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

The Equality Act 2010 rightly protects people with the protected characteristic (PC) of 'gender reassignment' from losing their job or their home or being denied service in a restaurant etc. because they're a transwoman or transman.

The recent Supreme Court judgment confirmed that the Act's PC of 'sex' refers to biological sex only, not gender. And it as a consequence confirmed that women-only spaces MUST exclude all transwomen. Because a transwoman's sex is male. That cannot change.

The judgment specifically stated that under the Equality Act 2010, transwomen are men and transmen are women. Having or not having a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) is irrelevant. Men remain male, and transwomen are both men and permanently male. So they must stay out of all women's spaces.

But it's not a fetish doncha know.

A friend boarded a plane recently with a muddle aged man who was wearing a wig, loads of cartoon-like make up, tight fitting mini skirt, high heels, a top made of see through mesh with huge breasts and enormous nipples fully visible. He sat at the airport gate with his legs wide open.

Does he need protecting?

Quite. And why should women 'respect' him just on that presentation?

For what? Why?

His civil rights should not be lesser than anyone else's on the grounds that he cross dresses, but it ends there. Inappropriate expression of cross dressing and inappropriate behaviours should not be automatically enabled as an extension.

I can understand why people are anxious about women’s safety and single-sex spaces — those concerns are real and deserve to be taken seriously.

But I don’t see anything in this job description that suggests it’s about undermining women’s or female-specific rights. It appears to be about updating and coordinating trans rights policy, which hasn’t kept pace with legal, medical, and social developments.

Acknowledging trans people’s rights doesn’t automatically mean removing protections for women. In practice, most policy work should be about balancing both — ensuring trans people are treated with dignity and equality, while still recognizing the importance of sex-based protections where they are genuinely necessary.

Given how much the scientific and legal understanding of being transgender has changed , including the move away from treating it as a mental health condition , does it not seem reasonable for the UK to have someone whose role is to make sure policy reflects current scientific consensus rather than past assumptions?

Unfortunately from long and bitter experience, and being systematically and purposefully disadvantaged by generously and kindly being compassionate and believing the best and in good intentions - yes, this post will inevitably turn out to be for the purpose of fucking over women's rights.

As every post in government that has the word 'woman' in it has been systematically captured by those who ensure the only 'women' they represent and further the interests of are men who identify as.

Its too late to negotiate nicely with a tiger when your head is in its mouth.

"Updating and coordinating trans rights policy" is founded on removing the rights of women and child safeguarding. That is the sole aim - hence the thousands of mentally vulnerable young people caught up in this mess with their mental health challenges untreated because the responsible adults in their lives failed (or were too frightened) to safeguard them from the lie that their growing bodies were flawed but could change sex.

This is an immensely powerful and dangerous ideology that has been able to influence social policy / political ideology with the result that the NHS is experimenting on children as young as 10 with drugs the government has previously banned because they're unsafe. And as for the bonfire of women's rights with women now having to reclaim the basic language of women, reinstate women centred language and facts in health care (maternity, menopause etc). Not to mention the porn soaked trans lobby groups who've been able to sell fetish and porn as suitable for children under the guise of SRE.

All in plain sight and promoted by politicians. We don't need more trans activism in the Cabinet office. We need referrals to Prevent, safeguarding children to be prioritised again and the SC judgment to be fully implemented.

You beat me to it. Ffs indeed.

Indeed. A rather nice wee earner that job isn't it? Tossers!

Fully agree.
The article in the OP says that the role is about understanding the impact of FWS. The government will have access to all the legal advice that it wants about the impact of FWS, which is that sex in the EA means sex so SSS are only ever for biological reality. So the role can only be required if the government is unhappy with advice and wants something different.

ETA should have said fully agree with @MrsOvertonsWindow

I disagree with most of what you’ve said, and I think it relies on assumptions rather than what’s actually stated.

There’s nothing in “updating and coordinating trans rights policy” that implies removing women’s rights or safeguarding. The role applies to all trans people — including trans men, who are almost entirely absent from these discussions — and updating policy does not automatically mean dismantling sex-based protections.

Being transgender itself is not classified as a mental health disorder. That doesn’t mean trans people can’t experience mental health difficulties — many do — but evidence shows that dismissing someone’s gender identity as “just mental illness” often worsens distress rather than resolves it.

On medical care: puberty blockers have been prescribed for decades in paediatric care, primarily for precocious puberty. Their use in gender-related care is rightly debated and more tightly regulated, but it is not accurate to describe this as the NHS “experimenting” with banned drugs (they were never banned). Decisions, where they occur, involve specialist clinicians, safeguarding processes, and parental consent. These proffesionals have worked with the child over a long period and are in a better position than you or i with the parents to make the decision on what's best for an individual child.

It’s reasonable to debate how services should operate and how safeguarding should work — but that’s very different from claiming the purpose of this role is to undermine women or harm children.

And to be clear, being trans isn’t an ideology. It’s a recognized aspect of human identity, and there’s no evidence that people can be persuaded or recruited into being trans. Major medical bodies recognize that gender identity is not a choice, and attempts to dismiss it as ideology or social contagion aren’t supported by evidence — This is like back when being gay was also seen as a mental illness or social contagion... but now we know you cant convince a straight person gay or a gay person straight. its something you are born into.

You of course are entitled to disagree - transactivists usually hand wave away women's rights and child safeguarding.
The rest of society is finally seeing transactivism for the harm it has caused - especially to children. Bullying, threats, untruths and intimidation being the mechanisms used to silence questions and challenge and to ensure compliance with these anti social demands. All aptly showcased in the Fife and Darlington nurse tribunals where women had to go to court to establish that they are legally entitled to single sex spaces to undress away from men claiming to be women.

This raises an interesting idea: What would the airport/ airline do if someone, male or female, tried to travel entirely naked? And what if the essentially naked person described had been a genuine female (presumaby she could only have been plying her trade and seeking customers, on airport and airline premises, since the pre-rape fetish of exhibitionism is not a female habit, any more than females are liable to autogynephilia) ? The airport/airline security staff would probably have stepped in, preventing that one customer's self- advertising from causing distress to all the other staff and passengers.

This is a very helpful thread that focuses on the worlds of a gay man critiquing the privileged class roots of transactivism and identifying the deeply embedded homophobia this ideology depends on and uses in an attempt to eradicate same sex attraction and women's rights.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5478587-5478587-the-gender-warthis-didnt-come-from-the-streets?reply=149986231

Being transgender is not an ideology. Using transgender identity to remove womens sex based rights and safeguarding of children is an ideology. You have to be a believer that sex is irrelevant, your gender identity matters to society and if you say you are transgender, it means you never have wrong or cruel intentions.

Non believers say sex matters in certain situations more, your gender identity matters to you and no one else and being transgender shouldn't mean you get to break rules that apply to others: no falsification of documents, no using sports and facilities of the opposite sex, no demanding plastic surgery or drugs that are not physically necessary and no get out of jail free cards because judges feel sorry for you

FFS, £65K a year. My wife is an MSc Research scientist, with 23 years experience. She spends her days, analysing data and carrying out assays in order to design medical testing kits and she is on £30K a year.

You have no idea of the extent of the stranglehold trans rights activism has on the entire Civil Service. Trans identified men are taking colleagues and their employer to court for daring to believe that sex is immutable, for insisting on single sex toilets and for allowing SEEN (Sex Equality and Equity Network) to exist.

I think we fundamentally disagree on what “the rest of society” thinks, but that’s not the same as saying these concerns don’t exist. They clearly do, and cases like the nurse tribunals show how difficult some of these situations are in practice.

Where I disagree is the idea that trans rights work is inherently about erasing women’s rights or safeguarding. Courts recognising that sex-based protections exist doesn’t mean trans people therefore have no rights at all, or that their existence is an ideology rather than a reality policymakers have to deal with.
I actually agree that some spaces, like changing rooms, are reasonably organised by sex. Acknowledging that doesn’t require pretending trans people don’t exist, don’t face discrimination, or don’t deserve legal protections in other areas of life.

On children, I think harm exists on all sides of this debate, but it’s not accurate to suggest that trans children themselves are unaffected by the climate around this. Many experience bullying, stigma, and distress precisely because their identity is dismissed as either a phase or a threat. Safeguarding should mean protecting all children — including those who are trans — not framing one group’s existence as the cause of harm to another.

We can debate where boundaries should sit without reducing trans people to an “ideology” or assuming that recognizing their rights automatically means sacrificing women’s.

Apparently since Saturday, this post has decided to identify as a different job title.

I'm sure they would have stepped in, yes. But a man portraying himself in an overtly sexualised fetish costume? That's fine.

It's interesting how much protection these men have isn't it.

I see I was deleted for my political comment on legislation….

Employment tribunals aren’t evidence of a “stranglehold”; sex is biologically stable and legally immutable, and courts deal with conduct and policy, not private beliefs. Groups like SEEN are internal staff networks, not policy-making bodies, and they exist to support equality for all genders, not just trans people.

SEEN exists to support equality for all genders??

On children, I think harm exists on all sides of this debate, but it’s not accurate to suggest that trans children themselves are unaffected by the climate around this. Many experience bullying, stigma, and distress precisely because their identity is dismissed as either a phase or a threat. Safeguarding should mean protecting allchildren — including those who are trans — not framing one group’s existence as the cause of harm to another.

Another ‘all sides’ where one side lies to children, tells them they can change sex, encourages the use of dangerous drugs that reduce IQ, isolates them from their peers and locks them into a life of sterility, asexuality and lower life expectancy from the affects of drugs on heart/increased cancer as well as untreated mental illness or caused by a life chasing the impossible. A side that tells everyone else that they must lie too and bullies them into conforming. That destroys safeguarding for all children - telling boys they can ignore girls boundaries, annd telling girls boundaries are bullying, and reinforces harmful regressive sex stereotypes.

And on the other side we have people who say children should not be lied to, should be allowed to grow up and become comfortable in their sex, safeguards all children, allows all children to speak the truth about sex and have boundaries about their person and their privacy and dignity, and says girls and boys do not have to be limited by harmful stereotypes.

Of course, the whole concept of transgendersim is an ideology. An ideology is a set of ideas which seek to explain how the world works, or how one would like the world to work. Often ideologies bear no relation to reality and the nature of human beings and societies. They remain idealistic..because they originate in ideas not practical reality.

Before the concept of 'transgender' came into being - those few men ( overwhelmingly men) who were driven to present as women were known as. transsexuals, or esle transvestites...depending on how far they took the desire.

'Gender' itself is a conceptual idea. It is sex which is the measurable reality.

Postmodernistic theories of the self that began to be promoted on university campuses from about the late 1980's postulated the idea that there was no truth and that we all made up our own truth. One central idea idea was to challenge stereotypes about what it meant to be male or female, but this somehow managed to get caught up in re-affirming sex based stereotypes rather than in challenging them.

And many young people have certainly been caught up in this, girls particularly. When I was last teaching in schools in 2010 - there was no such thing as a trans child; nobody had heard of it; it wasn't a thing. After Stonewall secured gay marriage equality in 2014 they sat about promoting and re-defining 'transgenderism' - aided by American dollars - and the whole concept of 'a gender identity' took off. 'Non binary' is just one of the latest identity labels to be added to the ever growing catalogue. Youth cultures no longer revolve around music like they used to, now youth feel the need to adopt some sort of 'identity' that is rooted in Queer Theory if they want to appear cool or express individuality.

People who adopt such identities remain either male or female; they are not some unique category of person - and there is a broad range of people who have been encouraged to take up such identities From men who were previously referred to as transvestites ( who now declare themselves 'transgender' and destroy their marriages and family life due to this obession); to young tech bros and gamers with autism and a lack of social skills; to young lesbians and other non conforming young women who hate on-lnne depictions of what it is supposed to mean to be female and/or don't want to present in girly or overtly 'feminine' ways; and those escaping sexual abuse and/or emotional trauma and/or dysfunctional family life.