UK U.K. Top Court Says Trans Women Do Not Meet Legal Definition of Women Under Equality Act - The UK Supreme Court says YWNBAW! (although the trans identity is still a protected characteristic)

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Featured on Apr 17, 2025 by Null: U.K. Supreme Court declares: You will NEVER be a Woman.
Article | Archive
The New York Times. Published: 16 April 2025

U.K. Top Court Says Trans Women Do Not Meet Legal Definition of Women Under Equality Act​

Britain’s Supreme Court was asked to rule on whether trans women can be defined as female under a British law that aims to protect against discrimination.

The Supreme Court in Britain ruled on Wednesday that trans women do not fall within the legal definition of women under the country’s equality legislation.

The deputy president of the court, Lord Hodge, said in a summary of the decision: “The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological women and biological sex.”

However, he added: “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.” He said the ruling “does not cause disadvantage to trans people” because they have protections under anti-discrimination and equality laws.

The landmark judgment follows a yearslong legal battle over whether trans women can be regarded as female under the 2010 law, which aims to prevent discrimination on the basis of gender, sexuality, race and other protected characteristics.

The decision was highly anticipated because it could have potentially far-reaching consequences for how the law is applied to single sex spaces, equal pay claims and maternity policies as well as to some of the rights available to transgender people in Britain.

BBC live reporting; https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cvgq9ejql39t
0.webp
1.webp 2.webp 3.webp 4.webp

Also, sex is binary:
5.webp 6.webp

👀
single-sex-spaces.webp

Related:
JK Rowling, the Queen of TERF Island who helped fund this lawsuit, is celebrating.
Queen-of-TERF-Island.webp GosUamSXUAAWcMW.webp
And the troons are melting down even more than usual over her. See:
https://kiwifarms.st/threads/u-k-to...women-under-equality-act.217313/post-21120381
https://kiwifarms.st/threads/u-k-to...women-under-equality-act.217313/post-21129887
https://kiwifarms.st/threads/u-k-to...women-under-equality-act.217313/post-21135630
a.webp b.webp c.webp d.webp e.webp
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: Ripstart Reginald, Enzo, Yellow Rose Of Texas and 601 others
Click to expand...
My apologies for the ignorance, but how did the UK pull such a massive 180?
Even under the conservative rule i was under the impression that AGP was sacrosanct and that if the NHS were to be stripped of funding the travistock clinic would still get all the money they needed for castration and pinkpilling ops.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Dumb
Reactions: Broken Cuddles, mama Lazarou, Elim Garak and 17 others
teriyakiburns said:
No. We know what a woman is. Some people were trying to redefine its definition in law, in order to gain special privileges. The court has ruled that their attempts at redefining the law are stupid
Click to expand...
Are you sure, because during the last General election, the hard hitting issue for a while was 'what is a woman', with disagreements between Rishy and Starmer on if a woman could have a penis or not. Starmer things some women have cocks...
Glad I left that clownworld...but here's going the same way now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Not a bee, Coldgrip and 8 others
Slimy Time said:
Always wondered how the law deals with tranny rape (apart from pretend it doesn’t exist) given the very specific (and old) definition of rape the UK has which makes it so only a man can commit it.

That’s the sort of can of worms shit they probably don’t want to be dealing with by accepting more of this trans nonsense.
Click to expand...
The would refer to her penis and threaten victims with contempt of court if the didn't use the preferred pronouns for a bit. Obviously that didn't go down well and the second bit was scrapped, but judges are still pronoun respecters.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Elim Garak, Not a bee, dacky blarks and 9 others
FedPostalService said:
The would refer to her penis and threaten victims with contempt of court if the didn't use the preferred pronouns for a bit. Obviously that didn't go down well and the second bit was scrapped, but judges are still pronoun respecters.
Click to expand...
Not Lord Hodge and Lord Reed clearly lmfao. I love everything that has happened today. You can't sit with us, trannies
 
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: Broken Cuddles, PetiteFeet, Elim Garak and 13 others
Ugandan discussions said:
One of the key points: The Supreme Court can only rule on the law as it is; it doesn't make law. As such, this judgement not only clarifies things as they are now, but it also states what the law always has been.

There are loads of bodies will now need to unwind policies/processes that are predicated on an incorrect EA2010 understanding of the meaning of women.
Click to expand...
How does that affect things like GRCs? Could we see anything good come from this, new challenges to the insanity etc? What would the key things to attack via targeted lawsuits?
Dreamland said:
how did the UK pull such a massive 180?
Click to expand...
One of several reasons is that they went after mumsnet. They swatted the founder and tried to get women who spoke up about this doxed and their lives ruined. And worse, kicked off mumsnet (lol.)
What troons failed to realise is that MN has a very diverse user base. It isn’t just mummies chatting. Some of those women are in positions of significant power, and some have the ear of the men in power too. I know for a fact (and will elaborate no more) that there was a point where some women with the ears of the very well connected said; enough and started to put their foot down and organise offline, in real life . Because women are social, and are capable of organising properly and discretely in real life rather than malding online. The cases brought against women by trannies had zero public support. There is no good optics in perverted men bullying clean cut nice ladies who remind you of your mum - it seems to really hit a nerve.
JKR has to also be thanked here - having a woman who is respected, generally toes the line on social things, and not any kind of extreme loon etc speak up was huge and it gave other women a bit of hope. You can’t point at JKR and say she’s always been ‘far right’ - she’s pretty lefty in most stuff and so not easily dismissed. When someone otherwise very reasonable is saying ‘guys, this is crazy’ it’s much harder to dismiss them. Incidentally this is why the right fails so much, too few reasonable figures. Anyway
There is a bit of the English psyche that will not be told what to do by tyrants. And you will laugh at that because we are so incredibly cucked over most stuff these days, but it is true, and the women of England have manifested that every way they can and forced this shit a little bit back.
Still a long way to go before it’s all nice and cleaned up, but we’ve done our best and will continue to do so.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Dilligaff, FarmerKhourtney, Broken Cuddles and 109 others
Crunkle said:
Also, for all of you non-Brits that are reading this, I might put a thread in Prospering Grounds about the guy who brought and supported this case financially.

His name is Jolyon Maugham, a man whose father had wealth back in the day. He's been suing everyone since he got a taste for it in the 90s and is pretty well known in this country as a vexatious litigant.

About a few years ago on Boxing Day, he goes outside in the morning wearing a silk red kimono. What does he do when he sees a wounded fox stuck in the chicken wiring he put up? He does the only thing any sane person would do:

He uses a cricket bat to beat the fox to death in his garden, and then posts about it on Twitter (the day after Christmas).

He runs the Good Law Project which has been scamming its leftist supporters for a while now, and was set up to annoy the Tories when they were in power and to use up as much of their resources as well as taxpayer money to virtue signal. GLP had been on a losing streak in the courts for about 3 years now, and he is quite the funny character.

View attachment 7227776
Click to expand...
Already is one - rarely updated. This KC is a running joke amongst the few British lawyers I know.

 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Broken Cuddles, PetiteFeet, Elim Garak and 14 others
Dreamland said:
My apologies for the ignorance, but how did the UK pull such a massive 180?
Even under the conservative rule i was under the oppression that AGP was sacrosanct and that if the NHS were to be stripped of funding the travistock clinic would still get all the money the needed for castration and pinkpilling ops.
Click to expand...

What @Otterly said plus Jk Rowling and a lot of tough UK lesbians who loathed bullshit and perverts in dresses trying to bully women. (All the TERF madness also sprung from TERFs being anti-porn, which is the genesis of all trannies existence)

It truly was a huge “silent majority” vs screeching trannies and danger hairs.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: PetiteFeet, Brenda Tits, Elim Garak and 34 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back