50 reasons The Definitions of Woman and Man Bill is wrong, unscientific, non-biological, misogynist, and just catastrophically stupid

Emily Writes

10 Jun 2026 — 8 min read

The Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill is a wrong, unscientific, non-biological, misogynist, catastrophically stupid, bigoted, unworkable, expensive solution to a non-existent problem.

But that’s not all. Below are 50 reasons why the bill is horrible. It's not too late to stand against this bill. Details on how to submit against the bill are at the bottom of this page. Or you can come along to any of the protests this weekend - details are at the bottom of the page for those too.

Feel free to skip to the comments if you read this already in your email!

Skip to comments

It discriminates against transgender, non-binary, and intersex people and has already caused significant harm to transgender and intersex communities
It encourages, legitimises and normalises anti-trans extremism toward already vulnerable communities.
Sex is far more complex than a female being XX and a male XY. Says gynaecology specialist with a specialist interest in biology Ed Hyde: "There is a range of possibilities ranging from female to male, with the majority of people at either end, and a significant minority somewhere in between. In Aotearoa, approximately 1.7 per cent of the population is known to have an innate variation of sex characteristics."
It erases intersex people born with variations of sex characteristics.
It erases all people whose bodies or identities fall outside of rigid sex and gender binaries.
If you can erase one group, you can erase any group. Who is next?
The bill doesn’t even define what ‘biological’ means.
Also did they ask a biologist? They should have because biologists know that "biological sex" is wildly complicated. Just ask this biologist, Professor Peter Dearden, Director of Genomics Aotearoa: "Biology is often a normal curve, and in this case, it’s well to think of that. The population of humans is distributed into two normal curves, one based around what Seymour calls ‘female’, and one around ‘male’. But the complexity of how we build our bodies and how they differentiate into different states is huge. Those two normal curves have outliers, and they overlap. Biology isn’t about two fixed, set boxes for gender; there is complexity and shades in between. While you might believe it is sensible LEGALLY to define male and female as one thing, biologically, that is nonsense.:
We barely even mention 'man and woman' in our legislation - we usually use gender neutral language.
It’s up to each of us to define ourselves and our bodies - not Winston Peters and the government.
Feminists have fought for decades against the policing of rigid gender roles and this bill sets us back to a time when there was only allowed to be one type of woman - barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.
Te Kāhui Tika Tangata Human Rights Commission says the bill falls short of the Government’s human rights obligations.
It’s in breach of the Law Commission’s 2025 Ia Tangata report on the status of human rights protections for intersex, trans, and non-binary people.
The Bill violates Te Tiriti o Waitangi by depriving takatāpui of the right to bodily autonomy and access to equitable, safe healthcare.
It creates serious privacy concerns because people will be required to disclose their personal medical history, birth records, or sex characteristics to access everyday services.
The bill doesn’t ‘protect women’s spaces’ - under the Human Rights Act, organisations are already allowed to provide services exclusively to cisgender women in Aotearoa.
Defining - across all New Zealand laws - the word “woman” as “adult human biological female,” and “man” as “adult human biological male.” - doesn’t make any sense; it’s simply a political slogan.
The bill creates categories that many people literally cannot realistically fit into because of biological variation.
Unintended consequences of the bill have not been modelled or costed.
It’s wasting the time of cash-strapped and time-poor community women's rights groups who have to spend time opposing the bill instead of their already big workload.
All existing laws, policies, and systems would need to be reviewed, rewritten, or tested in court to determine how the new definitions even apply.
It’s a cruel bill - it’s already making trans children and adults believe there’s something wrong with who they are.
Thousands and thousands of cis women have said they don’t support the bill
It will encourage the harassment and abuse of people who don’t dress according to outdated gender norms.
It leaves it up to institutions to "verify" "biological sex", which is violating and invasive.
Anyone, of any age, who appears to be outside of the gender norm policed by their birth gender (short hair if you’re a woman, long hair if you’re a man) will face harassment.
There’s literally no problem that the bill is trying to address - nobody is forced to acknowledge the existence of trans and intersex people if they don’t want to.
The government could use time and money on legislation that would improve the well-being of women instead of this unnecessary bill.
It would be astonishingly expensive to enforce, and there’s no detail of how it would even be enforced.
At a time when public servants are already facing so much crap - like being laid off, and the survivors being told they're being replaced by AI before being laid off - they'll now possibly be expected to make decisions about someone's 'sex status' without clear guidance or expertise and likely against their own values system.
This government doesn’t care about so-called “sex-based rights” and only believes in women’s rights when those rights are about enforcing gender norms that suit men.
It won’t change how Women’s Refuge operates because that’s an organisational decision; they recognise that trans women facing domestic violence pose no harm to cis women.
The bill is part of a far-right agenda.
The Bill enforces a colonialist view that there are only two genders and sexes, men and women. This is a racist view that is at odds with Te Ao Māori.
Women under 20 could be excluded from accessing abortions if the bill passes.
Anti-choice and anti-women groups will use this bill to push for even wider restrictions on women’s reproductive rights
The National Council of Women of New Zealand opposes the bill. Minister for Women Nicola Grigg said: "I'm not convinced that this bill will advance the rights and opportunities or the wellbeing of women and girls in any way, shape, or form in New Zealand.”
Arbitrary ideas of what a woman is reduces women to our reproductive capacity. This is a slippery slope (I mean...are we Gilead now?)
The bill is a continuation of a campaign that has in the past denied women the vote and denied gay couples the right to marry and have sex. It is about controlling women’s bodies and denying people their basic freedoms - like driving (you can't get a license if your gender marker is based on Winston Peters' idea of biology), or travel (passports where your gender assigned at birth doesn't match your actual gender).
It seeks to divide us based on what's in our pants. At a time when Aotearoa is already so divided, why would we want to start talking about genitals?
There was no consultation on the bill and the only people calling for it are weird bigots obsessed with other people's junk.
Those same weird bigots will now try to police people in bathrooms and changing rooms - leading to even more violence and intimidation toward not just trans and intersex people but anyone who doesn't fit a very strict gender norm.
State-level misgendering carries documented mental health harms.
It is an HR nightmare as every day New Zealanders are forced to attack each other in the workplace.
Importing culture wars from the US is a far-right play designed to make us blame each other for things like the cost-of-living crisis and state violence instead of those who are really to blame.
If consultation isn't listened to like other bills, it will further erode and reduce trust in the government and public sector.
It is an incredibly boring and predictable exercise in outrage politics.
Did we mention it's unscientific? We did! But it's so unscientific that we want to mention it again! Here is Dr Tim Curran in correspondence with the Science Media Centre: "The proponents of the Bill are arguing that biology has concluded that sex is binary, when that is not the case."
Haven't had enough science? Here's more science! "We evaluate the primary approaches to defining sex and synthesise the active discourse to conclude that there is no current consensus on a definition of sex that is free of assumptions and limitations."
So if the bill is unscientific and misogynist and biologically illiterate and wildly stupid and will harm vulnerable trans people and adversely affect the cis-women it claims to be protecting, why is the Government taking it to a vote? Because Winston Peters' political career depends on the cookers, the Government depends on Winston Peters, and because malignant right-wing billionaires are taking over all the world's media, and because it benefits those people only to whip up resentment among the easily-led under the branding of "common sense." Scapegoating a minority is the oldest trick in the fascist playbook. The truth is that people have always come in all kinds. That's what makes us people.

Please show up on Saturday to Unite for Trans Rights.

There are demonstrations all over NZ on Saturday 13 June. Put it in your calendar now and make sure you show solidarity, because trans rights are human rights.

Please spread the word - we need to be loud!

Submissions are open for the Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill. Here is a guide produced by a collective of transgender people and their allies to help others who are also opposed to the bill make their own submissions:

Make your submission before the deadline at midnight on 2 July 2026.

Sign the petition from E Tū E Kī - They Don’t Speak for Us - Block the Definition of Woman Bill.

Finally, here’s a template builder for all of the rubbish bills the government is trying to push through:

💡

Thanks for reading. It takes a lot to write these articles. If you can spare it, please help support this work.