Thread by @fairplaywomen

**NEWS THREAD**
Tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear an appeal to force UK gov to record X on passports. This would be a first step towards state-recognition of non-binary identities. If the appeal is won it threatens women's sex-based rights. Here's why/1
fairplayforwomen.com/non-binary-the…

In April, Fair Play For Women instructed barrister Jason Coppell QC to seek permission to intervene at the Supreme Court. You can read our full submission to court here /2

fairplayforwomen.com/wp-content/upl…

We argued that refusing X on passports is justified because of the wider impact on society and in particular women's rights. X conveys the ideological message that humans can be sex-less. That some people are neither male nor female. Sex isn’t universal. This matters because.../3

1) If humans can be 'sexless' it will allow some to 'opt out' of sex-based rules and responsibilities. Trans pressure groups are already promoting the idea that non-binary identities should have access to women-only spaces /4
fairplayforwomen.com/stonewalls-non…

2) If human can be 'sexless' the next demand will be to drop sex as a universal identifier altogether. Sex gets erased.

Far fetched? We don't think so. This £600K funded gender research project is preparing the ground by introducing the idea /5

futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk

A long list of trans pressure groups have also sought permission to intervene. We were the only group there speaking up for women.

Stonewall
Gendered Intelligence
ILGA-Europe
Transgender Europe
Human Rights Watch
Organisation Intersex.

/6

The court decided to reject all new interventions. We are disappointed not to have the chance to present more evidence to the Supreme Court. But the fact that a women’s rights group showed up counts /7

The Supreme Court is now aware there are two sides to this story, and Stonewall and co did not manage to slip in unnoticed. It also sends a message loud and clear to the big trans organisations; women are stepping up. /8

Imagine their shock when they learnt that Fair Play For Women had organised to intervene at the Supreme Court. The days of trans-activist getting the room to themselves are over. Women are watching and we are ready and able to take action /9

This case isn’t really about an individual’s right to present in an androgynous manner. It’s about creating a semi-legal route to the removal of the two sex classes from law /10

That’s why so many trans activist groups wanted to intervene. It’s trying to reshape how society operates. It’s about breaking the sex binary, and ultimately erasing sex altogether /11

Transgender rights have evolved gradually over time, often unnoticed. In the absence of critical challenge these gains have slowly encroached on the rights and definition of others. We’ve learnt how well trans activists play the long game. Non-binary is no different /12

For sex-based rights to work effectively in society sex classes need to be FIXED, OBJECTIVE and UNIVERSAL. The first two have been seriously eroded by the GRA and self-ID. The relatively recent emergence of non-binary identities signals a clear incursion into the third /13

In order to secure women’s sex-based rights and protections persuasively and intelligibly, UK law and systems of governance must continue to distinguish birth, or legal sex from self-selected gender identity. Everyone is born male or female. No one can opt out of that /14

Letting some people claim to have no sex will undermine the legal and social systems and processes on which women and girls rely. This is the next battle ground that we need to defend /15