In a society that strives for inclusion and equality, it’s vital that we make space for a range of perspectives—especially where legal definitions and human rights intersect. Achieving that balance is far from easy, but that should never deter us from trying. The recent High Court ruling in England, which reaffirmed the importance of the legal definition of sex in specific contexts, has sparked significant debate across the country. While this decision may feel unsettling to some—particularly within the LGBTQIA+ community—it also presents an opportunity to reaffirm our shared commitment to dignity, fairness, and respectful dialogue.

The LGBTQIA+ community continues to face very real challenges: discrimination, marginalisation, and harmful rhetoric still persist in many areas of life. It is essential that we stand in solidarity to protect the rights, identities, and lived experiences of trans, non-binary, and queer individuals. Inclusion must go beyond basic tolerance—it means recognition, validation, and equal protection under the law.

That said, as this ruling has raised concerns about how future decisions might impact the rights of LGBTQIA+ people, it is crucial that greater clarity is provided on the legal reasoning and scope of such judgments. Moreover, support must be extended to individuals on all sides of the discussion—because fear, confusion, or triumph felt in isolation can deepen divisions instead of building understanding.

At the heart of it, we are all part of the same society. Difficult, even painful, issues can be navigated through open, compassionate communication—especially when one side may feel they’ve won, and the other fears what comes next. Our goal should not be to defeat one another, but to shape a society that honours the dignity and humanity of everyone within it.

Personally, while I don’t disagree with the substance of the ruling in this specific context, I find the way it was celebrated unsettling. Legal clarity should not come at the expense of compassion. The conversation around gender identity is far more nuanced than high-profile cases involving athletes or prison placements. Likewise, concerns about women’s safety and the preservation of sex-based rights are valid and deserve respect. These issues are complex and deeply personal, and they deserve more than a moment of triumph or fear—they require thoughtful, empathetic engagement.

My thoughts go out to people on both sides of this issue. That said, I feel strongly that we must move away from reductive headlines like “you are only a woman if you were born one.” Such messaging does more harm than good, fuelling division rather than understanding. My support is with everyone who felt hurt or invalidated by the way this ruling was presented in the media. I hope they can find some reassurance in knowing that, as is so often the case, the press has sensationalised what is actually a far more nuanced and specific legal matter.