Link to the statement here: https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/disability-rights-uk-opposes-uk-supreme-court-ruling-‘biological-sex’
I'm disabled (having two autoimmune diseases) and I'm frustrated with this statement which has been issued on my behalf. (To be fair, I'm pretty sceptical of Disability rights uk as it adopts a quite postmodernist 'social' concept of disability that says that disability will evaporate if our society is just structured in the right way. Tell that to my immune system which is destroying two of my organs).
"As part of a movement that has always called for ‘nothing about us without us’ – we’re particularly concerned by the court’s exclusion of Trans voices in their decision, and their failure to be led by the lived experience of one of society’s most silenced groups. Decisions about any group’s rights should never be made without the involvement of those most impacted."
The myth that 'trans voices' were excluded from the decision seems to have fully taken root, despite the fact that the trans position was fully argued and represented by the Scottish Government and Amnesty International. I don't see how the 'lived experience' of trans people would have aided the court in interpreting the legislation, which was purely an exercise of law.
"Around half of Trans people are also Disabled. Government policies already place disproportionate barriers on accessing vital healthcare, and now this ruling also erodes their protections against discrimination."
It's a bald faced lie to say that trans people have had protections against discrimination 'eroded'. The court was at great pains to explain that trans people are protected on the basis of sex and on the basis of gender reassignment.
But this bit made me particularly annoyed: "Setting the precedent that it’s okay to weaken the rights of one group, undermines everyone else's rights. Prioritising a bio-essentialist view of gender harms everyone, especially Disabled people. A person’s anatomy, hormone levels, or ability to conceive does not define whether they are a ‘real’ woman. "
And what about women's rights that were actually weakened by fake Stonewall law? The disabled women who faced having intimate care from male caregivers? The poor mentally ill woman who was in a psych ward with a male and who was gaslit into pretending he was a woman? Our rights have been systematically weakened for years by the trans movement: we have lost sporting opportunities, spaces, and even our sexual identity (lesbians being told they have to be open to relationships with males). I honestly think that many people don't really take seriously the idea that women even should have rights - we have little treats, perhaps, that are open to men who want them too and we are being awfully unkind for not being willing to share and putting up a fuss.
So now apparently saying that a woman is a female is a 'bio essentialist' view of gender. Why this is bad is not explained - 'bio essentialist' is just invoked as a bogeyman. And why would a bio essentialist view of gender particularly harm disabled people? It's not said.
But more importantly the Supreme Court wasn't talking about 'gender ' at all - it was talking about sex.
"Trans rights do not come at the expense of Disabled, or anyone else’s rights. In fact, our fight against ableism will never win without an end to transphobia too."
Look, if trans rights means that males who believe they are women get to go into single sex spaces that does come at the expense of women's rights to be in a female only space. It just does. I have no idea why people keep pretending that if transwomen are allowed to do whatever they want this will have no impact on women at all. There's currently a woman in a tribunal fighting for her right to get changed in a female only space - is she not impacted? And what on earth does disability rights really have to do with transphobia?
After this judgment I've just been seeing so much crap put out there that makes me feel like I'm back in 2016. The same old mantras and tropes are coming out to play: there's no conflict at all between trans rights and women's rights, it's transphobic for women to insist on their rights, saying women are female is 'bio essentialist' and harmful. It dismays me that the tension and conflict between trans rights and women's rights is just...not recognised. I would be far more happier if people were just honest and said 'yeah, we know you women have a right to single sex facilities but these rights should be taken away because the needs of trans people are more important" as opposed to this disingenuous bullshit that giving trans people everything they want will not affect any one else in the slightest.