New trans equality civil servant at the Cabinet Office to focus on the ‘implications’ of 2025’s Supreme Court judgment

[IwantToRetire]

Well, well, well.

Talk about sending a clear message about who is more important to Labour.

Trans will get their own cheer leader to make sure they are not discriminated against.

Women have no one to stop the discriminiation of blocking the implementation of singe sex provision.

Full article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/19/civil-service-hire-trans-equality-chief-supreme-court/

And at https://archive.is/S57Uv

I suspect this is true, but in terms of daily practice who would know this.

Language has become so mangled that it isn't just about the law, whether clarified or not, what most people whether as users or suppliers have all had their language transed.

Each time anyone of us posts on FWR emphatically it is this, dont forget there are thousands (millions?) whose brains have not been reprogrammed by the Supreme Court, Mumsnet, JKR or even the brilliant nurses.

But my understanding is that in terms of the law, the court case was about the EA. ie the meaning of the word women within the act.

So if someone chooses to talk about a service for females, but is in fact trans inclusive, anyone challenging it would have to show how by not having that service genuinely only for biological women they were being discriminated against. ie was / is it a service that can or should only be for biological females. Swimming pools, public walks.

We no longer have the older traditional notions of why certain things should be for one biological sex.

There may well have to be a test case to illustrate that most member of the public seeing something advertised as being for women assumed it was about biological females.

We no longer have the older traditional notions of why certain things should be for one biological sex.

We do.

This is just ridiculous.

Agree with the posts made about not feeding the trolls.

Not so sure this is trolling but an example of someone hijacking a thread to be able to go on and on about their view point.

Which has nothing to do with the info in the OP that our politicians who we rely on to get things right (ha ha) have publicly signaled in the creation of this post, that they think the most important aspect of the Supreme Court ruling is about the rights of trans.

Not about saying yes will do everything we can to ensure that women's rights are protects and work with businesses etc to insure that trans peopel are also catered for.

I have to admit that I'm impressed with Collat's food preparation and parenting skills. Putting together a spag bol and spending time with the kiddos in 6 minutes!

Most of the women on here are ‘gender critical’ - that means we do not believe men and women should be constrained by harmful socially constructed stereotypes. That women can become leaders or engineers, that men can become carers and do an equal share of the housework. That girls can wear blue, have short hair and play football and are no less girls for it. And boys can like pink, long hair and play with dolls and that does not make them any less boys. That women are not sex objects for men’s pleasure. You have not explained why you think we should be constrained by such regressive sexism, let alone why we should organise anything on that basis?

If "we do" why do so many members of the public, the media, younger people reject it.

One of the reasons FWR exists and continues is because in the majority of other places to talk or read, this is no longer the norm.

Not only that, Sex is no longer being recorded in terms of stats.

Have had to recently complete forms from 2 totally different organisations, and each of them asked for my gender (5+ options).

Both of these organisations should be keeping records about sex, eg to show there was no sex discrimination, but they cant do that, and clearly dont care that they cant do that.

The polling shows that the vast majority of people agree with single sex provision in certain circumstances.

The people you are referring to are a noisy minority.

If that's a reply to me, it is because this is FWR that by "traditional" and given the number of threads about it, ie toilets, health provision, hostels, and so on.

You are talking about gender stereo types.

I was talking about sex.

So if someone chooses to talk about a service for females, but is in fact trans inclusive, anyone challenging it would have to show how by not having that service genuinely only for biological women they were being discriminated against. ie was / is it a service that can or should only be for biological females.

No, anyone challenging it would simply have to show it was advertised as a service for females but let men in. A service advertised for women is already relying on the EA or it would be discriminating against men.

Stereotypes shape expectations, not identity. Gender identity is the internal sense of self. Gender roles are the social rules built around it

This particular sub forum was created for the purpose of discussing the negative impacts of gender ideology on children and on women's rights and protections. That is its context

No! 'Gender Identity' is a contemporary framing device which encourages people to view themselves through the lens of this thing called 'gender'.

The internal sense of self is just 'ego'...the sense of oneself that holds the whole thing together.

This post is illogical and inconsistent.

First of all you say that identity doesn't shape expectations ( stereotypes do)...but then you go on to claim that social rules ( expectations) are built around this identity.

Gender roles are actually the social expectations that are constructed around the reality of biological sex, not around gender identity.

How can you have an internal sense of something you are not? You don't know what it is to have an internal sense of!

The amount of time someone has spent on a topic doesn’t automatically make their conclusions stronger. Someone can learn more in three months of focused, open‑minded research than another person does in ten years. What matters is the quality of the information, not the length of the timeline.

I’ve tried to engage with everyone here in good faith where i feel they are with me, and I’ve responded to as many points as I can — which is harder when several people are debating slightly different angles at once. If my tone came across as anything else, that wasn’t the intention.

Where you lose me is the appeal to “we’ve done our research and verified our facts.” Everyone says that. What matters is whether the evidence actually supports the claims being made. And on this topic, the scientific and medical consensus overwhelmingly supports trans people and the reality of gender identity.

If we’re going to debate, let’s debate the substance — not who’s been here longest or who sounds the most confident.

Nobody doubts the reality that there are people who exist that believe they are the opposite sex ...we just don't believe that to be true. In fact we klnow it is not true. We also don't accept that the concept of 'gender identity' over-rules the reality of sex.

The evidence says that nobody can change sex, and that 'gender identity' is a mental construct...no matter how deeply felt.

I'm not sure what your sources are, but it is simply not true that there is any overwhelming evidence or consensus...in fact, far, far from it. The consensus is the opposite. Dysphoria is, by definition, a mental distress, a pathology.

You sound kind and sincere, but also completely gullible.

You don’t need categories to have an internal sense of self. The labels came later — they just gave names to the ‘this is me’ and the ‘this is not me’ feelings people already had

The only internal sense of self you can have is of you as an individual. No man can have an internal sense of being female.

Correct. The internal sense of self just is.

It is trans ideology/gender identity theory that has created labels and categories which people have come to use to try to explain themselves. That is why I refer to it as a framing device ( a particular colour and shape of lens with which to view the world - shaping the way you perceive and experience it)

I rather pity this new trans equality civil servant, despite his/her generous salary, because he or she will have to try to get to grips with this nonsense and his or her head will surely explode.

He can imagine himself to be female, but imagination is as far as it goes.

They/them will just affirm, not question.

And that imagination is based on a very male fantasy of women.