Mick Hartley

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that people who think defining women as female equals 'enforcing the idea that all women need to conform to a singular, racialised and ableist model of femininity' probably shouldn't be teaching anything in university, let alone feminism.

— Dr. Jane Clare Jones (@janeclarejones) May 3, 2025

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Here's the letter: Not In Our Name – Feminist Academics and Educators Speak Out.

We unequivocally reject the idea that women can be defined by their biology, a claim which is neither feminist nor scientific. For centuries, women have fought for the right to do, wear and be what they want to be. It is essentialist and patriarchal to assert that body, genes, chromosomes and reproductive capacity make women (or men).

Feminism teaches us that our body does not determine our destiny, and nor should legislation, policies, or society's expectations.

Trans people are being used as scapegoats and a distraction from the problems that we actually face in society. This is an attack on trans people and will further inflame transphobia. When the Supreme Court ‘clarifies’ (cf. Supreme Court, 2025, pg. 76) what a woman ‘is’ they enforce the idea that all women need to conform to a singular, racialised and ableist model of femininity.

They can't quite get their heads around the idea that woman can be – are – defined by their biology, but that this in no way defines how women present themselves, or dress, or behave, or think. Years of Gender Studies, Queer Theory, and reading Judith Butler can do that to you.