The UK Supreme Court Tells Us What A Woman is

And it tells us about lesbians too

The rights of gays and lesbians depend on an understanding of what sexual orientation means. Sexual orientation is about whether a person is sexually attracted to men, women, or both: it’s about physical attraction – which is based on biological sex. Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom affirmed this basic fact.

The ruling (in the case For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers) established that the legal meanings of “sex” and “woman” relate to biological sex. The story has gone global. The carefully-worded, 88-page ruling exposed all the absurdities of including “trans women” – people born male – in protections specifically devised for the benefit of women. (No one bothers to focus on the legal meaning of “man”: gender identity doctrine is misogynistic through and through).

The valiant Scottish feminist group known as “For Women Scotland” who successfully brought this appeal was supported with an intervention by LGB Alliance and lesbian groups known for the occasion as “the lesbian interveners.” In our intervention we explained at length why it is crucial to understand that sexual orientation is based on sex – not “gender identity.” It is clear from the number of mentions of the word “lesbian” in the ruling that our intervention played a key role in the deliberations. During the public hearing of this case, we watched the five Supreme Court judges grappling with the nonsense of a straight man who has a government-issued Gender Recognition Certificate saying his “gender” is “woman” calling himself a lesbian and claiming the right to enter all lesbian spaces and services. As the court drily observed: “People are not sexually oriented towards those in possession of a certificate.”

When I read the words in the ruling that being obliged to accept such men as “lesbians” renders the concept of sexual orientation “meaningless,” and being obliged to admit them to lesbian spaces and services results in an “inevitable loss of autonomy and dignity for lesbians,” I wept with relief. We had been seen. Finally.

Lesbians and gays have lacked representation – and have been misrepresented -- in recent years. Organizations such as GLAAD, the HRC, and the ACLU – and Stonewall UK ­– which once promoted lesbian and gay rights, have abandoned us. Today, they all promote the frankly ridiculous idea that sexual orientation is about “gender identity.” It really isn’t. It’s about male bodies and female bodies. I remember vividly the moment in the Allison Bailey employment tribunal in 2022 when the representative of Stonewall UK – flanked by her lawyer, her mother and her support dog – told the judges earnestly that there is no such thing as male and female bodies: “there are just bodies,” she intoned. Yeah… right.

It is because of the lack of representation of LGB rights, and Stonewall’s refusal to listen to our viewpoint, that Kate Harris and I set up the UK organization LGB Alliance in 2019 – the first lesbian, gay, and bisexual rights organization in the world to reject the idea that everyone has a “gender identity” that overrides biological sex. Since then, similar groups have sprung up around the world, from Iceland to Taiwan, to Brazil to Australia – and in the United States.

Today, standing up for the rights of homosexuals means enduring attacks from two opposing sides. On the one hand, the reactionary opposition of conservatives, in many cases religious extremists, is still a potent force, even in the Western world. On the other hand, we face fierce opposition from the TQ+ crowd represented by the HRC, the ACLU and the rest. Our voices have been squeezed out.

No lesbian wants a man hitting on her on a lesbian dating app – although some will say, to appease the activists, that they don’t mind. No gay man wants a woman hitting on him in a sauna – although many gay men will declare they accept “trans men” as men. Gay men in general tend to be less concerned by such invasions, since they are seldom worried about the prospect of physical attack. The power differential is important here. Women often fear men’s superior strength, not the other way around.

The UK Supreme Court’s decision drew widespread international interest. CNN naturally framed it from the trans perspective, saying the definition of woman “excludes trans women.” The American approach to what are usually called “trans rights” – but which are really a far wider-ranging set of issues, involving women’s and girls’ rights, LGB rights, and child safeguarding – has become hopelessly polarized along party lines. When I saw the brave young Democrat Jonah Wheeler arguing the case for women’s rights in New Hampshire, I was full of admiration for his calm responses to the vitriol hurled at him by fellow Democrats.

I passionately hope the UK Supreme Court’s ruling can help to shift this polarization in the US. It has been welcomed by the UK’s Labour Government. Whatever people may think of Trump, his Executive Order stating that there are two sexes was correct, ground-breaking, and of crucial importance to all of us. Ruth Bader Ginsburg constantly used the phrase “on the basis of sex” when referring to women’s rights. Lesbian and gay rights too are based on sex. Yesterday, the UK Supreme Court affirmed that. I hope the court’s message reaches into every corner of the world.