Supreme Court rules the term sex refers to 'biological women'

[everythingthelighttouches]

Finally.

There is no “triumph” for me.

i am delighted though.
I feel relief that this reasonable request for clarity has been heard.

The judge also said “the law still gives trans people protection against discrimination.”

As it should do. No one ever argued otherwise.

It REALLY makes men butthurt when women get something for themselves doesn’t it

This is a highly divisive and transphobic generalisation, that says a lot about where you are coming from

And held up signs saying “decapitate TERFS” and surrounded a meeting where women were discussing sexual violence yelling abuse to drown out the voices of women sharing deeply painful personal experiences

the appeals to beeeeee kiiiiind ring very hollow

It says it clearly, unequivocally, in detail, with workings laid out, with references, with gravitas and aplomb.

If a service is for women, men can't use it, no matter how the men feel about it, no matter what certificate they may have.

Report it then

Say it louder for the people in the back!

Yes, I expect the highly educated, massively respected, stratospherically successful, billionaire author is really sad about that.

We are celebrating a tiny bit of sanity being restored, which will hopefully bring about the end of an insidious, regressive, ideology that is harmful to women and girls, children and those with ND. Trans people are no less safe than any other group but you already know that.

Or maybe it’s true and you’re throwing around accusations to make us STFU

It hasn't. We all know that, even the people trying to argue that it has.

They know that TW's 'rights' to invade women's spaces would never be popular among anyone who actually thought it through. So they are desperately trying to ride on the coat tails of genuinely oppressed groups. Yet another underhand and dishonest tactic. 🙄

Can I just check here? The highest court in the land has met and come to the conclusion that if you have a schlong you are a man and if you have a fanny you are a woman?

Some of us had first hand experience of being harassed by TRAs or watching others be harrassed because we dared to stand up for ourselves.

Ots funny how these “I’m a real woman! Say I’m a real woman” types act so very…male

225. Accordingly, a certificated sex interpretation produces incoherence in the application of these provisions. Moreover, it is not necessary to achieve the purposes of either the GRA 2004 or the EA 2010. On any view, the plain intention of these provisions is to allow for the provision of separate or single-sex services for women which exclude all (biological) men (or vice-versa). Applying a biological meaning of sex achieves that purpose.

https://supremecourt.uk/cases/judgments/uksc-2024-0042

I am happy to quote from this judgement all day long.

It's very clear, and thorough.

(bolding is mine)

C'est ca, oui.

It does if an exception has been used under the EA.

If an exception is not used, then yes, it is as mixed sex as that organisation wants it to be.

Right, next up to spin the decision on Radio 4 is the PM programme. It'll be amusing if it's Evan Davis in the chair.

It seems to be you who've failed to read (or possibly understand) the judgement. Maybe a cup of tea and a good read is in order?

That’s not my style. Better to let it stand, so people can see the true character of people’s attitudes

And again, it's very clear as Arabella says...

The plain intention of these provisions is to allow for the provision of separate or single-sex services for women which exclude all (biological) men (or vice-versa). Applying a biological meaning of sex achieves that purpose.

No exceptions for men regardless of certificate. The point of the separate and single sex service for women is no men.

Doesn't mean that services shouldn't be fully available for those men, but they cannot take and use the women's.

Which, lets remind ourselves, has been tested thoroughly on the way to this Supreme Court judgement and got here because it did not work well for women . Those services are needed by women for women. Men will survive not being allowed to take needed stuff away from women. They really will.

Couldn't be clearer. Off you trot MRAs and TRAs.

What part of the exceptions under the EA that organisations can use are you ignoring?

Yes, yes it does.

It so happens I'm coming from a chill out area in a women's only spa today.

The joy. The joy.

I suppose strictly speaking it doesn't say trans people are not entitled to use female spaces.

It depends (entirely) on their sex. Their calling themselves 'trans' is just irrelevant. Whether or not they have a certificate to say they are 'trans'.

What matters is their sex. Biological sex. Which cannot change.

So, you're right, Lostcat. In a way. 😊

This also protects our children because if they go into a changing room in the ladies at swimming pool, for example we we take our children grandchildren with us . And also it protects women in maternity units homes for the elderly we could go on but this is a fantastic win. I’m over the moon actually. I’m not trans phobic. I totally accept that they want to dress up as women but no way does it give them the right to invade our safe spaces no way on this planet. And I hope the NHS erases all the ridiculous nonsense about chest feeding and anybody with a cervix on the (cervical smear appointment letter. )

We sure can see your true character 👍