Ginger men who now identifies as a woman.

[King Billy]

The Supreme Court knows what a woman is, as do we all, and has said so on the only occasion it was asked.

The Supreme Court is not an English version of the French "Académie Française".
The English language is alive and evolves. There s no English equivalent of the "Académie Française".
Your reliance on the Supreme Court's judgement is ill-founded, in respect to the meaning of the word "woman".

The Supreme Court stressed in its judgement that it is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor to define the meaning of the word “woman” other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010.

Do you fantasise that it would stop knowing, if it was asked again?
Feel free to try,

It isn't a case of the Supreme Court changing its mind, it will be more of a case of the government of the day catching up with medical and biological science to clarify the current legal confusion, and update the legal framework.

As of late April 2026, the UK government has not yet formally published the final, long-awaited guidance on single-sex spaces following the 2025 Supreme Court ruling, though it is expected shortly.

It's been expected shortly for about six months.

 

[JohnD]

The Supreme Court is not an English version of the French "Académie Française".
The English language is alive and evolves. There s no English equivalent of the "Académie Française".
Your reliance on the Supreme Court's judgement is ill-founded, in respect to the meaning of the word "woman".

All of which is irrelevant waffle.

A man is not a woman.

 

[King Billy]

There is nothing meaningless about saying that a woman is an adult human female.

It is meaningless to claim that is the only definition.
The English language evolves with the advancement of science. It is not stuck in Victorian or religious dogma.
If language was stuck in Victorian or religious dogma, we wouldn't recognise gay marriage, female homosexuality, or even sex education.
And male homosexuality would still be illegal.

What's your definition?

A "woman" is a label assigned to an adult female, or the gender of a someone has adopted that gender.
But as said multiple times, language evolves. It might take on other definitions at a later date.

 

[King Billy]

All of which is irrelevant waffle.

As defined by a religious fanatic who has no meaningful or scientific arguments, nor data to present to justify his TERF activism.

A man is not a woman.

A biological man can legally adopt the gender of a woman.
And your TERF activism cannot prevent it. Although it will foment hatred and violence against transwomen.
That is your objective and you will be content with that.

 

[JohnD]

As defined by a religious fanatic who has no meaningful or scientific arguments, nor data to present to justify his TERF activism.

Poor Billy has descended in fantasy and hallucination.

 

[pete01]

Men are men and women are women....

In the rare occasion someone is born intersex should we then allow men who say they are women into the men's loos?

Seems utter madness.

 

[King Billy]

Poor Billy has descended in fantasy and hallucination.

As defined by a religious fanatic who has no meaningful or scientific arguments, nor data to present to justify his TERF activism.

How about explaining your motivation for your TERFism, rather than just more repetitive ad hominem attacks?
Or a scientific explanation for your irrational beliefs?
Or a justification for your activism, say some data on sexual offences on ciswomen by transwomen in single sex changing rooms or toilets?
Your TERMism is illogical and irrational.

Or do you prefer to see these people in women's changing rooms and toilets?

Rather than these people.

 

[King Billy]

Men are men and women are women....

That's as meaningful as JohnD's typical senseless slogans.
Aren't there more rewarding threads for you to amuse yourself?

In the rare occasion someone is born intersex should we then allow men who say they are women into the men's loos?

A chance for you to demonstrate your understanding of the issue, although your comment demonstrates that you don't.
I'm happy to explain it to you.


How often is rare?

 

[pete01]

That's as meaningful as JohnD's typical senseless slogans.
Aren't there more rewarding threads for you to amuse yourself?

A chance for you to demonstrate your understanding of the issue, although your comment demonstrates that you don't.
I'm happy to explain it to you.


How often is rare?

No thanks