Trans identifying male Harriet Haynes loses court case to play in women's pool

[ArabellaScott]

A great win for Lynn Pinches!

Congratulations to her, and the EBPF.

'CASE DISMISSED! The case against EBPF by Harriet Haynes. '

Haynes to pay costs.

Earlier articles:

Males banned from women's pool:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/articles/c1k4gd2vge9o

Haynes sues:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2025/04/08/transgender-pool-player-harriet-hayes-suing-governing-body/

Pool Federation:

https://ebpf.uk/

Judgement:

https://jrlevins.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/K01CT207-judgment-1-8-25-handed-down.pdf

'CONCLUSION
267 Having come to the end of what is essentially a long footnote to this judgment, I reiterate that in my view the effect of the decision in FWS is that the claim fails at the first hurdle because there has been no gender reassignment discrimination. The claim must therefore be dismissed. '

The decision comes after protests were held at the final of the Ultimate Pool Women's Pro Series Event earlier this month, which was competed between Harriet Haynes and Lucy Smith - two transgender women.

I had forgotten this. It is a good example of the importance of keeping female categories protected.

I don't know how anyone can argue that TIMs don't have an advantage when there's two of them in the women's final. They supposedly only make up 0.5% of the population and are a tiny and vulnerable group. Yet there they are, rising stubbornly to the top.

It was good to see in the judgement discussion of the various human rights articles that TRAs believe will be their saviour and why they were not relevant.

Well, JR does in fact credit herself in her bio as being partially responsible for the “landmark” Forstater ruling! Which is indeed true.

I really enjoyed reading the judgment (but then I am a lawyer), it is clear that Robin White and Jane Russell could barely organise a piss up in a brewery, let alone make coherent arguments as to why some men with special identities should be able to play in women’s sports.

Any barrister with a grasp of the law would have told Harriet that his claim of gender reassignment discrimination had no prospect of success, and that a claim of sex discrimination (which would have been the correct claim, but one which he would have been ideologically able to pursue) was bound to fail after FWS.

Clearly males should not play in women's sports, but I wonder why pool isn't an open game. Is there much difference between male and female players? Or is it that men have excluded women? Or something else.

The scientific evidence was discussed in great detail and is laid out comprehensively in the judgment. The judge concluded that yes men would have an advantage.

I think this shows how grateful we should be to FWS. I know I am especially on behalf of my daughters, nieces etc so access to sport isn’t hindered because they end up playing against men.

Read the judgement - it reports in some detail what the four experts said about pool being a gender-affected sport! I can't tell you what it said as I skipped that part but the judge's conclusion was that it is (though he also said he didn't need to know that to decide the case).

Yes there is. I saw Lynne Pinches explaining it quite well somewhere (can't remember where). Apparently men clear more balls during the break than women do, which is a massive advantage.

And even though players generally aren't using the full extent of their power, there's always a trade-off between power and accuracy. So for any given shot, a man can be more accurate than a woman (because he's operating at a lower percentage of his "full power" than she would be of hers, if that makes sense).

So by this argument the judge would be okay with men competing in the women's category in, say, chess - have I understood that right?

Amazing 🫶

Great news. As a pp said, the team if RMW and JR are our best friends 😄

I think that's what he was saying, but I think he's wrong. (Cheeky of me!) Women's and girls' chess is usually justified as Positive Action anyway but a MCW would still be a man with the PC of GR and therefore excludable either way.

Well I guess there could be a mixed section in pool. My female mate used to wipe the table with all the men in the pub team, and we went to play other pubs too. She was the only woman but won nearly every game.

But yeah, in many sports it's to gain advantage. In some it is just to take over something because you wish you were part of it when you're not and can't ever be.

He didn’t claim sex discrimination though. He claimed “gender reassignment discrimination”.

The judgement is worth a read & the claimants agreement gets a thorough spanking with the judge commenting on their contradictions & how their arguments fall apart under FWS.

One of the reasons pointed out was a women with protected characteristic of gender reassignment would not be excluded from the women’s category.

may the dream team of JR & RMW keep going.

https://www.outertemple.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/K01CT207-judgment-1-8-25-handed-down24.pdf

If I read it correctly, the judge is saying that in this case argued before him, there wasn’t evidence that the presence of trans women was off putting to women entering the sport. There were complaints from women about bathroom usage but those trans women would be using the same women’s facilities and generating the same complaints even if they weren’t playing but spectating instead.

It doesn’t mean that another sport or another case couldn’t ever show that women were put off, just that the evidence presented here didn’t convince him. Whereas the evidence on the point of fairness did convince him.

Really not a big deal.

If Harriet has trouble competing in the male bracket, I dunno what to say except maybe just practise more?

I was reading that thinking 'is it that Ms White and that Ms Russell? And indeed it was.

I hope this will help JR now accept that she has totally misunderstood the extent of the FWS judgment.

Claimant tried to argue that the correct comparator for a TW was a W.

Judge “err no this is wrong. Sex is a material difference”

judge rules firmly against TWAW.

Women - we exist 🤩

Absolutely! It is amazing how many mediocre male athletes decide they are women and suddenly are winners and medalists because they are in the womens category- cycling, swimming, even bloody Park Run results are dominated by TWs

Section 19. Sport of the Gender Recognition Law refers to unfairness in participation of trans identifying individuals. I don’t understand why this has been persistently ignored:

(4)A sport is a gender-affected sport if the physical strength, stamina or physique of average persons of one gender would put them at a disadvantage to average persons of the other gender as competitors in events involving the sport.

In any event the recognition of sex based legislation seems to made the Gender Recognition irrelevant. Hooray!

The BBC has yet to report.

The Independent has gone with 'Banned for being trans' as a headline, and the article is heavily skewed with sympathy for males.

'Matt Champ, senior associate at Colman Coyle, who represented Ms Haynes, said: "We and our client are naturally disappointed with the court’s decision that it was bound to follow the much-criticised Supreme Court case of For Women Scotland and dismiss our client’s case for gender reassignment discrimination.
“However, whilst the judge dismissed the case based upon For Women Scotland, we take some solace in the fact that he found that, if he was not bound by that decision, he would have agreed with our client and found that the need to show that exclusion was ‘necessary’ so as to comply with the Equality Act 2010 would have been on the defendants, that was a hotly contested issue at trial.
“More importantly, the judge also found that if he were required to decide it, he would have found that the EBPF’s actions were not capable of being a ‘proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’ and so the defendants’ secondary case would have failed. But, obviously because of the judge’s reliance on For Women Scotland, the claim still had to be dismissed. We are reflecting on the judgment and our next steps which will include whether or not we appeal."'

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/transgender-pool-player-ban-harriet-haynes-b2800323.html

In the bbc link it says there already is:
“The body said that an open category "will continue to be open to all regardless of sex".

Ha ha ha. "If it wasn't for the law, we would have won!" 😂

"The Independent" isn't a newspaper any more, just a tedious website. No more worthy of attention than Gay Times.

The TIMS won't want to play in that category. No validation, innit?
swirls spinny skirt