Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Write to your MP

7 replies

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2025 15:03

Here's what I just sent to mine:

Dear [redacted],

Firstly, as this is the first time I have contacted you, please allow me to congratulate you on your election to parliament.

I am moved to write to you in the wake of last week's Supreme Court decision on the meaning of the word "sex" in the Equality Act. This decision has wide ranging implications for women and girls everywhere.

As you will no doubt be aware, the judges' unanimous verdict was that the protected characteristic of "sex" means biological sex and not certificated sex, meaning that transgender women (biological males who have transitioned to live as though they are women), with or without a gender recognition certificate, are not considered women within the meaning of that legislation.

As a woman, a mother and a feminist, this decision is of the utmost importance to me. I have watched in dismay as those on the political left and centre left, and even some on the political right, have repeated the mantra "trans women are women" without appearing to grasp the consequences of this seemingly benign phrase. Worse still, people who disagree with this statement have been labelled bigots and transphobes.

Regardless of the laws in any particular country, female people will continue to exist in reality as a biological sex class. We are the ones who are paid less than the opposite sex, in every country in the world, for equivalent work. We are the ones who perform the most unpaid labour, taking care of both our young children at the beginning of their lives and our elderly relatives at the end of theirs. We are the victims of almost 90% of all sexual offences, almost 100% of which are committed by the opposite sex. We are the only ones who can become pregnant as a result of rape or failed contraception, the only ones who may need access to abortions or maternity care, and the only ones at risk of discrimination due to pregnancy or childbirth. We are less safe in cars because crash test dummies are modelled on the average male body, and there is a healthcare gap because medical research on matters ranging from recognising the symptoms of a heart attack to the correct dosage for paracetamol are also largely based on male test subjects. We are the sex which is at risk of being selectively aborted in cultures where sons are considered preferable, and the sex which is still subjected to female genital mutilation in many countries in the world. We have collectively given birth to every human who has ever lived.

I find it astonishing that some people believe we do not need a word for female people. That they either do not think there are any negative consequences of denying us a word for ourselves and a few sex-based rights, or that they do not care.

And although I have empathy for people with gender dysphoria who feel very strongly that they should have been born the opposite sex, I find the very idea that "women" is a category that biologically male people should be allowed to simply "identify" into highly offensive.

I do not know how aware you are of this issue and the consequences it has had for women, particularly since the Gender Recognition Act was passed.

Here are a few examples:

  • Male sex offenders who have been convicted of violent crimes against women have claimed to be women and have been allowed to serve their sentences in the female prison estate, where they have gone on to sexually assault female prisoners.
  • Female rape victims have been ordered by judges to refer to their rapist as "she" when giving evidence against him in court and warned that they will be in contempt of court if they do not comply.
  • An elderly woman was raped by a transgender patient on a single sex NHS ward and when the police arrived to investigate, they were told that such a crime could not have occurred because there were no male patients on the ward.
  • Rape crisis services in various parts of the country have refused to help rape survivors who have sought out female only services, branding them bigoted and transphobic.
  • In Edinburgh, a major rape crisis organisation advertised for a female applicant to run the centre (using the single sex exemption in the Equality Act) and then appointed a trans woman without a gender recognition certificate to the post, who then said that female rape survivors who do not accept him as a woman are bigoted and need to "reframe their trauma", and also fired a member of staff who expressed concerns about this.
  • Various women have experienced discrimination and harassment from their employers for expressing their view that biological sex is real and important, notably Maya Forstater and Allison Bailey.
  • The famous author JK Rowling, who has explained that the reason she speaks out on these matters is because she never needs to work again and therefore does not need to worry about losing her livelihood, has received, in her own words, enough rape and death threats to wallpaper her (extremely large) house with.

This violence and intimidation towards women who dare to say "no" to sharing their sex-based language and their spaces with members of the opposite sex who feel entitled to them, has got to stop.

I for one am absolutely delighted that the Supreme Court has ruled that female people have the right to exist as a distinct category in law (as well as in reality) and that we have the right to single sex services and spaces from which all members of the opposite sex can be excluded, no matter how they identify or how sad it makes them feel not to be included.

However, I note that various politicians from the Lib Dems, the Greens and the SNP have hailed this decision as unjust, and many members of the Labour government seem distinctly lukewarm about it.

I am also aware that in the last few days there have been a number of so-called "trans rights" protests in various cities in the UK, in which some trans rights activists have displayed placards threatening physical violence against "TERFs" (a misogynistic slur for women who say no to their demands). Some of them have also threatened to stage a public dirty protest using bottles of their own urine if they are not allowed to use the toilets of their choosing. (It would not be the first time trans activists have protested by throwing their own urine around; they also defaced the public entrance to the Equality and Human Rights Commission in exactly the same way last year.)

Anyone tempted to feel sympathy for these individuals should really look at their violent and criminal behaviour, and ask themselves whether perhaps the women who don't want them in our changing rooms, rape crisis groups, menopause support groups (no, I am not joking) and women's shelters might possibly have a point.

I would also point out that although the majority of the protesters were protesting peacefully and did not behave in a violent or criminal way, they were still protesting against a decision that simply confirms that female people exist in law and our rights are not trumped by those of transgender people.

As I hope I previously made clear, I have every sympathy with people suffering from gender dysphoria who just want to quietly live their lives in the way that makes the most sense to them, and mean no harm to anyone. But society's natural and humane desire to protect these vulnerable individuals from harm must not come at the expense of the rights, safety and dignity of all women and girls. They must have their own safe spaces.

It remains to be seen how Labour will interpret the Supreme Court judgment and put it into policy. My guess is that rape crisis organisations and women's shelters will have to provide appropriate single sex care for women, and I am hoping there will be no more male patients in female hospital wards or male prisoners in the female prison estate. However, I am anticipating a lot of toilets and changing facilities simply being changed to "gender neutral" or mixed sex, which is not good enough from the point of view of women's safety and dignity. I also expect that a lot of organisations (including many of the trade unions) will openly defy the judgment.

The Supreme Court judgment is a resounding victory for women and girls, but it is not the end of the story. I am reminded of Winston Churchill's famous quote from 1942: "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

Can I count on you to hold Labour's feet to the fire and uphold the sex-based rights of women and girls?

Yours sincerely,

[redacted]

OP posts:
SquirrelSoShiny · 22/04/2025 15:07

Excellent letter and I hope it gets a robust response promising to protect women's rights. Anything less and I see more of a movement towards Reform. People have had enough of violent 6ft men throwing mantrums and drenching the place in piss rather than having reasoned debate.

MMAMPWGHAP · 22/04/2025 15:14

I’m on your side but that is far far too long

highame · 22/04/2025 15:28

MMAMPWGHAP · 22/04/2025 15:14

I’m on your side but that is far far too long

But very cathartic

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2025 15:42

highame · 22/04/2025 15:28

But very cathartic

Oh yes.

OP posts:
CervixSampler · 22/04/2025 16:08

Excellent. I have a few relatives I’d like to send similar to! I’ve contended myself with deleting them off Facebook because I can’t abide the lack of critical thinking skills.

RoseAndGeranium · 22/04/2025 16:47

Oof. I wrote to my current MP about this issue when he was running for Parliament. The reply was so extremely discouraging. Latterly I happened upon his campaign manager when he was trying quite stealthily to drop off a leaflet at my house. I told the campaign manager my thoughts on the issue and he was a Lib Dem explained that I could not vote for someone whose party had tried to shut down all debate on this subject. He denied that this had happened, which is funny because the Lib Dems still reject the Cass Review and have lost at least one tribunal relating to exactly this issue, I believe. He then acknowledged that he disagrees with trans women in women's prisons or women's sport, and admitted that he felt uncomfortable with the possibility, which he accepted was realistic, that women would be victimised in the form of voyeurism, sexual assault, or rape as a result of government policies regarding the admission of trans women into women's toilets, changing rooms, and refuges. Yet when I asked him why, that being so, he wasn't speaking up more within the party and working toward a policy position that reflected those views he started babbling on about how it was an election campaign and really people couldn't just say what they thought all over the place. He wasn't stupid, or a bad person, he just wasn't brave or committed enough to put his head over the parapet and take the shots. And I suspect that goes for my now MP too. Maybe I should try again though. I guess all we can do is keep beating on the door until it falls.

Manderleyagain · 24/04/2025 18:40

I have looked back at the reply I got from my mp (labour) before she was elected. I had raised the manifesto commitment to make it alot easier to get a grc. She said it would be fine because services could be poivuded based on biological sex if needed. So i will write to her again to support the ruling and try and make sure the government carry on in a sensible direction. But it's difficult not just to say everything. I seem to remember in the past advice was- relate it to personal circumstances, and you can ask them to contact a relevant minister on your behalf. So I might say something to support the equalities minister's statement.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page