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

Sorry i mis typed, for all sex based equality.

but it is not accurate to describe this as the NHS “experimenting” with banned drugs (they were never banned).

puberty blockers are currently banned for ‘trans’ (admittedly they are still used as chemotherapy for prostate cancer and for endometriosis where there are strict controls limiting their use to six months and only once in a lifetime due to their dangers).

The nhs is about to start an experiment treating children with puberty blockers - called the Pathway Trial..

This is a huge SO WHAT? It's a fairly standard admin manager salary in the public sector. Someone needs to draft the new recommendations and policies. I used to work in this area and getting the trans stuff right took up a huge amount of time (and got me a lot of personal abuse). I'd have been enormously grateful if someone else was there to do it!!

Why not apply?

There are only two sexes. Please stop with this ideological jargon about 'genders'.

If only there were an organisation already paid to produce guidelines, and if only those guidelines were written and ready to be laid before parliament?!

You know the concept of 'equality' is not the same as things being identiical to each other. Categories in the equality act receive additional protections and measures against known issues and factors - to enable them to take part in society with dignity. 'Sex' is one of those categories.

There is no scientific consensus at all on the whole transgender project - for the reason it is highly ideological in construction.

There is no way that anyone is ready with guidelines for the millions of different situations where this stuff arises (especially across health, where the wrong move has resulted in doctors and nurses being fired, e.g. for putting something on the wrong record). It's a huge situation and the implications are massive.

I gave up working in this area because it was an impossible job. If you think otherwise, seriously apply for it! I don't think it matters at all what your personal views are in this sort of role (if you are making that assumption).

You do realise that not too long ago the intention of Stonewall to remove 'Sex' as a protected characteristic altogether and replace it with the concept of 'Gender Identity'. Many would still like to see this happen.

Thank goodness we challenged the whole concept of self ID - because if we hadn't we'd be well on the way to the legal erasure of 'Sex' already. Many organisations had conveniently forgotten or had been mis-advised that it was 'Gender' and not 'Sex' that was the protected category.

How have you managed to missed all of this?

Or you could just follow the law….

Yep good luck trying to comply with the Gender Recognition Act 2004 with your NHS patient records with no guidelines whatsoever. It's been an incoherent shambles for years but that doesn't stop people with the best intentions from losing their jobs.

Sex and Gender are different. Its not ideological, its fact.

Which brings us back to the EHRC and their guidelines ready to be laid before Parliament….

Please define ‘gender’?

Gender is not measurable in the way that sex is because it is conceptual. A creation of mental processes. It originates in ideology: ideas about the self and society. 'Gender' is ideas and expectations about 'Masculine and 'feminine'.

The term 'gender' has been wilfully conflated with the measurable, biological reality of 'Sex' 'Gender' cannot be measured and it means different things to different people. Not everyone has a 'gender identity' because it is a label that originated in Queer Theory. Most people don't identify themselves in such ways.

She's something. That's for certain.

The EHRC Guidance cannot contradict the law.
Phillipson was given the guidance in Spetember
She was given the (legally not needed) impact assessment in October.

The Supreme Court ruling was not about "trans"
It was about women.
The only "trans" people angry with it
are entitled men who have been told they are not allowed in female spaces

Gender is a Mens Rights campaign

I support single-sex spaces — courts uphold these protections, and my earlier comment reflected that. Recognizing sex-based rights doesn’t stop us acknowledging trans people or ensuring they have protections where appropriate.

i didn't miss anything, its a very complex topic surrounded by lots of confusion, and rhetoric. Places like Finland are slightly more forward on this and already move toward gender neutral bathrooms where possible etc. Its inevitably where society over here will move towards if common sense is followed.

It really is not that complex at all? What is "'complex?" The idea that this is too complex for people to understand has permitted all sorts to go on under cover of ignorance.

Earlier on you confidently stated that 'Gender' and 'Sex' were two separate things and that genderists ( believers in gender identity theory) were not intent on the erasure of sex and thus women's established sex based protections. That is simply false.

What did you make of the Labour party mantra TWAW and TMAM? The one they used to chant at people. They were definitely trying to conflate the concept of gender identity with the reality of sex. The whole concept of 'cis' women and 'trans' women was another attempt to suggest that some men are actually women and an attempt to blur the boundaries.

You’re correct that gender isn’t biologically measurable and is self-identified. At the same time, gender reflects social norms and roles historically linked to biological sex, which have evolved over time and vary across cultures. It is not an ideology or a belief system — it’s a way to describe how people experience, express, and navigate identity within society.

Gender expression and fluidity have existed for hundreds of years across cultures. Like sexual orientation, gender is a deeply personal aspect of identity that shapes how people live and interact, without denying the biological reality of sex.

You are also correct in that not everyone has a gender identity, these are non-binary people.

What you are failing to see is the whole way the concept of 'gender identity' has been framed; the ideological and theoretical constructs that lie beneath and behind it. What you are calling 'trans people' are simply male and female people who have adopted a certain type of identity label. A type of identity which has been heavily pushed and promoted for quite some time now......long enough, for many not to recall, or even question, its origins.

What do you think people felt or did before the advent of trans ideology? Can you remember that time? It wasn't that long ago .What do you think about those of us here, or any one at all who didn't feel comfortable with the cultural, familial or self imposed expectations based on their sex? How did they resolve these feelings without the language of gender ideology to give it shape and form? How did people step outside of social stereotype and expectations to express themselves and their sexuality?

The difference, I suggest, is that before people didn''t deny they were male or female ( deny the reality of biological sex). People have always been various in their personality and preferences etc...if that is what you mean by 'gender fluidity'. Just think back to glam rock in the 1970's as but one example; or the extravagant flamboyance of men in certain royal courts throughout history; or Joan of Arc's attempt to enngage in what would have typically been a masculine pursuit. Think about the women's liberation movement and the gay liberation movement. People struggled to be who they were without claiming they were actually the opposite sex; to be free of rigid constraints predicated solely on their sex.

”You are also correct in that not everyone has a gender identity, these are non-binary people.”

This is completely wrong. Most people do not have a gender identity and most people are not non-binary. Most people don’t spend a single second of any day thinking about their “gender identity”. They get up, they go to work, they look after their family and, if they are women, they are likely paid less, taken for granted and patronised - because of their sex.

”gender reflects social norms and roles historically linked to biological sex, which have evolved over time and vary across cultures” - in other words, gender/gender identity is based on sexual stereotypes. We know! That’s why we object to it and why it oppresses women.

Non binary is absolutely a gender identity. It is one of the most recent and now most popular. It is also an absolute nonsense. Everyone remains either male or female regardless of their personal preferences.

Interesting that transactivists suddenly want mixed sex spaces having dismissed them as "othering" and "outing" for so many years. Access to the unclothed bodies of unconsenting women and girls has always been a high priority for so many men claiming to be women.

Presumably mixed sex spaces are the current demand in the face of the clarity of the SC judgment. Thus demonstrating the deluge of incoherent and ever changing demands from transactivists as they attempt to maintain their "sacred caste" role at the top of the oppression hierarchy.

In relation to your earlier claim that
"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".

There are countless mentally vulnerable children who, once they announce they're confused about their sex have been immediately affirmed. Reputable professionals recognise that confusion / unhappiness about your body may well be a passing phase. Huge damage has been done by transactivists in promoting "immediate affirmation", often leaving mentally vulnerable children in the clutches of extreme activists and alienated from their families and those who love and care for them. Yes, safeguarding is about protecting all children which is why the recorded attempts of transactivists to remove this group of exceptionally vulnerable children from basic safeguarding principles has been so dangerous.

The reason why you're getting such robust responses @Collat is because women are sick and tired of society abandoning the welfare of women and children in favour of this powerful ideology that's based on a set of incoherent and ever changing beliefs and demands.