Category Archives: Transgender

Supreme Court Ruling Is Anything But Clear – And Endangers All Women’s Rights, Trans Group Warns

Posted on by
Reply

A leading trans advocacy group has hit out at the “widespread confusion and fear” caused by the Supreme Court’s ruling that a woman is defined by biology.

The momentous judgement came after years of campaigning from gender-critical groups and has left the trans community in disarray.

Keir Starmer has shifted his stance on trans rights recently too. His spokesperson said on Tuesday that the PM no longer believes a trans woman is a woman – even though he said the opposite in 2022 – and said the government welcomes the judgement.

But, in a new letter to the prime minister, campaigners from TransActual challenged the government’s repeated claim that the top judges’ decision had brought “clarity” and pointed out the 14 issues the ruling has not addressed.

The letter asked: “How is ‘biological sex’ to be defined other than by certification on original birth certificates? Hormonal? Genital? Chromosomal? How will outliers in these be treated?”

The campaigners also looked at how women who are not trans will be impacted by the Court’s decision, particularly women with “gender non-conforming appearances or attributes”.

The group said: “In the course of early legal analysis, a number of huge risks have been identified for all LGBTQ+ people, as well as women with gender non-conforming appearance or attributes, which arise from this deviation from the clear original intentions and definitions in the Equality Act.”

It also asked: “What mechanisms will be available to correct ‘administrative’ mistakes such as the young girl recently reported as having M marked on her original birth certificate last autumn, or the woman who discovered a few years ago that she was legally male when she went to marry her long-term partner and father of their child?”

The campaigners then questioned single-sex issues around policing.

TransActual asked: “How will policies like that of the British Transport Police (BTP) – who announced that trans women would be strip-searched by male officers – not create a huge risk to all women?

“How will the BTP determine who is trans and who is not? What will the remedy be for those women who are not trans who end up being strip-searched by male BTP officers? What is the impact on trans people’s privacy?”

The group also looked at the issues around public places after the minister for equalities and education secretary Bridget Phillipson said people should use toilets according to their biological sex.

“How would access to single-sex spaces be policed?” the campaigners asked. “How would this be funded? What laws would be brought in to enforce this as, for example, the only laws around public toilets are around their provision, not who accesses them?”

It also asked: “If trans women should be barred from female single-sex spaces, and trans men be barred from female and male single-sex spaces, which facilities should trans men use, and how will you ensure trans women’s safety and dignity?”

This morning we wrote to the Prime Minister to express concern in respect of last week’s Supreme Court’s ruling and the confusion that has brought to all equalities law. You’ll find more info on what we said, and the letter itself, at: transactual.org.uk/blog/2025/04… #Trans #Nonbinary

— TransActual (@transactualuk.bsky.social) 2025-04-22T19:00:19.941Z

TransActual head Helen Belcher concluded the letter by writing: “We hope that these urgent questions demonstrate this ruling has brought widespread confusion and fear, not clarity, and that equalities law in the UK must be immediately returned to a sound legal footing.

“There are many other questions which also arise from the judgement which will follow as legal study is done and the practical effects continue.”

When LBC presenter Nick Ferrari asked about the British Transport Police policy that male officers would now be conducting strip-searches on trans women, policing minister Diana Johnson appeared to support it.

She said: “My understanding from the Supreme Court judgement last week is, that it would be done on the basis of biological sex…yes, that’s the law of the land. And I support the law of the land.

“I’m very pleased we’ve got that clarity from last week as to biological sex being the basis of that.”

But Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer, later hit back at the government’s response.

She told HuffPost UK: “Sadly for women, both trans and not, many of [our] rights have been eroded in recent years.

“Cuts to healthcare, a rise in misogyny and transphobia, and government neglect of public services have made us all less safe and less supported.

“I’m deeply concerned that this government’s response to the recent Supreme Court ruling will entrench these problems for trans people, while doing nothing to address the real issues facing all women – making it harder for trans people to exist in public spaces, to access support, or to get healthcare.

“I am also worried that rather than standing up against a tide of hatred and fear directed against trans people, this government is giving ground to those who would see trans people pushed out of public life.”

All of us, whether we’re trans or not, deserve dignity and respect, and the freedom to go about our daily lives without fear of abuse or harassment. Govt has urgent Qs to answer about how it will ensure those rights for trans people – sadly I didn’t get those answers yesterday.

— Carla Denyer (@carladenyer.bsky.social) 2025-04-23T09:46:20.689Z

Share Button

5 Judges Just Decided How To Define A Woman – And Have ‘Set Trans Rights Back 20 Years’

Posted on by
Reply

The Supreme Court has just ruled that the term “woman” refers to those born as biologically female.

The landmark moment has delivered a blow to the trans community and comes after years of campaigning from gender-critical groups.

Here’s a look at how we got here, and just what that means.

What just happened?

The UK Supreme Court, operated by the five most senior judges in the country, has officially defined what a woman is.

Lord Reed, Lady Rose, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Simler and Lord Hodge have all ruled sex is defined by biology.

It comes after gender-critical campaigners escalated a case looking at Scottish legislation about how to define gender.

Judges were looking at this question: “Is a person with a full GRC [gender recognition certificate] which recognises that their gender is female, a ‘woman’ for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010?”

Lord Hodge announced today: “The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.”

Essentially that means defining someone based on their reproductive organs and chromosomes rather than their gender identity and any gender-recognition process.

It has defined sex as binary.

Why was this issue even in the courts?

It comes after campaign groups of gender-critical women, For Women Scotland and Sex Matters, brought a case against the Scottish government to the Supreme Court.

They were fighting against legislation led by former first minister Nicola Sturgeon in 2018 which aimed to set up gender quotas for public boards.

This law recognised trans women with gender recognition certificates (GRC) as women.

But the campaigners claim sex is biological and binary.

They said the legislation had broken with the separate definition of women and trans women as explained in the 2010 Equality Act.

They claimed that sex based protections should only be offered to those who were born biologically female – and therefore not include those with a GRC.

So they began contesting the legislation in 2021 with a judicial review.

The Scottish government argued its legislation was in line with the definition of women in the Equality Act and trans women as defined by the 2004 Gender Recognition Act.

The 2004 legislation states: “Where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person that their acquired gender is female, the person’s sex is that of a woman.”

The Scottish courts already ruled twice in the Scottish government’s favour, saying sex is “not limited to biological or birth sex” – including those with GRC.

So the group escalated it to the Supreme Court – meaning the ruling will now impact the whole of Britain.

How did the judges come to this decision?

Hodge said the predecessors to the Equality Act used definitions of biological sex and gender reassignment was added as a separate characteristic.

He said: “Although the word ‘biological’ does not appear in this definition, the ordinary meaning of those plain and unambiguous words corresponds with the biological characteristics that make an individual a man or a woman.

“These are assumed to be self-explanatory and to require no further explanation.

“Men and women are on the face of the definition only differentiated as a grouping by the biology they share with their group.”

Hodge also noted if people with Gender Reassignment Certificates were included in the sex group, it would make the Equality Act read in an “incoherent way”.

He said any issues linked to pregnancy and maternity can be read as referring to biological sex, but other parts of the Act referred to “certified sex”.

However, he said this ruling should not be seen as a victory for either side of the argument, and claimed trans people are still protected in the law.

What does this mean for the trans community?

Lord Hodge said the marginalised group are still protected through the Equality Act 2010 against discrimination – indirect and direct – as well as harassment.

But trans rights campaigners fear this means they will lose protections and that public bodies and organisations will change how they operate in regard to single-sex spaces.

Statista found the number of police recorded hate crimes against trans people has been rising in recent years. In 2023/24, there were 4,780 recorded incidents.

Trans women with GRCs may not be able to access women’s single-sex services.

The Good Law Project also claimed the court did not hear from a single trans person.

The campaigners added: “This ruling sets a dangerous precedent and erases trans women from protections. It puts trans rights back 20 years.”

<div class="js-react-hydrator" data-component-name="Twitter" data-component-id="1143" data-component-props="{"itemType":"rich","index":47,"contentIndexByType":1,"contentListType":"embed","code":"

The Supreme Court sided with FWS. But it didn’t hear from a single trans person.

This ruling sets a dangerous precedent and erases trans women from protections. It puts trans rights back 20 years.

We won’t stop fighting for trans rights 🏳️⚧️

— Good Law Project (@GoodLawProject) April 16, 2025

","type":"rich","meta":{"author":"Good Law Project","author_url":"https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject","cache_age":86400,"description":"The Supreme Court sided with FWS. But it didn’t hear from a single trans person. This ruling sets a dangerous precedent and erases trans women from protections. It puts trans rights back 20 years. We won’t stop fighting for trans rights 🏳️‍⚧️— Good Law Project (@GoodLawProject) April 16, 2025\n\n\n","options":{"_maxwidth":{"label":"Adjust width","placeholder":"220-550, in px","value":""},"_theme":{"value":"","values":{"dark":"Use dark theme"}}},"provider_name":"Twitter","title":"Good Law Project on Twitter / X","type":"rich","url":"https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/1912436399724216402","version":"1.0"},"flags":[],"enhancements":{},"fullBleed":false,"options":{"theme":"news","device":"desktop","editionInfo":{"id":"uk","name":"U.K.","link":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk","locale":"en_GB"},"originalEdition":"uk","isMapi":false,"isAmp":false,"isAdsFree":false,"isVideoEntry":false,"isEntry":true,"isMt":false,"entryId":"67ff5f03e4b051f6e26e5e91","entryPermalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/explained-supreme-court-has-decided-how-to-define-a-woman_uk_67ff5f03e4b051f6e26e5e91","entryTagsList":"lgbtq,transgender","sectionSlug":"politics","deptSlug":null,"sectionRedirectUrl":null,"subcategories":"","isWide":false,"headerOverride":null,"noVideoAds":false,"disableFloat":false,"isNative":false,"commercialVideo":{"provider":"custom","site_and_category":"uk.politics","package":null},"isHighline":false,"vidibleConfigValues":{"cid":"60afc140cf94592c45d7390c","disabledWithMapiEntries":false,"overrides":{"all":"60b8e525cdd90620331baaf4"},"whitelisted":["56c5f12ee4b03a39c93c9439","56c6056ee4b01f2b7e1b5f35","59bfee7f9e451049f87f550b","5acccbaac269d609ef44c529","570278d2e4b070ff77b98217","57027b4be4b070ff77b98d5c","56fe95c4e4b0041c4242016b","570279cfe4b06d08e3629954","5ba9e8821c2e65639162ccf1","5bcd9904821576674bc55ced","5d076ca127f25f504327c72e","5b35266b158f855373e28256","5ebac2e8abddfb04f877dff2","60b8e525cdd90620331baaf4","60b64354b171b7444beaff4d","60d0d8e09340d7032ad0fb1a","60d0d90f9340d7032ad0fbeb","60d0d9949340d7032ad0fed3","60d0d9f99340d7032ad10113","60d0daa69340d7032ad104cf","60d0de02b627221e9d819408"],"playlists":{"default":"57bc306888d2ff1a7f6b5579","news":"56c6dbcee4b04edee8beb49c","politics":"56c6dbcee4b04edee8beb49c","entertainment":"56c6e7f2e4b0983aa64c60fc","tech":"56c6f70ae4b043c5bdcaebf9","parents":"56cc65c2e4b0239099455b42","lifestyle":"56cc66a9e4b01f81ef94e98c"},"playerUpdates":{"56c6056ee4b01f2b7e1b5f35":"60b8e525cdd90620331baaf4","56c5f12ee4b03a39c93c9439":"60d0d8e09340d7032ad0fb1a","59bfee7f9e451049f87f550b":"60d0d90f9340d7032ad0fbeb","5acccbaac269d609ef44c529":"60d0d9949340d7032ad0fed3","5bcd9904821576674bc55ced":"60d0d9f99340d7032ad10113","5d076ca127f25f504327c72e":"60d0daa69340d7032ad104cf","5ebac2e8abddfb04f877dff2":"60d0de02b627221e9d819408"}},"connatixConfigValues":{"defaultPlayer":"16b0ecc6-802c-4120-845f-e90629812c4d","clickToPlayPlayer":"823ac03a-0f7e-4bcb-8521-a5b091ae948d","videoPagePlayer":"05041ada-93f7-4e86-9208-e03a5b19311b","defaultPlaylist":"2e062669-71b4-41df-b17a-df6b1616bc8f"},"topConnatixThumnbailSrc":"","customAmpComponents":[],"ampAssetsUrl":"https://amp.assets.huffpost.com","videoTraits":null,"positionInUnitCounts":{"buzz_head":{"count":0},"buzz_body":{"count":0},"buzz_bottom":{"count":0}},"positionInSubUnitCounts":{"article_body":{"count":9},"blog_summary":{"count":0},"before_you_go_content":{"count":0}},"connatixCountsHelper":{"count":0},"buzzfeedTracking":{"context_page_id":"67ff5f03e4b051f6e26e5e91","context_page_type":"buzz","destination":"huffpost","mode":"desktop","page_edition":"en-uk"},"tags":[{"name":"lgbtq","slug":"lgbtq","links":{"relativeLink":"news/lgbtq","permalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/lgbtq","mobileWebLink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/lgbtq"},"section":{"title":"News","slug":"news"},"topic":{"title":"LGBTQ","slug":"lgbtq","overridesSectionLabel":false},"url":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/lgbtq/"},{"name":"Transgender","slug":"transgender","links":{"relativeLink":"news/transgender","permalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/transgender","mobileWebLink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/transgender"},"section":{"title":"Life","slug":"lifestyle"},"topic":{"title":"Transgender","slug":"transgender","overridesSectionLabel":false},"url":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/transgender/"}],"isLiveblogLive":null,"isLiveblog":false,"cetUnit":"buzz_body","bodyAds":["

\r\n\r\n HPGam.cmd.push(function(){\r\n\t\treturn HPGam.render(\"inline-1\", \"entry_paragraph_1\", false, false);\r\n });\r\n\r\n","

\r\n\r\n HPGam.cmd.push(function(){\r\n\t\treturn HPGam.render(\"inline\", \"entry_paragraph_2\", false, false);\r\n });\r\n\r\n","

\r\n\r\n HPGam.cmd.push(function(){\r\n\t\treturn HPGam.render(\"inline-2\", \"entry_paragraph_3\", false, false);\r\n });\r\n\r\n","

\r\n\r\n HPGam.cmd.push(function(){\r\n\t\treturn HPGam.render(\"inline-infinite\", \"repeating_dynamic_display\", false, false);\r\n });\r\n\r\n"],"adCount":0},"isCollectionEmbed":false}”>

The Supreme Court sided with FWS. But it didn’t hear from a single trans person.

This ruling sets a dangerous precedent and erases trans women from protections. It puts trans rights back 20 years.

We won’t stop fighting for trans rights 🏳️⚧️

— Good Law Project (@GoodLawProject) April 16, 2025

Scottish Trans told the public “not to panic” as it was working to “properly understand what the court has decided today”.

Writing on BlueSky, it said: “There will be lots of commentary coming out quickly that is likely to deliberately overstate the impact that this decision is going to have on all trans people’s lives. We’ll say more as soon as we’re able to. Please look out for yourselves and each other today.”

Helen Belcher, chair of trans advocacy group TransActual, said trans communities “are devastated by today’s ruling”.

“The Supreme Court has made a ruling which appears to contain a number of contradictions. Irrespective of the small print, the intent seems clear: to exclude trans people wholesale from participating in UK society. Today, we are feeling very excluded.

“Yet, we have come through worse before and are not going away. Whatever the world throws at us, we will be back, each time, stronger and bolder than before.”

Amnesty International ’s chief executive Sacha Deshmukh, said the ruling was “disappointing”, adding: “All public authorities in the UK need to unequivocally enforce protections for trans people against discrimination and harassment.”

What does it mean for British society as a whole?

The question over socialised gender and biological sex has been a culture war touchpoint for years now, leading to spike in abuse against the trans community.

Because the issue was escalated to the most senior court in the UK, the ruling will now impact the way the whole of Britain perceives sex and gender.

The outcome of the justices’ decision will hit the interpretation of the Gordon Brown-era 2010 Equality Act.

It will affect how single-sex services work, how future equalities or gender policies are written.

A UK government spokesperson responded: “We have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex.

“This ruling brings clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs.

“Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government.”

And, despite the judges’ warning not to see this as a victory, it is already being celebrated by the gender-critics.

Tory Party leader Kemi Badenoch praised the decision, saying: “Saying ‘trans women are women’ was never true in fact, and now isn’t true in law either.

“This is a victory for all of the women who faced personal abuse or lost their jobs for stating the obvious. Women are women and men are men: you cannot change your biological sex.

“The era of Keir Starmer telling us women can have penises has come to an end. Well done to For Women Scotland!”

Activists sing as they hold placards including "Women are born, not some bloke with a form" and "Women are women, men are men, you can't change sex with the stroke of a pen" during a protest in Parliament Square across the Supreme Court in London on April 16.
Activists sing as they hold placards including “Women are born, not some bloke with a form” and “Women are women, men are men, you can’t change sex with the stroke of a pen” during a protest in Parliament Square across the Supreme Court in London on April 16.

HENRY NICHOLLS via AFP via Getty Images

Help and support:

  • The Gender Trust supports anyone affected by gender identity | 01527 894 838
  • Mermaids offers information, support, friendship and shared experiences for young people with gender identity issues | 0208 1234819
  • LGBT Youth Scotland is the largest youth and community-based organisation for LGBT people in Scotland. Text 07786 202 370
  • Gires provides information for trans people, their families and professionals who care for them | 01372 801554
  • Depend provides support, advice and information for anyone who knows, or is related to, a transsexual person in the UK
Share Button