Why political mainstream has switched sides for good in trans debate

The tone of the debate must be respectful in wake of landmark Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman

There was at least one line in Shirley-Anne Somerville’s statement to Holyrood this week on which the warring sides in the gender identity battle should agree. The Social Justice Secretary told MSPs it is “important to recognise the tone and the temperature of the surrounding debate” as she set out the Scottish Government’s response to its defeat by campaign group For Women Scotland in the Supreme Court.

Somerville said the SNP administration fully accepts last week’s unanimous ruling by judges sitting in the highest court in the land that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act “refer to a biological woman and biological sex”.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer U-turned on the issue. In March 2022, he stated: “A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that transwomen are women, and that is not just my view – that is actually the law.” But asked on Tuesday whether Sir Keir still believed a transgender woman was a woman, his official spokesman said: “No, the Supreme Court judgment has made clear that when looking at the Equality Act, a woman is a biological woman.”

Susan Smith, left, and Marion Calder, directors of For Women Scotland, cheer as they leave the Supreme Court in London following the landmark ruling against the Scottish Government | Getty Images

An embarrassing volte-face

Earlier, the UK Government’s equalities minister Bridget Phillipson said the Supreme Court ruling means transgender women should use male toilets and pledged “to end the practice of mixed-sex wards once and for all”. Embarrassing though the volte-face undoubtedly is for both Labour and SNP ministers, at least they no longer need fear the question they have dreaded for years: “What is a woman?”

The Supreme Court has supplied them with the answer, although critics might accuse them of outsourcing the critical thinking they ought to have been able to do for themselves. We can expect to see fewer mainstream politicians hazarding a guess, as Starmer once did, at what proportion of women have a penis.

We are unlikely to witness another frontbench MP speculate, as the now Foreign Secretary David Lammy once did, on the circumstances under which a man might be able to grow a cervix. And hopefully the vitriol that has grown depressingly familiar in the gender debate will start to fade.

The problem with self-ID

Several arguments seem to render the cause of gender self-identification unsustainable. It is for very good reasons that women have the right to female-only spaces in places such as changing rooms, toilets, refuges, hospitals, prisons and rape crisis centres. Opening up these spaces to people who are biologically male takes this right away from women.

In sport, males on the whole possess clear physical advantages that make their participation in women’s competitions unfair and in some cases dangerous. Self-identification also has adverse implications in areas such as striving to achieve gender balance in boardrooms and in the recording of crimes.

For Women Scotland campaigners protesting in London | PA

Children ‘let down’

Then there are the concerns raised by the landmark review carried out by retired consultant paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass into gender identity services for young people. The Cass Review found a lack of reliable evidence on medicine for those questioning their gender and said children had been “let down” by services that failed to match the standards of other NHS care.

Cass said clinicians complained about a lack of guidance, evidence and training, and that the “toxicity” of the debate around gender meant professionals were “afraid” to discuss their views openly. Her recommendations, including a “pause” on new prescriptions of puberty blockers and a move away from so-called gender-affirming care, have been endorsed north and south of the Border in order to protect young people.

But over and above the clinical and medical concerns raised by Cass, and the implications for women’s rights, fairness and safety is something more basic. Sex is immutable. Men cannot become women because the sexes are wired differently and we have evolved through the ages to instinctively know the difference between the two. If you have a Y chromosome, it will stay with you until the end of your days.

This is an observable reality in the same way that it is scientifically factual to say two plus three equals five or that the Earth is round. People are entitled to believe and to argue that the Earth is flat but that does not mean they are right or that they should expect everyone else to do so too.

In contrast, arguments in favour of gender self-identification seem specious. What frame of reference is there that could allow us to determine whether we have a gendered soul that is different from our biological sex?

A demonstration for trans rights outside the UK Government Office at Queen Elizabeth House in Edinburgh in 2023 | PA

Political flip-flopping is unlikely

Perhaps the strongest gender ideology card is “be kind” – an appeal to emotion rather than reason. Most people want to be kind, thankfully. But it is not kind to take hard-won rights away from others, or to fail to uphold proper standards in healthcare for children and young people.

After years of rancour, the case now appears to be compelling on one side and incoherent on the other. This, combined with last week’s Supreme Court ruling, is why the mainstream British political position on this issue has flipped. And it is difficult to see it flop back again.

It is hard to envisage another First Minister dismissing the concerns of gender critical feminists as “not valid”, as Nicola Sturgeon once did. But this shift, over the course of just a few years, comes as a bitter blow to thousands of trans people and their loved ones.

The kind course of action now will be to respect the ruling of the Supreme Court judges and the findings of the Cass Review, while at the same time seeking solutions to ensure that trans people have their dignity protected and are embraced, rather than marginalised, in society.