Supreme Court For Women Scotland

If this goes the wrong way - and I'm not giving up yet - then I expect the next practical thing to do will be to demand a change in the law, more loudly than we've ever demanded anything before. They could fix this by repealing the GRA and nullifying all existing GRCs, or by clarifying the EA to say it means biological sex. I rather think the right strategy would be to demand both, loudly enough that the government will be glad to get us off its backs with only the latter. (For now.) Remember, the public is increasingly united in being, in effect, gc. The challenge will be how to enlist all those people who agree with us but haven't so far made noise about it. I think that will go slowly, then all at once.

Re not giving up yet: Akua Reindorf is a commissioner of the EHRC, which intervened in the case with that rather hand-wringing "well yes technically but it makes the law an ass" intervention. So in that sense, in this piece, she is still in role. I don't know to what extent there are genuine legal disagreements and to what extent it's strategy, but the FWS and Sex Matters cases were pretty convincing that the court could just find in FWS's favour! (I recently rewatched it - recommended.)

Anyone seen anything other than the appearance of this piece to say that the judgement is "imminent"? I do hope so.

I'm very afraid it may well do. And we know what Labour will do. Sex fudge.

A possible outcome of the case is that the judges will decide that a GRC does make a male into a woman under the Equality Act, but will also suggest that parliament considers amending the legislation to sort out the problems this causes.

Does this herald the outcome, do we think?

Oh god.

The problem is the courts are not ruling on reality, they are ruling on law. And GRCs try to create a false reality that is imposed on us all.

The European Court of Human Rights - where the trouble started in the first place.

Thank you. Wonderfully written by Akua Reindorf.

Fingers crossed it goes the way of common sense. Men cannot be Women or lesbian.

This makes me feel slightly nervous. The correct ruling seems obvious, of course men can never actually turn into women and conversely women can never actually turn into men. Hair, makeup, clothes, medication, surgery and even paperwork do not have the ability to change a persons sex.

And of course females and males have different needs, different risk and threat profiles, different strengths and weaknesses etc that are directly and indirectly linked to physical sex not psychological identity.

So the result seems like it should be clear and simple, but I have this strong feeling they're going to get it wrong.

Thank you for the share.

An article which pulls no punches. Thank you for share token.

Thanks for the share token.

Is this the final ruling for FWS, does anyone know? If this court says men are women, are there any further steps they can take, or is this the final word?

Thank you 🙏🏼 for the link.

Encouraging to see more his detailed in The Times:

"If it is the latter (turn men legally into women), the result is chaos. It means that under the Equality Act a lesbian is either a female without a GRC or a male with a GRC, who is attracted both to females without GRCs and to males with GRCs, but not to females with GRCs or to males who identify as women but do not have GRCs. A lesbian couple could consist of two males with GRCs, but not two males who identify as women but do not have GRCs (those would be gay men) or one with a GRC and one without (that would be a straight couple)."