The UK's Supreme Court Decision: What Makes a Woman?

TALK TO ME, TEXT IT

The UK Supreme Court has finally drawn a line in the sand, ruling that transgender women cannot be legally considered women for certain sex-based exceptions. This landmark decision arrives at a time when defining womanhood has become unnecessarily complicated despite biological reality being self-evident. Yet, as we dig deeper into this ruling, troubling contradictions emerge—men with Gender Recognition Certificates still maintain legal status as women in many contexts, potentially allowing access to women's spaces like prisons and shelters.

Beyond the headlines lies a complex web of legal nuance that leaves both sides dissatisfied. While advocates for women's sex-based rights celebrate a partial victory, the ruling carefully preserves most transgender protections, creating a confusing middle ground that fails to provide clear guidance. Organizations remain caught between respecting women's safety concerns and fearing discrimination lawsuits. This UK decision serves as both warning and preview for Americans as we navigate our own cultural and legal battles around sex and gender identity.

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, we witness this ideology playing out in American beauty pageants. Bill Belichick's girlfriend is set to compete in Miss Maine USA against the competition's first transgender participant—a competition where biological reality seems increasingly irrelevant. These developments highlight the ongoing struggle to maintain sex-based protections in a culture that has embraced confusing terminology and concepts.

The conversation takes an unexpected turn with a fascinating biblical discovery: dragons appear in scripture! This revelation serves as a perfect launching point for deeper biblical exploration. What surprised you when first reading the Old Testament? Scripture continues to reveal unexpected wisdom and fascinating details that challenge our modern assumptions, reminding us that truth—whether biological or spiritual—sometimes requires rediscovery in each generation.

Buzzsprout - Let's get your podcast launched!
Start for FREE

Thanks for listening! 

Liberty Line each week on Sunday, look for topics on my X file @americanistblog and submit your 1-3 audio opinions to [e-mail] and you'll be featured on the podcast. 

Buzzsprout - Let's get your podcast launched!
Start for FREE

Support the show

Tip Jar for coffee $ - Thanks

Music by Alehandro Vodnik from Pixabay

Blog - AnAmericanist.com
X - @americanistblog

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello, good morning, happy Thursday.
We are getting right to it.
I'm talking about women and theUK's Supreme Court saying that.
I guess it was there oh gosh, Ihave it on my blog.
I have to go read it againabout women being defined as a

(00:20):
biological woman.
I mean, we're here.
This is where we are, where wehave to have a Supreme Court of
people telling us what a womanis, when we already know what a
woman is.
The Bible tells us clearly whatthe Bible is Speaking of which
I have a great question of theday I hope I don't forget, and
it is in regards to the Bible.
All right, so I'm going to readmy blog post that I spent some

(00:42):
time on yesterday and I'm kindof happy about, and I hope that
you go read it and share it withothers, please.
All right, the UK Supreme Courtrules that trans women are not
real women.
The United Kingdom has shown arare semblance of sanity and
perhaps even spine.
Their Supreme Court ruled thattrans women cannot legally be
considered real women.

(01:03):
Well, kind of Sure, the UKSupreme Court is now willing to
admit that a man isn't a woman,but they're still protecting the
right of men to be recognizedas women, which likely means
that they'll still be allowedinto women-only spaces, because
they say in this ruling, orwhatever it was, they are saying
that trans rights over thereare not being affected by this.

(01:28):
So which is it?
You can't have it both ways.
So you might be wondering whyI'm covering a UK Supreme Court
ruling on an Americanist, whichis my blog.
Simple, because what'shappening over there is warning
for us.
The UK has been at thisforefront of pushing gender
ideology and now they'restarting to hit the brakes,

(01:50):
while we Americans have beenwaking up to this madness.
We're not exactly moving atlightning speed.
Here's another thing Gender.
No such thing.
There's sex.
There's male and female, butthey've twisted this and people
use the term gender now likeit's a real thing and it's sex.
There's male and female, butthey've twisted this and people
use the term gender now likeit's a real thing and it's not.
So we need to stop doing that.

(02:10):
First and foremost, again, whenthey steal the language, they
take control.
All right, so before we get in,okay, I'm going to skip over
this because I put here, I putin my blog post about the
history and the Tavistock GenderIdentity Development Center
over there and how this allstarted, so I tried to give you
a little background.

(02:31):
In the UK, I also talk aboutKelly J Keene, and if it wasn't
for her, if it was not for KellyJ Keene?
I know JK Rowling's getting alot of credit, and yes, I
suppose she should, but becauseI guess she didn't have to come
out.
Jk Rowley is a big name.
She didn't have to come outpublicly and state any of the
things that she has stated.
She did risk her career indoing so, kind of.

(02:54):
She has not been harmed by it,thank goodness.
Kelly J Keene, on the otherhand, has been on the ground
doing actual work on this.
So don't forget that, pleasedon't forget that.
So, anyway, we're going to moveon.
So here's the decision theSupreme Court ruled that trans
women, biological males, are notlegally considered women for

(03:16):
the purposes of single-sexexceptions under the Equality
Act of 2010.
This is theirs, not ours.
We don't have anything likethis.
This means, legally speaking, aman who identifies as a woman
can be treated differently incertain contexts that are
protected for biological women,such as political party

(03:37):
shortlists or women-onlyservices.
So that's good.
However, there's a catch.
The ruling does not roll backso-called trans rights or strip
legal recognition fromtrans-identifying individuals.
If a man has legally changedhis gender via a gender
recognition certificate a GRCthat's huge over there under the

(03:59):
Gender Recognition Act of 2004,he is still recognized in most
legal contexts as female.
So, yes, the court says a manis not a woman when it comes to
specific sex-based rights, butmen with a GRC are still legally
women in many other areas oflaw.
This means a biological malewho identifies as a woman could

(04:21):
still access women's spaces likeprisons, changing rooms or
shelters, depending on theinterpretation of other laws and
policies.
Organizations are still in alegal gray zone, often fearing
discrimination lawsuits if theyexclude trans-identifying males,
even when safety or privacy isat stake.

(04:42):
Now, I am not an attorney.
I have no idea how this rulingreally is, but everything I'm
reading on social media, theyare celebrating it as a win and
as they should.
Just be careful because I thinkthere are some loopholes here.
But I'm not an attorney.
I'm not a lawyer.
Isn't there always a loopholesomewhere, right?
All right, we need to move onto my next story.

(05:03):
Please go read that.
There's more to my blog postover there if you're interested
in that kind of a topic.
The next thing I want to talkabout is from the New York Post,
and it's Bill Belichick's 24year old girlfriend almost said
daughter, his 24 year oldgirlfriend.
You know who Bill Belichick isright, he's like 77 years old
football coach.

(05:23):
So his girlfriend, who is 24years old, is going to compete,
bill.
Let me just read the headlineBill Belichick's girlfriend
Jordan Hudson is her name tocompete for Miss Maine USA
against competition's firsttransgender woman.
So see, over here we've stilllost our minds.

(05:44):
So Bill Belichick's 24-year-oldgirlfriend, jordan Hudson, will
be competing against atransgender woman in a Maine
beauty pageant next month.
According to a report, hudsonis looking to claim the crown of
Miss Maine USA after placing asrunner-up in last year's
competition, but will face astrong challenge in the form of
Isabel St Cyr, who is set tobecome the first transgender

(06:11):
individual to vie for thecoveted state title.
Set to become the firsttransgender individual to vie
for the coveted state title.
Here's the thing if I was Jordan, first of all, I wouldn't
compete, because a man iscompeting in the competition.
Second of all, you're going tolose because they're going to

(06:32):
prop up this man as a woman inthis pageant.
So, jordan, don't do it, eventhough I really don't care for
you.
Starting pageants at 24 feels abit like starting cheerleading.
When I was 14, st Cyr wrote ina statement on Facebook on March
25th this is the transgenderperson St Cyr is.
When I started cheerleading, Ihad all the odds stacked against
me.
So much pushback, so manypeople telling me it wasn't a

(06:54):
space for me.
No, a guy can be a cheerleader,you just have to be a guy.
Okay, they're called yellleaders is what we called them
in our school.
So a farm owner from Monson,monson, maine, st Cyr, said he
is not participating in thecompetition to make any
political point, but forpersonal reasons, which is
bullshit.
Because later on he says I'mjust doing it because I love

(07:18):
pageants and I just happen to betrans.
I want to show everyone thattrans women absolutely do this
pageant and can do well.
He told Bangor Daily News.
Now I'm correcting thisreporter with their pronouns
because they keep calling SaintSarah she when he's really a
dude.
Okay, somebody, we got tocorrect these people so you can

(07:39):
go.
Finish reading that.
So we're still not safe fromany of this trans ideology,
trans cult crap.
Just keep that in mind.
Just because an executive orderwas signed doesn't mean things
are back to normal becausethey're not All right.
We need to go on to the questionof the day.
I was listening to my Bible ina year on the way into work and

(08:00):
we're on Daniel.
I think it's Daniel, butthey're talking about Daniel and
how he, the false god, bel orBella, whatever it's called and
he showed the king how it was afalse god and he destroyed it.
And so the king put before hima dragon, a living dragon.

(08:21):
This is in the bible.
Did you know that there weredragons in the bible?
I had no idea.
So the question for you is whenyou first started really
studying and reading the biblefor the very first time, what
was probably the most surprisingthing that you discovered in
the Bible, in the old, in thefirst few books?

(08:41):
Not, this is pre pre-Jesus andpre-Testament, this is, like in
the Torah, the first few books,so before Jesus came.
I want to know that what is themost surprising thing that you
discovered or learned when youfirst started reading the Bible?

(09:01):
Now, today, it's just.
There's lots of things thatI've like oh wow, oh wow, I
didn't, oh wow.
Just really has opened me up.
But I'm just speaking for today.
The thing I learned today wasthere are dragons in the Bible.
I did not know that.
Okay, I got to go.