Canadian Politics Today

That's fair.  When I first read your post and I pictured a moment like that, I kind of agreed it would be awkward.

But upon reflecting on it more, I don't see why it should be other than the fact that it's something not familiar. 

Is it awkward to change in front of a lesbian woman who very well may be looking at me sexually?  Not at all but probably because I've been around lesbians all my life.

Maybe it's not about whether someone might be looking at you in a sexual sense.

Another thing, other than the showers at my local pool, every gym I've ever visited has changing rooms

That hasn't been my experience, but if establishments are updating their changing areas to provide more privacy, I think that would do a lot to put their patrons' discomfort to rest.

so this wouldn't be about anyone seeing me naked, it would be about ME seeing a woman with a pe-nis (can't believe that's too vulgar for the forum) who is comfortable enough with her body to get naked in an open room. 

Then the onus is therefore on me, not on them. 

Ok, hang on... many people now accept the premise that some people are so fragile that we should avoid using the word "rayp" (I can't believe the forum censors that one too...), and do "jazz hands" or snap our fingers instead of clapping.  And yet we're also now proposing that women who hold to long-standing social norms regarding intersex group nudity have to just shut up and deal with it?

Do you have to be special in some way before your feelings merit some consideration?

And we're now at a point where some people support providing women-only swimming times at public pools, out of respect for Muslim customs. And yet the mood now appears that women ought to share not just the swimming pool but also their showers and changing room with biologically male patrons.  Don't you think there's a bit of a contradiction there?

If a Muslim member of BodyBlitz complained that having to change in the presence of a biologically male person was against her religious beliefs, would people support some sort of "reasonable accommodation" for her?

And, if so, then why shouldn't there likewise be an effort to make reasonable accommodation for people who are just not comfortable changing in front of some unfamiliar person with their dong hanging out?

I think this decision is based on the same notion as the bathroom rules where they're not worried about 'real' transgender women, but creepy straight men in wigs trying to be peeping toms. 

If there's a male you don't know in the locker room, what's your first reaction?

In order to not discriminate and have to leave it up to judgement, it's a systematic rule.

I can see the other side but I think it's discriminatory at the same time.  Personally I don't agree.

Discrimination isn't necessarily illegal.  The very existence of female-only facilities is an example of a situation where it was decided that there was a reasonable justification for discrimination. 

Another fair reason for discrimination might be to preserve the patrons' sense of security and privacy.

Another fair reason for discrimination might be to avoid economic hardship-- which might be the result if patrons stop coming to the club because they find the locker-room situation to be uncomfortable or upsetting.

 -k