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).

And yet you don’t believe in sex based rights. Tell me - why should women who’ve worked in their craft for years and years, have to compete in sports with men based on “lady feelings”? Is that fair?

.

"I think Boggins is getting a bit of a hard time here because it is obviously true that no one can ever be certain they have correctly discerned the sex

Boggins is getting a hard time is that it is also true that humans are VERY good at correctly discerning sex"

Not sure of your point there @SameyMcNameChange

I am NOT "cis" I am a woman.

Provocative? It is true though @Bogginsthe3rd

Christ your dick pandering is so acute you are prepared to erase yourself. You do not need a prefix to explain you are a women. Your post is really fucking sad.

Have thought about it thanks.

Neither do you, because you told me earlier that you’re a biological woman, so what gives you the right to lecture us? You don’t have ‘lived experience’ of being ‘trans’.

The laughing faces are because of the near hysterical hyperbole you exhibit when talking about the lives of TW, like they live every moment of their lives either being attacked or threatened, when in reality it’s women who experience way more violence. They’re no more vulnerable than anyone else.

You are the problem - you are misinterpreting the judgement

don't be so bloody facetious

For the 1000th time, nothing is at stake. No rights have been lost, no laws have been changed, no one had had their existence denied or anything else. The supreme court clarified what the law is and has always been, because people made up stuff and said it was the law when that wasnt true.

Like, for instance, your title and your OP.

Or we don't care. As unnecessarily provocative as that is.

If transwomen are women that must also mean whatever we feel is real. So I’m the Queen of the World and demand you bow to me. Santa must also be real and the Easter bunny.

And to state the obvious, trans don’t know what it is “to be a woman” …. And women, we know what’s at stake.

No amount of whatever you are arguing from human rights to gametes to receptors … is just no argument at all … it’s just shouting into the void.

Clearly you and others don’t understand the fact that women feel all of these things .

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

People are laughing at your utter hypocrisy, lack of understanding. Sheer egocentrism. Sums it all up really.

I expect they are irony laughs.

The truth is provocative now is it?! You’re so funny 😆

Can you imagine being asked to tell the truth in an important situation, say in court, and you reply that you can’t because the truth is unnecessarily provocative? I bet Dr Upton will adopt that line next time he’s in court 😂😂

I think if you're looking for the 'interpretation of the judgment' that is likely to be the one that actually happens in practice, it's probably best to listen to someone who doesn't do alternative/personal realities. Otherwise you're likely to end up disappointed.

I think you’ll find I am the Queen of the World, thank you very much, but I’d be prepared to share the title if you bring chocolate!

Very upsetting? Christ, your life sounds like a walk in the park.

I don’t have the emotional capacity, or energy, to be “very sad” about someone else’s identity.

There is far more to life.

Well I think it depended on how directly it was being pushed at you and what it was being used to leverage. I'm thinking of the group of rape survivors driven to tears by the derision and dismissal of their explanation that their needs were incompatible with giving men this wonderful gift of fabrication. And the woman told she was not raped because 'there were no men on the ward'. And the women who lost their jobs. The kid assaulted in the toilets. The women who had to submit to massage and intimate touch from Bryson without right of refusal. The lesbian and women's health groups bullied and destroyed.

Probably quite upsetting to put it mildly for those women.

Mass delusions tend to take a few decades to die out. But it's a start.

I'm not sad about other people's identities either. I am, however, furiously angry that the indulgence of other people's identities has directly led to women's rights being trashed and women being harmed.HTH.

Sorry FOJN
But it's an indication of the type of unhinged activism that so many women have had to endure - and an education for the "they only want to pee, be kind" brigade. 😄

As the thread draws nearly to a close, I think we can conclude from the OP's own 'arguments' that the thread can now be summarised as...

People are still people

So that clears everything up nicely

I was born white and want to identify as black. I want to black up and barge into spaces and groups reserved for black women and tell everyone I’m even more oppressed than natal black women are.

I hope that’s ok by everyone?

There is no ‘debate’.

Women are women. Men are men. 2+2=4. The world is round.

‘Case Closed’.