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).

Well that's fine because Transmen are still women and don't pass as men anyway.

If this means what the GCF faction think it does for toilets and changing rooms they're going to be sharing theirs with people who've transitioned from female to male.

People with beards!!

So:

• You are confused by the idea that you were conceived female
• You are similarly confused by the idea that you cannot change your sex
• You are also confused by the fact that some people have differences in sexual development, that humans are sexually dimorphic and that their sex is binary.

How come you are not able to process these fairly straightforward ideas, that are accepted by society as a whole and particularly by the vast majority of people involved in the scientific study of human physiology and reproduction?

I am genuinely interested in why you have such difficulties. Unless, of course, you were conceived male, which would explain most of it.

Before Wednesday, they could just claim to be transwomen. Which cannot be proved and which lots of businesses and public bodies had been incorrectly trained meant they were allowed there and any woman objecting was a hateful bigot. Now, women can raise the alarm and have some confidence the man will be removed, until Wednesday women were afraid to do so because they'd be turned on and the business would side with the man.

Myth: the UK Supreme Court says trans women are not women
in fact it says exactly that, with respect to the area it has power to say it, which is the Equality Act. Where that refers to women it means only biological women. Trans women can claim other kinds of discrimination but they cannot claim to be discriminated against as women, and they do not have a right to be in women-only spaces.

Myth: the ruling means trans women can’t claim legal protection as women
This is exactly what it means.

Myth: the ruling says you can ban trans women from women’s loos or other women only spaces.
You absolutely can. You don’t have to, in many situations, but you are allowed to. In some situations, such as workplaces and hospitals, you have to have single sex toilets and you are no longer allowed to open these to trans women,

Even when they look and sound like men?

I know one. They're expert in a particular field and are on the radio/TV from time to time. They also do training.

If I'd not known them before I don't think I'd have clue as to their birth sex.

There is no 'violation'. They are a male. Men. It's a violation of FEMALE rights by having a male invading and violating that space. And I enjoy telling you this; we will pressure every group and place to exclude males. And we will not stop until every group does, and the revocation of the GRA. You MRAs will not win, not now, not ever.

So? Beards aren’t used for rape.
Transmen are female, and therefore entitled to use women’s single sex facilities. It’s really not difficult.

But not penises and not with the same patterns of sexual offending as men ( including transwomen).

The judgement itself changes nothing. The way it is being interpreted by many is catastrophic. I think this is all clear in the OP.

We're already were sharing changing rooms with people with beards

From now on, the beards will be attached to women, not men.

I'm all good with that change.

And yet we were supposed to be OK with sharing toilets with bearded men as long as they said they were a woman

I don't know why people think we'd get worked up about beards.

There are women who aren't taking any hormones who could grow a beard - they just generally choose not to.

Do you not know that trans women are MALE? And males make up 50% of the population? And are far more dangerous? You don't put a male in a dress, re-label him as a woman, like a wolf in sheeps clothing and say he is safe. And you also don't say 'well burglars will break into your house anyway, so why bother locking your doors'. We strengthen safeguarding, we don't throw up our hands and give in. Allowing a male in a dress in makes women less safe. We are scared of males. Transwomen...are....MALE.

You so funny.

The answer to that is both yes and no.

Female people with transgender identities are like all female people in that they have been subject to negative sexist discrimination since birth. Something that male people have never been. Therefore, they have most definitely experienced direct life time discrimination.

They also may be subject to discrimination in employment where they might need the protections against more direct discrimination needed on account of their female sexed bodies.

If people think that they are male people, maybe then they will escape discrimination. And there is a greater chance of them being perceived as being the gender identity they belief they are than male people with transgender identities.

It’s interesting again the lack of understanding about what women do in private spaces. Most Women would not do this for many many reasons, women understand this, men don’t.

The arrogance of men assuming they know what women do in private spaces astounds me.

What a novel take @LostCat

Are you a legal professional who reads court judgments regularly?

Transwomen are not 'discriminated against' because they are trans.

They are 'discriminated against' because they are MALE.

Clearly you didn't hear the woman from Sex Matters interviewed at length on Wednesday/Thursday - not sure of original day/time as I caught it on repeat - but she was very big on beards!!

There was no arguing until TRAs started to take over women’s spaces, sports, shelters and job roles.

I didn’t give trans people much thought then as I don’t give most people who are just going about their lives including my neighbours.

But if my neighbour suddenly decided that in order to live his life he needed to have free access to my home then you’re damn right that I’m going to object. And if I object, tell him to go to his own home, and he persists then if I call the police and create barriers in order to prevent him from accessing my space then he is not the aggrieved party. I am.

This .

Women’s job roles?

When and why do we get our own job roles.

The public is not your home.

Meanwhile, you still haven't given a precise and coherent answer about in which way women and transwomen are the same.

Genuinely, i really want to know why you believe this because the"transwomen are women" position is really confusing to me. Please can you answer me?

All I will say is that I don't think the judgement necessarily means what the GCF faction say it does.

I also think that if Government are heaving a sigh of relief that it absolves them of the need to legislate on trans rights they may be in for a surprise.