West Norfolk campaign groups, MPs and councillors clash over Supreme Court ruling on definition of a woman
Campaign groups, MPs and councillors from across West Norfolk have had their say on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the definition of a woman.
Last week, five judges ruled that the term "woman" legally means a biological woman. This is expected to have widespread impact on the way certain services are run.
For example, from now on, a biological man who identifies as a woman will no longer be able to access women-only spaces.
That includes changing rooms, toilets, women's refuges, and single-sex hospital wards.
So what do people across West Norfolk think?
THE BIG DEBATE
The biggest clash in ideals has undoubtedly been between the Lynn and West Norfolk Pride group and the West Norfolk Women’s Rights Network (WRN).
A statement from the Pride group has argued that the court ruling will “feed hate” - but the WRN believes it has confirmed a “matter of fact”
The Pride organisation said: "At King's Lynn and West Norfolk Pride, we stand with trans women. We see trans women and the challenges they face, we see gender non-conforming people, intersex people, and trans men who are impacted, harmed and hurt by yesterday's ruling.
“The Supreme Court’s ruling on the legal definition of a woman cannot be ignored or played down. The ruling was supposed to set a simple definition to ensure the safety and protection of women within the Equality Act.
“However, this new definition feeds rhetoric, discourse, and hate. It is a severe step backwards for the rights of trans women and men, intersex people, and non-binary people.
“The systems in this country are increasingly difficult for trans people to navigate, and this new legal definition ruling is the start of a new wave of harmful legislation which will be written not to benefit anybody, but to appease a loud group of people, spearheaded by a bitter billionaire, who can't simply live their own lives while trans people live theirs.
“At King's Lynn and West Norfolk Pride, we imagine a world where we take the energy used to exclude trans people from sport, from medicine, from the workplace, from public spaces, and instead use that energy to extend a welcoming hand to create inclusivity and dignity for all."
However, Ermine Amies, a spokeswoman for the West Norfolk WRN, said: “Women are adult human females. This is not a matter of law but a matter of fact.
“For years, the law and reality have been misrepresented and misunderstood. We welcome the clarity of the For Women Scotland judgment and the unequivocal support for the Supreme Court ruling provided by the Prime Minister.
“The ruling confirms that ‘sex’ in the Equality Act means, and has always meant, binary biological sex. This cannot be altered by possession of a Gender Recognition Certificate.
“A woman is not a man who self-identifies into womanhood.”
She wants to see major changes to the way the police and hospitals are run - such as by preventing transgender women from entering women’s wards and female staff changing rooms.
She believes Norfolk Police “must immediately suspend its policy allowing male officers to strip-search women”.
MPs HAVE THEIR SAY
Terry Jermy, the Labour MP for South West Norfolk, said: "Single-sex spaces are very important, and this has been reaffirmed by the court’s decision. Whilst the decision has provided some clarity, there are many practical considerations that still need to be looked at.
“I also understand this is an unsettling time for some with many trans people feeling frightened.
“I am deeply concerned by the rise in transphobia and welcome that the Supreme Court has reaffirmed as part of this ruling that discrimination and harassment against trans people - whether because they are trans or perceived to be of a particular gender - is illegal.
“I would want everyone in South West Norfolk and beyond to be able to live safely with respect, dignity and compassion.”
James Wild, the Conservative MP for North West Norfolk, added: “This welcome ruling reflects the common-sense position that women are women and men are men and should ensure that single sex spaces are protected.
“The ruling also reaffirms protections for trans people. After what has been a divisive debate, I hope this judgement will be respected and implemented by the NHS, schools, and other organisations.”
COUNCILLORS
Jo Rust, an Independent councillor who represents the Springwood ward on West Norfolk Council, fears for the safety of trans people following the ruling.
“I don’t think this makes cis women and safer. Men can and always have intruded into female spaces,” she said.
“They don’t need to put on a dress in order to be able to do so, they just do it. What this has done is to stoke fear and division and focus on an already vulnerable section of society.
“Our society is more lenient to rapists that it is to trans people. I stand with my trans friends and share their fears and concerns.”
Brian Long, the leader of the borough council’s Conservative group, does not believe the ruling has “relevance in a local context”.
“It doesn't stop how folks can identify themselves. Everyone receiving local services does so irrespective of their sex, self identification, race, creed, colour or religion,” he said.
The Lynn News approached borough council leader Alistair Beales and Labour group leader Francis Bone for comment, but received no response from either.
HOSPITAL
A spokesperson for Lynn’s Queen Elizabeth Hospital said bosses are “waiting on the guidance to come down”.
They provided a generic statement from the NHS saying: “The NHS is currently reviewing guidance on same sex accommodation and as part of this process, will consider and take into account all relevant legislation and the Supreme Court ruling.”
POLICE
A Norfolk Police spokeswoman said: “Following the Supreme Court’s ruling we will be reviewing our existing policies and procedures in accordance with the outcome.
“We will need time to consider the full implications of the court’s decision, as will many other public bodies.”
The Lynn News asked the force specifically about male officers strip-searching women and whether this will be prohibited, but has yet to receive a response to that query.
