Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Are there judgements / decisions / tribunals / etc that will need to be revisited now?

9 replies

Cismyfatarse · 18/04/2025 09:37

I understand that the SC ruling means that it has now legally always been the case that sex = biological sex in law. There are threads about things like prizes, sporting results etc. I just wondered if this can allow appeals or re-opening decisions that have been made over the past few years. For example, where a woman has lost her job or where she has been discriminated against through lack of facilities. For example, hypothetically, could I go back and claim discrimination and win for inadequate changing facilities at a gym. My own example, was the sleeper train where single women used to be put to share with other single women. The sleeper service told me that it was same gender and I did not book on that basis. The other example is the YHA where I did not book on that basis. In both cases I lost the option of a cheaper trip / stay because to save money I would run the risk of sharing with a male who had declared himself female.

But this is not a huge issue, others have faced much worse.

Any thoughts? Hopefully Sarah (RCrisis Brighton) and Sandie Peggie and the Darlington nurses will now get a future positive result, but I am wondering about past results.

Any legal thoughts?

OP posts:
loveyouradvice · 18/04/2025 13:25

Me too! Love an answer - and seeing a lawyer friend this weekend and intend to explore...

HollyBerryz · 18/04/2025 13:32

Law can't be applied retrospectively as far as I know so I don't think so.

NameChangeForReason · 18/04/2025 13:33

HollyBerryz · 18/04/2025 13:32

Law can't be applied retrospectively as far as I know so I don't think so.

This one can.
Its not creating a new law, its clarifying existing laws.

Igmum · 18/04/2025 13:45

IANAL. I suspect in the instances you cite that nothing can be done because you were never a customer. For the ETs I’d anticipate a significant impact/clear victory.

Cismyfatarse · 18/04/2025 14:29

I was a customer before I realised and (by necessity of where I lived) used the sleeper again once I knew but only when travelling with someone I could share with. But, agreed. Not a customer who found herself actually sharing with a man.

OP posts:
TeenToTwenties · 18/04/2025 14:40

i am definitely not a lawyer.

It seems to me if you asked if something was 'women only' and was told 'yes' but it turned out to include men when you got there you could have a case.

But if you clarified and were told yes it would include men and you declined the service then you wouldn't have a case.

I do feel that if anyone disciplined for complaining about men in changing rooms they should get an apology and that removed from their record.

Peregrina · 18/04/2025 16:46

I would have thought that sportswomen who were denied medals and prize money would have a strong case.

After all medals do get stripped from athletes caught doping.

CarefulN0w · 18/04/2025 16:57

Peregrina · 18/04/2025 16:46

I would have thought that sportswomen who were denied medals and prize money would have a strong case.

After all medals do get stripped from athletes caught doping.

That’s an interesting thought.

OuchyEars · 18/04/2025 17:12

Hopefully the winners of the women's sporting events would get the money and award they are due as well as the title, without waiting for the awarding body to try to reclaim rom the man they gave them to.

I can just see that Jolly lawyer's eyes lighting up with a new fundmygrift page.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page