I am coming to the end of my legal battle on belief discrimination with my former employer, after losing my job for saying that men cannot be women. Through the course of the four-year case I won protection for everyone in the UK to be able to say that sex is real, binary and immutable, without losing their job. My legal precedent has played a large role in breaking the stranglehold of “no debate” on sex and gender – a good thing to celebrate on International Women’s Day.
But I don’t want to stop there. I think it is time we sort out the clash between sex and gender identity in law.
At the end of last year I started a petition asking the government to clarify that sex means sex in the Equality Act. It has already collected 85,000 signatures, and needs just 15,000 more to trigger a parliamentary debate. If you care about free speech, evidence-based policy-making and sex-based rights, go to www.sex-mattters.org/petition for more information and to sign.
The Equality Act is important because it sets the rules which allow single-sex services (including both specialist and everyday services), schools, associations, charities and sports.
My ex-employer is just one of thousands of organisations that have got themselves hopelessly tied up in fear and magical thinking on sex and gender identity. As the boss told me on the phone in our final call: “Our policy on this is we recognise the right of people to self-identify their sex and gender, and we recognise those people for whatever sex/gender they identify themselves.”
But sex is not “gender” (or else if it is, then gender is just a polite word for sex). And these kinds of word games quickly break down when truth and wishful thinking come into conflict. Nicola Sturgeon recently floundered over whether the convicted rapist Isla Bryson is a woman, saying “she regards herself as a woman, I regard the individual as a rapist… and in the context of the prison service what matters is that the individual was convicted of rape and that is what we are talking about here.”
What matters in the context of many everyday interactions (particularly when they involve single-sex spaces such as showers, changing rooms and sports) is a person’s sex, not their self-professed gender identity.
What gets so many organisations tangled in double-think is not just their willingness to talk nonsense to signal their virtue (or to avoid the wrath of enraged activists), but the fact that the law recognises some men as women, for some purposes, and it is not clear which purposes these are.
The Gender Recognition Act enables the issuing of a certificate that is said to change a person’s sex “for all purposes”. This is why I lost the first round of my case. The judge thought those purposes could include changing my thoughts and compelling my speech. He was wrong, and the appeal judge clarified that “for all purposes” only relates to applicable legal purposes, such as marriage and pensions. A judge in Scotland declared at the end of last year these applicable purposes include changing the definition of sex in the Equality Act.
But can that possibly be right?
This would mean that a woman who gets a certificate saying she is a man, and who is trying for a baby (because the certificate has not changed the facts as to who can get pregnant), would not be protected against any sex discrimination she faces as a woman of child-bearing age. It would also mean that it is unlawful for lesbians (or anyone, for that matter) to establish a female-only association unless those who are “female” by virtue of a government certificate are allowed in. The idea of “lesbians trapped in a man’s body” used to be the punchline of a bad joke; now it is the start of a costly discrimination case.
When the Gender Recognition Act was brought in in 2004, for the first time allowing people in the UK to change their legal sex, parliamentarians suspected (although they tried not to think too hard about it) that ignoring the fabric of reality like this might cause legal problems. So they put in a safety clause to allow amendments to clarify which other laws are allowed to continue to consider material reality, and which must defer to paperwork.
The petition is asking the government to use this clause to fix the problem with the Equality Act by enacting a simple amendment making clear that the words “male”, “female”, “man” and “woman” mean biological sex for the purposes of that act.
A large part of the reason why gender madness has been allowed to proliferate through organisations is that those setting the rules and laws have been able to talk in vague language. This obscures the fact that what they are doing is allowing rapists into women’s prisons, boys into girls’ changing rooms, men to compete in women’s boxing, and cross-dressing enthusiasts to play out their fantasy as Girlguiding leaders.
Front-line workers such as nurses, doctors, teachers are forced to tell lies, or to work around idiotic edicts such as that they must ask all “male” patients if they could be pregnant.
Having a debate in Parliament would bring the gender wars back to where the trouble started. If MPs want to defend a law that makes it difficult for service-providers to say “no” to men who want to share showers, dormitories or hospital wards with women and girls, and makes it impossible for lesbians to say no to the idea that men can be lesbians too, then they should do this in Parliament.
It should not be left to individuals to crowd-fund and to take cases that require them to put their life on hold to defend the right to state the bleeding obvious.
Please sign the petition and help make the debate happen.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
86,535 now. Signed, sealed and delivered my vote. 100% in support of this lady.
Signed. Stop the insanity. Maya – the second link doesn’t work.
Signed also.
Signed.
Let’s get it to the 100,000 and we will then have the pleasure of watching “our” MPs squirming, denigrating women who want sex-based rights upheld, displaying their virtue and either their ignorance of basic biology or blatantly LYING about it ……. those who can be bothered to turn up, anyway.
Feminists have brutally and relentlessly attacked men and masculinity for decades. Men are murderers, rapists, terrible father’s, ignorant, stupid, evil, weak. Men are pathetic dumb animals no better than a dog. Articles written about how we could look forward to a society that doesn’t include men at all – masculinity is what needs to be eradicated from society and technology could get us there; in the meantime, we can emasculate society to such an extent that it feels like men don’t exist. A movement steeped in such narcissism that it can’t even consider the consequences of such an immoral, divisive and deeply destructive campaign. What could possibly go wrong?
Where were all the women saying “errrr, hang on, I think we may have gone too far?”. Pointing out their bloke, like all guys, had a multitude of issues that society not only turned a blind eye to, but openly mocked. Where were you all ladies? I’ll tell you where, you were shouting from every rooftop that you could find that men should be more like women. The irony.
Feminists (which most women appear to identify as) have been shouting for decades you not only don’t need men, you don’t like men. Strangely, I won’t be signing the petition you now need me to sign. Bed, lay, and all that. Yep, you’re right, I am bitter about it all. But don’t worry, it’s not you, it’s me.
Once you all drop the “I’m a feminist” and sign up to being a humanist, then I’ll think again.
I’ve signed the petition because I agree with it.
But I would also sign one to get rid of International Wonen’s Day.
Well meaning as it may be, the weaponisation of victimhood needs to stop. It’s lomg been getting out of hand.
It’s a hangover from the Soviet Union isn’t it?
Agree. I was a feminist in the 70s. FL, I think we had legitimate grievances then, eg treated as bears of little brain, and, yes, paid less for the same work. But, nowadays, it’s far harder to be a young man, who pretty much needs a woman to sign a contract before he makes any sort of physical advance – ‘stealing a kiss’ can land a man in court! I’ve just had an email from a clothing retailer I use headed ‘International Women’s Day’. Deleted, unread.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, and I’ve always tried to be crystal clear on this: women 100% had legitimate grievances when the movement was first created and continued to have for quite some time; it started out as an honourable, worthy cause. However, that all changed a long, long time ago (as you acknowledge) but the majority of women I experience refuse to recognise this. I had a horrendous, but very common, encounter last weekend when my wife and I met a couple that I used to work with. The woman, after having a couple of glasses of wine, spent the next hour belittling her bloke, criticising men (that’s ‘all’ men), relaying how much she was discriminated against in her youth (strangely, my wife recalls the 80’s quite differently) and telling us all just how generally fantastic she was. Oddly, we’re no longer talking as she couldn’t handle any counter-arguments. None. Admittedly, the guy should have said more himself, but blokes generally don’t want to be in conflict with their partner, so they say less than they should. Why should men have to listen to this nonsense 24/7, and why aren’t there more women calling it out.
Anyway, I’ll have another think. It’s not like, as Stewart points out, that I don’t agree with it. There are also women like my wife and yourself who are largely caught in the crosshairs. If only there were more of you though – women who saw men as their friend, not their enemy. A social partnership, rather than a war that one side is oblivious to.
I have so far had emails celebrating International Women’s Day from:
Ebay
Cult Pens
Marloe Watch Company
Wex Photo Video
Ryanair
And doubtless there will be more before the day is out.
I have deleted each one. Unread.
Bloody sick of the woke crap.
And another one from the Royal British Legion reminding me that “this month is all about women, as we celebrate Women’s History Month, International Women’s Day – which is today, and Mothering Sunday on 19th March…”
Oh do F. off!
I spend a fair lot (of my very limited spare) time among students and I don’t see that happening (sign a contract before). Technically, unwanted physical contact of a sexualized nature may be sexual assault but in practice, it seems to be handled by women mostly by brushing it off as unavoidable nuisance if it was really unwelcome (which often doesn’t seem to be the case).
[This keeps amazing me because I absolutely abhor close physical contact to strangers, including people I may know from sight or occasionally even talk to.]
Deleted
Blimey. All the petition is asking for is clarity in the legal definitions used, which would be of benefit to both sexes and all genders.
The Government must exercise its power under s.23 of the Gender Recognition Act to modify the operation of the Equality Act 2010 by specifying the terms sex, male, female, man & woman, in the operation of that law, mean biological sex and not “sex as modified by a Gender Recognition Certificate”
And BTW – International Men’s Day is on 19th December this year.
The 6 Pillars of International Men’s Day
https://internationalmensday.com
That’s 19th November, not December.
Really?
These international days are simply awful.
They seem little more than bandwagons for virtue signallers and busybodies who love nothing more than to tell others how they must behave. Oh, and for retailers to sell more stuff.
Improve gender relations and promote gender equality. Please, what a load of bullshit. Yeah, coz nothing promotes good relations more than banging on about how special one is. FFS.
Maybe the goal is to make our society completely braindead.
‘Course it’s all about the merch. Today is also World Maths Day. Father’s Day, Mother’s Day, Children’s Day, Transgender Visibility Day (31st March, if your interested), Earth Day…just about every day is a Something Day these days (sic). Ridiculous.
If aliens did (allegedly) interfere with our evolution, I sometimes wonder if they were Ferengi….
I had to laugh when I heard about International Level Crossing Day.
Don’t let a few shouty women stop you from seeing the real importance of this issue.
Well, it’s a little more complicated than that. It’s not just “a few shouty women”; it seems it’s the majority of women (and brainless Guardian-reading men) who identify as feminists. If you identify as a feminist then you have to understand that the thing that so disgusts you now is the very same thing that you yourself stitched together, and did so without any consideration of what is was exactly that you were creating. After several decades of demonising all men we can now see what feminists stitched together was a monster. Some of us could see the monster before it was clear it was one and before it rampaged through society destroying every single thing of tradition and normality. But feminists would not listen – it was only men that were a problem, only men that are still a problem.
Of course it’s an important issue, but maybe, just maybe, we’re now staring down the barrel of decades of man-hating, women playing the perennial victim card, and the aggressive feminist campaign to remove all differences between the sexes. Karma really can be a bitch.
Anyway, enough said, no more from me on this.
I can see I’m not going to convince you FL, fair enough.
I guess I was trying to appeal to the part of you that might have a sister/daughter/wife or maybe to you sense of being in it together against this insanity? I think the “let’s rubbish men” is yet another agenda from TPTB and some people get carried away with it but as I don’t watch a lot of TV/consume much mainstream media, I don’t tend to get that involved with it.
I think you should make that Some feminists or Some people calling themselves feminists.
Everyday life is also far from perfect in this respect. I personally know locations where lone woman are pretty much implicitly asked to tactily agree to being groped by strange men and who usually only have the recourse to leave if this happens. I’ve seen that often enough.
Signed!
A woman is a woman ! And, in time, the truth will prevale! Sometimes it takes me aback!, that we’re even having this conversation! Emily Pankhurst would be turning in her grave! All that sacrifice to get your voice heard only to get it hijacked by men!, dressed as women!
I’m not surprised some men want to be women. As IMO nowadays women have it easier than men. But, no matter what operations they have, no matter what hormones they take, they’re still men. I see that some men wish to ‘identify as’ women (and vice versa) but if they have a ‘right’ to do that, it’s also my right to identify them as the sex they are.
Here f-ing here!
I’m an old fashioned man btw and totally respect women! I enjoy their company better than other men, there far more honest and easier to talk to! My wife told me so!
Penis, vagina.. biological fact!
Good grief! I hope Aliens aren’t watching us from a far! It would be like watching the smash advert from the seventies, they’ll be rolling about on their backs laughing!
“ha ha those foolish humans, that one with a beard and frock has taken off his two perfectly good spuds and smashed them up ha ha”
Signed the petition. I don’t believe this is an IWD sponsored petition thank goodness – I just looked at the IWD 2023 website and their theme for this year is …. EQUITY!
I also saw a story reported by Mahyar Tousi yesterday on the treatment of schoolgirls in Iran – being subjected to unspecified chemical treatments. Yet this real world issue is not in the MSM, nor – unsurprisingly – on IWD 2023.
Our society is so morally self indulgent.
Once a transwoman is in the ground & the worms have done their stuff, any archaeologist coming across the skeleton 100 years later would say that they had come a cross the skeletal remains of a man. The name on the headstone not agreeing with the hard skeletal evidence may well cause consternation & confusion. But hard biological facts remain.
Header picture: “women won’t wheesht”
What on earth is that supposed to mean?
Its Scottish and means won’t be quiet/silent. My Scots sis-in-law used it to shut the kids up. Unless its some kind of new street slang in which case IDK!
Ah yes, I would have guessed it was Scottish as in old-fashioned Geordie dialect they’d say ”Whisht” for ”shush”. We get a lot of the dregs of the Scottish dialect and slang words trickling over the border. Nobody talks like that anymore hardly..
“Nobody talks like that anymore hardly.”
Which is a great shame in my opinion. I love the Geordies abd the Maccams.
In an episode of Line Of Duty, during a very tense interview, Superintendent Ted Turner says, “Houl yer wheesht”. Northern Irish and Scottish viewers would have completely understood, others may have been puzzled.
Me too.
I’d like to add that I know a few locations which only have one shared toilet facility and this usually works nicely as it mainly just means No urinal. Which has the nice side effect of stopping these place from becoming a general hangout and business parlour for gay prostitutes (who are a real pest in Reading).
Signed at 12:04.
Now at 89,199.
I will share via some WhatsApp groups.
I’ve signed this because I agree with it and I admire Maya Forstater. But I would be interested to see some information and statistics on previous petitions that have reached the 100K mark that demonstrate that the Parliamentary Petition mechanism is anything more than a ‘safety valve’, a way of giving the impression of democratic accountability.
I’ll sign when we get Mens’ Rights and International Men’s’ Day and when Equality Act is repealed.
We all have the same Rights; we don’t need an Act, we have the British Constitution and Common Law – making special provision for some inevitably puts impositions on others and means others are disadvantaged.
Women are reaping what they sowed: men and women are equal, they insisted, no physical or emotional differences; women should be allowed into mens’ spaces, do mens’ jobs, etc.
Now the high-heel is on the other foot, they don’t like it. Too bad.
Dr Schadenfreude call your office.
93,105 have now signed, including me. Nearly there!
That’s about 20.000 more than when I signed it which is decidedly not bad for a couple of hours.
Done. I seldom do this sort of thing but I have had a tit full of the dross that makes life so hard for women because they want to wear a dress and fake bubbies.
97,880 at 08.10 0n 9th March!