It feels like we’ve stepped into a time machine. However, instead of heading back to the 1960s, when women were fighting for equal rights just before Title IX became law, we’ve landed in 2025, when the protections enacted then are being rolled back by many who use the same slogans as those who fought for them in the first place.
That’s the uncomfortable reality behind the story of a woman who was kicked out of Gold’s Gym after confronting a biological male in the women’s locker room. She had just finished her workout and was in the middle of changing when she suddenly realized a man was in the same space doing the same thing. Startled and uncomfortable, she reported the situation to the gym staff — only to have her membership revoked in response. Not because she harassed anyone, and not because she broke a rule, but because she dared to say what many women are now too afraid to say: “This isn’t okay.”
Fifty years ago, this would have been unthinkable. Back then, society still recognized the fundamental differences between men and women, and there was a shared understanding of boundaries, common sense, and right and wrong.
Yet as the world has “progressed,” virtue signaling has replaced actual virtue. Ironically enough, women are expected to sacrifice their safety and privacy on the altar of social justice. Speak up about it, and you risk being the one punished.
The viral video of the incident shows the woman confronting the man who had entered the women’s locker room. According to her account, the man mockingly commented that women like to see the private parts of men’s bodies, to which she was understandably furious, and demanded that he leave. Yet instead of Gold’s Gym protecting her right to privacy, the gym took away her right to be there.
When the story spread online, another video surfaced — this time showing her circling the gym lobby, raising her voice about what had happened. “Men, grown men with big d***s, in the women’s locker room — that’s why I’m getting kicked out,” she shouted. It wasn’t polite, but it was honest. And that honesty has made her something of a hero to women who are tired of being told to stay quiet.
Here’s the part that should trouble everyone, no matter their politics: We’ve reached a point where a woman expressing discomfort when she’s vulnerable is now being treated as the problem. Maybe “regression” isn’t even the right word to describe the dilemma because even before Title IX, no one believed that women wanted privacy or single-sex spaces out of hate or discrimination. It was simply about fairness — if men can have their own spaces without being accused of bias, why shouldn’t women be afforded the same? It wasn’t about “phobia” or hate in the first place, so why is it being painted that way now?
It’s about boundaries, consent, and common sense. Women fought for decades for access to our own bathrooms, our own locker rooms, and our own safe spaces where we could exist without fear of exposure or intimidation. Those spaces were hard-won. Yet in today’s climate, if you question a man who wants access to them, you risk being publicly shamed, banned, or branded with an ugly label.
The woman in this story, who later identified herself as a lesbian and someone who should be protected by the Rainbow Mafia that claims to fight for oppressed minorities, made a point many women have echoed: “How can you say you’re a woman and not care how women feel?” She’s not against individuals with their own lifestyle or identity; she’s against a system that prioritizes ideology over women’s safety and dignity. And she’s right to ask: if the goal is inclusion, why is it always women’s spaces being sacrificed? Why not build separate, private facilities for everyone’s comfort and privacy?
Even Gold’s Gym’s own policy highlights a major flaw in the system. Its “transgender criteria” for locker room access allow individuals to use facilities based on self-identification or basic legal documentation. In reality, no gym employee — particularly those whose job description is simply to sell memberships — wants to have an in-depth conversation about hormone therapy timelines or “gender identity” history. They will simply look at a person’s ID or even take their word for it — and suddenly, the women’s locker room is open to anyone.
That’s not a policy based on protection or fairness. It’s loophole activism dressed up as inclusion. Additionally, these policies ignore the real concerns beyond personal identity, such as criminal history, mental health, and other factors that could make someone unsafe to be in close proximity to undressed women — especially in spaces where there’s no one around to help if something goes wrong.
The message being sent is chillingly clear: Women are expected to be silent, compliant, and accommodating — even at the cost of safety and true equality. If you have a problem with it, you’re the one who gets removed.
What happened at Gold’s Gym isn’t just about one woman losing her membership. It’s about what happens when institutions care more about avoiding social backlash than creating dangerous situations. It’s a reminder that feminism has somehow come full circle, back to a place where women’s voices are dismissed, their instincts mean nothing, and their boundaries are erased — all to please certain men.
If that’s what “progress” looks like, maybe it’s time we speak up again — loudly, unapologetically, and together. Because if today’s progressives get their way, there won’t be any women’s spaces left to defend.
