Despite the law and public opinion, there is strong resistance to gender reality among politicians and officials

When nurse Sandie Peggie complained about the presence in a women-only changing room at work of trans-identifying Dr Beth Upton, she was treated disgracefully by her employers.

Ignoring the law protecting single-sex spaces – and the dignity of female employees – NHS Fife initiated a disciplinary process against Peggie, while senior staff treated Upton as a victim.

Unwilling to be bullied out of the career to which she has dedicated three decades, the nurse launched claims of harassment and discrimination against both the health board and Upton. Initial tribunal sessions during February heard how Peggie had raised concerns about Upton’s presence in a changing room at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy only to have management turn on her.

Last week, it emerged that NHS Fife has already spent £220,500 defending itself and Upton against Peggie’s claim.

That total will soar by the time the tribunal process – which resumes on Wednesday after a prolonged break – reaches its conclusion.

Feminists who have been engaged in fighting the extreme demands of trans activists use the work “peaking” to describe the moment at which an individual recognises the harm caused by an ideology that insists the feelings of men matter more than the reality of being a woman.

I think it reasonable to say that Peggie’s case is responsible for “peaking” a remarkable number of Scots.

During the period when Nicola Sturgeon was First Minister and pushing hard to remove the rights of women to single-sex spaces, we might have expected to hear senior politicians wax nauseating about Upton’s bravery. We might have expected to hear MSPs attack Sandie Peggie as a bigot. We might have expected to hear endless meaningless bromides about being “kind”.

But times have changed. Government-funded trans activist groups, for so long seemingly free to dictate policy to the SNP, are no longer running the show. A number of high-profile legal cases, including the successful action by campaigners group For Women Scotland which saw the Supreme Court rule that, when it comes to sex, biology trumps vibes, have strengthened public opposition to gender ideology.

Some politicians have felt the way wind is blowing and changed course. In December 2022, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar whipped his MSPs to back the SNP’s disastrous attempt to reform the Gender Recognition Act, allowing anyone to self-identify into the legally-recognised sex of their choosing but his position now is that, had he known then what he knows now, he would not have done so.

Of course, had he paid the slightest bit of attention to the feminists warning him that self-ID would destroy women’s rights, Sarwar would have know everything he needed to know in order to oppose the proposal long ago.

While Sarwar has reconnected with reality on this issue, First Minister John Swinney remains fully committed to the removal of women’s rights, recently stating that he had no regrets about backing reform of the GRA.

Well, what else could he say?

While more than 60 per cent of people agree with the ruling of the Supreme Court, just a fifth of voters think the justices made the wrong decision.

Swinney is one of a dwindling band of supporters of self-ID, which remains popular with the hard-left and self-styled “progressives”.

The political division over gender ideology has been clear for a long time. The case of Sandie Peggie brings into focus another societal split on the issue.

The trans-rights movement is the first “equality” crusade to filter from the top down. The luxury belief that an individual can magically change sex has been pushed not by grassroots activists but by well-funded organisations and political parties captured by activists.

Peggie is a working class woman while Upton – in common with so many gender activists – was raised in middle class privilege. The difference in power, in agency, is clear.

During February’s evidence sessions, Upton claimed to be a “biological female”. It says something about the doctor’s sense of entitlement that Sandie Peggie and the rest of us are expected to accept this. Until recently, a male entering a female-only changing room at work would have faced the strongest possible disciplinary action. The fact that Upton was ever permitted to use the women’s facilities at work is a scandal.

But, among the chattering political and middle classes, the idea that one should be cheered for living “authentically” rules, even when that authenticity means expecting others to share and indulge someone’s delusion, no matter how uncomfortable that may make them.

To Nicola Sturgeon and her fellow gender militants, the consequences of their actions mean nothing. If a vulnerable woman has to share a confined changing room with a man, then she should not complain but educate herself. And then see that man as the brave woman she is.

The class aspect of this whole mess is the reason it will take so long to complete the necessary process of removing the influence of gender ideologues from public bodies.

The powerful men and women – politicians, highly paid government officials, senior academics – who have fully invested in this nonsense are not (the occasional Anas Sarwar, aside) easily going to admit they got things so terribly wrong.

And so – although common sense is winning – there remains a thick streak of resistance to reality among the upper echelons of society.

Eleven working days have been set aside for concluding stage of Peggie’s tribunal hearing. Among those scheduled to appear is Dr Kate Searle, who permitted Upton’s use of the women’s changing facilities at the Victoria.

I can’t image Searle is relishing the prospect of being examined by Sandie Peggie’s impressive lawyer, Naomi Cunningham KC. It stands to be very messy, indeed.

But the messier the better, I say.

The humiliation of anyone in power who ignored the law to pander to trans activists would be hugely helpful. Pour encourager les autres, you understand.