After the Supreme Court

I was privileged to be in the Supreme Court on Wednesday as the ruling was handed down in the For Women Scotland case. I went into the court with no idea how the result would go; I wanted to believe, I knew that our legal team felt things had gone well, I know that others felt confident, but still I didn’t know. We’d been asked to be quiet as the ruling was read out and, indeed, the court was completely silent as Lord Hodge spoke, although there was a muted gasp as he said ‘the appeal is upheld’. At the end of the session, after the judges had left the court room, there was a round of applause, followed by a lot of tears and hugs and thankyous for our legal team. Then, it was out into the April sunshine and a bank of cameras.

It’s still hard to take in exactly what happened. I’m delighted that the result was a positive one for us, and that Scottish Lesbians will no longer be breaking the law if we refuse to admit a man, but it feels very much like the start of a very uncertain, difficult time. Already, in the few days since the ruling, protests against it have been organised and there has also been an outpouring of rage that I can only describe as entitlement denied. However, it’s also possible to see the beginnings of longer campaigns to change equalities law to what trans identifying people assumed it was- and, indeed, had been told, by the policies of so many Stonewalled institutions and organisations, that it was.

First up is the smear campaign, aiming to discredit the Supreme Court, the judges, and any organisation or individual involved in the For Women Scotland side of the case. The Supreme Court as an institution has been described as far-right, out of touch, in the pocket of JK Rowling, biased, and ‘actively hostile to trans existence’. Lord Hodge, who delivered a unanimous ruling from all five judges who heard the case, has been dismissed as old, crusty, white and male and, along with his fellow judges, overpaid. The case itself has been described as a ‘sham’. 

The court has been accused of hearing only from ‘anti-trans hate groups’, while trans identifying people were ‘specifically blocked’ from giving evidence. Our solicitor, Peter Daly, put out an excellent thread on Twitter explaining why this is nonsense.

The ruling itself has been described in hyperbolic terms as devastating, fascist, unjust, violence, anti-scientific and Trumpian. It has even been likened to imperialism. The feminist groups involved in the case are variously described as ‘far right’, ‘well funded’ and backed by ‘powerful people’. Scottish Lesbians has been described by one commentator, who applied unsuccessfully to intervene as an individual, as being a fake organisation run by two non-Scots from the south of England. It’s vastly easier, of course, to attribute our desire for clarity in law to nebulous non-people or other evil bogeymen than it is to understand that these are the feelings of millions of British women who are sick of having to give way to men.

Next is the fear mongering. It is being asserted that the ruling will remove trans-identifying people from public life completely, while also exposing them to ‘medical violence and death’. People who do not conform to gender stereotypes will face ‘consequences’ and scare stories are already being circulated of butch women being forcibly removed from public toilets. The racist trope that women of colour look like men and will be excluded from women’s facilities is being rolled out, and women are being told that we will have to show our genitals before being admitted to public toilets. Most disturbing is the fearmongering aimed at children, who will apparently face ‘torture and death’ at the hands of therapists practising conversion therapy.

Finally, we’re being warned that ‘consequences’ are coming. ‘What the Trans’ has compiled a list of 30 protest events around the country as an immediate reaction to the ruling. The Trans+ Solidarity Alliance has launched, on Instagram, a new campaign called ‘Unite 4 Trans Rights’ which calls for action to counter ‘hate’. Other organisations have started fundraising in order to bring legal actions, including discrimination cases, which means the courts may soon have more decisions to make. Some organisations appear to be encouraging defiance and lawbreaking, while trans identifying individuals are using social media to state their intention to ignore the ruling and continue to use facilities designated for the opposite sex. 

‘Haven’t you got anything better to worry about?’

Of course, in parallel to all of this, we’re told that the ruling is completely inconsequential, affects a tiny number of people, and is a ‘ludicrous waste of time’. Defining what a woman is is ‘policing boundaries’, ‘politicising’, and ‘narrow minded’. Instead of campaigning for legal clarity and women’s rights, women should be focussing on the really important issues like disability cuts, poverty, and male violence against women. But only the male violence committed by men who identify as men, obviously. No tactic, it seems, is too low for people who are desperate for ordinary, leftie women (and their hard-won rights) to disappear in a puff of right wing smoke. The Governments in both Westminster and Edinburgh need, as a matter of urgency, to commit to upholding the law as, we now know, it has always stood.