In February 2024, a coalition of Australian women’s and LGB groups, led by AAWAA, wrote to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) to raise urgent concerns about the impact of sex self-identification, or “sex self-ID”, on women’s rights and sex-based protections in Australia. Our coalition comprises teachers, lawyers, nurses, doctors, scientists, academics, retirees, mothers, and lesbians — women from all walks of life, united by a commitment to safeguard the human rights of women and girls.
Our letter highlighted the real-world consequences of sex self-ID legislation and policy for women’s safety, dignity, and participation in public life.
Sex self-ID: what is at stake?
Sex self-ID enables individuals to legally change the sex marker on their birth certificate or other official documents on the basis of self-declaration. While this is intended to reduce stigma and discrimination against transgender and gender-diverse people, the Australian experience demonstrates that sex self-ID can undermine the rights and protections of women and girls in critical areas.
The disappearance of female-only spaces has become a significant issue. The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) recently rejected a Victorian lesbian group’s request to hold female-only events, citing anti-discrimination laws that now prioritise gender identity over sex. As a result, women’s groups have been forced underground, unable to meet exclusively as females to discuss issues that affect them. Providers of female-only services for victims of sexual abuse and family violence have quietly adjusted their models to accommodate males who identify as women, often under pressure to retain public funding. Those who hold firm to female-only principles risk losing resources and public support.
There has also been a chilling effect on free speech. Women who express “gender critical” views — affirming the importance of biological sex for women’s rights — have been de-platformed, lost jobs, or faced investigations and fines. Many women in leadership roles say they agree with these views but are afraid to speak out. Parliamentary committees and official inquiries have often excluded gender-critical voices, breaching the right of all Australians to seek and receive information and ideas.
How did we get here?
Legislative changes have occurred without women’s input. Parliament introduced protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex status in the Sex Discrimination Act amendments of 2013, but did not debate the definition of “sex” or “woman.” The AHRC and government have since interpreted these amendments as establishing that sex is not a binary concept and can be changed, despite assurances at the time that the changes would not affect women’s rights or special measures.
State and territory governments introduced sex self-ID laws after “targeted consultations” with LGBTQ communities, but often excluded women’s groups and child safeguarding experts. In most cases, women were only consulted after bills were tabled or in response to public pressure.
CEDAW Article 7 obliges governments to ensure women can participate equally in the formulation and implementation of public policy. Yet, Australian authorities have repeatedly excluded women from the most basic questions about what it means to be a woman and what is needed to guarantee women’s rights to safety, non-discrimination, and dignity.
Real-world impacts
The impact of sex self-ID is evident in sport, where male-born individuals who identify as women are now entering and winning female competitions. This discourages women and girls from participating in sport. While the Sex Discrimination Act allows for single-sex sport, government-funded bodies often discourage its application at the club level, citing guidelines developed without input from women’s groups.
In healthcare, the introduction of de-sexed language such as “pregnant people” and “chest feeders” has caused confusion and undermined sex-specific care, especially for migrant and refugee women. The “gender-affirming” model of care, now widely practised in Australia, is being rejected by several European countries and the World Health Organisation due to a lack of evidence. Yet, Australian governments have resisted calls to review practices in gender clinics, even as demand for medical interventions rises. New laws criminalise or discourage alternative treatments for gender dysphoria, such as psychotherapy, denying trans-identifying people the right to access psychological support.
Data integrity has also been compromised. Most Australian sex self-ID laws allow adults and children to change the sex marker on their birth certificate, rather than issuing a separate gender recognition certificate. This may already be distorting national statistics on issues such as sexual assault and undermines the ability to track the status and well-being of women and men over time.
CEDAW’s purpose undermined
CEDAW was created to ensure women can enjoy their fundamental rights on an equal basis with men. By erasing distinctions between women and men in areas where women are most vulnerable because of sex, sex self-ID legislation undermines the very purpose of CEDAW. Sex-based distinctions remain material to the safety and dignity of females in critical domains of life.
Our call to action
We urge the CEDAW Committee, and all those concerned with women’s rights, to ensure open and transparent consideration of sex self-ID and its impacts. It is vital to actively seek out the perspectives of women directly affected by these changes, including female prisoners, sexual abuse survivors, lesbians, detransitioners, sportswomen, and girls. Sex-based protections are essential to women’s safety, dignity, and equality, and these protections do not diminish the rights of gender-diverse people.
See the full letter, below.
