The settlement of a discrimination lawsuit against King Spa in New Jersey has forced a mandatory policy shift regarding access to female-only nude areas—a move that has ignited a contentious debate regarding the intersection of gender identity, privacy and cultural tradition.
Spa Agrees to Policy Overhaul
King Spa, a Korean–or jimjilbang-style–spa in Palisades Park, New Jersey, has amended its admission rules to allow all guests access to sex-segregated nude areas based on their gender identity, regardless of physical characteristics.
This shift follows a 2022 lawsuit brought by Alexandra 'Allie' Goebert, a trans woman who alleged she was denied access to the female-only nude section.
The Incident That Sparked the Legal Battle
According to the court filings, Goebert arrived at the spa with a female friend and was initially given a male wristband, despite having a New Jersey state ID that identified her as female.
When she later accessed the women's locker room, staff reportedly questioned her about having 'boy parts' and whether she'd had surgery.
Once she admitted she still had male genitalia, Goebert said staff forced her to leave and use the male section instead. She declined an offer to use the women's area if she wore a swimsuit, according to the lawsuit.
What the New Policy Says
Under the settlement reached in August 2025, King Spa's updated policy now reads: 'All clients will be permitted to access ... facilities ... that correspond to ... gender identity ... regardless of whether the client is transgender ... and regardless of any physical ... traits ... which may or may not align with traits stereotypically associated with that gender.'
Importantly, the policy clarifies that discomfort from other guests is not a valid reason to exclude someone. 'No client may force another client ... not to use the sex‑segregated area ... because of ... personal discomfort,' it states.
Training and Cultural Change
As part of the settlement, King Spa also agreed to train its staff. The spa must now provide at least one hour of non-discrimination training with an independent consultant specialising in gender identity.
Additionally, employees will use a new handbook that covers gender identity terms and instructs workers to use customers' preferred names and pronouns.
The handbook also notes a significant shift: 'areas requiring partial or full nudity will contain clients whose bodies may not align with 'stereotypical expectations' for that gender.'
Legal Context and Broader Debate
This case comes amid growing legal scrutiny of sex-segregated public spaces. A similar issue arose in Washington State, where the Ninth Circuit ruled that a Korean women-only spa cannot exclude pre-operative trans women.
In that case, the spa argued its Christian beliefs justified the exclusion. The court rejected that argument, noting that anti-discrimination laws apply even in age-old cultural spaces.
However, some critics worry about privacy in fully nude spaces, especially when bodies diverge from traditional gender norms. A past complaint in New Jersey raised concerns after a woman claimed she encountered a pre-operative trans man in a women-only nude area.
Supporters of the ruling, by contrast, argue that denying access based on anatomy is discriminatory and that gender identity must be respected.
The Human Impact
For trans individuals like Goebert, the outcome represents more than a legal victory — it's access to a shared, intimate space that had once excluded them.
For other spa-goers, the ruling forces a reckoning with what 'female-only' really means. It challenges traditional notions of nudity, gender, and safety in communal wellness settings.
King Spa's policy shift may set a precedent. As other spas and bathhouses grapple with similar disputes, this case could reshape how public and private venues across the US accommodate gender diversity—even in the most personal, vulnerable spaces.
