Trans Activists Aren’t on Side of Science

EDITORIAL – In the latest round of the battle over gender ideology, a UK Supreme Court ruling has struck a much-needed blow for biological truth and legal clarity. The court’s decision to define “man,” “woman,” and “sex” strictly in terms of biological sex under the Equality Act 2010 is not only a win for common sense but a sign that Western societies may finally be reasserting reality in the face of radical activism.

For too long, transgender activists have insisted that “science is on our side,” a claim echoed in a recent editorial at The Daily Signal, where this assertion is dissected with facts and reason. Activists routinely ignore or attempt to rewrite fundamental biological principles, demanding that society redefine male and female to accommodate personal identities, not scientific realities.

But biology isn’t bigotry. Chromosomes, reproductive systems, and immutable biological differences are not subject to how one feels on any given day. The court’s ruling acknowledges that when it comes to legal protections, especially in spaces like women’s shelters, prisons, and sports, real-world distinctions matter. A legal system that blurs those lines puts women—biological women—at risk.

Take the case that spurred the UK court ruling. It wasn’t just about terminology; it was about safeguarding single-sex spaces, something feminists and conservatives alike once agreed on. The push to erase those boundaries in the name of “inclusion” has created confusion in schools, undermined women’s sports, and led to chilling effects on free speech for those who speak out.

The narrative that questioning gender ideology equals hatred is both dishonest and dangerous. The scientific community is not in lockstep on these issues, especially when it comes to treatments for minors and the validity of concepts like “rapid-onset gender dysphoria.” In fact, some countries in Europe are now pausing or rethinking their approach to transitioning children—highlighting that caution, not capitulation, is the responsible path.

Let’s be clear: compassion for individuals with gender dysphoria is important. But compassion doesn’t require denying biological facts or overhauling centuries of social norms. We can love our neighbors without surrendering to a worldview that insists a man can become a woman by declaration alone.

This ruling from the UK should serve as a wake-up call. Truth matters. Words matter. And no amount of activist pressure should force society to abandon what it knows to be true. It’s time for lawmakers, educators, and courts in the U.S. to take a similar stand—for the sake of women, children, and the integrity of science itself.