So, DH has received the Defence earlier this week. It was interesting reading and, as @SabrinaThwaite highlighted last Sunday (thank you), they are leaning heavily into the disadvantages suffered by trans identifying men (TiM).
It was written by a leading junior at 11KBW with 14 years call. Apparently, she has previously been instructed in some quite high profile cases.
I will go through some of the major points that they rely on in the Defence and I will quote two paragraphs from the defence as they are, I feel, quite instructive as to how they are looking at this issue.
I very specifically won’t refer in any way at all to what DH is putting in his Reply. Partly because he hasn’t finished writing it yet and, also, because it hasn’t been served on the WI yet.
But I will raise some themes and ideas that come to my own mind around this. This is just me having some random musings. I’ll probably split this up into separate posts as otherwise this will be too long.
.
First of all, the quotes from the Defence. It has been a matter of some speculation on this thread as to what “living as women” means. Well, according to the WI, a woman is anyone who says that they are, subjectively, a woman (but trans identifying women are specifically excluded “Biological women living as men may not join”). They say:
“...it is admitted that the term “live as women” is subjective. The Defendant wishes members to be empowered to define themselves, and does not seek to police the definition in its policy. If a member sees themselves as living as a woman, then they will be admitted. As a membership association, the Defendant is entitled to set a subjective Membership Criterion if it wishes to do so. It is denied that this Membership Criterion will encompass all women (as defined under the EqA) as well as men who have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Anyone may choose to live as a woman, but women (as defined under the EqA) who choose to live as men are excluded by the Defendant’s membership rules.”
Oops! They seem to have overlooked that they are a charity with a constitution.
.
The next paragraph that I will quote is the justification for positive action under Section 158:
In the alternative, even if the Membership Criterion would otherwise be prohibited under the EqA, it is lawful positive action under s.158. The Defendant will say that:
(a) Trans women suffer disadvantages connected to their protected characteristics (for the purposes of the EqA, they are biological men with the further protected characteristic of gender reassignment). These disadvantages include:
(i) Trans women grow up feeling that they are truly female, but are generally excluded by girls and women, or from activities for girls and women.
(ii) Even after transition, trans women often find themselves excluded from spaces and activities for women, compounding the experience of exclusion that they have always suffered. This has only been exacerbated since the judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16, [2025] 2 WLR 879.
(iii) These experiences can often result in internalised feelings of exclusion, alienation and self-exclusion, as well as significantly higher levels of loneliness and isolation.
(iv) Trans people suffer disproportionately from poor mental health, including depression, which cannot be disconnected from their experience of exclusion, loneliness and isolation.
(v) Further, older trans women are disproportionately more likely to experience poor mental health.
(b) Arising from the above, trans women have needs connected to their protected characteristics. These needs include:
(i) accessing environments where they can feel included among other people living with the same gender as them; and
(ii) accessing opportunities that they may have been of felt excluded from as a result of being trans.
(c) Trans women have disproportionately low participation in certain activities. These activities include:
(i) educational opportunities;
(ii) professions and jobs; and
(iii) roles in public life.
(d) WI membership enables or encourages trans women to overcome or minimise these disadvantages, and/or meets those needs, and/or enables or encourages trans women to participate in those activities by offering a welcoming place where transgender women can connect with other women, socialise and learn together. To the Defendant’s knowledge, the WI is unique in the United Kingdom, in that there is no other similar organisation for trans women that offers this space. Specifically:
(i) The WI offers trans women an acutely needed sense of community, solidarity, inclusion with and acceptance by other women, including women who are not trans.
(ii) The WI offers trans women a sense of acceptance by providing a space where they can expect to be welcomed as women alongside women who are not trans, with no need to justify their presence, and free from prejudice, discrimination and judgement.
(iii) The WI offers trans women access to practical and educational opportunities that they have not been or felt able to access. Most directly, the WI enables and encourages trans women to access the opportunities and activities offered by WIs.
(iv) More broadly, by offering trans women inclusion, acceptance, mutual support and access to WIs activities (all as detailed above), it gives confidence and encourages their representation in other educational, voluntary and public roles.