In this issue I return to attempts to produce “trans-inclusive” definitions of womanhood. Two weeks ago I discussed attempts to do so by analogy with adoptive parents and naturalised citizens; in this issue I look at so-called “ameliorative” inquiries—which I don’t think stand up any better.

In which I start to debunk the various awful arguments I’ve come across for the proposition that “trans women are women”. This week: why analogies to adoptive parenthood and naturalised citizenship don’t work.

The uneasy co-existence of dignity and victimhood culture means laws and mores are shaped around the assumption that most people are following one moral code, when in fact many are following another.

This week I’m picking up where I left off three weeks ago: writing about the ongoing shift from dignity culture to victimhood culture. If you haven’t already read that issue, start there. If you received this email because someone forwarded it to you, why not subscribe? Sign me

Allison won on her central claim: that she suffered direct discrimination and victimisation by Garden Court on the basis of her gender-critical beliefs. For this she was awarded “aggravated damages”—which suggests the tribunal thought Garden Court’s behaviour was egregious.

On Tuesday 19th July, Sex Matters launched a report on single-sex spaces at the House of Lords. This week I’m sharing my speaking notes for the event.

I’m writing about something a little different this week: a big change during the past decade in the way workplaces function. I’ve a lot to say about this, so this article is going to be split in two. The second instalment will be next week, or shortly after

Part 1 I’m starting to write this on Wednesday 6th July, just a couple of hours before Maya Forstater receives the judgment in her employment-tribunal case. Unusually for a first-instance hearing, she was given notice yesterday that the result is coming today, probably around 11am—normally the judgment just