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:
JellySaurus · 06/08/2025 22:38

I have never understand how legally validating a personal belief is anything to do with the right to respect for private and family life.

Wanting to be legally defined as the opposite sex in order to marry someone of the same sex as you is a bonkers way to get around the restriction of marriage. And completely irrelevant now that the UK has equal marriage.

In what other circumstance does a citizen demand that the government give him special status for his belief, legally document that status, and require that society then bend itself around affirming that belief?

How is it any different from me, a non-Muslim:
I demand that I be legally recognised as a Muslim.
I demand a government document stating that I am a Muslim.
I demand that Muslims welcome me into their mosques, where I will behave according to my interpretation of Muslim-ness and claim Islamophobia should anyone object.
I demand that there should never be pork in my presence, nor may my colleagues wear sleeveless tops.

Bonkers. And offensive to Muslims.

moto748e · 06/08/2025 22:10

And yet, people take her seriously.

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 06/08/2025 21:31

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.

What a load of navel gazing cobblers!

Edited to add: reading Judith Butler makes me lose the will to live. I feel like I'm being gaslit by aliens or something.

SerendipityJane · 06/08/2025 20:54

If the Court did find that the UK had violated the Convention, the UK would be obliged under international law to comply with the judgment, take action to rectify the incompatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights and provide any victims with a remedy. If it no longer wishes to comply with these treaty obligations, the UK will have to confront the possible consequences of withdrawal. ...

Or not, as the case may be.

We could decline to withdraw and invite the treaty to expel us.

I used to be in favour of a written constitution for the UK. But then again I was also in favour of the clusterfuck the FTPA turned out to be. However following recent shenanigans I'm swinging back in favour again.

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 18:56

Allthegoodnamesarechosen · 06/08/2025 18:13

Lose their jobs : of course not.

Insist on being in the woman’s ward, prison cell, refuge or changing room when you are a man : of course not.

Sex is not a ‘belief’ or an ‘opinion’, it is a hard physical fact. People like Ryan (who is at a glance a male person) can deny their sex to themselves, but they cannot and should not expect anyone else to deny it, and to ignore the clear differences which it entails.

I agree.

IwantToRetire · 06/08/2025 18:22

... (recent UK) legislation diverges from the notion that human rights are universal and apply to everyone regardless of conduct or status.
It also increases the likelihood that the European Court of Human Rights will find the UK to be in violation of its human rights obligations in the future.

If the Court did find that the UK had violated the Convention, the UK would be obliged under international law to comply with the judgment, take action to rectify the incompatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights and provide any victims with a remedy. If it no longer wishes to comply with these treaty obligations, the UK will have to confront the possible consequences of withdrawal. ...

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9958/

and https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/75th-anniversary-of-the-european-convention-on-human-rights/#heading-10

OP posts:
Allthegoodnamesarechosen · 06/08/2025 18:13

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 10:46

I accept at the moment there is a real imbalance. Although this is slowly being addressed in the courts.

That is why I am proposing we respect each other’s views and legislate so neither side can use their position as a weapon or a threat.

I don’t want to live in a society where people lose their jobs or are vilified because they are gender critical.

I also don’t want to live in a society where people lose their jobs or are vilified because they believe in gender identity or are trans or non-binary.

A compromise should be achievable.

Lose their jobs : of course not.

Insist on being in the woman’s ward, prison cell, refuge or changing room when you are a man : of course not.

Sex is not a ‘belief’ or an ‘opinion’, it is a hard physical fact. People like Ryan (who is at a glance a male person) can deny their sex to themselves, but they cannot and should not expect anyone else to deny it, and to ignore the clear differences which it entails.

SerendipityJane · 06/08/2025 17:51

Bannedontherun · 06/08/2025 17:06

@SerendipityJane I think you are correct about the ECHR, they have no enforcement powers.

However, when we were members of the EU there were problems with the Supreme Court (Lords as it was), having to set aside Parliamentary will, or interpret Acts of Parliament, to bend to the EU Court, (a different Court to the ECHR)

As a law student I recall the Factortame case in which Lord Denning was most unhappy about his own judgement.

(May have spelt that wrong).

This was the main reason i voted to leave the EU, it was because our democratic processes were being interfered with, by unelected, appointed Commissioners, who wrote EU law. That often were not in our nations interests.

I do not take the same view regarding the ECHR, as they have developed and afforded protections for women.

So Mx non-binary should pursue his case but i doubt it will get anywhere. Over 80% of claims are rejected, before they are heared.

Yeah, Lord Denning is hardly the epitome of jurisprudence. "Appalling vista" and all that.

And my point stands. There are precedents for the UK telling the ECHR "Thanks for that" and ignoring it. With absolutely zero comeback. Those who have been paying attention at the back will note that successive governments of all parties have continued that tradition.

I'm happy to repeat it wherever, whenever and however it arises. The UK Parliament is supreme. It cannot be fettered. It has no boundaries other than those it chooses to abide by itself.

Nchangeo · 06/08/2025 17:19

Startingtocollapse · 06/08/2025 16:32

OP isn’t wrong actually

I still don’t understand what the flip non binary is.

Well I agree with you on the latter 😂

Bannedontherun · 06/08/2025 17:06

@SerendipityJane I think you are correct about the ECHR, they have no enforcement powers.

However, when we were members of the EU there were problems with the Supreme Court (Lords as it was), having to set aside Parliamentary will, or interpret Acts of Parliament, to bend to the EU Court, (a different Court to the ECHR)

As a law student I recall the Factortame case in which Lord Denning was most unhappy about his own judgement.

(May have spelt that wrong).

This was the main reason i voted to leave the EU, it was because our democratic processes were being interfered with, by unelected, appointed Commissioners, who wrote EU law. That often were not in our nations interests.

I do not take the same view regarding the ECHR, as they have developed and afforded protections for women.

So Mx non-binary should pursue his case but i doubt it will get anywhere. Over 80% of claims are rejected, before they are heared.

SerendipityJane · 06/08/2025 16:44

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.

Remember how the UK lost the ECHR case about votes for prisoners ? As a result, guess how many prisoners have since voted ?

None.

People forget that, as it rather runs counter to the "We have to leave the ECHR" right wing bollocks that is currently popular with people who know no better.

It's a shock to many really really stupid people, but not only is the UK parliament supreme. It always has been. Or even more distressingly, there has never been any quantum of time when it has not been supreme since 1688.

Startingtocollapse · 06/08/2025 16:32

Nchangeo · 06/08/2025 02:55

OP you are wrong. In everyday spoken and written English language (of normal people over the age of I don’t know maybe 30 ie. pre gender identity madness); gender = sex and sex = sexual intercourse. That was and still is widely accepted as normal language.

OP isn’t wrong actually

I still don’t understand what the flip non binary is.

MyAmpleSheep · 06/08/2025 16:30

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 10:46

I accept at the moment there is a real imbalance. Although this is slowly being addressed in the courts.

That is why I am proposing we respect each other’s views and legislate so neither side can use their position as a weapon or a threat.

I don’t want to live in a society where people lose their jobs or are vilified because they are gender critical.

I also don’t want to live in a society where people lose their jobs or are vilified because they believe in gender identity or are trans or non-binary.

A compromise should be achievable.

We already have legislation. When “both sides” accept that and abide by it, then we can talk.

IwantToRetire · 06/08/2025 16:24

MyAmpleSheep · 06/08/2025 07:05

I don’t think that’s correct. I’m definitely older than 30 and to me sex has forever meant male or female, while gender was something that nouns in foreign languages had, being masculine or feminine (or neuter).

Edited

Yes - you described it much better than I did.

Gender as a word was totally unknown to me, and I first heard it used in relation to other languages. And found it very strange.

And isn't it used in botany?

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 06/08/2025 10:53

Bobbymoore123 · 06/08/2025 09:07

All genders are imaginary, that is literally what it means to be "gender critical". Not that any of you seem to know that before self-identifying.

Yes, that’s right, because “gender” is entirely a social construct based on sex stereotypes. Your point?

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 10:46

MyAmpleSheep · 06/08/2025 10:08

Because gender is held over us, the unbelieving majority, as a weapon and a threat, by its own cadre of high priests.

I accept at the moment there is a real imbalance. Although this is slowly being addressed in the courts.

That is why I am proposing we respect each other’s views and legislate so neither side can use their position as a weapon or a threat.

I don’t want to live in a society where people lose their jobs or are vilified because they are gender critical.

I also don’t want to live in a society where people lose their jobs or are vilified because they believe in gender identity or are trans or non-binary.

A compromise should be achievable.

MarieDeGournay · 06/08/2025 10:32

IwantToRetire ·
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.

I find this, with a few tweaks, makes quite a lot of sense!

Gender is not a stable identity anchored in biology - 100% agree, I was born biologically female and never accepted the 'girly' things I was expected to like, or 'perform' - an experience shared by many of us on this thread.

The male/female binary is a regulatory fiction, maintained by social norms that seek coherence between sex, gender, and desire.
Now this is where I disagree, not with the claim in general, but with the use of the words 'male/female'.
This is a sneaky shift in the use of words, because up to this point the binary has been a socially-constructed one between stereotypes of masculinity and femininity, but now it has suddenly become 'The male/female binary ' - male and female= terms used to describe biological sex.

So if the sentence read:

The masculine/feminine stereotype binary is a regulatory fiction, maintained by social norms that seek coherence between sex, gender, and desire.
I'd have no problem agreeing with it, in fact it would be a pretty good definition of GCness.

Legal recognition of non-binary identities interrupts the illusion that male and female are exhaustive, natural categories.
This is continuing the drift from gender as a social construction and performance, to the biological categories 'male' and 'female', so it has lost the plot and is making claims about legal recognition of NBism that are based on this sneaky shift in the use of language.

I'm happy to accept
gender as a constructed field of possibilities, not a biological destiny.
Butler [or the ChatGPT interpretation of Butler] has strayed back onside.
It's the lack of clarity in the use of the words 'male/female' 'masculine/feminine'
sex as biological fact and gender as social performance that er... queers the pitch😏

Butler has been around the academic block for decades, she must be aware of the importance of having a clear definition of terms in academic work; so her slick mixing up of male/female i.e. biological sex and masculine/feminine i.e. gender performance seems to be deliberate.
And very useful to gender theorists and TRAs....

MyAmpleSheep · 06/08/2025 10:08

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 08:38

Why does one side have to “win” why not go for a “win-win” solution?

Not believing in Gender Identity is a perfectly valid position, just like not believing in Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism etc.

We protect faith based beliefs despite there being many non-believers, why not do the same for those who hold Gender Identity Beliefs?

A hardline position could backfire.

Because gender is held over us, the unbelieving majority, as a weapon and a threat, by its own cadre of high priests.

CinnamonCinnabar · 06/08/2025 09:36

I find it very odd that people demand government recognition of their chosen gender - no one wants a government certificate of their sexual orientation, or religion or political beliefs or disability - can you imagine if someone proposed a special certificate for gay people or Catholics??!

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 09:23

GallantKumquat · 06/08/2025 09:14

That's a fair point. My strong disagreement is with:

I am not someone who believes you can turn the clock back.

I don't believe that the differentiation of gender from sex is progress, so I don't see 'not believing in gender' as 'turning back the clock.' In general I think concept of gender identity is harmful.

But you're quite right that being strident or rigid about it risks being off-putting to people who would otherwise be allies. If I came across as rude or dismissive of your position, I didn't mean to. I was only trying to communicate that some of us (myself) have seriously investigated the idea of gender and rejected it. Presumably you've also investigated it, but found it be a useful framework.

No I think gender identity is a load of bollocks. But I respect people’s right to have a belief.

What I am is someone who can step out of a situation and appreciate both sides of an argument and look for the compromise.

What I meant by not turning the clock back is the GRA and gender reassignment pc. are law you might be able to revise them but I can’t see them being abolished.

Added - you were not being disrespectful you were debating the issue by respectfully stating your position.

WarriorN · 06/08/2025 09:20

Identityoneoff · 06/08/2025 07:39

Out of curiosity, I checked my children's "red books" issued by the NHS, c.a. 2005 and 2015, and they report the sex of the child.

because the charts are different depending on sex of the child. Boys have a very different line to girls.

after about 12-14 asthma peak flow charts are completely different depending on your sex.

WarriorN · 06/08/2025 09:18

Picked up an 80 year old how to draw hands boom in a second hand book shop and it had a whole chapter on sex differences between hands. And used the term sex.

fairly certain police look at hands too when viewing csa images as can tell the sex and often identify the individual from their hands.

sex matters

GallantKumquat · 06/08/2025 09:14

Harassedevictee · 06/08/2025 08:38

Why does one side have to “win” why not go for a “win-win” solution?

Not believing in Gender Identity is a perfectly valid position, just like not believing in Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism etc.

We protect faith based beliefs despite there being many non-believers, why not do the same for those who hold Gender Identity Beliefs?

A hardline position could backfire.

That's a fair point. My strong disagreement is with:

I am not someone who believes you can turn the clock back.

I don't believe that the differentiation of gender from sex is progress, so I don't see 'not believing in gender' as 'turning back the clock.' In general I think concept of gender identity is harmful.

But you're quite right that being strident or rigid about it risks being off-putting to people who would otherwise be allies. If I came across as rude or dismissive of your position, I didn't mean to. I was only trying to communicate that some of us (myself) have seriously investigated the idea of gender and rejected it. Presumably you've also investigated it, but found it be a useful framework.

Bobbymoore123 · 06/08/2025 09:11

ElaineParrish · 05/08/2025 21:29

ECHR has a lot of important stuff, id rather keep it

No! Like all good feminists we here are against ECHR and are rooting for wife-beaters-united Reform! 😮💨

Lemniscate8 · 06/08/2025 09:08

Bobbymoore123 · 06/08/2025 09:07

All genders are imaginary, that is literally what it means to be "gender critical". Not that any of you seem to know that before self-identifying.

Exactly, being "feminine" or "masculine" isn't legally recognised, is it

Swipe left for the next trending thread