any clothing felt wrong. Even though I thought I was a liberated person, I realised I'm not.' The whole experience made her 'very uncomfortable' she admits.
Coming out of the pond, another woman wearing a linen shirt and carrying a swimming bag over her arms says that she once saw two men using the pond which made her 'despair'.
'At the time I was very distressed because I thought: 'Oh that's the end of women-only spaces then,' she reflects. The guys I saw were very much a provocation. They had big hairy bodies and were wearing bikinis. It was very aggressive, very much an attack. I felt it was sad… I felt angry.
'The beauty of women-only spaces is that you don't have to think about what your body looks like in a costume or whether you want to take your top off when you sunbathe,' she says. 'There's a lovely freedom there and I think it's instantly contaminated, even if you're liberal-minded about the trans issue.'
But not all bathers today are concerned. Alba Hernandez, 28, a theatre usher from north-west London is more accepting. 'I feel very safe and I don't think I would feel threatened,' she says. 'If anything happened that would endanger somebody, the pond is a very strong community and it would be stopped very quickly.'
Barbara Massey, 76, another regular, holds a similar view. 'There was one person who was a man and became a woman, she was always coming here,' she says. 'But she sat with us up on that bench and everyone accepted her as a woman. As long as they don't feel you up or chat you up.
'But if it's a guy who's sneaking in here, saying: 'I identify as a woman' and he's actually eyeing women up, we wouldn't like that.'
Yet other women point out that erasing women-only spaces excludes certain religions. 'It's very important for some people to have space for women-only,' says 75-year-old Daphne Grey. 'Certain religions would not be allowed to swim at all if they had to go mixed, so I think it's important. They've got mixed ponds and men-only ponds, so why not women-only?'
Protesters against the recent policy claim that one of the main figures driving the charge to allow trans-identifying men into the ponds is Edward Lord, an elected member of the City of London Corporation since 2001. Lord identifies as non-binary and goes by they/them pronouns.
It was Lord who, in 2018, oversaw a consultation by the City of London Corporation about its trans policy, including in relation to women's and men's ponds and changing rooms on Hampstead Heath.
Promoted mostly on his Twitter account, Lord launched the consultation, saying: 'It shouldn't be controversial. It shouldn't be a debate. Trans women are women, trans men are men.'
Yet when Forstater polled her Twitter followers in 2019 to see how many people said they had been blocked by Lord in the past – and therefore would have been less likely to see the survey he was promoting – it appeared that 83 per cent of the 1,821 blocked were women.
However, some women on the online forum Mumnset did see the survey and sensed problems straight away.
'No mention of sex, no mention of impact on any stakeholders, all leading questions, and horrible clear intention to filter,' wrote one.
The survey found that 60 per cent of respondents appeared to support the inclusion of trans-identifying men in the ponds. Yet critics argued that it was 'a sham'.
Alice Sullivan, professor of sociology at University College London's Social Research Institute and author of a recent independent review assessing how sex and gender identity are recorded in public data, statistics, and research commented at the time. She said the consultation had been handled in an 'oddly discreet way'.
Today, her views are even more robust. 'This is a strong contender for the worst questionnaire I have ever seen,' she says. 'Instead of asking users of local services concrete questions about whether males should be allowed into women's spaces, the City of London asked pure gobbledygook questions such as: 'Do you agree or disagree that: 1/ a person may come to feel that their gender is different from that assigned to them at birth. 2/ A person who consistently identifies in a gender which is different to the one they were assigned at birth should be accepted by society in their stated gender identity etc.
'To add insult to injury, there were 39,650 responses, but half of these responses were deemed invalid, with analysis only carried out on the remaining 21,191 cases. The exercise was a sham from start to finish.'
However, the trans-inclusive policy was adopted, leading to women's rights campaigners to lead several protests.
'The moment a man was allowed in, [the atmosphere at the women-only pond] changed at a stroke in a short-sighted move designed to bolster the already overinflated ego of Edward Lord,' says Janice Williams.
'I later joined the committee of the Kenwood Ladies Pond Association (KLPA) hoping to explain all this to them but to no avail. They refused to even discuss it. I proposed the AGM motion to return the pond to women-only but a lot of young students appeared to have been drafted in at the last moment to vote against it and the meeting was abandoned in chaos because speakers in favour were refused a hearing. This was pre-Supreme Court clarification.'
A spokesman for the City of London Corporation said: 'Edward Lord has had no direct involvement in shaping the City Corporation's response to the Supreme Court decision. Our position is guided solely by our legal obligations under the Equality Act and our interpretation of the Court's judgment.'
Supporters of the trans-inclusive policy cite the positive vote to include trans women from members of the KLPA as a reason why Sex Matters should drop any case. But Sex Matters dismiss this.
'You can't vote to discriminate and obviously if you've caused lots of women to self-exclude and then you take a vote amongst those who didn't self-exclude, the answer will be: 'We think it's fine,'' says Forstater. 'But it's not up to them to vote, it's up to the City of London to provide a service that is lawful.
'People still have freedom of association to vote to live their life in a particular way and if there is a group of women who want to swim with trans women then they are free to do that.
'But they need to do that in the mixed pond. What they can't do is vote that a public service that is spending public money and is required to comply with the Equality Act doesn't do that.'
Venice Allan is another supporter of Sex Matters' legal action and will be a witness for their case. She has taken part in several protests since 2018 to keep the pond women-only.
'In a women-only pond you're free to be semi-naked in the pool and naked in the shower, but there's a joy and physical peace to being there because there are no men or boys splashing around,' says Allan, 50. 'I have two sons myself and there's nothing wrong with that kind of swimming but to have a peaceful space like this was wonderful.'
Venice says she has encountered men claiming to be women swimming in the pond on at least two occasions.
'There were two men who were clearly 'transitioning' because they had little 'moobs' and several years later there was a man with a woman who was on some kind of hormonal treatment. They were sitting there topless just watching the women.
'Some elderly lesbians I was with actually complained to the lifeguard and at the time I was quite timid and felt: 'Was this the right thing to do?'
'But now I feel completely differently. The men who go now, particularly after all the publicity with the Supreme Court judgment, are deliberately violating our boundaries. When one man comes into a space with lots of women the atmosphere completely changes.
'I was absolutely thrilled when Sex Matters said they were going to take this action. There are three ponds where these men could swim – it's literally the most progressive, inclusive and welcoming space in London – and there is no reason on Earth as to why these men can't use the mixed pond. For me it's the perfect court case.'
