Supreme Court Ruling on "Woman" Definition [backs 'biological' definition of woman]
 

[In 2022, FWS successfully challenged the original Act
over its inclusion of trans women in its
definition of women. The Scottish Government
then dropped the definition from the Act
and issued revised statutory guidance – essentially,
advice on how to comply with the law.]


1 hour ago




Just on GMBHD itv.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg7pqzk47zo

Live in London Court all 3 News Ch's
now


Only People Born Female are to be
recognised in the Equality Act.


Woman in UK Law means biological sex.

Trans women are not legally women, Supreme Court rules

Supreme Court unanimously backs For Women Scotland

Scottish Tory leader: Victory for common sense

For Women Scotland ‘absolutely jubilant’

Hooray, I was correct all along.:dance:

Makes Good Common Sense,


SkyNewsHD were just in
in Edniburgh


The Ladies are singing with Joy

The ruling by the Supreme Court that sex in equality law refers to biological sex
will have far reaching implications for the protection of women’s rights and
single sex spaces.

It means that people who were born male can lawfully be excluded from
women’s sports, changing rooms, toilets, women only support groups and
women only shortlist, which was the issue at the centre of this long running
legal dispute.

This case is significant as it is about those who have already legally changed
their gender by obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate.

Yes LT
all good news.

Maya Forstater, the chief executive of Sex Matters, said it meant the notion of
gender self-identification (self-ID) was “dead”.




“Everyone is going to have to pay attention to this, this is from the highest
court in the land. It’s saying sex in the Equality Act is biological sex. Self ID
Is dead.”

Live Debate on LBC
right now


He is trying to talk up problems

Finally, a ruling or common sense :clap1:

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2025/04...4787533422.jpg

get in your lane


The Supreme Judge
has Ruled today Live

Badenoch: You cannot change your biological sex

Kemi Badenoch has said “you cannot change your biological sex” as she reacted
to the Supreme Court’s ruling.

“Saying ‘trans women are women’ was never true in fact, and now isn’t true in
law either,” the leader of the Conservative Party said.

“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!”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/...eg?imwidth=660

Susan Smith and Marion Calder, the directors of For Women Scotland, crack open champagne after the Supreme Court’s ruling

Sharron Davies MBE
@sharrond62

From now on I don’t want to see any media outlet refer to a man in a dress
who rapes, abuses or murders someone as a woman! These are NOT our
crimes.

what Sharon, like this? : https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...rsery-35056718

https://x.com/Glinner/status/1912132816420163897

The Supreme Court’s ruling has “badly let down” transgender people, the
Scottish Greens have said.

A pro-transgender group has claimed gender-critical campaigners have “links to
the global far-Right” as it condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling.

In a statement, Labour for Trans Rights said: “The Supreme Court’s decision is
hugely disappointing, and a result of ceaseless lobbying from
a well-funded anti-trans network with links to the global far-Right.

:rolleyes:

Common sense, can't believe it took this long

Oh not the Far Right again...:nono:

Sex matters in a lot of ways especially for women and so we need to keep a clear definition. Putting this down to some far right agenda is a way of trying to shut down very real and genuine concerns women have. It matters for us in so many different cases. I can't believe some people - even after rapists had been sent to women's prisons on some occasions and attempted to be sent to on others - still try to act like women don't really care about protecting our rights and spaces and "just hate transwomen" That isn't to say that there aren't groups who've jumped on that wagon because they are far right just like groups with more nefarious reasons will have joined the opposite "side", unfortunately that's just life.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...SP-May2016.jpg
Ash Regan MSP@AshReganMSP

@ForWomenScot
won their appeal in the Supreme Court.

Women’s concerns were valid, women’s rights do matter and the Supreme
Court have confirmed the law matches biological reality.

3 Scottish mums humiliated the Scottish Government. This cannot be without consequences!

Indeed, its like talking to a brick wall though in some cases

The Sandie Peggie ruling is now very much in focus..

Many think this will make women safer, but it won't really, because women aren't at risk from trans women, they are at risk from cis men, who if they want to attack a woman will do just that.

The next stop will likely be ensuring all trans people use the bathroom of the sex they were born as which will result in a load of bearded, muscular trans men sharing a space with biological women. We'll see how well that goes down :shrug:

https://sc0.blr1.digitaloceanspaces....1487144315.jpg

JK Rowling hails Supreme Court ruling


The Harry Potter author shared posts on X from For Women Scotland and the commentator Samantha Smith celebrating the judgment.

This is bad logic and not how safe guarding works. Women are at risk from predatory men, men who would use any loophole to get easy access to their victims. It's kind of like saying burglars will burgal anyway so no one should lock their houses or get an alarm.

The type of access you're giving men by allowing self ID (AKA allowing any man at all to simply say they are a woman) is access to women for example who are in prison and would have no way at all to remove themselves from a very dangerous situation should some rapist declare he's a woman upon his arrest.

What you're taking away from women and girls is the right to complain and raise the alarm if some creepy dude is hanging around the women's changing room but says "I'm a woman" when approached.

Yes predatory men will find victims but we don't make that easier for them and limit ways for women to make themselves safer. We don't allow them unrestricted access to women when they're at their very most vulnerable ie in a state of undress or unable to leave because it's a prison..

Yep.

I do appreciate that POV, but why are Trans women being held responsible for the actions of cis men? Why are they having their own protections removed for the safety of others for which the perpetrators are not them? Why are they collateral damage?

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...DL_400x400.jpg

Richard Dawkins @RichardDawkins

Supreme Court rules that a woman is legally defined as . . . a woman.
Congratulations.

And “The concept of sex is binary, a person is either a woman or a man”. Yes,
the science was settled in the Precambrian. Nice that the law has finally caught
up.

Yes this statement was interesting, too. They just erased Intersex people and then talk about science... huh.

with all due respect it isn't women's responsibility either to give up our safe guards to shield transwomen from predatory men.

Nobody is intersex. Humans aren’t inter-anything. They’re all male or female.


Intersex is not an identity but a congenital birth defect

Intersex people are still male or female, there is no third sex.

Tbh it's usually the children the bad ones go for.

Women were expected to be the collateral damage for a teeny tiny percentage of the population who identify themselves as trans women, we were told to use the disabled toilets, that we didn't need to have penis free spaces even in domestic refuges, that we had to accept trans women who had gone through male puberty in womens sports, ...women represent over 50 per cent of the population, it is only right that womens spaces are protected do you not think? Whilst I agree trans women have a right to feel safe too, their rights do not take precedence over women and this includes lesbian women. I understand genuine transwomen will be upset over this judgement but it is the right call in my opinion even going on purely population

You're right, but, as we've established, allowing Trans women to use women's bathrooms isn't sacrificing biological women's safety because trans women aren't at risk and any cis man who wants to attack a woman will do it anyway.

There isn't an epidemic of cis men cosplaying as women to attack women, the stats do not support it.

Between 2013 - 2023, the number of rape/sexual offences in the UK that took place in a public bathroom was 210 over a 10 year period. That's 21 cases a year. So approximately 0.010% of all cases. The effort is being concentrated in the wrong place.

That's precisely my point, it's biological and it's just been erased by saying biological sex is binary.

Intersex refers to individuals born with sex characteristics (chromosomes, hormones, genitals, or internal reproductive organs) that do not fit typical male or female definitions

It exists, in science, and now somehow doesn't.

I've covered most of this above really.

I do agree with you in terms of the sporting aspect, someone born a man who went through puberty and hasn't taken any medication, such as HRT, to reduce testosterone levels, etc... to fall more in line with a biological women's levels shouldn't be allowed to compete professionally.

But again it feels like there is such a heavy focus on something so minimal. In the US, out of 500,000 college athletes, about 10 of them are trans.

The issue is there's not really anyway to tell which transwomen are genuine and which are not especially when you're talking about self ID. The whole point is they are all biological men and the way safeguarding works is to ban all men to protect women and girls.

Also you made a point in a previous post asking why transwomens protections are being removed for the safety of others, why is it OK for you to raise that as a point but when it's asked the other way round we're told women are going to be attacked anyway so what difference does it make to allow that safe guarding to be lowered

Well done to the judges.
A victory for common sense.