Supreme Court ruling: can women’s groups still choose to allow trans women?

[Blackdow]

I’m just looking for someone to explain it to me. Sorry 🤦‍♀️.

Now that’s it’s been clarified in law than trans women do not come under the “women” category in the equality act, so we can use the single sex exemption to keep them out without fear of being sued, can place still choose to allow them?

For instance, a sexual assault support group for women or a woman’s group of any kind was previously being told they had to allow trans women as the equality act was being misrepresented. Now, the single sex exemption can be used properly so trans women can be told no. But what if they group wanted to allow them? Is the single sex exemption optional? Or do they now have to follow it? I’m just trying to make sure I understand it.

The group can just say who is allowed eg mixed sex or women plus transwomen (ie biological men) etc. It is not rocket science. The main gain is that women can now exclude biological men from things which will keep a lot of women safer. It is also the only logical interpretation of the 2010 Act which bans discriminaton on grounds of sex and then separately gender discrimination and sexual orientation etc etc.

My children all went to single sex schools (my choice). Girls' schools that are single sex might have a teenage girl who is trans and will need to accommodate her although for someone like that it may be better to move to a mixed sex school.

Oh for goodness sake. Yes, these children were all male at birth. They have a genetic disorder. They go through male puberty at the age of puberty at which point it becomes obvious they are male. In the U.K. this would be identified at birth.

medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/5-alpha-reductase-deficiency/

Sexual orientation is different from gender identity.

Unfortunately, scientifically speaking, binary means they have to be one or the other. Someone's sex is defined by a host of sexual characteristics; chromosomes, physical characteristics, gene expression and hormones. Someone who isn't expressly on one side of the 'binary' or the other with all characteristics are termed as outside the binary or intersexed (oversimplification but I would be writing paragraphs upon paragraphs if I didn't simplify). Most modern minds posit that sex is bimodal (two peaks, one representing male and the other female characteristics where any given person might be on the peaks or anywhere in between).

Especially considering as newborns doctors only check one of 4 characteristics that define sex it leaves much to be desired in the medical field. Some people who were defined female sex at birth might not even be if their other characteristics are checked. Also I wouldn't call 1.7% (of confirmed intersexed individuals) of 8 billion people 'disordered', that's too high of a population to scientifically be considered outliers.

Using chromosomes is silly too because people with XY chromosomes can have vaginas at birth and grow on to have a perfectly functional uterus and birth healthy babies.

People with Swyer syndrome are born with a vagina and uterus (they do not “go on to develop a uterus” - I’m not sure you really have a grasp of biology at all) but no ovaries. So they cannot get pregnant without the use of donor eggs and considerable exogenous hormone support. This is extraordinarily rare.

Another useful idiot defying reality and biology and "be kinding" women straight under the bus. I love the fact she says "It's been really obvious that they have not listened to trans people,", because that's what determines biological reality. She doesn't mention listening to women as they are just support creatures and not worthy of rights or protections 🤐
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g355v07l2o

Are you actually suggesting 1.7% of humans are “intersex”?

"Yet, from a scientific perspective, the idea that there are only two sexes and, thus, only two genders has become harder and harder to maintain." - From 'Diversifying Gender Categories and the Sex/Gender System' by Ridgeway and Saperstein 2024.

'Multimodal models of animal sex: breaking binaries leads to a better understanding of ecology and evolution' McLaughlin et al. 2023

'Biological sex, by-products, and other continuous variables' Neuhoff 2022.

"This article examines the concept of sex as a biological “fact” in Western science... how the binary definition of sex has been maintained despite empirical flaws and contradictory data" 'No Way Out of the Binary' Sanz 2017.

'Deconstructing Sex and Gender Dichotomies in Archaeological Practice' Ghisleni et al. 2016.

Most that argue for keeping the binary sex system argue that there's no need for such specificity (stupid since science is all about specificity) or it's "chauvinistic".

"...biology recognises that sex isn't binary and is in fact a spectrum (by the simple fact that intersex people exist)"

Oh good grief, not this again. Sex is totally binary and is not "in fact" a spectrum.

If by "intersex people" you mean people with differences of sex development then every single person who is affected by any of these conditions is totally either male or female - there is no inbetween.
.

"...there is in fact several instances of people who's bodies have changed sex biologically speaking"

You are really claiming that there are human clown fish? That is so funny.

No you can't have a group that is just for women and transwomen as that is mixed sex but excluding men who are not trans, so therefore discriminatory.

A single sex girls school with "trans boys" can continue to have single sex toilets and changing rooms as all the students are female.

@Pinkrabbitt but transgender is also a protected status, isn’t it?. So couldn’t the group be for (biological) women and transgender people (so trans men would be included under both branches, as it were)?

"Most modern minds posit that sex is bimodal (two peaks, one representing male and the other female characteristics where any given person might be on the peaks or anywhere in between)."

You really do seem to misunderstand what those two peaks represent. There is a very good explainer here (it's only 6 mins long):

A full transcript and sources are here:

https://www.theparadoxinstitute.com/watch/is-sex-bimodal

No if you have a single sex group it must be single sex. So it could include women and trans men OR men and trans women.

If it was for women and transwomen then it wouldn't be single sex and this would be sex discrimination.

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic so you cannot discriminate against someone because of this. Not letting biological men in women's single sex spaces is not discrimination.

You can only have a group for two protected chararacteristic if everyone is in both those groups. This means lesbian womens groups are allowed as all the lesbians are also women. You can't have have have trans identified men in a female space by saying a group is for woman and transgender people of any sex.

My phrasing might have been off, what I was referencing to is that a newborn girl doesn't have a uterus that has eggs and can get pregnant yet. Its only as they grow does that process occur.

"This is extraordinarily rare." And yet it happens. I mention the fact that some with Swyer syndrome can give birth without help to point out that they do in fact exist (science is about specificity if it doesn't fit exactly then the categories have to be changed/updated). That doesn't disprove my point. Medically speaking, there are enough people who fit into the "intersex" category, some people without even knowing it unless they got their genes checked, that they can't be considered outliers anymore. The medical system is based on outdated assumptions of what characteristics apply to which sex that it leaves swaths of women (even biological women) without help. It's what has allowed intersex babies to have their bodies surgically altered for the "comfort" or their parents and for the wider society.

I know I've gotten into a tangent, but I think the medical and legal system needs a drastic overhaul at the very least to recognise intersex individuals. If third world countries can do it, why can't we?

Thanks for explaining - i didn’t know that!

So could you have a discussion group for Muslims, but not for Muslims and Christians, because the latter would exclude believers of all other faiths? (Genuinely curious!)

Thought it was permissible now to exclude for single sex space, but not mandatory?

So for instance if you have a female only grief group, my understanding is that one could exclude trans gender women as the characteristic has been defined as biological.

Why are you referencing the Paradox Institute? It is a misogynistic alpha man podcast rife with misinformation and none of them have a background in science. That is the last thing you want to be referencing in this.

I have a background in science, I have read detailed scientific articles, please if you disagree with me at least reference legitimate sources. I will even offer to find the ones I alluded to that opposed my view.

A newborn girl is born with all the eggs she is ever going to produce. The eggs aren't in the uterus of course because they're in the ovaries

You think that science can't develop to match our advances in scientific research and understanding. It's wild that I reference legitimate scientific sources and the replies are just like "136 million intersexed people are just disordered and are actually outliers so it shouldn't impact the status quo of what I believe human biology should be"

If humans were clownfish we'd be swapping sexes all the time. It wouldn't be as "rare" as it is.

Do you disagree with Prof Robert Winston when he says that if you have an SRY gene and functional testosterone receptors then you are male and if not you are female ?

Gosh my phrasing is off again. Sorry about that, I will clarify further I meant 'at birth/as a newborn, the eggs are unable to move to the uterus yet, and they are unable to get pregnant". I was attempting to as clear as I could and was going to mention "during puberty" but interestingly, its as soon as a female begins ovulating which can occur long before puberty (that is something I just found out). Anyway, thank you for letting me know my phrasing was off, that was a blunder on my part.

What does a baby being unable to get pregnant before puberty have to do with identifying the sex of human beings

This is inaccurate, if the group had 25 members or more. The BBC report on the interim guidance is very clear:

”In associations - groups or clubs with more than 25 members - the EHRC says "a women-only or lesbian-only association should not admit trans women (biological men), and a men-only or gay men-only association should not admit trans men (biological women)".”

0.018% have a DSD, not 1.7%. The only people who claim it is 1.7% have included conditions such as PCOS and hypospadias. I think it’s fairly obvious why they have to fake the data. They never seem to produce any data showing a correlation between those with diagnosed DSDs and those identifying as trans though. So what DSDs have to do with anything fuck knows.

Useful for filling those bingo cards though.