Four years ago, when I lived on the Gospel Oak side of Hampstead Heath, I used to swim in the Ladies' Pond once a week. I saw plenty of things during my time at the ponds: boobs, genitals, famous people, ducks, body hair, people with one boob, people with no boobs, the odd crayfish, more ducks. What I never saw, once, was someone making other people uncomfortable due to their perceived gender.
The ponds are a distinctly peaceful, unjudgmental and welcoming place. There are unwritten rules and codes of conduct that mean everyone behaves as they should, to protect the sanctity of the ponds. If they didn’t, I’m sure they’d be ejected by the brilliant-yet-firm lifeguards and stewards who police the ponds and maintain order.
This is why the debate over trans women’s rights to attend the ladies' pond is so preposterous. It has been reignited by the recent Supreme Court ruling that defined a woman as someone who was assigned female at birth. Trans women have been allowed to swim at the Hampstead Ladies’ Pond under formal guidance approved by the local swimmers’ association since 2019. But now, spurred on by the Supreme Court ruling, certain swimmers at the ponds are preparing for an “occupation” to try and get trans women banned from the Ladies’ Pond.
One of their so-called “occupations” appeared to take place on Bank Holiday Monday, where around 30 women wearing fake beards, wigs and moustaches stormed the Hampstead Men’s Pond and started shouting “no goolies in our poolies.” They argued that they identified as men, so they must be allowed to swim in the Men’s Ponds.
The protestors insist that, if they can feasibly break into the men’s pond and pretend to identify as men, even though they are not trans, then a man could break into the women’s pond by identifying himself as trans. From there, they fear women’s spaces could be compromised by men ogling, leering and potentially sexually assaulting women under the guise of transness.
The futility of their protest was highlighted when they were eventually met by security guards and police who ejected them for breaking the rules of the Men’s Pond. Much like how they would deal with someone breaking the rules of the Women’s Pond — i.e someone who was making people uncomfortable, or threatening them — because the integrity of the pond’s security is actually pretty decent.
Below the obviously ridiculous, hypocritical, cringeworthy nature of their protest, there is something rather nasty that lies beneath.
Only 0.5 per cent of the UK population identify as trans according to the 2021 census, something which the ONS have already admitted might be an overestimation. That’s one in every 200 people. According to the Hampstead Heath Bathing ponds and Lido Annual Review 2023, the latest data available, there are 876 people that hold an annual season ticket for the ponds. In theory, around four of those regular pond goers could be trans. With non-season ticket holders, it will be more. But it will not be many, because there are not many trans people in the United Kingdom, proportionally. There will be less now, since a bunch of mean-spirited pond goers made everyone gender non-conforming, or even open-minded, feel unwelcome at the ponds. (There are also very few trans criminals, FYI, with 230 out of 80,798 prisoners in England and Wales identifying as trans).
Not only does the anti-trans agenda go against the entire spirit of the ponds, which have long been a queer-friendly, accepting space for all people of all bodies, but it also goes against the spirit of London. This is a city of acceptance, of embracing people’s differences, of pride.
And it’s also near impossible to enforce. Any proposed “rule” on which women should be allowed in will be murkier than the ponds themselves. Unless there is a security guard checking people’s genitals at the gate, good luck. How else are they going to do it? If it’s based on people’s outward appearance, that risks isolating those who don’t look “feminine” enough, even if they are biologically women. It risks discrimination against butch lesbians, or masculine-presenting women, or those who have undergone mastectomies.
Every woman has the potential of being hurt by this kind of rule, whereas no women have ever been hurt by a “fake trans woman” infiltrating the ponds to sexually assault them, from what I’m aware of. There are no statistics available for “fake trans women” assaulting women in women-only spaces, which is convenient for the anti-trans campaigners, because it acts like Schrodinger’s Cat. Until we have a stat that clearly says it never happens, they can insist it is a huge threat. But the fact the statistic doesn’t exist despite hundreds of thousands of pounds being behind the anti-trans cause makes me think it’s probably pretty damn low.
Meanwhile, there were 4,780 incidents of hate crime against transgender people in the UK in the year ending March 2024. And according to Stonewall’s School Report 2017, 92 per cent of trans young people have thought about taking their own life. So it sounds to me like they’re the ones at risk here. If women are too, that is only because of the nefarious behaviour of evil men, not trans people.
Actually, now I remember someone making other people uncomfortable when I used to swim at the ponds: it was the women who spoke loudly against trans rights while other swimmers were simply trying to enjoy their laps. The same women who would have boasted proudly about the inclusive, body-positive nature of the ponds, how queer-friendly they are, how safe. There is no threat to the ponds other than these attitudes disrupting their good-hearted nature. So stop trying to create one.
Maddy Mussen is a London Standard columnist
Counterview: Of course trans women should be banned from the Ladies' Pond on Hampstead Heath
