Debate contribution: Supreme Court Ruling: Legal Definition of a Woman

Debate contribution by Ms Joanne Bunting on 28 April 2025.

MLA

Ms Joanne Bunting

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

28 April 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Matters of the Day

Heading

Supreme Court Ruling: Legal Definition of a Woman

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4913766

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the ruling. As my colleague has said, it is a victory not just for women in the UK but for common sense. Nevertheless, I express my regret that this was the length to which women in this country had to go to ensure that their spaces were protected and their very existence recognised, defined and protected from biological men. It seems to me that, of late and until now — after hundreds of years of fighting for rights and equality — the most fundamental of rights for women and girls were being eroded and erased under the guise of so-called progress, even in language, never mind definition. Women are not merely "people who menstruate" or "people who chest feed". Let me be clear: women did not view any of this as progress or advancement for them. At every turn, as these changes were being made for biological males, it was at the expense of biological women and their rights and needs. It is women who have suffered and watched as their rights have been eroded and their safety compromised. Some in the House have been seeking to dilute women and their rights by making them invisible — erasing their very definition, as per biology, and regardless of their basic respect, safety and privacy. Yet those same Members, without a hint of irony or self-awareness, will come to the House and wax lyrical on their supposed prioritisation of the safety of women and girls from violence, abuse, predatory behaviour and intimidation, yet they see no problem in permitting biological males with full male genitalia into women's safe and private spaces and into their sport, which presents enormous physical risk. There are those who argue that there is no difference and no distinction in performance in sport. However, if that were the case, why is sport segregated at all? Nonsense has prevailed for too long at the expense of half our population. In the course of this Matter of the Day, many have sought to acknowledge the trans community and its needs, but this whole issue is not about trans; it is about women — biological women. For once, what about acknowledging them, their protection and their needs? Following the ruling, we saw criminal damage to female statues and footage and photographs of takeovers of women's toilets in order to film videos and protests outside women's toilets. Hence, women and girls have had to run that gauntlet to use the bathroom. Is that in any way acceptable? I look forward to hearing from each Minister about the implications of the ruling and actions across each of their Departments, given the Supreme Court's indications on the judgement's likely highly persuasive and consequential precedent for local courts. Women in Northern Ireland deserve the same legal definitions, equality and protections as every other woman in the UK, and they will accept nothing less. As I have said in the Chamber many times, I reiterate this: there is no place for biological males in women's safe and single-sex spaces, including changing rooms, shower rooms, toilets, sports and even prison cells.

516 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Qualifying Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:27 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification