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

Can anyone do the bigly writing for:

what position is being rejected?

what position is being rejected?

Gender is simply the social and cultural dimension of sex — the roles, expectations, and classifications societies attach to being male or female. You don’t need a metaphysical definition for it to matter in law; it matters because those social classifications affect how people are treated.

Gender matters in law for the same reason other socially‑defined categories matter: because they shape how people are treated. Law doesn’t require something to be physically measurable to recognize that it has real social consequences

i feel at this point you have to be trying to not understand this.

So sexist, outdated bollocks then. Awesome.

😂😂

yep, that is what Collat has been arguing for this whole thread - that we should define women by regressive oppressive misogynistic stereotypes.

At least Collat’s side seems to have improved their understanding that gender is not sex. But we have yet to have an explanation why men who identify as trans must use facilities for female sex when gender is not sex. Or why the Supreme Court ruling has any impact when gender is not sex as the ruling was that the equality act refers to sex.

Gender is simply the social and cultural dimension of sex — the roles, expectations, and classifications societies attach to being male or female.

But woman still = adult, human female.

I won't go again over the bits I already explained.

This isn’t complicated: every major medical and psychological body recognises trans people as a demographic group whose existence isn’t a belief system. That’s the point you’re disagreeing with. If you think they support something else, you need to say what — because right now you’re avoiding the fact that none of these organization's share your framing

Those bodies recognise trans people as a self-declared demographic group. I already said that GC people also recognise trans people in that way. So no, those bodies don't disagree with GC people.

Nobody here is defining women by stereotypes — describing how gender functions socially isn’t the same as endorsing it. And you still haven’t explained why you think trans people using facilities is about ‘gender not sex’ when the legal framework doesn’t work the way you’re implying.

The Equality Act protects people from discrimination based on sex and gender reassignment as separate characteristics. That’s why the Supreme Court ruling matters: it wasn’t saying gender = sex, it was saying both characteristics have legal force. You’re treating this as if the law only recognises sex, when it clearly doesn’t

Are you actually going to address why every credible medical and psychological body disagrees with your position? You can exclude WPATH if you want — the consensus still stands.

And just to be clear, my stance has always been that sex‑based spaces are justified where necessary. What I’m pushing back on is the attempt to drag the conversation back decades by framing trans people as a disorder rather than a natural variation in human experience.

can you list all the credible bodies who supports your sides framing?

Gender is simply the social and cultural dimension of sex

So the revelant dimension is sex? Exactly what GC people argue.

Also, answer me this: I'm a transman who likes nail polish and stereotypically female hobbies, and who doesn't identify as either male or female. What gender am I?

im glad because you don't seem to grasp simple aspects and its getting tiring repeating the same thing.

Yes, medical bodies recognise trans people as a self‑identified demographic group — but they also explicitly reject the idea that trans identity is a belief system. You’re reducing their position to the one part you agree with and ignoring the rest.

Yes. The court recognises sex and gender are different. So can you explain why transGENDER people want to use facilities for the opposite SEX? . (sorry can’t get the hang of the bigly writing yet)

@Collat

And just to be clear, my stance has always been that sex‑based spaces are justified where necessary.

Which makes you highly transphobic.

What I’m pushing back on is the attempt to drag the conversation back decades by framing trans people as a disorder rather than a natural variation in human experience.

Then why is gender incongruence listed in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and the ICD (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems) ?

In my case at least, it's clearly a disorder.

I understand perfectly that gender is 'the roles, expectations, and classifications societies attach to being male or female' - that's central to my gender critical radical lesbian feminism.

That is not, however, how it has been defined by trans rights activists over the years - it has been referred to as an inner belief, a soul, a perception, a manifestation, an expression - many variable and entirely subjective definitions.

That is not a viable basis for legislation, as the current anomalies thrown up by gender recognition legislation around the world is demonstrating: making laws based on something that has so many definitions, and no agreed definition, is proving to be damaging to public perception of the law. The creation of the legal fiction that a person has changed sex when changing sex, as you agree, is totally impossible, makes the law look like an ass.

If transgender people now claim they are not changing sex, they are changing their gender [and that is a change, from 'transwomen are 100% women like any other woman and how dare you suggest otherwise'?], why should the law get involved at all?

Trans people are not the only demographic that reject ' the roles, expectations, and classifications societies attach to being male or female'.
People like me do it every moment of our lives, but 'we don't need no piece of paper from the City Hall keeping us tied and true' to who we are and how we live our rejection of gender stereotypes.

Yes, medical bodies recognise trans people as a self‑identified demographic group — but they also explicitly reject the idea that trans identity is a belief system.

That would be because medical bodies consider it a mental health problem and a disease. Yet when some GC people call it that, they get called transphobic. Go figure.

I think the problem that you have @Collat , and some of the organisations you quote perhaps have a similar problem, is that you have the very outdated view that trans = old-fashioned transsexual, nearly always homosexual.

Trans nowadays = anyone who says they are trans, no reasons given, no questions asked. You cannot make policies for such a loose collection of individuals. Organisations which were originally trying to produce policies for this tiny group have been hit by a tsunami of other people also claiming to be trans and they are struggling to adapt, particularly in the face of a very aggressive and vindictive trans lobby.

edit sp

Yes, please be precise and specific @Collat

The Equality Act also recognises marital status but facilities are still based on sex. The law is quite clear that facilities are based on sex not gender. There is no ability under the law in the UK to ascribe facilities based on gender. Gender reassignment is not gender Identity. The protected characteristic of gender reassignment means a man who identifies as a woman must not be discriminated against compared to other MEN. The comparator is others of his biological sex even if he has a GRC.

Your side loves to misrepresent the law it seems…

Trans people are a demographic, but trans identity is not a belief system.

There’s your problem. Trans identity is entirely a belief system.

Collat · Today 09:28
im glad because you don't seem to grasp simple aspects and its getting tiring repeating the same thing.

It is, isn't it?

How can this disparate group of people you are engaging with - with all sorts of different lives and experiences and identities and knowledge and achievements and backgrounds - how is it that none of them grasp these simple aspects no matter how many times you post them?
We must all be stupider than you, or more ignorant than you, or less well informed than you, or less gifted intellectually than you, or less widely read than you.
Like, all of us.
What are the chances, eh?

The “consensus” is almost entirely based on WPATH’s “standards”.

That’s not “gender identity”. “Trans women” are male, not female, so if you thought it was “simply the social and cultural dimension of sex” no one would be pretending that they think trans identified males are “women”, would they?

Even the bigly letters are being ignored. Must be a real hard question to answer🙄

WPATH, the Yogyakarta Principles, in Ireland TENI -Transgender Equality Network Ireland [which only recently were the authors of a guide to trans rights published by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, which is state-backed] -

There is a rich seam of investigation to be done into how groups of people with vested interests and varying levels of qualifications or expertise seized the day and came to be regarded as the go-to experts on the emerging field of transgenderism.

We are seeing the results of lack of due diligence and scrutiny of their 'expertise' before it was written into laws and standards and guidelines in so many areas of society.

Do you have a copy of the diagram showing all the circular referencing? Cass identified it but I couldn’t see it in the report?