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).

My mum used to say 'I'm coming back as a bloke' all the time and I didn't really know what she was saying. But it certainly is a man's world. They have it all ways - where can they possibly go wrong?

Are men really saying that they have a right to use women's spaces because they're frightened of men? Whaaaaaaaaaat? And women aren't???? Why are men frightened of men?

Then educate men not to harm.

When will men stop intimidating (abusing, being aggressive to everyone/abandoning their children, raping, murdering) women? Then women wouldn't need safe spaces/refuges.

Why are women afraid of men?

Men always twist whatever women do/say to actually blame women for their own behaviour - it's her fault I abused/abandoned her with my half dozen children/ raped/killed her.

Why do men feel that women wanting to protect themselves from men are wrong? Why do men threaten to beat women senseless with baseball bats with nails in because we don't want them in our safe spaces?

Why on earth do men (who would rather be women) want to use women's spaces?

Why are men frightened to use men's toilets so 'need' to use women's toilets?

Why do men want to take women's medals?

The answer is - because they can.

There does not appear to be any consequence world wide which can persuade men to stop taking advantage of/threatening/being aggressive/violent towards women.

Why can't men answer for/stop/explain their mean/hateful/murderous behaviour towards women?

Does 'be kind' only apply to women because only women are unkind?

Oh it's not all men I hear you all howl - it's the majority of them if we're completely honest.

Lads! Lads! Lads! It's only banter!

Who is actively teaching males as young as 10 years old to abuse women primary school teachers?

They all blame women for how they were brought up - this must be because good male role models do not exist.

Men blame women for their own obnoxious/murderous behaviour!

Why don't men ever take any responsibility for their own behaviour?

Why do men turn a blind eye to all the abuse suffered by women at men's hands? Why don't men want women to have safe spaces? Why don't men want women to be safe, to feel safe?

Just because they can.

Man's world.

Julia Hartley Brewer criticised for stating the truth and informing Shivani Dave that he's a man and frightening him - poor thing. That's why women must be kind - so men can keep trampling women into the ground.

How many women will be killed this week by their male 'friends'?

Men must address this issue, why would they stick their heads in the sand and ignore it? Men - you're allowing your daughters to be harmed/raped/murdered. Why would you tolerate this?

H has gone to his exclusive man's club to do manly things. Isn't he lucky?

But don't forget 'guys' - it's all just banter. That's what they all say isn't it? That's all right then. As you were.

This thread has provided much amusement and this post represents why.
Societies have successfully distinguished between men and women for ever. The actions of a niche group of random queer theorists started the erosion of the social contract in relation to removing both women's rights and aspects of safeguarding children.
As this was a movement led initially by powerful men with influence, their tactics of initially operating in secret along with the unthinking acceptance by too many hard of thinking politicians and organisations has led to fantasies, lies and un truths being imposed on an unconsenting public.

Sex is binary. Women are a sex class that don't include men and the Supreme Court have clarified the meaning of the law.

Time for transactivists to grow up and start behaving like responsible citizens. Use all the £££ donated by the tax payer to work out how 3rd spaces can be implemented where necessary.

Professor Winston actually stated that every cell in your body is sexed,male or female.No matter your medical condition.BTW people with DSD hate being used by people like you trying to score points.

@Nameychangington , I always assumed that an employer had to provide separate toilets for women and men.
I was thinking of a situation where they are provided in the common way of a room with separate toilet cubicles and hand basins on another wall. Then one activist insists on using the women's facilities, saying that he is a woman. Until recently the employer often shrugged and told all concerned to be kind.
Now if one real woman complains about the presence of the Trans person. How does the employer deal with it with the trans person insisting that the employer prove they are not entitled to use the female facilities.

The self entitlement of that Dr was unbelievable. I watched the whole thing.

My lord, the reaching. Is there a single person on this thread who has agreed with you, OP?

The trouble when deciding what is reasonable is one must take into account lots of things, re chess it would need to be established whether there are any differences in processing in the brain or stamina to ensure there was no sex based advantage/disadvantage. Much more reasonable just to have make/female separation

Exactly - I have found a reference he made back in 1995 when discussing AIS and the potential for embryo transplantation - his QT appearance was a joy to watch - but he suffered the consequences - let’s see if the BBC invite him back 😏🤔🤭

what that pp wrote is essentially the same as what I wrote. She’s rearranged the language slightly differently , that’s it

what you wrote:

Transwomen are men. They are men, they are males. Always were, always will be. And the law has now affirmed this.

Is what the judgement precisely and specifically said it was not saying and that people shouldn’t use it to assume.

So I think you’ll find the person acting with a lack of “integrity” is you,

If they haven't have you defined what a trans woman is?

A man.

Ni part of my post is trying to use DSDs to score points. I have said in many other posts that DSDs have nothing to do with trans issues. And just to make clear I believe that people with DSDs are either male or female not some kind of odd intersex hybrid as some other posters seem to believe

The judgment says that trans women are male and that if they are included in women's single sex spaces, those spaces are no longer women's single sex spaces.

It doesn't need to say "trans women are men, ha ha ha" in order for the implications of that to be clear.

That’s not what the judgement says. You are over interpreting

For years we have had well meaning fools claim that transwomen are women, which they patently are not. They are men. They used this biologically incomprehensible claim to trespass into women's sport, changing rooms, prisons etc. We have dangerous, anarchist, activists who want to place rapists in women's prisons and refuges.
This court judgement does make it clear that in terms of the Equality Act transwomen are not women and they can't use their, false claims and cult slogans to gain access to women's spaces.
It always makes me wonder why so many people are more concerned about the desires of a small group of men (many AGP fetishists) than the safety of women.

Are you aware that the overwhelming majority, something like 90-92%, of transwomen are fully intact males? Did you even know that? So you're arguing for a fully intact male with penis and testicles in a dress to be in the ladies toilets and ladies change rooms.

Are you still not really fussed now that you understand it's about a fully intact male, an actual 100% full bloke, and not some sort of unuch (sp?) ?

This. Again and again.

To be a transwoman you have to be a man. Male.

We need to drop the 'transwoman' word and call men who say they are women what they are — trans-identified men.

Yes. A man.

Everything is made complicated. Minority groups constantly challenging society, forgetting that we are all equal to the law. The Princip of Law is clear. Woman has always been a woman. The minority groups tried to challenge that and got finally rebuffed, but have they? A new chapter will begin in law making. 😀

Yes, I would be delighted if one of the consequences of this is trans people detrans and instead get mental help which they should have got all along, maybe time in a psychiatric hospital perhaps. Maybe These 'where will I go now' will stop the hormones, if they're on them, and detrans. If it forces them to do this/get help it will be great.

Fir the purposes of the Equality Act, women = biological women. Therefore under the Act, transwomen are not women. This much is clear from the judgment, no?

Did you ever share your legal credentials with the class?

I am familiar with DSD I’m also aware that Prof Winston is very clear that you cannot change sex and your sex is determined by your chromosomes that exist in every cell of your body … I am also aware that people who have DSD are not a pawn to expand the definition of sex. I am also aware that a DSD is very complicated and can be very traumatic

I think I will stick to the to the Y chromosome and the potential to produce sperm as my go to definition as well as the current DSD classification system

Keira Bell (the detransistioner who successfully sued the Tavistock) uses the men’s toilets to avoid causing distress in the women’s in case she is mistaken for a man.

Realistically using the gents raises different issues. Most men aren’t afraid of being raped by a TM. Many women are afraid of being raped by a TW and with very good reason.

On the other hand, that moment showed Fiona Bruce up for what she is. A facade.