In its latest study (A/HRC/59/47) to the UN Human Rights Council of 16 June 2025, Reem Alsalem, peculiar Rapporteur on force against Women and Girls, is addressing a subject that has been systematically marginalised in the global debate over the last decade: the importance of the biological sex for the legal and organization protection of women.
In the latest report (A/HRC/59/47) for the UN Human Rights Council of 16 June 2025, Reem Alsalem, peculiar Rapporteur on force against Women and Girls, is addressing a subject that has been systematically marginalised in the global debate over the last decade: the importance of the biological sex for the legal and organization protection of women. In accordance with Resolution 50/7 of the Human Rights Council, The rapporteur discusses force against women and girls, rooted in biological sex and fresh forms of force that stay unrecognized. It pays peculiar attention to the keyity of sex knowing in terms of biological criteria as a condition for appropriate identification, countering and responding to gender-based violence. The study recalls the obligations of States resulting from CEDAW, MPPOiP and another global instruments to prohibit discrimination on grounds of biological sex.
How states The expert, force against women and girls is rooted in the reality of their biological gender, which makes them more susceptible to certain forms of violence. The effort to omit this nonsubjective fact – by blurring the boundaries between the biological sex and "sexual identity" – has led to a weakening of the effectiveness of the fight against force and discrimination.
"The deficiency of designation of this fact prevents a fair description and knowing of force against women as male force against women and effective defence against it," Alsal warns.
This clear and unambiguous voice from UN structures should be seen as a groundbreaking act of opposition to the ideology of global law, which, on the grounds of exclusivity, led to the exclusion of women from their own legal space. The replacement of the word "woman" with terms specified as "menstrugators" not only undermines women's dignity, but besides makes it hard to formulate public policies responding to their real needs and even more difficult: it leads to "epstemic violence" – alternatively of protecting women, it erases their reality and experiences.
The study defines the English word "sex" as a biological category – a dichotomic discrimination between men and women, based on gametes and biotechnical conditions, according to classical biological definitions, quoting among others Richard Dawkins. On the another hand, ‘gender’ is defined as ‘social meanings given to biological differences between sexes’, as reported in the report, revealed in stereotypes and subordination structures. The study highlights the hazard of breaking this difference in legislative and linguistic practice, leading to legal erosion of the category of women and little effective protection of victims.
Main problems and their implications
This in turn raises the following problems, according to Alsal:
- Absorbing the specificity of the biological sex — The study warns that modern political and legislative trends aim to destruct the category of "woman" as a biological sex. The substitution of a neutral sex language ("mentrussers" etc.) leads to "Coercive inclusion“ erasing femininity as a legal category. Alsalem cites, among others, the ruling of the United Kingdom ultimate Court of 2025, which decided that ‘sex’ means actual biological sex, protecting women and girls as a separate category.
- No data based on the biological sex – The study indicates that sex neutrality in data collection leads to incomplete statistic and hinders policies in pro-family and anti-violence directions. It identifies examples of countries where the reporting of sexual crimes by men identified as women distorts sex indicators (e.g. Norway, Canada, large Britain).
- New forms of force – Alsalem discusses phenomena invisible in the conventional paradigm genderbased violence, specified as: women's suicides related to home violence, sexual selection at birth, feminicide femicide) as part of genocide, digital force and cybercrime directed at women and girls, etc.
Social and legal implications
The Alsalem study correctly identifies key areas where the consequences of biodiversity omission are peculiarly destructive:
- distorted statistic to hinder effective prevention of violence,
- lack of real legal protection for victims of gender-based violence;
- the deficiency of designation of fresh forms of force specified as digital violence, force against women and the killing of women as a tool of genocide,
- marginalisation of girls and women not identified as "trans" in the wellness and education system.
Recommendations: concrete actions
The study contains a set of circumstantial recommendations:
- use of gender-specific language in law ("woman", "girl" – woman, girl) and restoration singlesex spaces (single-sex public spaces),
- Prohibition of prenatal sex selection and prohibition of medical intervention in children with alleged "sex dysphoria" (sexual identity disorder),
- standardisation of the definition of “agreement” in criminal government on sexual violence,
- establishing the monitoring of femicides (woman-bottles), collecting data by biological sex and penalising fresh forms of force as elements of genocide.
In a peculiarly courageous way, the UN expert besides points to the request to defend children from irreversible medical procedures, specified as hormonal and surgical "sex change", and the ban on prenatal sex selection, which she combines with force and forms of genocide.
Consistency with global human rights law
The study makes it clear that countries are required to defend against discrimination on grounds of biological sex, including in the context of conflicts with another identity claims. As he points out, global law does not supply for a derogation of protection from discrimination due to this – even in exceptional situations. The Alsalem paper is in line with the basic acts of global law, specified as: UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which refers exclusively to women as categories of biological sex (see preamble and Articles 1 and 2), International Pact on civilian and Political Rights (MPPOiP) and International Pact on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, where references to "gender" are systematically made (sex), alternatively than "social and cultural sex" as a basis for protection. The European Court of Human Rights has not yet made it clear that sex identity has been recognised as an equivalent to biological gender, and the ECHR case law points to the request for a prudent balance of interests and respect for the constitutional values of the associate States.
Right to fact and debate
In the conclusion of its report, Alsalem calls for the right of women and girls to express their views openly on force and policies, without fear of repression, censorship or so-called. Cancel culture. This postulate is highly crucial in the context of expanding attempts to exclude votes critical of sex ideology from public and academic debate, including in Poland. Ordo Iuris Institute multiple times intervened in cases of discrimination on grounds of biological and ethical beliefs.
Completion
The Alsalem study not only accurately diagnoses the phenomena of force against women, but besides reveals the mechanisms of their systemic disregard. It presents a catalogue of crimes that escape the radars of global organizations, precisely due to the fact that they have given up realistic definitions of sex. In fact, she calls for the restoration of the legal order in which a female – as a biological reality – is the starting point, not just a construct.
In the context of expanding global force to recognise the alleged gender identity as a basis of law, the Alsalem study is an highly valuable tool for defending women's rights – not as a symbolic category, but as a real-life social group to which adequate, adapted protection should be required. The Reem Alsalem study is an crucial step towards legal and political reconstruction of women's protection, in line with biological facts and principles of global law. It is an crucial confirmation of what the Ordo Iuris Institute has consistently emphasised for years: only designation of the reality of the biological sex allows to effectively defend women and girls from violence, discrimination and instrumentalisation of their bodies. In the face of the progressive ideology of the strategy of law and public policy, this study becomes a tool for recovering the language of fact and natural law—a language that recognizes differences between a female and a man not as an obstacle, but as the foundation of justice.
In this sense, too, this study becomes 1 of the most crucial UN papers of fresh years – restoring sense to global standards for the protection of women and girls. The Polish government should so be urged to formally support its assumptions and implement recommendations – including through legislative improvement and a clear position in the global debate.
"Can't effectively defend what we can't explicitly name"
"This conclusion from the UN study should present become the motto of legislators, scientists and all those who are truly at the heart of women and children.
Julia the Book
== sync, corrected by elderman ==
