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).

It's the SRY gene rather than the Y chromosome that triggers male development. In 99.9% of cases the SRY gene is located on the Y chromosome hence the usual definition of XX or XY

Yep, third spaces. And we won't give in until this happens. Whatever it takes, as long as it takes. MRA/TRAs really didn't understand our commitment to womens rights or our longevity. I'll fight til I'm 80 years old if it comes to that. I will never, ever, ever, ever stop fighting for womens sex based rights and spaces.

But what you’re posting isn’t relevant.

We have a Supreme Court for this.

Said every peddler of nonsense since the dawn of time.

The intricacies of rare DSDs are of great importance in sports, elite sports in particular.

They are of zero importance when discussing the rights of bog standard common garden males to access women's spaces and services.

Fwiw the ruling this week now enables sporting bodies to have these specific conversations, and to lay out their own conditions as they see appropriate for their sports. If the ruling had declared that legal sex is all that counts in the eyes of the law, then any discussion of testosterone levels, or male puberty or androgen sensitivity would have been redundant - a piece of paper would have legally entitled anyone to anything.

Oh well, OP. Never mind, eh? You win some, you lose some.

Fwiw the ruling this week now enables sporting bodies to have these specific conversations, and to lay out their own conditions as they see appropriate for their sports

this was always the case and they have always done so

Is it this @Naunet? I'm old enough to remember when Mermaids etc used to peddle this shite to police forces 😁

And PC Gul told Harry Miller he'd 'had the training'. Glorious days.

That’s a lot of words to say “I don’t understand the law or the Supreme Court ruling” @Lostcat 🤣. I’m sure you’ve been thoroughly corrected by now.

Yes, but there was ambiguity, and it could have been argued that sporting bodies were breaking the law by excluding males with a GRC. That was the whole point of this case - to clear up that ambiguity and to make it clear that trans women are not the same as women and there are instances where it is right and legal to treat them differently.

I agree,I also find it very suspicious that trans supporters are only now speaking about trans men when they haven’t given a shit about them until now when they can use them for their own agenda.It’s always been about the men.Trans men are not and never have been a threat to women.

I was quite “live and let live” up until the point they started staying “trans” women would be the ones conducting police body searches and providing intimate care at hospitals even for women who specifically stated they wanted a female nurse/police officer. TOO FAR.

It doesn’t matter if trans women are or aren’t predatory. Women do not have to explain themselves. You’re not going to bully females into who has access to their bodies. The very idea boils my blood.

I wonder how many Righteous people genuinely live by the non-sex-specific-bollocks they espouse.

• Are they unsure which Gallus gallus cloaca they hope to get something edible out of?
• Do they feel puzzled which white fluid from Bos taurus to put in their tea?
• When planting a farm of papaya or hops or kiwifruit, do they shrug in confusion if no fruit appear?
• If at puberty they start bleeding from their genitals, do they seek medical attention, or conversely if at puberty they don't start bleeding from their genitals?

You are trying to muddy the waters. Doesn’t wash I’m afraid.

Every cell in their body is XY. They will never be women.

Yep, agree. I think Dr Beth Upton declaring in court that he would treat women who had specifically asked for female-only care was quite revealing for those who are otherwise not giving this issue much attention

So aggressively male

I had a mental image of you writing that with a crayon.

Prof Winston also stated categorically on Question Time that you can’t change your sex. But, hey, what does he know? He’s only one of the foremost biologists of his generation.

My observation has been that a lot of the people who have no problem with TWAW:

• have not considered the actual real world implications on female safety
• are extremely privileged and have not been abused or intellectually willing need of female only spaces
• not intellectually willing/capable to consider the pitfalls of the ideology
• are narcissistic virtue signallers with too much time on their hands

Has anyone managed to define what a woman is yet if it’s not adult human female? I keep asking and nobody is giving an answer

I hope @Lostcat has the integrity to read this and apologise. As we stated to them over and over and over x 500, their interpretation is wrong. Which is precisely why that animal torturer Jolyon or whatever his name is, is so worried, as well as all his fellow Good Law Project pro-trans pals. Transwomen are men. They are men, they are males. Always were, always will be. And the law has now affirmed this. Hence trans lawyers being in absolute despair. They know what this means, even if the OP doesn't.

Aibu to say I don't want to find their surgery? Having your body modified isn't going to change who you've been born as, it's just something I don't agree with

Indeed. But it would never mean that any sort of elephant would be classed as a tiger.

There are an extremely small number of people who might not fit a straightforward XX/XY definition of female/male.

But there is no ambiguity that for XY people without such ambiguities, they are male.