Scottish government banned from redefining "woman"
-
The Court of Session (Scotland's highest civil court) ruled yesterday that the Scottish government did not have the power to redefine "woman" to include trans-women.
Technically, the lawsuit only covered the definition of "woman" but it also includes the definition of "man".
-
@raphjd said in Scottish government banned from redefining "woman":
The Court of Session (Scotland's highest civil court) ruled yesterday that the Scottish government did not have the power to redefine "woman" to include trans-women.
Technically, the lawsuit only covered the definition of "woman" but it also includes the definition of "man".
A victory - albeit short-lived - for transphobes the whole world over, I'm sure!
Of course, courts have a long history of stemming the tide of social change! Right, Dred Scott?
-
@raphjd My question becomes, can they ever redefine the term to include trans women? Does it need to come from a vote of the people, or particular legislation?
-
As I understand it, only the UK government can change it.
-
Actually, the use of the word to describe a female human can be re-defined by "society" long before any legislative body gets around to it! And word "definitions" come from common use, not legislatures!
To wit:
- Actors used to be male, as there was Actress for women... no more: they're all Actors
- Literal (literally) used to mean one thing (as opposed to "figuratively"), but now it means BOTH - because people came to use the phrase incorrectly so much ("I am literally sweating my balls off here!" - I don't think so!)
-
But that's not what the lawsuit was about. The court didn't rule on society changing the definition, but the Scottish government changing the definition.
