Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Nonbinary citizen to take gender recognition legal challenge to the European Court of Human Rights

108 replies

IwantToRetire · 05/08/2025 20:42

The Gender Recognition Panel, responsible for assessing applications under the GRA, determined that Ryan had met the criteria required, but refused to issue Ryan with a GRC stating their gender was nonbinary. Since then, they have fought their case through a judicial review, challenged the decision in the Court of Appeal in January this year, and applied for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court in April, just two months later.

Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected in July on the grounds that the application did not raise an arguable point of law.

Now, Ryan and their legal team are looking to file an application to the ECtHR invoking the right to gender recognition under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to respect for private and family life. This article has been applied to similar cases where other applicants brought a case for legal recognition of their gender.

If the ECtHR finds a violation of the law, it would then file to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which reviews the execution of the Court’s judgments. This could include ensuring that Ryan achieves legal recognition of their gender in the UK by way of a GRC.

Ryan and their legal team claim that a successful outcome could set a precedent in Europe for legal gender recognition for nonbinary individuals.

https://www.leighday.co.uk/news/news/2025-news/nonbinary-citizen-to-take-gender-recognition-legal-challenge-to-the-european-court-of-human-rights/

(I think there may have been threads about this person before!)

Nonbinary citizen brings challenge to ECtHR

Ryan Castellucci and their legal team are preparing to file an application to the European Court of Human Rights.

https://www.leighday.co.uk/news/news/2025-news/nonbinary-citizen-to-take-gender-recognition-legal-challenge-to-the-european-court-of-human-rights/

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
YeahNoBut · 01/07/2026 14:47

Perhaps copy, cut, paste is woman’s work?

NowSober · 01/07/2026 13:54

Zoonosis · 01/07/2026 13:38

They are on blusky @YouCantProveIt

Edited

You never provide any links so we have no way of knowing whether you are spouting lies or not. On balance if you can't be arsed to follow the normal forum etiquette & provide supporting evidence then I just discount your posts.

StrictlyCoffee · 01/07/2026 13:48

Every time you think surely we’ve now plumbed the depths of this shite along comes something else. Fucking arsehole

Zoonosis · 01/07/2026 13:38

They are on blusky @YouCantProveIt

YouCantProveIt · 01/07/2026 13:32

Zoonosis · 01/07/2026 10:50

No they didn't. Ryan posted 5 days ago that the ECHR had accepted the filing of their claim, which means it will now progress to the review stage.

Can you link to that

SpareMe · 01/07/2026 13:22

IwantToRetire · 06/08/2025 02:41

Whilst gender has historically been used as a polite word for sex

This is false, and whilst it appears in some small communities this was true it was not universal.

Nobody except people in universities talked about gender.

Back in the day politicians didn't shy from using the word sex.

That's why the UK was able to pass a bill called the SEX discrimination act.

Also, this false narrative actually obscures the true narrative which is the queer agende to undermine the reality of biological sex with the open to many meanings word gender.

That's why only shortly after many universities were persuaded to start Women's Studies, in no time at all the old allies of MRAs and TRAs demanding they be shut (as it wasn't "fair") and instead set up "Gender" Studies.

This is one of the early acts that shows how the MRA agenda and the TRA agenda coincide with attacking their common enemy women.

So no it isn't true that anyone used the word gender instead of sex. Find me one novel, one film or tv series that did this prior to the queer agenda to attack and undermine the norms.

It’s not the word gender, it’s the word identity that causes all the issues.

Sex = sex
gender = sex stereotypes
gender identity = all the linguistic gender nonsense above.

Gender is conceptually different from sex. It means something different.

Zoonosis · 01/07/2026 10:50

Bannedontherun · 30/06/2026 22:03

The ECHR chucked this case out

No they didn't. Ryan posted 5 days ago that the ECHR had accepted the filing of their claim, which means it will now progress to the review stage.

MarieDeGournay · 01/07/2026 09:49

Somebody on another thread suggested that 'gender identity', if it exists at all, could best be described as one's personal aesthetic.
How you like to present yourself to the world.
Your personal style.

So you can be either a man or a woman, decided by biological sex, and you should have all the human rights that are due to you as a man or a woman. Equality laws are there to protect those rights.

Your personal aesthetic, your style, how you 'present' to society may conform to stereotypes of how men are, or how women are, or you can have your own personal style, which is a mix of both, or neither - a non-binary personal aesthetic, which is separate from your biological sex.

I'd like the Court to tell Ryan that Ryan is free to follow socially constructed stereotypes of masculinity and femininity, or to decline them and construct Ryan's own personal aesthetic, there even may be a Legal Latin phrase they can quote that translates as 'You want to be non-binary? knock yourself out!'Smile
but I think that should be considered a private matter.
Everybody should be guaranteed their human rights, but how the individual citizen presents themselves/relates to/lives their immutable biological sex is up to them, not the courts.

That's if I ruled the world - I'll start with Europe😁

Startingtocollapse · 01/07/2026 09:01

JellySaurus · 01/07/2026 08:06

What solid basis can there ever be to gender nonsense? It’s the ECHR that got us into this mess in the first place, by deciding that not validating gender nonsense violates a man’s right to something or other.

There’s nothing solid about genderwang. It’s a big pile of slippery nothingness.

Harassedevictee · 01/07/2026 08:50

BunnyBunbunbun · 01/07/2026 08:38

I'm not so sure that "gender" has historically been used as a polite word for sex. Sex until the 20th century was only used to mean male or female. At some point in perhaps the second half of the 20th century it also came to be applied to what we now call sexual activity. Around this time too "gender" started to be given a new meaning, or set of meanings, the word presumably being borrowed from grammar.

From Wikipedia. And this only applies to the English language. Some other mostly European languages started to use "gender" in this sense as well, but many languages still only have one term for male/female and haven't introduced a "gender" term.

Though sex and gender have been used interchangeably at least as early as the fourteenth century, this usage was not common by the late 1900s.[15] Issac Madison Bentley defined gender as the "socialized obverse of sex" in 1945.[16][17] Sexologist John Money popularized this distinction beginning in 1955, but did not invent it.[18][19] As Money viewed it, gender and sex are analysed together as a single category including both biological and social elements, but later work by Robert Stoller separated the two, designating sex and gender as biological and cultural categories, respectively.[20][improper synthesis?] Before the work of Bentley, Money and Stoller, the word gender was only regularly used to refer to grammatical categories.

Your wiki quote backs up my post.

It points out sex and gender have been used interchangeably since 14th century.in more recent times there has been a split.

Grammarnut · 01/07/2026 08:39

IwantToRetire · 05/08/2025 21:21

The Butlerian View: Why Recognizing Non-Binary Matters

1. Gender Is Not What One Is, But What One Does

In Butler’s view, gender is not a stable identity anchored in biology — it is a socially regulated performance, reiterated through acts, language, clothing, and roles. The male/female binary is a regulatory fiction, maintained by social norms that seek coherence between sex, gender, and desire.

To be non-binary, then, is not to exist “outside” gender — it is to expose that gender was never a natural binary to begin with.

Legal recognition of non-binary identities interrupts the illusion that male and female are exhaustive, natural categories. It forces the law — and society — to confront gender as a constructed field of possibilities, not a biological destiny.

2. Recognition Is Survival

Butler emphasizes that being recognized as a legitimate subject is essential for living a livable life. Without recognition, people are socially and politically unintelligible — they become precarious, vulnerable to erasure, violence, or invisibility.

“When we are unrecognizable, we are ungrievable.”

Legal recognition of non-binary people means acknowledging their existence as intelligible subjects within the social and political order. It reduces the existential and institutional precarity that comes from being seen as outside the human norm.

3. Non-Binary Identity Undoes Gender Norms

Recognition of non-binary identities destabilizes the normativity of the binary gender system. It opens up space for alternative ways of being, where gender is not defined by alignment with male or female archetypes, but by self-determined embodiments of life.

“To undo restrictive gender norms is not to destroy identity but to multiply the terms through which life becomes possible.”

In this sense, non-binary recognition is not just about protecting individuals — it’s an act of cultural transformation, a disruption of the hegemonic gender matrix.

4. Law as a Site of Performance and Power

Butler would see the law not just as a neutral arbiter but as a regulatory regime that performs and enforces norms — including gender norms. When the law insists on binary gender markers, it doesn’t merely reflect reality — it produces a binary reality by denying the legitimacy of anything else.

Legal recognition of non-binary people is a subversive act: it compels the law to speak what it has denied — that gender is plural, unstable, and contingent.

In Summary – A Butlerian Answer

Recognition of non-binary identity is important because:

  • It exposes the constructedness of gender categories.
  • It challenges the binary regime that polices bodies and lives.
  • It makes life more livable for those whose existence defies normative gender scripts.
  • It forces the state to acknowledge the performativity and plurality of gender.
  • And ultimately, it resists the violence of erasure and normativity.

In Butler’s terms, to recognize non-binary identity is to open the space for gender trouble — not to create chaos, but to widen the frame of what counts as a human life.

I am amazed this word salady tripe gets published.

BunnyBunbunbun · 01/07/2026 08:38

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 02:12

I am not someone who believes you can turn the clock back. Whilst gender has historically been used as a polite word for sex we have to consider that the two words sex and gender for some are now two completely different things.

I believe long term having a clear legal distinction between the two maybe the right solution. Sex being biological, binary and fixed and gender being a social construct and fluid.

Sex would take precedence and sex based language and rights would be protected; capturing and recording sex would be mandatory.

Gender identity would over time see language evolve to distinguish it from sex and have protected rights e.g. not to be discriminated against. Gender identity could be recorded in addition to sex, but never instead of sex. Gender identity legislation would explicitly recognise that not everyone has a gender.

Society often leads legislative change e.g. women’s rights, decriminalising same sex relationships, abortion etc. I see open debate and respect for different view points as the best way to protect sex based rights whilst respecting the right of people to have a belief in gender identity.

I'm not so sure that "gender" has historically been used as a polite word for sex. Sex until the 20th century was only used to mean male or female. At some point in perhaps the second half of the 20th century it also came to be applied to what we now call sexual activity. Around this time too "gender" started to be given a new meaning, or set of meanings, the word presumably being borrowed from grammar.

From Wikipedia. And this only applies to the English language. Some other mostly European languages started to use "gender" in this sense as well, but many languages still only have one term for male/female and haven't introduced a "gender" term.

Though sex and gender have been used interchangeably at least as early as the fourteenth century, this usage was not common by the late 1900s.[15] Issac Madison Bentley defined gender as the "socialized obverse of sex" in 1945.[16][17] Sexologist John Money popularized this distinction beginning in 1955, but did not invent it.[18][19] As Money viewed it, gender and sex are analysed together as a single category including both biological and social elements, but later work by Robert Stoller separated the two, designating sex and gender as biological and cultural categories, respectively.[20][improper synthesis?] Before the work of Bentley, Money and Stoller, the word gender was only regularly used to refer to grammatical categories.

Sex–gender distinction - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex%E2%80%93gender_distinction

JellySaurus · 01/07/2026 08:06

fromorbit · 01/07/2026 06:41

As the deluded women Freddie just found found out ECHR is not that crazy to impose gender nonsense without a solid basis. As long as enough people fight back we can end this:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5547207-trans-man-freddy-mcconnells-challenge-to-be-named-as-father-on-birth-certificate-deemed-inadmissible-by-the-echr

What solid basis can there ever be to gender nonsense? It’s the ECHR that got us into this mess in the first place, by deciding that not validating gender nonsense violates a man’s right to something or other.

Bannedontherun · 30/06/2026 22:32

There is another thread on this

MyAmpleSheep · 30/06/2026 22:29

I don't think the case has been accepted or heard in Strasbourg yet.

I wonder how Josh Parry is doing now the BBC has hardened its stance somewhat on reporting trans issues, and whether the BBC will use uncritically the same they/them pronouns about Ryan in the next report.

YouCantProveIt · 30/06/2026 22:19

Bannedontherun · 30/06/2026 22:03

The ECHR chucked this case out

Do you have a source?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cyve4m79e6lo

This is the latest re the Supreme Court not hearing it

A person with long hair smiles at the camera taking a selfie. They're sat on a beach wearing a green coat and a white roll-neck jumper.

American loses UK appeal to become legally non-binary

Lord Justice Singh says the issue is "better suited to resolution in Parliament than the courts".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cyve4m79e6lo

LiveLuvLaugh · 30/06/2026 22:09

rriffraff · 05/08/2025 21:25

Although I didn't vote for Brexit I don't like the thought of the ECHR setting the law in the UK on gender recognition it is worrying, the judgement could conflict with the High Court ruling and make wavering politicians less certain of sex based rights.

Well if Reform get in they plan to leave the ECHR over immigration issues and so and so the High Court would then be the top authority unarguably but that may take 6-7 years if it ever happens.

ECHR is nothing to do with the European Economic Community. It was created by the Council of Europe (a human rights organisation) after WW2 and is a completely separate entity. The UK is, and always has been since its inception, a member of the Council of Europe.

Bannedontherun · 30/06/2026 22:03

The ECHR chucked this case out

MyAmpleSheep · 11/09/2025 14:43

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/09/2025 15:37

i think OldCrone summed it up best.

Agreed.

TheUnusuallyQuerulentMxLauraBrown · 10/09/2025 16:04

Ryan’s sex is no more ambiguous than that of any other long haired bloke.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/09/2025 15:37

i think OldCrone summed it up best.

Coatsoff42 · 10/09/2025 06:36

aspirator · 10/09/2025 02:11

It sounds like that's what he's trying to do. I found forum posts of his where he says as much.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40054535

I've been surgically modified such that my body doesn't produce sex hormones in any significant quantity on its own. As a substitute, I use separate transdermal gels containing testosterone and estrogen, which have relatively short metabolic half life in my body.

I normally target an estrogen level similar to an average woman and a testosterone level between the female and male reference ranges. I'm able to adjust the mix on the order of days when it suits me, and there absolutely is a difference. People who know me well can usually tell what mix I'm running.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31013343

For context, I'm a transgender non-binary person in my 30s. I started transitioning a few years ago, and had non-conforming gender affirming surgery this past September. If anyone is interested in details, I've written about it elsewhere. To my knowledge, I am the only person publicly out about having had that particular procedure done.

My HRT includes a combination of estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone. I've largely been able pick which primary and secondary sexual characteristics I want for my body. My appearance these days frequently leaves people unsure of my gender, which I find affirming.

If this person is non binary, why do they want gender affirming surgery? Why are they transgender? Why are they taking any hormones at all? Isn’t gender just a social construct of behaviours? I thought non binary meant not identifying with either gender. What difference would surgery make to a list of social behaviours?

I think they need a new word like biologically amorphous or indistinct or something along those lines.
I don’t know many people living a life 100% according to their genderised social construct so it’s a useless term anyway.

That way it’s clear, you would want to be physically sex indistinct, and/or gender non binary, they are two separate things.

OldCrone · 10/09/2025 03:48

aspirator · 10/09/2025 02:11

It sounds like that's what he's trying to do. I found forum posts of his where he says as much.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40054535

I've been surgically modified such that my body doesn't produce sex hormones in any significant quantity on its own. As a substitute, I use separate transdermal gels containing testosterone and estrogen, which have relatively short metabolic half life in my body.

I normally target an estrogen level similar to an average woman and a testosterone level between the female and male reference ranges. I'm able to adjust the mix on the order of days when it suits me, and there absolutely is a difference. People who know me well can usually tell what mix I'm running.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31013343

For context, I'm a transgender non-binary person in my 30s. I started transitioning a few years ago, and had non-conforming gender affirming surgery this past September. If anyone is interested in details, I've written about it elsewhere. To my knowledge, I am the only person publicly out about having had that particular procedure done.

My HRT includes a combination of estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone. I've largely been able pick which primary and secondary sexual characteristics I want for my body. My appearance these days frequently leaves people unsure of my gender, which I find affirming.

Bloke with weird fetish for putting different combinations of hormones into his body and having some extreme cosmetic surgery, wants recognition as a different type of human to the rest of us.

My appearance these days frequently leaves people unsure of my gender, which I find affirming.

Me, me, me, me me. Narcissist. Why is anyone pandering to this nonsense?

aspirator · 10/09/2025 02:11

Merrymouse · 07/08/2025 10:22

If the argument is that Ryan wants to keep his sex secret, then the logical conclusion is that that applies to everyone and nobody should be forced to reveal their sex on any official document and birth certificates should not record sex.

If on the other hand sex is relevant and should be recorded, then Ryan is no more being deprived of his article 8 rights than anyone else.

It sounds like that's what he's trying to do. I found forum posts of his where he says as much.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40054535

I've been surgically modified such that my body doesn't produce sex hormones in any significant quantity on its own. As a substitute, I use separate transdermal gels containing testosterone and estrogen, which have relatively short metabolic half life in my body.

I normally target an estrogen level similar to an average woman and a testosterone level between the female and male reference ranges. I'm able to adjust the mix on the order of days when it suits me, and there absolutely is a difference. People who know me well can usually tell what mix I'm running.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31013343

For context, I'm a transgender non-binary person in my 30s. I started transitioning a few years ago, and had non-conforming gender affirming surgery this past September. If anyone is interested in details, I've written about it elsewhere. To my knowledge, I am the only person publicly out about having had that particular procedure done.

My HRT includes a combination of estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone. I've largely been able pick which primary and secondary sexual characteristics I want for my body. My appearance these days frequently leaves people unsure of my gender, which I find affirming.

I've been surgically modified such that my body doesn't produce sex hormones in ... | Hacker News

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40054535

Swipe left for the next trending thread