Piet Hoebeke is a well-known Belgian Urologist at the Ghent Universitary Hospital and Dean at the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences of the Ghent University. He is actively involved in multidisciplinary teams addressing sexual development disorders and gender dysphoria.
After some hesitation, Prof. Hoebeke decided to respond to the verdict of the British High Court regarding the position and rights of trans women in the United Kingdom. As you might remember, the court ruled that the definition of “sex” in the Equality Act refers to “biological sex” only, i.e. the gender as recorded at the time of birth of an individual. This means that the (changed) gender of the people commonly referred to as “trans people” is not respected, despite them holding a Gender Recognition Certificate and having had their new gender legally recognized. According to the British Court, trans women can therefore not claim access to spaces or activities that are ‘women only’.
Prof. Hoebeke shared his viewpoint on this ruling in an article published by Belgian newspaper De Morgen on 22 April 2025, in the print edition of the newspaper as well as the online edition.
I am glad that Prof. Hoebeke raised his voice anyhow. He is highly experienced in the matter, having worked and guided several ‘trans people’ (and still doing so to date) while having deep scientific and medical knowledge in the matter. His overall claim is that the verdict of the British High Court seems to be built upon the assumption that trans women only want to pretend to be women, merely disguise as women. He regrets how this ignores several available, modern insights.
I admire how Prof. Hoebeke in his article eloquently put words to emotions, feelings, convictions and evidence regarding the topic; in a way that I wished I could but that totally surpasses my ability to put such words together in proper phrases. I liked his article much because it was inspiring, clear, based on evidence and practical experience. Above all, it puts people first. And—most importantly—it corrects many of the ruling, simplistic ideas concerning the sophisticated and complex ecosystem that the human body is, and of gender and sex specifically.
I am humbled that Prof. Hoebeke allowed me to translate his article into English to share it with my network of readers and followers. I have slightly edited and expanded the article to emphasize that this is more than a legal matter only in the UK only.
Although, obviously, this message is not about politics in itself, there is no escaping that we all are actors in a political system. This is a message about ethics that should help us consider what sort of person we chose to be in what sort of society. The start is openness and looking beyond our self-fulfilling bubble of viewpoints. At a personal level, I see this message as a way to extend my mission of “humanizing the workplace with Scrum” to “humanizing society”.
Enjoy reading
Gunther
Your independent Scrum Caretaker
Trans women are women. Not a different species, not an exception, not a threat. Just women.
Piet Hoebeke
Doubt. That is what I initially felt when the verdict of the British High Court was made public. The Court judged that the notion “woman” in specific legislation only applies to someone who was registered as a woman at the time of birth–thereby ruling out trans women, even when they have their change of gender legally recorded.
I doubted whether to respond. Because every time that I speak out about the rights of trans people, a flood of outrage and accusations comes my way, not in the least via all sorts of digital platforms and channels. However, remaining silent, certainly in this case, felt like weakness, and even cowardness. I decided that this is not the time to remain silent, given the ignorance of the (scientific) truth, fundamental human rights and the on-going vicious attacks on this vulnerable group in society. It kept me awake at night. So, find hereby my response.
What stands out for me is that trans women are firstly…women. They are not a separate species or type of people, not an exception, not a threat. They are women that are part of our society and whose existence is as legitimate as that of cis women.
This case, that ultimately made me speak out again, actually already started in 2018 as a legal disagreement between the Scottish government and the committee called “For Women Scotland” (FWS). The Scottish government wanted to offer trans women holding a “Gender Recognition Certificate” (GRC) the same legal protection and rights that (cis) women have. FWS disputed that right before local courts first arguing that sex-related protection and rights should be preserved for people that were born as women and are therefore biologically women.
After the rejection of their claim in 2022, FWS was granted permission to take the case to the U.K. Supreme Court. That court now follows the reasoning of FWS. Susan Smith, co-founder of FWS, was clearly relieved when she stated that the High Court confirmed that women should be protected based upon their biological sex, and biological sex only: “Spaces intended for women will from now really be for women”.
At first sight, this might indeed sound like a victory for women’s rights. However, if we look beyond the surface, the real signal of this verdict is that trans women are not really women. It’s even worse as the signal is that trans women are a threat (to cis women). The underlying thinking is that a trans woman, thus biologically born as a man, presents a danger and a threat in spaces for women. It reduces trans women to men in disguise that abuse their transition to enter spaces that are reserved for women only. The suggestion is that their aim is to spy on and—ultimately—potentially abuse the women present in those spaces.
This train of thought is, more than just highly stigmatizing, completely absurd. These people do not wish to pretend to be women, but have a deep desire to actually be women, exist as women.
Too few people seem to grasp that going through a long process of gender transition is socially, medically and personally a far from fast and easy journey, far from being the quick result of an impulsive overnight decision. Trans women have to wade through tons of administration, are subjected to extensive hormonal therapies, have to consider undergoing gender affirming surgery and often have to overcome hostile reactions (verbally or physically) from their close and wider environment—up to the point of being rejected. There is not a single person that makes the choice to go through all these steps and processes, which takes several years, lightly—let alone do it to peek at women or commit acts of sexual aggression.
On a side note, regarding sexual aggression, there are far more serious problems to tackle than the unfounded, implicit accusations projected on trans women. The numbers are even devastating. In a survey of about 5800 people that was mirroring the Belgian population (conducted between July 2021 and August 2022), more than 16% of women responded that they have been the victim of sexual aggression at some point of their life. The inconventient truth is that these acts of sexual aggression are almost exclusively committed by (cis) men. In most cases these men are even known to their victims, rather than being some far-away stranger. The exact numbers might differ, but the overall trends are the same in other countries.
By the way, there is also the simple fact that a vast majority of trans women is heterosexual. They are attracted by men, just like cis women are. The hidden accusation of wanting to spy on, seduce or violate cis women is not just wrong, but reveals a rigid social bias.
The science also tells a different story about gender identity. Research increasingly shows how gender identity is, at least partially, also rooted in our genes and not merely in our chromosomes. Thus, although our genes are clearly another part of it, they still are a part of our biology, thus revealing a possible biological basis for gender dysphoria. Various genetic, hormonal and neurological factors play a role in the coming into existence of the female gender identity of people that are biologically born as men. Some studies have found important differences in the brain, structurally and functionally, that support the gender identity of trans women. Nature is more complex and sophisticated than the common binary view on X- and Y-chromosomes. Gender is more than an emotion or feeling, it is anchored in someone’s natural identity and is as real as physical sexual characteristics.
What I find even more striking is the near-exclusive focus on trans women. It seems to imply that trans men—people born biologically as women but identifying themselves as men—are not perceived as problematic. Nobody seems to believe that they would transition merely to invade typical men spaces and have a better view on someone else’s willy.
I see only one explanation for this difference: we still strongly cling on to the cultural stereotype that men are dangerous and women are to be protected from danger. According to the ruling of the British High Court, trans women are a part of the first category while trans men disappear from the radar. This is a confirmation of the ideological and selective nature of the gender debate, rather than a rational and scientific one.
The impact of this verdict of the British High Court is much more than just a legal matter. It is an unfortunate confirmation of the widespread misunderstanding of gender dysphoria in society. The implication is that our society says that we only protect people whose gender identity matches what was recorded on their birth certificate.
We should wonder what sort of society we aspire being if we systematically exclude people—fellow human beings—based upon irrational fears, assumptions and scientific ignorance. Trans women are not a threat. They are people in the first place, human beings. They deserve recognition, respect and safety. They deserve being treated equally.
Anyone using the arguments of safety and the danger of physical harrassment to exclude trans women from spaces designated for women is not championing women’s rights, but maintaining an outdated status quo. Women’s rights cannot be used to exclude other women. That is not equality. Trans women are not a threat. What is a threat, is imposing legislation to increase inequality and inequal treatment of people. It is time to stand up and to say clearly that feminism is much needed but cannot be founded on exclusion and expulsion. It is time to stand up for all women and equal rights for all women.
About Piet Hoebeke
Prof. Dr. Piet Hoebeke is a prominent Belgian Urologist at Ghent University Hospital (UZ Gent) and is currently also serving as the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences at Ghent University (UGent).
He is recognized for his expertise in pediatric urology, urogenital reconstruction, adolescent urology and disorders of sexual development. He is actively involved in multidisciplinary teams addressing sexual development disorders and gender dysphoria.
Prof. Hoebeke has authored or co-authored many peer-reviewed publications. He is a respected voice in both medical and societal debates for his contributions to public discussions on gender and sexuality.
Finally, if you prefer listening over reading, you might want to check out my recording of the above text: