Trans women are still women

[Lostcat]

AIBU to share what the Supreme Court judgement on the meaning of women in the Equalities Act does and does not do/say/mean.

Although there are now moves to take the ruling and embed discrimination against trans women into uk law, this was not the intention of the Supreme Court judgement. In fact, the judges made it very explicit that politicians, media and activists shouldn’t seek to weaponise the judgement for political gain. Unfortunately that is exactly what people (including a whole host of mumsnetters) are doing.

So what does the judgement do?

Myth: the UK Supreme Court says trans women are not women

Myth: the ruling means trans women can’t claim legal protection as women

Myth: the ruling says you can ban trans women from women’s loos or other women only spaces

What the ruling actually says:
“It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word ‘woman’ other than when it is used in the provisions of the [Equality Act] 2010.”

The ruling says that in sex-based provisions under the Equalities Act 2010, sex means “biological sex” and refers to one of two biological sexes.

The ruling reiterates that trans women are protected from sex discrimination as women - because they experience the same sexism as women do.

The ruling affirms also that trans people are protected under the law from discrimination on the basis of gender reassignment.

As before (and as the law has stated since 2004) trans women, with or without a Gender Recognition Certificate, should be treated as women and given access to the relevant women’s services - as before, an exception may be made under limited circumstances where the need to exclude trans women may be proportionate (the law gives women’s refuges as an example of a space where this may be necessary, sometimes).

The ruling merely states that in legal references to “sex” the words “man” and “woman” in the sex discrimination clauses of the equalities act refer to “biological” women and men - it is merely about the use of language in legal cases of discrimination.

The very real impact of this on trans and non-binary people’s lives comes from misinterpretations of what is meant or intended by the ruling.
The trans community is fearful because of the inevitable spin manufactured by biased news media and the powerful gender critical lobby (including wealthy and high profile people such as JK Rowling who claim they are “silenced” by trans advocates).

The terminology is probably confusing you OP. Transwomen have always been and always will be men and are not excluded from men's single sex spaces. Transmen have always been and always will be women and will not be excluded from women's single sex spaces. Maybe time to change the terminology so "transwoman" becomes trans identifying man and vice versa? No one is being excluded or persecuted and no rights have been removed from anyone.

Google Katie Dolatowski

If you’re so bored why are you here? You could just leave it to those of us who are prepared to fight for the rights of women, and if you’re a woman, benefit from our hard work. Because presumably you don’t turn down all the basic rights that other ‘boring’ women have fought for you to enjoy, whilst you stand back smugly looking down on them, because you’re so progressive.

What is says is that if a transwoman is paid less because an employer thinks they're a woman then that is unlawful sex discrimination (by perception).

If a transwoman is fired for being trans, that's unlawful discrimination on the basis on gender reassignment.

On the other hand, if someone refuses them access to a female-only service because they are male, then that's perfectly legal - assuming that a single-sex service has a legitimate justification in the first place.

And if someone refuses a transman access to a female-only service, that may or may not be justified depending on the particulars of the case.

I am very comfortable with men. I do not fear men universally.

But I do fear men who try to push my boundaries. They are a massive red flag which makes survival instinct kick in.

The same applies to transwomen. I do not believe I have something to fear from all transwomen. But I very much fear those trying to trample all over what I feel comfortable with. I don't think the TRAs really represent the trans community but they have been allowed to cross every comfortable boundary and there needs to be acknowledgement of this from the other side of the debate.

If a transwoman needs rape counselling they should absolutely be entitled to it. But the kind of person who has experienced that vulnerability but still wants to force their way into an all women's session even when told they are causing upset is a walking red flag to all of us and should be to the trans community as well.

That’s fine: I’m all for clarity , precision and objectivity in the use of language.

Registered female at birth will do.

I'm also fine with this.
People keep trotting this out as if it's new information. We always knew this would be the case.

1. you cannot change sex. Sex is binary and we remain in our birth sex all our lives.
2. the court spelled out that the equality act was referring to biological sex (which is a permanent state)
3. gender reassignment is a protected characteristic, which means that someone who has undergone gender reassignment cannot be discriminated against eg not given a job if otherwise they would, excluded from entering a public space etc.
4. gender reassignment protection under the equality act does not mean that someone should be treated as if they actually are the opposite sex.

this was the decision of the Supreme Court this week. it is not a myth.

That argument is extremely lame and it's embarrassing people are still desperately making it. We know a female from a male. It really, truly is not the gotcha argument you think it is.

And did it not occur to you that trans people can argue for third spaces. As we've asked them to for years?

Is that some kind of gotcha? Literally nobody minds transmen using women's toilets.

Imagine how much less "toxic on both sides" the debate might have been if the pro trans lobby had taken women's "no" for an answer instead of threatening to rape and murder us.

No, as PP helpfully posted upthread, a transwoman could make a claim for discrimination which occurred because he was perceived to be a woman. Just as a straight person could,if they were discriminated against by someone who perceived them to be gay. It doesn't make the straight person gay, and it doesn't make the transwoman a woman.

The word 'woman' in the Equality Act means biological woman. That is now crystal clear. For the purposes of the Equality Act (plus, y'know, actual literal reality) transwomen are not women.

How about…. Female.

No, it explicitly says they can’t. Biological sex is the only definition of women/woman in the EqA; including ‘certificated’ sex renders the act incoherent and unworkable. Discrimination against trans people is already illegal, transgender reassignment is a separate protected characteristic.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/commentary-and-opinion/clarifying-definition-of-woman-in-the-equality-act/5123032.article

What is to stop natal men going into female spaces, though? They can claim they are trans men. We all know predatory men will use an advantage wherever they can, and this could be a new one.

Yes, they are moral and intellectual cowards, they always flee when proven wrong. They know they've lost. They know. There wouldn't be so much upset in the trans community if there wasn't a loss. And their disappointment is enjoyment enough for me.

Do you mean in a Monty Python life of Brian type of way? Remember the stoning scene where John Cleese asks " are there any women here today?".

No - they can claim protection under the PC of being trans. They’re still men, with plenty of male tears to shed

gender reassignment protection under the equality act does not mean that someone should be treated as if they actually are the opposite sex

No this is a massive over-claim and herein lie the problem with interpretation.

The judgement simply specified for the purposes of understanding discrimination provisions under the EA 2010, “sex” means “biological sex”, and “woman” means women registered female at birth.

@Moveanymountain it hit my DD school and many girls wanted to change sex and pronouns etc.
It felt like a fashion and something to do to fit in.

The difference for me it seems is that should someone feel uncomfortable with their trans woman in their space they can now safely call it.
Before they would be asked to go to training to realign their view.
Now they can safely say no, that's still a man and I don't want him in here and no one can say... no it's a woman.

But not for the purposes of accessing women's spaces and services.

Only in the unlikely event that someone believes them to be female and discriminates against them on that basis.

Much in the same way that I can claim protection from discrimination on the basis that someone mistakenly believes I am a lesbian, or Jewish, but that does not entitle me to access spaces or services for lesbians or Jewish people.

I hope you also agree that you were conceived female, that your sex is female and cannot be changed, and that this is true of all humans despite differences in sexual development in a relatively very small number of people, which do not negate the fact that humans are sexually dimorphic and their sex binary.

The overwhelming majority of women who are assaulted are attacked by straight men, mostly who are already known to them. Banning transpeople from being able to use the loo is going to do nothing to improve that. Rape in the UK has about a 1.6% conviction rate. If we all focused our energy and JK Rowling’s deep pockets on supporting women to report and get through prosecution, or to rebuild their lives after domestic violence, that would do far, far more to actually help women.

They can identify as what they like - that’s their business, but they aren’t women and never will be.

And I don’t want what shoukd be safe spaces, for biological women, taken over or shared with those who have a penis.🤷‍♀️

Can you think of a situation in which we actually treat men and women differently, and the Equality Act does not apply?