OPEN LETTER IN SUPPORT OF CLARIFYING THE MEANING OF SEX IN NEW ZEALAND LAW

Written By Hamish McGregor

1 June 2026


LGB Alliance Aotearoa New Zealand / LGB Alliance NZ supports the intent of the Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill.


The Bill is right to recognise that sex-based terms in law need clear meaning. However, the current draft should be strengthened. It defines woman and man, and proposes definitions of female and male, but it does not first define sex itself. That is the central omission.


Sex is the foundational legal category. Woman, girl, man, boy, female, and male all depend upon sex having a stable legal meaning. If sex is left undefined, sex-based terms remain vulnerable to confusion, uncertainty, or displacement by self-identification.


This matters across New Zealand law, and particularly under the Human Rights Act 1993. The Human Rights Act recognises sex as a prohibited ground of discrimination, while also containing provisions and exceptions where sex can lawfully matter, including privacy, safety, sport, accommodation, education, services, equality measures, and sexual orientation. Those provisions cannot operate coherently if sex itself is unclear.


Women and girls must be able to rely on female-only provisions remaining female-only. Where a law, service, facility, programme, protection, or exception is sex-based, female and male should mean the two sexes. If a provision is intended to be mixed-sex, it should say so clearly rather than using terms such as women, girls, men, or boys.


This also matters for lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people. Sexual orientation depends upon sex. Homosexuality means attraction to the same sex. If the legal meaning of sex is made unstable, then the legal meaning of same-sex orientation is made unstable too. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual people must be able to name, organise, advocate, associate, and seek support on the basis of same-sex attraction.


Clarifying sex does not require anyone to conform to stereotypes associated with their sex. The law can recognise that female and male are real sex classes while also protecting lawful freedom of expression, dress, speech, behaviour, and presentation. Sex-based clarity and freedom of expression should support each other, not be treated as opposites.


The Bill should therefore be strengthened by putting sex first. It should define sex, then define female and male, then define the human sex-based terms woman, girl, man, and boy. It should also ensure that sexual orientation remains interpreted by reference to sex, that disorders of sex development are recognised without being treated as additional sexes, and that related sex-based terms are interpreted consistently across legislation.


We call on Parliament to support the intent of the Bill and strengthen it by:


  • defining sex first, by reference to the immutable biological distinction between female and male based on reproductive organisation;

  • defining female and male by reference to ova and sperm, without circularity;

  • defining woman, girl, man, and boy by reference to the female and male sexes;

  • interpreting sexual orientation by reference to sex;

  • recognising DSDs without treating them as additional sexes;

  • preserving freedom of expression and sex-stereotype nonconformity;

  • ensuring references to women and men are not unintentionally narrowed by age; and

  • ensuring related sex-based terms are interpreted consistently across legislation.


Sex-based terms in legislation should be interpreted by reference to sex

Hamish McGregor