JK Rowling celebrates after Supreme Court rules trans women are NOT legally women in landmark judgment linking gender to biological sex

S

serendipity

Verified User
A victory for common sense and a blow to trans activists.

Britain's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for the bitter debate over trans rights.

In a win for Scottish gender-critical campaigners who brought the case to the UK's highest court, five London judges unanimously ruled that "the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman, and biological sex".

However, the act also "gives transgender people protection" against discrimination in their acquired gender, Justice Patrick Hodge said in handing down the verdict


www.nbcrightnow.com

UK top court rules definition of 'woman' based on sex at birth

Britain's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for the bitter debate
www.nbcrightnow.com www.nbcrightnow.com
 
serendipity said:
A victory for common sense and a blow to trans activists.

Britain's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for the bitter debate over trans rights.

In a win for Scottish gender-critical campaigners who brought the case to the UK's highest court, five London judges unanimously ruled that "the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman, and biological sex".

However, the act also "gives transgender people protection" against discrimination in their acquired gender, Justice Patrick Hodge said in handing down the verdict


www.nbcrightnow.com

UK top court rules definition of 'woman' based on sex at birth

Britain's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for the bitter debate
www.nbcrightnow.com www.nbcrightnow.com
Click to expand...

I skimmed through the article and I -think- the British Supreme Court made the right decision. In essence, they're separating a person's sex from a person's gender, which makes perfect sense to me, as one can't change one's biological sex, but one -can- change one's gender. Quoting from the article:
**
In a win for Scottish gender-critical campaigners who brought the case to the UK's highest court, five London judges unanimously ruled that "the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman, and biological sex".

However, the act also "gives transgender people protection" against discrimination in their acquired gender, Justice Patrick Hodge said in handing down the verdict.
**
 
archives said:
Seems the right just can’t get over their obsession on what is inbetween other people’s legs, seems almost a perfect example of Freud’s theory of latent tendencies
Click to expand...

I think this ruling is more complex than a left/right thing. There -is- a difference between biological males and biological females. I think using sex to differentiate between biological classes and gender to differentiate between how people identify makes sense to me.
 
archives said:
Seems the right just can’t get over their obsession on what is inbetween other people’s legs, seems almost a perfect example of Freud’s theory of latent tendencies
Click to expand...
It’s the far left loons who are supporting trans-freaks competing with real women.

It’s the far left loons who support trans-freaks breaking the eye-socket of a real woman with a volleyball.

It’s the far left loons who are denying real women scholarships.

It’s the far left loons who support men in real women’s locker rooms…boys in little girl’s bathrooms.
 
Last edited:
archives said:
Seems the right just can’t get over their obsession on what is inbetween other people’s legs, seems almost a perfect example of Freud’s theory of latent tendencies
Click to expand...
Nice try. You guys tried this BS when people objected to the queer lobby with your “oh you must be a latent homo”

Funny the only transgenders out there are being forced by liberal moms seeking attention
 
RB 60 said:
We just don't want men in women's sports.
It's simple as that.
Sorry it's too difficult for you to comprehend...
Click to expand...
Indeed or in women’s bathrooms.

What is wrong with these creeps?

In days past, the men in the community would have taken care of a man trying to participate in women’s sports or in women’s bathrooms or locker rooms.
 
serendipity said:
A victory for common sense and a blow to trans activists.

Britain's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for the bitter debate over trans rights.

In a win for Scottish gender-critical campaigners who brought the case to the UK's highest court, five London judges unanimously ruled that "the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman, and biological sex".

However, the act also "gives transgender people protection" against discrimination in their acquired gender, Justice Patrick Hodge said in handing down the verdict


www.nbcrightnow.com

UK top court rules definition of 'woman' based on sex at birth

Britain's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for the bitter debate
www.nbcrightnow.com www.nbcrightnow.com
Click to expand...
Now let's see what they do about the rest of the UK problems.
2-tier policing, muslims as leaders.
This eventually will erase English culture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top