Has the For Women Scotland judgement made any difference?
Here is a lesson in power. One year ago today, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in For Women Scotland v. the Scottish Ministers, concluding that for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 ‘sex’ referred to biological sex and not ‘certificated’ sex. That is, a woman is someone who was born a woman and legal rights and protections specific to women (e.g. single-sex spaces) cannot be opted into by men who ‘identify’ as women. The judgment was, I wrote on Coffee House that day, ‘a victory for women’. But was it?
What we can learn from the Southport killer
Trump’s goals in Iran have always been clear
Flat out: the property squeeze crushing the young
One year on, policy and practice have yet to catch up with the law. True, there has been progress, such as Girlguiding remembering the first syllable in its name, but these victories stand out because they are uncommon. In the main, the response to For Women Scotland has been respectful non-compliance, with public bodies – the Scottish government comes to mind –........
