The British Supreme Court has ruled today that protections for women under the Equality Act of 2010 discussed in my piece only apply to persons of the female biological sex:
They thereby define the term women based on well-established biological science rather than on the imaginary vagaries of "gender identity." A great ruling, but there is still a long way to go. The right way forward is to eliminate the concept of "protected characteristics," as outlined in my piece, and replace it with language that is inclusive to all, not only to those who happen to have "characteristics."
The British Supreme Court has ruled today that protections for women under the Equality Act of 2010 discussed in my piece only apply to persons of the female biological sex:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/u-k-supreme-court-rules-males-dont-qualify-as-women-under-anti-discrimination-law-in-landmark-ruling/
They thereby define the term women based on well-established biological science rather than on the imaginary vagaries of "gender identity." A great ruling, but there is still a long way to go. The right way forward is to eliminate the concept of "protected characteristics," as outlined in my piece, and replace it with language that is inclusive to all, not only to those who happen to have "characteristics."