Letters: the cruelty of the Supreme Court trans ruling
From our UK edition
Cruel intentions Sir: Rod Liddle (‘Let’s strike a blow for honesty’, 26 April) seems to have fallen into the same trap as most writers who support the Supreme Court’s ruling on the trans issue – which is to refuse to differentiate between those who have undergone a full gender reassignment, so that they effectively no longer have the same bodies they were born into, and those who simply put on a dress and call themselves a woman. While it can clearly be argued that a man in a dress might pose a risk to women in single-sex spaces, it can hardly be suggested that a trans woman who has undergone full gender reassignment is in the same category, and should be refused access to women’s toilets and other similar places.