Police Strip Search Policy for Trans Women Shifts Following Supreme Court Ruling

 

Trans women in the custody of British Transport Police (BTP) will now be subject to strip searches by male officers rather than female, following a landmark Supreme Court ruling that defines "woman" under the Equality Act 2010 as referring to biological sex. The decision has prompted BTP to adopt a temporary policy in line with the court’s interpretation while further guidance is developed.

 

A spokesperson for the BTP Authority told Sky News, “Under previous policy, we had advised that someone with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) may be searched in accordance with their acquired sex. However, as an interim position while we digest today’s judgment, we have advised our officers that any same sex searches in custody are to be undertaken in accordance with the biological birth sex of the detainee.”

 

 

This interim change marks a significant shift from previous BTP guidelines. In September last year, the force had clarified that strip searches would be conducted by officers who shared the same sex as shown on a detainee’s birth certificate or GRC. At the time, trans women with a GRC were permitted to conduct strip searches on female detainees. Trans-identifying officers without a GRC, however, were not allowed to perform such searches. Strip searches, as defined by BTP, involve the exposure of buttocks, genitalia, and female breasts and go beyond the removal of outer garments like jackets, gloves, or footwear.

 

 

The policy came under legal scrutiny when the campaign group Sex Matters launched a judicial review in the High Court, arguing that the guidance posed risks to both detainees and officers. “The policy puts detainees at risk of sexual harassment and sexual assault,” the group said, citing Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. They also expressed concern that the policy “puts female officers in a humiliating and dangerous position, as they may be pressured to search trans-identified men.”

 

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling, public bodies across the UK are being urged to review their guidance on implementing equality law.

 

Government minister Karin Smyth confirmed that public institutions have been advised to assess their current policies. “Obviously, public bodies have been asked to look at their own guidance,” she said. “And we will do that very, very carefully.” However, Smyth also cautioned against rushed or inflammatory responses to the ruling, urging agencies not to make statements “that may alarm people,” and to take the time to review their protocols thoughtfully.

 

Baroness Kishwer Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), stated that the judgment brings clarity to the issue. “There is no confusion now,” she said. Falkner also noted that the NHS will need to revise its 2019 policy, which currently allows transgender patients to be placed on single-sex wards that correspond with their gender identity.

 

As institutions and legal experts continue to examine the broader implications of the ruling, the BTP’s new interim policy represents one of the earliest and most concrete responses to a decision that is expected to reshape how gender and sex are treated under UK equality law.

 

Based on a report by Sky News  2025-04-19

 

Related Topic:

UK Supreme Court Rules ‘Woman’ Means Biological Female, in Landmark Decision

 

 

I'm torn between:

 

1) That's not fair, making the male cops do the dirty work.

 

2) Kudos to them for saving the female cops from that horror. 

 

I just had a flashback to that scene in The Crying Game.  You know the one...

 

I wonder if the Romans had similar problems in the final death throes of their once mighty, but ultimately debauched civilization. 

1 hour ago, Social Media said:

Trans women in the custody of British Transport Police (BTP) will now be subject to strip searches by male officers rather than female

 

Presumably most of them would be quite pleased by this development.

7 minutes ago, GanDoonToonPet said:

 

The article is about how the UK Supreme Court's decision affects British Transport Police policy...try and keep up!

Good for the UK we could use it in the states if ya was born a dude ya gets searched by a dude.it still in my view is a non issue and is used more as an issue to create division no more no less.please do not misconstrue that I support disenfranchising gays from equal rights under law I fully support there rights not to be discriminated against.anyway my apologies I thought it was about the states my bad 😞 

A rare vote for common sense. Men using sexual orientation to cheat at sports and obtain an unjust legal advantage is over.  This legislation is long overdue and most welcome. 

43 minutes ago, Tug said:

Good for the UK we could use it in the states if ya was born a dude ya gets searched by a dude.it still in my view is a non issue and is used more as an issue to create division no more no less.please do not misconstrue that I support disenfranchising gays from equal rights under law I fully support there rights not to be discriminated against.anyway my apologies I thought it was about the states my bad 😞 

Its a huge issue in the UK. The equal act polices have to be changed in all places of work, hospitals, the whole of the NHS, schools and as the example above. The police. 

How do they know that they're trans women until they strip search them? Are they required to verify their GRC or get a copy of their birth certificate before they determine who should strip search them? 

Also, and I ask this in all these reports of how to treat trans women, what about trans men? Who searches them?  

Good.

 

I can just imagine some bloke in a dress getting a cheap thrill having his bits checked by a female officer. 

 

I bet female officers everywhere are breathing a sigh of relief. 

4 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

How do they know that they're trans women until they strip search them? Are they required to verify their GRC or get a copy of their birth certificate before they determine who should strip search them? 

 

It's the UK not Thailand.

 

Most of them have beards and a hairy chest. 

 

Plus they sound like Lenny Mclean.

18 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Also, and I ask this in all these reports of how to treat trans women, what about trans men? Who searches them?  

 

Who searches "trans men"? Female officers of course.

 

Women strip search Women. That's the law. 

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Who searches "trans men"? Female officers of course.

 

Women strip search Women. That's the law. 

Thanks for the clarification, but I think you have extrapolated that from how trans women are to be treated.

It seems to me that whenever ANYTHING is brought up about trans women, there is never a mention of trans men. An easy example is that there is a big hubbub about disqualifying trans women from taking part in women's sports, but I have NEVER seen any mention of whether trans men should also be disqualified from participating in men's sports. WTF? Do we have women's sports and men's sports, or women's sports and everyone-else sports?    

Just now, WDSmart said:

Thanks for the clarification, but I think you have extrapolated that from how trans women are to be treated.

It seems to me that whenever ANYTHING is brought up about trans women, there is never a mention of trans men. An easy example is there is a big hubbub about disqualifying trans women from taking part in women's sports, but I NEVER seen any mention of whether trans men should also be disqualified from participating in men's sports. WTF? Do we have women's sports and men's spots, or women's sports and everyone-else sports? 

 

Trans women are men.

 

Trans men are women. 

 

Hope that clarifies the situation that you are trying to complicate. 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Trans women are men.

 

Trans men are women. 

 

Hope that clarifies the situation that you are trying to complicate. 

I understand your (and most people's) opinion on this, but what I have said is I NEVER SEE any mention of trans men in all these governmental actions that involve trans women. That's all I'm saying... 

And, as I'm sure you probably know, we (the USA) used to have that same binary classification of White and non-White. Even just 50 years ago, non-Whites were not allowed to play sports with Whites. But, because as time went by there were more and more mixed-race people, we eventually declared that if someone was only 1/4 or 1/8 or even 1/16 Black, they could be considered White. (The percentage varied from state to state.) Now, of course, all races are (supposedly) treated equally. 

I hope that will be the same with how we think of gender in the future.

An off topic post and reply has been removed

2 hours ago, impulse said:

I'm torn between:

 

1) That's not fair, making the male cops do the dirty work.

 

2) Kudos to them for saving the female cops from that horror. 

 

I just had a flashback to that scene in The Crying Game.  You know the one...

 

 

Good morning.

Thank you for the best joke of the day.

I really liked your this post.

10 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I understand your (and most people's) opinion on this, but what I have said is I NEVER SEE any mention of trans men in all these governmental actions that involve trans women. That's all I'm saying... 

And, as I'm sure you probably know, we (the USA) used to have that same binary classification of White and non-White. Even just 50 years ago, non-Whites were not allowed to play sports with Whites. But, because as time went by there were more and more mixed-race people, we eventually declared that if someone was only 1/4 or 1/8 or even 1/16 Black, they could be considered White. (The percentage varied from state to state.) Now, of course, all races are (supposedly) treated equally. 

I hope that will be the same with how we think of gender in the future.

 

The reason you do not see this is that trans men are zero threat to real men.   They cannot take medals away from men in sports, they cannot rape men, there is just no scenario that they pose any kind of threat in any kind of situation for men.   They can use mens spaces and no-one cares.   On the other hand trans women are men and they can (and have) raped women, they pose a genuine threat to women in their spaces and they have an unfair advantage in women's sports.  The reason for this is that they are men, as clarified and made abundantly clear by the supreme court to leave you with zero doubt about what is a man and what is a woman.   Why this needed to be clarified for anyone above the age of 4 years old remains a mystery but it is what it is.   

4 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I understand your (and most people's) opinion on this, but what I have said is I NEVER SEE any mention of trans men in all these governmental actions that involve trans women. That's all I'm saying... 

And, as I'm sure you probably know, we (the USA) used to have that same binary classification of White and non-White. Even just 50 years ago, non-Whites were not allowed to play sports with Whites. But, because as time went by there were more and more mixed-race people, we eventually declared that if someone was only 1/4 or 1/8 or even 1/16 Black, they could be considered White. (The percentage varied from state to state.) Now, of course, all races are (supposedly) treated equally. 

I hope that will be the same with how we think of gender in the future.

 

It's because "trans men" do not want to compete against men in sports and they don't want to be strip searched by men.

 

They want it both ways.

 

Reminds me of back in the day when women wanted equal pay and equal everything else but still wanted to retire early. They wanted to slap a man and not get a slap back. 

 

Selective equality. Take the good bits and drop the bad bits. 

 

A bit like immigrants. They want the free healthcare and social security but don't really fancy the generations of hard labour that creates such a system. Just turn up at harvest time take the corn and then run back to the hammock until the mugs have created the next crop.

 

Playing the system. And rich lefties allow it because they see themselves as the privilged white saviours helping the little inferior people from themselves.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

It's the UK not Thailand.

 

Most of them have beards and a hairy chest. 

 

Plus they sound like Lenny Mclean.

 

Just for you Jonny!

 

 

I wish I could find the one where Babs is chiding someone for talking about their holiday choices:

 

"Isle of Man" - "Sexist!"

"Isle of Wight" - "Racist!" 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

How do they know that they're trans women until they strip search them?

 

Hands like shovels, five-o-clock shadow, knobbly knees, and look like a lipstick pig-in-a-wig …… shouldn’t be too difficult even for an extreme lefty to spot.

 

 

28 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

They want it both ways.

 

Reminds me of back in the day when women wanted equal pay and equal everything else but still wanted to retire early. They wanted to slap a man and not get a slap back. 

 

Selective equality. Take the good bits and drop the bad bits. 

Reminds me of this ...... 🙂

 

 

Same as minorities. They don't really want a level playing field.

 

They want DEI quotas. They want the indigenous competition removed from the pool. They want the justice system stacked in their favour in the form of PSR's guaranteed based on their race and religion. Preferential treatment for housing and education places.

 

It's almost like they don't want to compete on a level playing field. Can't imagine why, given the history and success of our respective cultures. 

 

It's like, hmmmmmmm. 🤔 It's a real head scratcher 😀.

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

The reason you do not see this is that trans men are zero threat to real men.   They cannot take medals away from men in sports, they cannot rape men, there is just no scenario that they pose any kind of threat in any kind of situation for men.   They can use mens spaces and no-one cares.   On the other hand trans women are men and they can (and have) raped women, they pose a genuine threat to women in their spaces and they have an unfair advantage in women's sports.  The reason for this is that they are men, as clarified and made abundantly clear by the supreme court to leave you with zero doubt about what is a man and what is a woman.   Why this needed to be clarified for anyone above the age of 4 years old remains a mystery but it is what it is.   

So, both trans women and trans men can participate in men's sports, correct?

I assume the "supreme court" you mention above is the UK Supreme Court. I saw part of their ruling, and they claimed their gender ruling, which defines male and female, is made on a "biological" basis. That's not true. This ruling is being made on a legal basis, an "either-or" basis. The true biological basis is that there is no such absolute "either-or" distinction. Gender, male and female. are made up of traits, which include physical, hormonal, and chromosomal, that are all shared between both genders. What we call "male" is someone who, from a cursory examination (mainly physical), is thought to have a large percentage of male characteristics. The same goes for females. But the facts are, there are some (I don't know the percentage, but I've seen it claimed to be as high as 3%. (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/trans-population-by-country), whose physical, homonal, and/or chromosomal makeup is somewhere in between.

That is the biological basis for trans people. 

(And, I am above 4 years old. In fact, I'm above 74 years old. ) 

24 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

So, both trans women and trans men can participate in men's sports, correct?

 

Sure, a women's category and an open category would be sufficient as then nobody can claim (falsely) that they are "excluded".   Men will not care if women pretending to be men wish to compete in mens or "open" category sports.   If an elite female athlete like Serena Williams wanted to pretend to be a man and fancied a go in the open category at Wimbledon not a single man or woman would have a problem with that as she would not even be in the top 500 if competing against men.

 

A woman or female according to the ruling that is that a woman is a female who is observed (not assigned) at birth of being a female.   Same as it always has been.  I'm sure when you were 4 years old you were able to tell the difference between boy/girl/man/woman.  It seems you have regressed somewhat due to media brainwashing. 

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

Sure, a women's category and an open category would be sufficient as then nobody can claim (falsely) that they are "excluded".   Men will not care if women pretending to be men wish to compete in mens or "open" category sports.   If an elite female athlete like Serena Williams wanted to pretend to be a man and fancied a go in the open category at Wimbledon not a single man or woman would have a problem with that as she would not even be in the top 500 if competing against men.

 

A woman or female according to the ruling that is that a woman is a female who is observed (not assigned) at birth of being a female.   Same as it always has been.  I'm sure when you were 4 years old you were able to tell the difference between boy/girl/man/woman.  It seems you have regressed somewhat due to media brainwashing. 

I would have no problem with labeling sports "women" and "open." Women have competed in men's sports occasionally in the past, like these seven golfers who participated in men's professional golf... Exploring the 7 women including Lexi Thompson who have played at a Men’s PGA Tour event. 

I did like your use of the word "observed" to describe how a person is assigned a gender at birth. I think without more in-depth testing of chromosomes, and hormones that don't really develop until puberty, a doctor ought to now assign a person's gender at birth as "TBD" (To Be Determined). 

I did believe there were only two genders and that I could tell them apart when I was 4. And then I didn't care who I played ball with or went inside the same bathroom. Also, I was "woke" when I was 4. Societal pressures lulled me to sleep sometime after that, but thankfully, I became "woke" again when I was about 30. I'm 79 now and have learned a lot in the past 75 years, not from "media brainwashing" but from scientific and biological reports. I'm 79 now and have learned a lot in the past 75 years, not from "media brainwashing" but from scientific and biological reports.

And my life has been amazing! 🙂 

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

It's because "trans men" do not want to compete against men in sports and they don't want to be strip searched by men.

 

They want it both ways.

 

Reminds me of back in the day when women wanted equal pay and equal everything else but still wanted to retire early. They wanted to slap a man and not get a slap back. 

 

Selective equality. Take the good bits and drop the bad bits. 

 

A bit like immigrants. They want the free healthcare and social security but don't really fancy the generations of hard labour that creates such a system. Just turn up at harvest time take the corn and then run back to the hammock until the mugs have created the next crop.

 

Playing the system. And rich lefties allow it because they see themselves as the privilged white saviours helping the little inferior people from themselves.

they want it both ways <WOOPS !!

1 hour ago, portisaacozzy said:

they want it both ways <WOOPS !!

Is that not what a lot of "Trannies" want?

Oh, 

A good news thread.

Good job. 

The sheer fact that such nonsense is being discussed and occupies courts is more than proof enough, that society went down the pan quite some time ago. All this gender rubbish is brainless and serves the 15 minutes of fame these trans-people try to get. 

Degeneration of society - of the finest order, me thinks! 

As each individual, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, has the right to request male or female doctors, shouldn't everyone have the choice of which gender strip searches them?