that's not what fws said, but whatever
November 1, 2026 at 4:27 PM
that's not what fws said, but whatever
3/ Stilitz opens and says he will deal with the structure of the Equality Act, the Goodwin cases, and what the Supreme Court actually decided in Scottish Minister (aka FWS), before dealing with the grounds and threshold issues.
November 4, 2026 at 10:12 AM
3/ Stilitz opens and says he will deal with the structure of the Equality Act, the Goodwin cases, and what the Supreme Court actually decided in Scottish Minister (aka FWS), before dealing with the grounds and threshold issues.
They're judge-shopping and once they get in front of a judge who's a fellow crank, FWS' happen
I don't think it'll work long term
I don't think it'll work long term
November 4, 2026 at 11:09 AM
They're judge-shopping and once they get in front of a judge who's a fellow crank, FWS' happen
I don't think it'll work long term
I don't think it'll work long term
FWS, Fash Women Scotland
October 29, 2026 at 3:44 PM
FWS, Fash Women Scotland
34/ We now turn to the implications of FWS v Scottish Ministers. Stilitz submits that the judgment is being misunderstood. He says the starting point of the argument was that a trans person without a GRC has their birth sex under the Equality Act.
November 4, 2026 at 12:33 PM
34/ We now turn to the implications of FWS v Scottish Ministers. Stilitz submits that the judgment is being misunderstood. He says the starting point of the argument was that a trans person without a GRC has their birth sex under the Equality Act.
I listed well over ten things and most of them have nothing to do with FWS.
November 4, 2026 at 6:22 PM
I listed well over ten things and most of them have nothing to do with FWS.
It’s interesting they finally made out their claim in a form other than “to divine the Supreme Court’s divination”. I thought they didn’t want to “re-litigate FWS”... what makes them think that they don’t have a choice?
9/ Cross submits that trans inclusion can never be proportionate. He argues that a rule of inclusion based on gender reassignment suffers the same (if not worse) shortcomings as the Gender Recognition Act (the “indistinguishability” problem identified by the Supreme Court).
November 3, 2026 at 8:34 PM
It’s interesting they finally made out their claim in a form other than “to divine the Supreme Court’s divination”. I thought they didn’t want to “re-litigate FWS”... what makes them think that they don’t have a choice?
HOLY SHIT NEW FWS!!!
November 4, 2026 at 2:46 AM
HOLY SHIT NEW FWS!!!
... abandoned plans for GRC reform, fully endorsed the most transphobic interpretation of the FWS ruling, turned a blind eye to transphobic bias at the BBC, institutionalized transphobia in data collection, and appointed gender critical transphobes to crucial positions.
November 4, 2026 at 3:36 PM
... abandoned plans for GRC reform, fully endorsed the most transphobic interpretation of the FWS ruling, turned a blind eye to transphobic bias at the BBC, institutionalized transphobia in data collection, and appointed gender critical transphobes to crucial positions.
Admittedly, NAL, but this case always felt doomed given it relied on the notion the Union should have behaved as if the FWS judgement was in place a year before it was decided and that they should have followed guidance that wasn't issued until 2 years later.
November 2, 2026 at 3:35 PM
Admittedly, NAL, but this case always felt doomed given it relied on the notion the Union should have behaved as if the FWS judgement was in place a year before it was decided and that they should have followed guidance that wasn't issued until 2 years later.
Some of the absolute worst cunts in Scotland in attendance: Gray, McColm, Dalgety, the FWS and Sex Matters psychos… I’d probably just [REDACTED]
November 2, 2026 at 10:37 AM
Some of the absolute worst cunts in Scotland in attendance: Gray, McColm, Dalgety, the FWS and Sex Matters psychos… I’d probably just [REDACTED]
Lena Holzer's critical article about FWS is now available open access in Feminist Legal Studies: link.springer.com/article/10.1...
Equality Law Taken Out of Context: An Analysis of For (Some) Women Scotland - Feminist Legal Studies
The judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers (FWS) in 2025 has created significant ripple effects for trans persons. Departing from dominant inter...
link.springer.com
October 30, 2026 at 8:40 AM
Lena Holzer's critical article about FWS is now available open access in Feminist Legal Studies: link.springer.com/article/10.1...
The question in the FWS ruling was basically “is it fair for positive action for women to apply to trans women” and they acted on an imaginary situation in which a trans woman was parachuted in without having experienced barriers to advancement. But they couldn’t imagine a symmetrical cis example?
Why would it be any more difficult to rule them out than nepobabies or other cis women that didn't follow that kind of career trajectory?
Does specifically the fact that such a trans woman might exist justify shutting out all trans women?
Does specifically the fact that such a trans woman might exist justify shutting out all trans women?
November 2, 2026 at 11:11 AM
The question in the FWS ruling was basically “is it fair for positive action for women to apply to trans women” and they acted on an imaginary situation in which a trans woman was parachuted in without having experienced barriers to advancement. But they couldn’t imagine a symmetrical cis example?
Again, I know this doesn't sit comfortably in GC circles, but FWS was a significant change in the law, even if the claim is it just clarified the text, and this is an attempt to reverse engineer that into a precedent that was always in place.
November 2, 2026 at 3:40 PM
Again, I know this doesn't sit comfortably in GC circles, but FWS was a significant change in the law, even if the claim is it just clarified the text, and this is an attempt to reverse engineer that into a precedent that was always in place.
The FWS ruling, the CoP, the Cass Report, the UK’s recent KCSIE guidance, the US’s HHS report on gender dysphoria: all follow Raymondian doctrine.
October 30, 2026 at 12:33 PM
The FWS ruling, the CoP, the Cass Report, the UK’s recent KCSIE guidance, the US’s HHS report on gender dysphoria: all follow Raymondian doctrine.
IANAL, but I'm *fascinated* that this case is being used in this context, given that everything that's followed from FWS in terms of guidance appears to ride roughshod all over this ECHR judgment.
31/ Stilitz now turns to ECHR cases, in particular the case of “I”. He highlights the complaint and the government's response at the time. Counsel says the rights in that case concerned her female social role, free from state interference.
November 4, 2026 at 4:32 PM
IANAL, but I'm *fascinated* that this case is being used in this context, given that everything that's followed from FWS in terms of guidance appears to ride roughshod all over this ECHR judgment.
The functioning of the GRA has now been completely compromised by the UK Supreme Court’s reinterpretation of *subsequently made* equality law (the Equality Act of 2010) in the FWS judgment.
October 30, 2026 at 12:26 PM
The functioning of the GRA has now been completely compromised by the UK Supreme Court’s reinterpretation of *subsequently made* equality law (the Equality Act of 2010) in the FWS judgment.
Thanks for the reminder. Haven't forgotten how powerful this blog was last year> www.carolinelitman.com/post/how-one...
How one dismal suburban dinner party focussed my mind as to the danger of cis complacency in the fight for trans rights.
I've felt so crushed by the UK Supreme Court ruling in the For Women Scotland (FWS) case, that states, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 sex now means ‘biological’ sex. I’ve struggled to colle...
www.carolinelitman.com
November 4, 2026 at 11:58 AM
Thanks for the reminder. Haven't forgotten how powerful this blog was last year> www.carolinelitman.com/post/how-one...
There is a chance that it offers some clarity to fws... But it all depends if the judge ignores all this. At the moment his line framing of questions does not fill me with joy.
November 4, 2026 at 12:46 PM
There is a chance that it offers some clarity to fws... But it all depends if the judge ignores all this. At the moment his line framing of questions does not fill me with joy.
A weird, fanciful, outlandish and morally outrageous choice such as this puts me in mind of the fanciful "what if?" scenarios that were used by the UK Supreme Court in the FWS v Scottish Ministers ruling. Those "lesbian only spaces."
November 2, 2026 at 10:42 AM
A weird, fanciful, outlandish and morally outrageous choice such as this puts me in mind of the fanciful "what if?" scenarios that were used by the UK Supreme Court in the FWS v Scottish Ministers ruling. Those "lesbian only spaces."
That is *why* the remedy adopted was to allow trans people to legally change sex *for all purposes*. That is *why* the FWS ruling is so completely asinine.
October 30, 2026 at 1:12 PM
That is *why* the remedy adopted was to allow trans people to legally change sex *for all purposes*. That is *why* the FWS ruling is so completely asinine.
A similar dynamic appeared in the consultation about the EHRC Code of Practice on sex in light of the FWS judgment. Again, both capitol and labor said overwhelmingly "this is economically insane" and again, the government did it anyway.
November 2, 2026 at 4:50 PM
A similar dynamic appeared in the consultation about the EHRC Code of Practice on sex in light of the FWS judgment. Again, both capitol and labor said overwhelmingly "this is economically insane" and again, the government did it anyway.
The same in the UK, the FWS judgement was made by a judge who goes to the same church as JK Rowling.
I think it's hard for academic lawyers to know the nuances on the ground, and harder still for students. But any practitioner specialising in a field knows which judges they want on particular issues, and which they pray to avoid.
The SC is now unrecognisable from 2019 - because of personalities.
The SC is now unrecognisable from 2019 - because of personalities.
November 4, 2026 at 5:24 PM
The same in the UK, the FWS judgement was made by a judge who goes to the same church as JK Rowling.
I'm not going to dignify this any further. Do feel free to point out the above conduct to anyone who pretends that FWS are in any serious way, "feminists".
This is also the last time I will talk about my medical history to satisfy the curiosity of those who want to publicly investigate my biology.
This is also the last time I will talk about my medical history to satisfy the curiosity of those who want to publicly investigate my biology.
October 28, 2026 at 11:17 PM
I'm not going to dignify this any further. Do feel free to point out the above conduct to anyone who pretends that FWS are in any serious way, "feminists".
This is also the last time I will talk about my medical history to satisfy the curiosity of those who want to publicly investigate my biology.
This is also the last time I will talk about my medical history to satisfy the curiosity of those who want to publicly investigate my biology.
Basically every transphobe is a chaser. FWS is definitely chaser central.
October 29, 2026 at 9:08 PM
Basically every transphobe is a chaser. FWS is definitely chaser central.