Trying to make who is what sex a matter of law instead of fact:

Amnesty International has been given permission to intervene in a landmark Supreme Court case on the legal definition of woman.

The charity, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Scottish Lesbians, and Sex Matters have all been granted permission to take part in For Women Scotland vs Scottish Ministers at the end of next month.

…

The case at the UK’s highest court is the latest development in a long-running legal battle over whether someone who is biologically male can legally be regarded as female for the purposes of the Equality Act.

The answer to that ridiculous question is so obviously “no” that it’s hard to grasp how it can be a long-running legal battle. Can rich people be legally regarded as poor for the purposes of the Equality Act? It would make just as much sense. The relationship among women, men, and equality is that women have historically globally been treated as unequal, so changing that has nothing at all to do with endorsing the fantasies of men who cosplay as women.

For Women Scotland had initially challenged the SNP government over a new law designed to increase the number of women on public boards. The legislation stated that anyone “living as a woman” would be eligible.

Thus defeating the whole purpose. Making men eligible for a law designed to increase the number of women on public boards is an exercise in futility. It’s like trying to make a car go faster by standing on the brake pedal. If you want to increase the number of women on public boards it won’t do you a bit of good to add more men even if they wear lipstick.

The group’s first action was successful, forcing the publication of new statutory guidelines which stated that transgender women should still be counted as female, so long as they held a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).

For Women Scotland challenged this, arguing that the Scottish Government had overstepped its powers by effectively redefining the meaning of female…An appeal by For Women Scotland was rejected by the Inner House last November prompting the Supreme Court bid.

Amnesty International UK said: “Amnesty International is intervening because we believe it is vital the Court is assisted by submissions setting out why legal gender recognition is a human rights issue and that trans people should not be expected to live without it.”

It’s a human rights issue all right but Amnesty is on the wrong side of it.

A bid to intervene by the Good Law Project was rejected. The group was representing Victoria McCloud, the UK’s first transgender judge and Prof Stephen Whittle, an academic who has been campaigning for transgender rights since the 1970s.

The one bit of good news.