:Middlesex Students Disappointed with Supreme Court Ruling on Definition of ‘Woman’ 

On the 16th of April, 2025, the UK Supreme Court upheld a ruling that the word “woman” in legislation can, in some instances, be interpreted as meaning “biological woman” only, which is a judgment that has sparked heated responses across the country. The case, brought by campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS), concerned the definition of “woman” in the context of legislation and gender-based rights. 

The judgment by the Supreme Court found that the Scottish Government had acted unlawfully when it attempted to include trans identifying women with Gender Recognition Certificates in the legal definition of “woman” under the Equality Act of 2010. Instead, the court stated that when the Act refers to “women,” it means biological women; a decision that reinforces legal clarity but has drawn sharp criticism from LGBTQ+ advocates and students across the UK. 

At Middlesex, students have expressed anger, disappointment and concern over the precedent this ruling sets. On the 8th of May, current MDXSU Education Officer Mihita Parekh travelled with one of Middlesex’s own trans identifying students, Sellaka Santos, to Manchester to join an Action Day being held in response to the ruling. 

“The event was focused on peer discussion, where students would share their university’s responses to the new Supreme Court ruling on the definition of sex and gender, as well as their approaches in supporting trans students,” describes Santos, going on to add “I personally think universities should stand beside their students at all times and that the meaning of woman in itself, the concept of what makes a woman, should not need to be defined by the law.” 

For some, the court's decision compounds a growing sense of institutional neglect. The legal distinction between biological sex and gender identity, while often debated in all kinds of circles, has now been cemented in a way that critics say risks being directly invalidating. 

Parekh, when asked about the highlights of the Action Day, shared: “We met up with the other student leaders from all across the country, like sabbatical officers and presidents of LGBTQ networks and societies. It felt like a really positive and safe place to be.” 

The Supreme Court has since acknowledged the issue raised, noting that the Equality Act does provide specific protections for trans identifying individuals, including the ability to change legal gender via a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). However, the ruling clarified that even with a GRC, a trans identifying woman may not be considered a “woman” for the purposes of legislation aimed specifically at promoting sex-based representation. 

This nuance has done little to alleviate student concerns. For those involved in gender advocacy at Middlesex, the ruling has sparked urgent conversations about how best to respond to this and what they would like to see from the Government moving forward. 

One such advocate who wishes to remain unnamed shared: “You never see politicians consult with scientists, experts, or therapists that have studied the topic. You see biases instead. Why do we not let these matters be discussed by professionals and have to bring outdated and dangerous views in Parliament when we can have informed and factual proofs and studies.” 

In the wake of the ruling, advocacy groups across the UK have called for legislative reform. As for Middlesex’s own position on campus, Parekh shared that she is working closely with the university to put out a statement that treats the subject with the proper wordage it would benefit from. “We as an SU are committed to protecting the human rights and dignities of all students on campus, without exception,” Parekh later added. 

As students continue to organise discussions in response to the ruling, the broader conversation about legal recognition, and inclusive policymaking shows no sign of fading. In the meantime, here are a few free and confidential resources to look up, collated by Parekh for anyone who may be struggling with the implications of this ruling: Switchboard, Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence, Galop, and Stonewall.