The proposed Definitions of Woman and Man bill seeks to define a woman as “an adult human biological female” and a man as “an adult human biological male” in the Legislation Act (2019). Its explanatory note claims the purpose is to “protect the integrity of sex-based rights” and ensure language reflects “biological reality.” Yet this framing ignores the lived realities of trans New Zealanders and reduces human identity to rigid biological essentialism.
More concerning is the rhetoric surrounding the bill itself. The bill proposing party (NZ First) is aiming to fight “cancerous social engineering” and “woke ideology.” And in support, Nicola Willis (on behalf of National) stated: “Most New Zealanders can see that there are two biological sexes, there are men and there are women, and they have legitimately asked ‘why doesn’t legislation always reflect that’?”
ACT leader David Seymour defended support for the legislation by claiming people are “sick of pretending” and are “sick of hearing terms like ‘pregnant people’ […] that deny basic biological reality.” Statements reinforce the idea that transgender and gender non-conforming identities are fraudulent or illegitimate. When politicians frame an already marginalised group as a societal delusion, they legitimise hostility against them.
This bill has passed its first reading and has been sent to the select committee. This means, soon, it will open for submissions. I urge you to write against this bill. History shows these kinds of laws rarely stop at definitions. Internationally, similar legislation has been tied to restrictions on healthcare, public facilities, sports participation, and anti-discrimination protections.
That symbolism matters. Trans people already face disproportionately high rates of discrimination, mental distress, and violence. Laws that publicly single them out send a message about who belongs and who does not. A government should not be using vulnerable minorities as political theatre during a cost-of-living crisis. This bill is not about definitions. It is about exclusion dressed up as common sense.
