Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: UK Supreme Court: Legal Definition of 'Woman' Excludes
 Transgenders
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:58:26 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <vtp5li$31jjt$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vtp33u$2vtk7$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 22:58:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9c782d87f41ee7addff7a676839077a3";
	logging-data="3198589"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QCLJBQBbcW5yFdMovIO9rTqA/3U28JAA="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Qn+AvejYaWtEi4BF992Yl0ZdVpM=
In-Reply-To: <vtp33u$2vtk7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2005

On 4/16/2025 4:14 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> London
> CNN
>   —
> The United Kingdom's highest court ruled that the legal definition of "woman"
> excludes trans women, in a case with sweeping consequences for how equality
> laws are applied.
> 
> Britain's Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the definition of a woman in
> equality legislation refers to "a biological woman and biological sex",
> sparking celebrations outside court among gender-critical campaigners but
> warnings it was a worrying development for transgender people.
> 
> The case centered on whether trans women with a gender recognition certificate
> (GRC) – which offers legal recognition of someone's female sex-- are protected
> from discrimination as a woman under the nation’s Equality Act 2010.

Seems a legitimate try to be sensible.  But it leaves me wondering if 
Brits are as prone as Yanks to, e.g., wrong-peepee restroom hysterics.