Gearóid Ó Loingsigh ☭ writing in Substack on 17-April-2025.

The British Supreme Court has in its recent findings stated that sex is biological as far as the Equality Act (2010) is concerned. The definition of woman in that Act was held to be biological and thus excluding transgenders from such a definition and any of the rights bestowed upon women by the legislation, though it was clear that this does not mean that trans cannot suffer discrimination, but they are not women. Sex is a protected characteristic and the judgement defended the idea of separate spaces for women and lesbian only spaces. To accept that sex was not a characteristic would undermine women’s rights and protections under the Equality Act. They further held that such an interpretation does not disadvantage trans people as they “enjoy the rights that attach to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment”.[1]

Without a doubt this is not the end of it. There will be calls for the legislation to be reformed, for other legislation to be introduced to revert the status of women to what it was in practice before this finding i.e. any man who said he was a woman was one and could gain access to women’s spaces, help companies meet their quota for women on boards etc., could apply for and obtain grants and other benefits set aside for women and glaringly participate in women’s sports and deprive women of medals and rankings in those sports and depending on the sport break a bone or two and boast about stuffing it to TERFS later, as many have done.

In the immediate aftermath of the court’s decision, there was much handwringing and plain downright lies from the British government. A government spokesperson stated “We have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex. Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government”[2] and welcomed the clarity that it brought. Except of course, it is not true, they haven’t always supported this. The Tories dragged their heels on this, and Labour had a disastrous position on this and stifled any dissent. The internet is awash with videos and articles quoting Keir Starmer stating that some women can have a penis and dancing back and forth around the issue.[3] Starmer is a man, he has a penis, he knows what it is. He is also a former human rights barrister and represented Croatia at the International Court of Justice, a former Director of Public Prosecutions in Britain but apparently is unable to say whether Israel is committing war crimes and/or genocide in Gaza. On occasions in the House of Parliament he has gone further and denied it.[4] He has shown no such reticence on other issues involving Serbia, which was found guilty of genocide or of the war crimes committed by the Russians, though not those committed by the Ukranians. Genocide is a matter of politics for him, not reality; his denial of biology in relation to women is also political, it is not the result of some lack of knowledge or of him staring down at himself wondering what it is he has between his legs.

He was quick to stifle the then Labour MP Rosie Duffield. She stated unequivocally what the Supreme Court has just stated, though much more succinctly that only women have a cervix. Starmer came down on her like a ton of bricks stating that it was “something that shouldn’t be said” and that it was “not right”.[5] Duffield was vilified for her position, denounced by all and sundry in the Labour Party. The situation got so bad she feared for her life. She has now asked Starmer for an apology, though she is unlikely to get one.

The judgement clears up various matters, in a legal sense, though they were always clear to anyone with an ounce of grey matter and lacking a cynical world view. Women are women, it is a biological category, it is not an identity. Women therefore have rights on that basis. Men who identify as women should now be moved out of women’s prisons, removed from female sporting competitions, not sit on boards or other bodies as part of a female quota, should not receive bursaries, grants or endowments earmarked for women. Rape crisis centres should not be bullied because they don’t allow men into centres dealing with women (men can and should have their own specialised unit for male rape).

Unfortunately, there will be some who will double down and try their best to undo this victory for women. The Socialist Workers Party was quick out of the hatches to bizarrely argue that it was an attack on women’s rights as well as trans rights under the headline Trans women are women, resist the Supreme Court ruling.[6] This of course is the same party that cares so much for women it once covered up a rape in its own organisation. The victim was branded a slut and just as in normal courts the SWP kangaroo court enquired about her past sexual activity.[7] Years later they eventually apologised for their behaviour,[8] though like the woke warriors their their apology came with a trigger warning. They will one day apologise for their position on women’s rights and trans.

There is an old Marxist refrain that material reality determines consciousness and not the other way round, and though Marx was not discussing trans, he was quite clear you don’t change reality by just changing your opinion of it. Engels mocked:

These gentlemen (that) think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.[9] 

You would think that these “Marxists” would actually read what their founders had to say, but apparently not.

Meanwhile across the waters in the USA, the liberal Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is also doubling down. Like Starmer she has danced around the issue of genocide in Gaza, going back and forth and trying to side step the issue. She did eventually use the dreaded G Word, but then went on to endorse Genocide Joe and Holocaust Harris as “working tireless to secure a ceasefire in Gaza and bring the hostages home.” Except of course as Kareem Elrefai pointed out it wasn’t true.[10] She has now stated that she won’t abandon the trans movement just to win an election. In other words, Gaza, Ukraine, Syria, the trade war with China, the deportations from the US, the disappearing of legal residents down a black hole in El Salvador’s prisons, none of these issues are as important to her as men getting housed in the women’s wing of prisons, competing in women’s sports etc. She and the SWP are next to useless, they are leading people up the garden path ready to hang them out to dry at the first sign of a whinge from some middle class spoiled brat or convicted rapist who thinks He should get access to women’s spaces.

The British Supreme Court’s decision is welcome and will give a legal basis to the fights coming down the road. But it is not over yet, the deluded will continue to delude themselves and attack women’s rights. Now is time for celebration, but not for letting our guard down.


[1] For full Access to the court documents, findings and video reading by Lord Hodge see.

[2] The Guardian (16/04/2025) Legal definition of woman is based on biological sex, UK supreme court rules. Severin Carrell. 

[3] BBC (16/04/2025) Westminster's tortuous battle with the gender question. Ben Wright & Brian Wheeler. 

[4] See.

[5] BBC (26/09/2021) Labour conference: Not right to say only women have a cervix, says Starmer. 

[6] SWP (16/04/2025) Trans women are women, resist the Supreme Court ruling. Tomáš Tengely-Evans. 

[7] The Guardian (09/03/2013) Socialist Workers Part leadership under fire over rape kangaroo court. Shiv Malik & Nick Cohen.

[8] SWP (16/05/2024) Statement on the 2013 crisis in the SWP. 

[9] Engels, F. (1872) On Authority. 

[10] The Nation (19/08/2024) AOC’s DNC Speech Was a Betrayal of the Gaza Movement. Kareem Elrefal. 

⏩ Gearóid Ó Loingsigh is a political and human rights activist with extensive experience in Latin America.

British Supreme Court 🪶 Sex Is Biological 🪶 Who Could Have Guessed?

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh ☭ writing in Substack on 17-April-2025.

The British Supreme Court has in its recent findings stated that sex is biological as far as the Equality Act (2010) is concerned. The definition of woman in that Act was held to be biological and thus excluding transgenders from such a definition and any of the rights bestowed upon women by the legislation, though it was clear that this does not mean that trans cannot suffer discrimination, but they are not women. Sex is a protected characteristic and the judgement defended the idea of separate spaces for women and lesbian only spaces. To accept that sex was not a characteristic would undermine women’s rights and protections under the Equality Act. They further held that such an interpretation does not disadvantage trans people as they “enjoy the rights that attach to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment”.[1]

Without a doubt this is not the end of it. There will be calls for the legislation to be reformed, for other legislation to be introduced to revert the status of women to what it was in practice before this finding i.e. any man who said he was a woman was one and could gain access to women’s spaces, help companies meet their quota for women on boards etc., could apply for and obtain grants and other benefits set aside for women and glaringly participate in women’s sports and deprive women of medals and rankings in those sports and depending on the sport break a bone or two and boast about stuffing it to TERFS later, as many have done.

In the immediate aftermath of the court’s decision, there was much handwringing and plain downright lies from the British government. A government spokesperson stated “We have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex. Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government”[2] and welcomed the clarity that it brought. Except of course, it is not true, they haven’t always supported this. The Tories dragged their heels on this, and Labour had a disastrous position on this and stifled any dissent. The internet is awash with videos and articles quoting Keir Starmer stating that some women can have a penis and dancing back and forth around the issue.[3] Starmer is a man, he has a penis, he knows what it is. He is also a former human rights barrister and represented Croatia at the International Court of Justice, a former Director of Public Prosecutions in Britain but apparently is unable to say whether Israel is committing war crimes and/or genocide in Gaza. On occasions in the House of Parliament he has gone further and denied it.[4] He has shown no such reticence on other issues involving Serbia, which was found guilty of genocide or of the war crimes committed by the Russians, though not those committed by the Ukranians. Genocide is a matter of politics for him, not reality; his denial of biology in relation to women is also political, it is not the result of some lack of knowledge or of him staring down at himself wondering what it is he has between his legs.

He was quick to stifle the then Labour MP Rosie Duffield. She stated unequivocally what the Supreme Court has just stated, though much more succinctly that only women have a cervix. Starmer came down on her like a ton of bricks stating that it was “something that shouldn’t be said” and that it was “not right”.[5] Duffield was vilified for her position, denounced by all and sundry in the Labour Party. The situation got so bad she feared for her life. She has now asked Starmer for an apology, though she is unlikely to get one.

The judgement clears up various matters, in a legal sense, though they were always clear to anyone with an ounce of grey matter and lacking a cynical world view. Women are women, it is a biological category, it is not an identity. Women therefore have rights on that basis. Men who identify as women should now be moved out of women’s prisons, removed from female sporting competitions, not sit on boards or other bodies as part of a female quota, should not receive bursaries, grants or endowments earmarked for women. Rape crisis centres should not be bullied because they don’t allow men into centres dealing with women (men can and should have their own specialised unit for male rape).

Unfortunately, there will be some who will double down and try their best to undo this victory for women. The Socialist Workers Party was quick out of the hatches to bizarrely argue that it was an attack on women’s rights as well as trans rights under the headline Trans women are women, resist the Supreme Court ruling.[6] This of course is the same party that cares so much for women it once covered up a rape in its own organisation. The victim was branded a slut and just as in normal courts the SWP kangaroo court enquired about her past sexual activity.[7] Years later they eventually apologised for their behaviour,[8] though like the woke warriors their their apology came with a trigger warning. They will one day apologise for their position on women’s rights and trans.

There is an old Marxist refrain that material reality determines consciousness and not the other way round, and though Marx was not discussing trans, he was quite clear you don’t change reality by just changing your opinion of it. Engels mocked:

These gentlemen (that) think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.[9] 

You would think that these “Marxists” would actually read what their founders had to say, but apparently not.

Meanwhile across the waters in the USA, the liberal Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is also doubling down. Like Starmer she has danced around the issue of genocide in Gaza, going back and forth and trying to side step the issue. She did eventually use the dreaded G Word, but then went on to endorse Genocide Joe and Holocaust Harris as “working tireless to secure a ceasefire in Gaza and bring the hostages home.” Except of course as Kareem Elrefai pointed out it wasn’t true.[10] She has now stated that she won’t abandon the trans movement just to win an election. In other words, Gaza, Ukraine, Syria, the trade war with China, the deportations from the US, the disappearing of legal residents down a black hole in El Salvador’s prisons, none of these issues are as important to her as men getting housed in the women’s wing of prisons, competing in women’s sports etc. She and the SWP are next to useless, they are leading people up the garden path ready to hang them out to dry at the first sign of a whinge from some middle class spoiled brat or convicted rapist who thinks He should get access to women’s spaces.

The British Supreme Court’s decision is welcome and will give a legal basis to the fights coming down the road. But it is not over yet, the deluded will continue to delude themselves and attack women’s rights. Now is time for celebration, but not for letting our guard down.


[1] For full Access to the court documents, findings and video reading by Lord Hodge see.

[2] The Guardian (16/04/2025) Legal definition of woman is based on biological sex, UK supreme court rules. Severin Carrell. 

[3] BBC (16/04/2025) Westminster's tortuous battle with the gender question. Ben Wright & Brian Wheeler. 

[4] See.

[5] BBC (26/09/2021) Labour conference: Not right to say only women have a cervix, says Starmer. 

[6] SWP (16/04/2025) Trans women are women, resist the Supreme Court ruling. Tomáš Tengely-Evans. 

[7] The Guardian (09/03/2013) Socialist Workers Part leadership under fire over rape kangaroo court. Shiv Malik & Nick Cohen.

[8] SWP (16/05/2024) Statement on the 2013 crisis in the SWP. 

[9] Engels, F. (1872) On Authority. 

[10] The Nation (19/08/2024) AOC’s DNC Speech Was a Betrayal of the Gaza Movement. Kareem Elrefal. 

⏩ Gearóid Ó Loingsigh is a political and human rights activist with extensive experience in Latin America.

3 comments:

  1. I always like your take on these matters. I welcome the ruling of the Supreme Court because I see in it not an attack on Trans people but a defence of women's rights.
    I would not celebrate it in any triumphalist sense because the Trans community are not the opposition here and I have huge sympathy with the predicament they face. I spoke with my daughter the other day from whom I learn a lot and she is vehemently in favour of the Trans community and critical of the Supreme Court ruling. My abiding fear is that if we abandon science we empower the religious fundamentalists who also abandon it.
    I am very much opposed to those fashist types for whom it is a fad or fashion and who push for cancel culture, censorship and authoritarianism. They, like the Zionists whom they copy, think courts can be ignored. They, not the Trans, need challenged.

    Any Trans person is welcome here and they can use whatever toilet they like. A few have passed through this house. They get treated the same as everybody else. I also know from many conversations with you that you are not in the slightest interested in persecuting Trans.

    What always makes me laugh is that religious idiots who believe in talking donkeys can criticise men for believing they are women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The trans community should have distanced themselves from the Trans Rights Activists (TRA) whenever they started advocating for self-id. That, coupled with the "no debate" tactic opened a can of worms (figuratively and literally) that gave us Barbie Kardashian.

      Delete
    2. To my mind, it is the TRA that bears responsibility for much of the backlash against the Trans community. Public bathrooms should display signs: Trans welcome, TRA not!!!!

      Delete