Recognising reality is not a threat to anyone, nor is it discriminatory. The judgement recognises the reality of biological sex. Then, people can identify however they wish to identify and we should all respect that.

But the article isn't saying anything new or startling, nor anything that affects today's judgement. It's a little piece about how not everyone fits neatly into standard gender classifications. Gender is not immutable but sex is.

That doesn't mean that a biological male can become a biological women or vice versa.

The author of that article is a graphics designer. Listen to actual scientists. A tiny number of people are intersex etc but laws are not made according to extremely rare exceptions. As for AIS, it means a biological male might present with female genitalia. It can't be the other way around.

Have you read the judgment in full? What human rights are being removed? Or do you count the right to disregard human biology as a human right?

A long time ago I was in Rome with my parents. We were eating at a hotel because local restaurants were strike-bound. In the lobby a guest sat down at the grand and played. I went up to him and said, You're awfully good." He asked if I knew who he was. I said No. it was Demis Roussos.