Extract from an as yet draft report for a special session on Violence Against Women 59th Session of the Human Rights Council. So expect it will be heavily criticised if not edited before then.
Am posting as much because she, like Baroness Falkner is so often attacked in public for just doing her job. As well as referencing recent Supreme Court Ruling
Erasure of sex specific language and categories
13. Recently, there has been a concerted international push to delink the definition of men and women from their biological sex, and erase the legal category of “women”. Such efforts have undermined the practical achievement of equality between men and women. Women are therefore being denied their rightful recognition as a distinct category in law and society. It is a form of “coercive inclusion” which relies on the expectation that women will be kind enough to sacrifice their own recognition and protection for the sake of others.
14. The suppression of women in language and law occurs in several forms: by replacing sex-specific language with neutral language; by reinterpreting sex-specific language to refer to gender identity rather than sex; and by referring to females in dehumanizing, biologically reductive terms such as “birthing persons” “menstruaters/bleeders” or “vagina havers” with “front holes”. Such a framing is accompanied by describing the distinction between male and female itself as “biological essentialism” and “an intrinsic expression of patriarchal structures”, rather than the material reality onto which oppressive gender norms and stereotypes are imposed.
15. In an effort to provide recognition for males who identify as women or girls, many states have denied females their own right to be recognized in law as a distinct, particularly vulnerable group in need of targeted protection as envisaged by international law, including lesbian and bisexual women. The pursuit of neutrality can often lead to a form of blindness to the distinct needs, rights, and vulnerabilities of particular groups. If the category of biological females is erased or fundamentally decoupled from sex-based oppression, that oppression becomes increasingly difficult to identify and, thus, to combat. In sum, we cannot protect what we do not define.
16. A powerful examination of the negative effects of the erasure of sex specific language and categories can be seen in the recent decision of the UK Supreme Court, which held that references to “sex” and “woman” in domestic anti-discrimination law must be references to biological sex. This ruling protects women and girls under a distinct category while also providing anti-discrimination rights to those who identify as transgender, without undermining the right of women and girls to single-sex spaces.
Elimination of sex-specific data
17. The UN recognizes that all humans have a right to a legal identity, and that this identity must include the sex of the person concerned. As a key demographic variable, the collection of accurate, robust data based on sex is essential to evidence-based policymaking across sectors, from healthcare to criminal justice. Accurate data is essential for combating systematic patterns of sex- based violence and oppression. The lack of data segregated by “sex”, confidentiality, data security, and underreporting by victims of violence are barriers to having good quality data needed for ending violence against women and girls
18. In recent decades, there has been a growing trend to collect gender identity data instead of sex-related data, including by the United Nations. The phenomenon is particularly evident in the 21 countries that have allowed for self-identification of gender identity (as of November 2020), such as Brazil, the UK and Australia. This is especially problematic in healthcare. The failure of medical science to account for sex differences is a well-known phenomenon with profound implications for women’s healthcare outcomes. For example, the effectiveness of medication for women with the effect of drugs on the female body is poorly researched and understood.
19. Collecting sex-based data does not reduce people to biological categories. It simply records information that is necessary to track outcomes for distinct groups to eliminate unjust disparities between them and provide targeted support, including trans people. Claims that the term “sex-based violence excludes non-binary, gender-diverse, and transgender individuals” wrongly implies that these individuals either do not have a sex or do not experience discrimination and violence based on their sex.
Extracts from a very, very long article downloadable as a word document at https://t.co/avyK2MOAJt
https://ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2025-05/a-hrc-59-47-auv-1-en.docx