The clear answer to this is no, he cannot. No matter how a man presents himself, what he wears, what he believes about himself, or what changes he may make to his body through surgery or medical treatment, a man remains a man. A man cannot become a woman. (Nor can a woman become a man.)

Our biological sex is determined at conception and is encoded into every cell of our bodies. Nevertheless, there is a legal mechanism that enables for want of a better phrase ‘men to become women in law’ (and ‘women to become men in law’). The legislation which enables this is the Gender Recognition Act (2004). The GRA enabled a ‘legal fiction’ to be created. It allows men and women to be treated as if they were the opposite sex in certain circumstances.

Under the Act, people who have a medical diagnosis of ‘gender dysphoria’ are permitted to obtain 'legal recognition in their acquired gender' by acquiring a GRC. Legal recognition will follow from the issue of a Gender Recognition Certificate by a Gender Recognition Panel. It does NOT give them the automatic right to access spaces and services for the opposite sex to that which they were born.

The fact remains that nobody can change their biological sex. We all have freedom of expression, and freedom of conscience, and throughout our lives we can explore our internal sense of self, but biological sex remains binary and immutable.

Yes it is. The purpose of the Equality Act (2010), as described by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, is to provide a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It provides an anti-discrimination law which protects individuals from unfair treatment and promotes a fair and more equal society.

The Act specifies the following as protected characteristics: age; disability; gender reassignment; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation.

The Act acknowledges the need for women-only spaces, services, roles and activities and makes it lawful to exclude males, including trans-identifying males, from these spaces. In all cases, the use of an exemption must be a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.

The two most important acknowledgements are as follows:

• Schedule 3 Part 7 Sections 26-28 outlines the legality of providing single sex spaces.
• Schedule 23 Part 3 outlines the legality of single sex accommodation.

If a man who ‘identifies’ as a woman does not have a GRC and wants to access a female-only space he should be refused access. It is not discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment, but discrimination on grounds of sex. He is refused access not because he says he is ‘trans’, but because he is both legally and biologically male. That means he can lawfully be refused access to any female-only space, just as any other male would be.

It is lawful to provide a single-sex space or service if there is a good reason for sex segregation; for example they may be used by more than one person and a woman might object to the presence of a man (or vice versa).

If a person who does have a GRC wants to access a space for the opposite sex to that which they were born, it may still be lawful to refuse (because of the exceptions in the EqA that apply to prohibitions on discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment, as in paragraph 28 of the link above).

There are other areas where the Act outlines the legality of single sex provisions. FairPlayforWomen has provided a clear guide here.

Self-ID or 'self identification' is the notion that a person can simplify self-identify their sex or gender. This needs to be carefully unpacked.

First we must make a clear distinction between sex and gender. Biological sex is binary and immutable. Sex is defined in law by s.212(1) Equality Act 2010 to mean that a woman is as a female of any age, while a man is a male of any age.

Gender has no objective definition. It is often used as a euphemism for 'sex' but it is increasingly being used as a description of a person's inner sense of self, a 'gender identity'. New 'gender' definitions are constantly invented. They keep changing and have no basis in science; they are simply different forms of group identification that some people like to buy into as representing themselves or others. 

The BBC claim there are over 100 different gender identities in programmes aimed at children.

Some groups claim that we all have 'inner gender identities'. There is no scientific basis for this - nor evidence that many people buy into this concept as a way of thinking about themselves.

Having made this clear distinction it is easy to see that self-identification of one's sex makes no sense. But self-identification of one's gender or inner gender identity is something that any of us is free to do.

Women and girls have sex-based rights. Wishing to take advantage of those rights, and to have them enforced via clear guidance to service providers is not 'unkind'. In order to do that we must speak in unambiguous language and be able to discuss policies which affect us free of abuse, harassment or intimidation. To discuss those policies, we must exercise the right to use the language which specifically refers to the anatomy of our biological sex. Men who 'identify' as women are not a category of women, they are a category of men.

Allowing men and boys to take advantage of the rights of women and girls is not kind to women and girls.

Because once policies that allow men into services, spaces, and sports reserved for women are brought into the daylight, it soon becomes clear that these are detrimental to women and they do not have the support of the general public. Consequently, the organisations promoting these policies would much rather we did not talk about them.

We are lucky to live in a country and an era which allows us probably the maximum degree of self-expression ever seen in any historical setting. People are of course free to express themselves and identify themselves any way they like and to have the right to ask others to reflect that self expression.

However, others have the right, and we must retain that right, to decline to reflect that self-expression. Without that we are in the realms of 'compelled speech'. Individuals must retain freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.

While the State has a legitimate basis to be concerned about matters of sex - data collection, medicine, the protection of women's single sex spaces, for example, we can see no role for the State in being concerned about matters of gender, beyond protecting, as above, the rights of the individual to self-expression.

These are complicated matters and we are likely to reflect upon them further.