UK Supreme Court: ‘Woman’ in Equality Act Refers to Biological Woman, Sex
Sanity prevails in the United Kingdom!
UK Supreme Court judge Lord Hodge announced the obvious: The definition of “women” in the 2010 Equality Act refers to biological women and biological sex.
Judgment has been given this morning in the matter of For Women Scotland Ltd (Appellant) v The Scottish Ministers (Respondent) UKSC 2024/0042: https://t.co/QGmrliNOsG pic.twitter.com/f2qlAD2JMV
— UK Supreme Court (@UKSupremeCourt) April 16, 2025
In other words, males are not females. A unanimous decision:
It followed a years-long legal battle between campaign group For Women Scotland and the Scottish Government over the definition of a woman.
Lord Hodge told the court: “The unanimous decision of this court is that the definition of the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.
“But we counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not.”
In its 88-page ruling, the court added that the “concept of sex is binary” under the Equality Act 2010.
I’ve become friendly with many of the wonderful females in the UK who have fought tooth and nail to maintain their rights as females without male intrusions. Victory:
Susan Smith and Marion Calder emerging into the sunshine to celebrate their victory @ForWomenScot pic.twitter.com/Snfdt6SGZ9
— Lisa Mackenzie (@lnmackenzie1) April 16, 2025
Lesbians in the UK no longer need to worry about males invading events and spaces meant only for lesbians.
It also means that males cannot take a spot meant for females from females. Males acting as females cannot be awarded as the “first female” of something or added to a diversity count.
The fact that this needed to be done is insane.
Lesbians assemble! Without men with certificates! The Supreme Court has interpreted "sex" in the Equality Act to mean "biological sex" and not "certificated sex". We are SO proud we were able to intervene in this important case along with @ScotLesbians and @AllianceLGB
— The Lesbian Project (@project_lesbian) April 16, 2025
The final sentence. Trans women nay not take the place of women on boards and be counted as women. This has implications for @UKLabour and AWS. pic.twitter.com/UtQiHiuJc8
— Dr Viv Pointon 💜🤍💚 (@VPointon) April 16, 2025
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Tomorrow we will get a ground breaking ruling that water is, indeed, wet.
Wait. Males aren’t females?
Does this mean females aren’t males?
This is so confusing.
And what’s this nonsense about water?
/s
Lefty Extraordinaire Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg should be happy now that US courts have guidance on this importance issue. And AA Justice Jackson now has the answer to a question once asked of her.
“From the birth of the United States as a nation, foreign and international law influenced legal reasoning and judicial decision making. Founding fathers, most notably, Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, were familiar with leading international law treatises, the law merchant, and English constitutional law. And they used that learning as advocates in legal contests . . . . The law of nations, Chief Justice Marshall famously said in 1815, is part of the law of our land. Decisions of the courts of other countries, Marshall explained, show how the law of nations is understood elsewhere, and will be considered in determining the rule which is to prevail here. Those decisions, he clarified, while not binding authority for U. S. courts, merit respectful attention for their potential persuasive value.”
https://opiniojuris.org/2010/08/02/justice-ginsburg-on-using-foreign-and-international-law-in-constitutional-adjudication/
What about dehydrated water?
I am still an embryo, with a long long way to go, until I make my brothers understand.. IYKYK
There was a time,, back in the day, when woman roared. I was young then and this sentiment probably molded my life. Right now, things are insane in this country, and the last thing I ever expected was sanity from the UK.
TY Mary.. ty very much.
Trump is coming to a country near you.
And now if we could only get the U.S. Supreme Court to do the same I’d e happy as a kite. But with its current make-up I doubt that would ever happen.
With Bondi’s announcement this morning’s of a Title IV lawsuit against Maine as well as a number of contradictory Circuit opinions already, this question is now on an unavoidable collision course with the Supreme Court. Will the Court find similarly to the UK Court? I think there are four solid votes in favor of biological women (Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh…and ACB, surprisingly). But, with Roberts and Gorsuch both voting with the libs in Bostock (and Gorsuch writing the majority opinion, no less), I have zero confidence this ‘conservative’ Court will mirror the sanity on display in the UK.
Thus far, the Second, Third, Sixth and Eleventh Circuits have all NOT been persuaded by Bostock when looking at these trans/sports cases, finding in favor of maintaining segregation on the basis of biological sex. The Fourth, Seventh and Ninth have all leaned WAY into Bostock when finding for trans plaintiffs suing for access to girls’ sports teams with the Tenth leaning that way but dismissing their case on procedural grounds.
I didn’t realize so that many Circuit Courts have already heard these trans sports cases. At least it’s encouraging there have been more favorable rulings than unfavorable rulings.
Did you mean Title IV or Title IX?
typo, Title IX
Frankly, I’m amazed; but also thrilled.
So JK Rowling isn’t canceled now? Good to know.
“Dame Edna Hardest Hit”
Good news, sure, but, what’s ultimately dismaying is that this question needed to be litigated, in the first place.
Courts should not seriously entertain the delusions of obnoxiously misogynistic and malignantly narcissistic male trannies.
Okay, I take back all, . . . or many, . . . of the disparaging comments I have made about the UK citizens, judiciary, government, etc.
Oh, don’t do that. They have lost any rights of free speech.
lefty women:
just keep paying us the same
but no expectations of same quality of work
keep pretending we can serve front line
but give us same status and honor
let men be women so we can say that women are in the same league physically as males
lefty men: roll over and give it to them
Let’s don’t get too far over our skis here. The UK court only stated their 2010 law the Equality Act, referred to XX women.
All it will take form the transmania to win is a change or an amendment to this law, or the UK gov to pass a new equality law and that is far more likely to happen than any other outcome.
Starmer and Labour MP’s are working on it right now.
“But we counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not.”
Oh it was. Normal people won. The freaks lost.
Never mind the ruling, the woman in green should be jailed for bad fashion sense and for wearing a biological weapon of mass destruction. My eyes are still hurting.
At least she took off the powdered wig before coming outside.
It takes quite a bit to surprise me these days, but this is a surprise.
Looks like it was done from a gay and feminist slant let those tweets.
I have been waiting for someone to ask if actual lesbians went for a so called ‘trans-woman. ‘
Leave a Comment