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).

No, a transwoman can claim if he is discriminated against because he is mistakenly thought to be a woman.

It's not being misinterpreted at all.
TW can be excluded from female single sex spaces (including toilets in some cases) on account of them being MALE.

The guidance coming to service providers will likely suggest a 3rd space should be provided where appropriate.

It certainly will exclude them from much more vulnerable places such as female prisons, dormitories and open plan changing spaces...and ESPECIALLY in the workplace due to the interaction with the extra workers rights legislation.

Dignity, safety, protection from harassment, privacy, access to essential services, protection from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment and punishment, life…

Yet you don't believe the female sex deserve that right. No male gets their right at the EXPENSE of female Dignity, safety, protection from harassment, privacy, access to essential services, protection from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment and punishment, life.

I'm going to put my cards on the table and say I have a ftm daughter.
We've spent days listening to the news (which she originally just started to make snap judgements about) and I'm glad the Supreme Court has clarified this legislation.
The situation was brought about in my opinion by pressure groups such as Stonewall who took their toxic messages into schools under the guise of 'helping' confused children. And that is where they went too far. Schools had no business pushing trans ideology and I note since Cass it is more and more prelivant in universities.
My daughter was bullied at school and sort support in the Internet communities. She had never given any hint she questioned her sex or sexuality prior to age 14. She's a computer whizz so any 'locking down' devices was futile.
Some of the stuff we went through as a family was horrific including suicide attempts and hatred.
I have never excluded her views but I will not address her as a man. She now agrees she is woman and that cannot change. Luckily I fought very hard to keep her away from the surgeons knife. She doesn't take hormones either. She dresses in what is deemed male attire. So I personally think trans people is a better description than any other. There are degrees of feminity or masculinity. Wear what you like , call yourself what you like but you remain your birth sex.
She has been a bit naive about mtf sex offenders because it doesn't get discussed by her LGBT friends. Sadly it's all about the discrimination.
I'm nearing 60 and I've worked with and employed two mtf people. One was lovely the other aggressive and combative. Both had had surgery and held GRC. Toilets were unisex in both work settings. No one complained to me.
However this was before such toxic campaigning and people went about their business. Mumsnet rightly campaigned to get changes into what was being taught in our schools, it's not transphobia it's just logic. Children need to be allowed to be just that.
We are a mixed heritage family and we have many friends who require same sex spaces. In my daughter's own words a natal man showering in female spaces is just a pervert. Decent people go out of their way to fit in.
Third spaces are what's needed and new public buildings are doing this. There are only 8000 people who identify as trans people yet those shouting the loudest are not having surgery and are natal men.
A dress does not make a woman but it doesn't offend me.
The poster who asked yesterday 'how can I live as a woman', you can't. You are a feminine man as my daughter is a masculine woman (debateble as she's small). Be happy in a country that protects all people from discrimination but don't shout wolf when there is no need.
Woman have only had a voice for 100 years, men still hold all the cards.
Would I choose to be a woman? I would not it's too hard. But I'm stuck with my XX chromosomes as is my daughter.

If it changes nothing then why are so many TRAs having tantrums over the judgement and throwing insults and death threats around like confetti?

Now, women can raise the alarm and have some confidence the man will be removed

Not the case. The provider of the facility or service still has the option of making it available to trans women. Nothing has changed. Not one thing.

That becomes vindictive surely?

If my friend Sue and her trans friend Mabel run a knitting circle for "women and transwomen", and everyone who joins the group understands that it is an inclusive knitting circle for people who are female and people who identify as female, how does that impact you? If you wanted bio women only in your knitting circle you could join Rose's women only knitting group. Why would you want to pressure Sue and Mabel to exclude trans women if they and everyone who joins the group are cool with those terms?

I don't see why this ruling can't just create a situation of greater clarity for everyone. You can have women only swimming sessions for bio women. Then "women plus" inclusive swimming sessions for those who are happy swimming with trans women. I see it as an advantageous position because the social contract is clearer. If I want bio women only I can have it. If my trans niece feels awkward about her body and wants to swim in a space without other male gaze she can go along to women plus trans session. Everyone is happy.

No biological woman would argue for the erasure of her sex class, as you are doing, and for inserting males in female spaces in order to remove female Dignity, safety, protection from harassment, privacy, access to essential services, protection from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment and punishment, life…

I think this is really important

If males in toilets/ prisons etc pose a risk to TW, then those males shoukd be held accountable / re-educated, rather than telling women to make way for them

But they can't describe a service as single sex if it can be used by both sexes

If you pulled your friends trousers down he would have a constructed gake penis, not a real one.

Thank you for sharing this. I wish your daughter well in her future.

The ruling reiterates that trans women are protected from sex discrimination as women - because they experience the same sexism as women do
No. the ruling says trans women are biological men. They are not protected from sex discrimination as women under the Equality Act because they are not women.
They are still protected from discrimination under the Equality Act by virtue of their gender reassignment status.

Have you read the judgement? It’s quite clear. It clarifies that Sex means biological sex not certificated sex, as the Scottish government tried to claim. The judgement explains why, and it also explains that trans people are still protected under the PC of Gender Reassignment.

If you hadn’t listened to the absolute lies and deception pushed by Stonewall and the like, you wouldn’t be so confused or upset. They misrepresented the law. This judgement has clarified the law and protects both women and trans people.

Transwomen are transwomen and that’s ok. They are protected as their biological sex and also under the Gender Reassignment PC. They were never entitled by law to use female single sex spaces.

You were not 'assigned' female at birth, you were 'assigned' female at CONCEPTION.

How many services describe themselves as “single sex”? They don’t, do they?

But nobody has any issue sharing those spaces with trans men.

Anyone who doesn't understand why that is, doesn't understand the issues at all.

This was never about just trying to be mean girls and exclude trans women for the sake of it, it's about safety.

Its about recognising that people who are biologically female and have undergone female puberty and crucially NOT undergone male puberty, are physically vulnerable to the opposite sex.

This^
I can’t understand why the trans community haven’t put all their effort into securing their own secure private areas and services. Taking over someone else’s, which was always going to end up in court this way, was a very high risk strategy and the trans community would not be in the position it is now if they had taken a more sensible path.

Do you think transmen are a danger to women?

Women are not a tool to validate the feeling of transwomen.

Trans groups should have been fighting for a space for trans people which doesn’t take away from another group. Years have been wasted.

No they're not. They're dudes.

But, you know what? There are women here and IRL who might have accepted and played along with the 'polite fiction' that Ian from Accounts is now Crystal and wears a miniskirt when drawing up the company P&L. I mean, I personally wouldn't, but lots would have.

And was Crystal satisfied with that? No sir, he was not. Crystal demanded to use the ladies bathroom, to join the ladies only corporate yoga, to go on women's Park Runs (which he always won), to win the company's Woman of the Year Award, to make younger female colleagues uncomfortable with his menstruation obsession, to be on a female only ward when he got sick.

And when some women baulked, Crystal went about screaming that they were terfs, dinosaurs, bigots, religious fundamentalists. He got them fired and reported to the police. He posed on Twitter with a mace, claiming that his hobby was 'decapitating terfs'.

So, no. Sorry, Ian. But NO.

I do not think that trans men are a danger to women.
I do think that a person who has been sexually assaulted and is triggered by being in an enclosed space with a male could easily be triggered by coming out of a stall and seeing a 5'7 bearded person at the sink, or finding a person with short hair, a beard, tattoos and a deep voice in the bed next to them in hospital, yes. Even if their brain then rationalises that it's probably a trans man. The fear trigger is subconscious and automatic.

Presumably that would also apply to a man who isn’t trans but is perceived to be female and is discriminated against. An unlikely scenario, but if that’s right it does show up the trans nonsense: if you’re not a woman you have protection against detriment on the basis of being mistaken for a woman, trans or no trans.

The trans bit is therefore just a label, nothing real.

Transwomen are still women.

Can you see the flaw in your argument right there?

Transwomen can’t STILL be women, because they were never women in the first place, otherwise they wouldn’t have had to go through all the drama of saying they ARE women and calling themselves trans. You can’t still be something that you never were in the first place.

Because they are misogynists. They revere superficial femininity but hate women and real sisterhood.
India’s “frump” comment yesterday was very telling.