- It has been ruled that “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act mean biological definitions, reinforcing the legality of women-only spaces for privacy and safety.
- While trans activists protested the ruling, many women across the UK viewed it as a necessary legal clarification to protect them and their rights.
On 16th April, five judges in the UK Supreme Court ruled that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act refer specifically to biological women and biological sex.
The ruling also affirms that if a space or service is designated as women-only, individuals who were born male but identify as women do not have an automatic right to access that space or service.
The Supreme Court justices stated that this was “the only consistent, coherent interpretation.”
In light of the ruling, many public institutions are expected to reassess their gender policies. These provisions may be applied for “reasons of privacy, decency, to prevent trauma or to ensure health and safety.”
On Saturday 19th April, Trans rights groups, trade unions and community organisations conducted what they referred to as an “emergency demonstration” in Parliament Square in Westminster. Activists demanded “trans liberation” and “trans rights now”, with some waving flags and holding banners.
Trans activists have long contended that restricting trans individuals from accessing public toilets aligned with their biological gender is discriminatory, arguing that it implies they are all sexual predators. However, this reasoning is flawed—women’s facilities are not open to any cist man, regardless of his possible intentions. Cist men are not subject to vetting before entering women’s spaces. Moreover, there have been several documented cases where women and girls have been assaulted by Trans individuals in public facilities.
This is about safeguarding women and protecting them from any potential harm, as women are physically weaker than men and the more vulnerable sex.
Though it may seem remarkable that such issues still require legal clarification in 2025, the ruling comes as a significant relief for many women and girls in the U.K. who have been particularly concerned about their privacy, dignity and protection in recent years.
Harry Potter author JK Rowling reportedly donated £70,000 (approximately $93,000) for Women Scotland, the campaign group that argued the case.
In response to the ruling, Rowling posted, “I love it when a plan comes together,” Rowling posted to X alongside “#SupremeCourt” and “#WomensRights”. However, she has since endured a relentless barrage of trolling and a targeted smear campaign online.
The author also said that many women are waiting to hear the Prime Minister’s views on the legal ruling. In a post on X, Ms Rowling, added: “After all, he’s the man who decreed: ‘A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view, that is actually the law’.”
