The Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill has passed its first reading, and is now in the Select Committee phase. The Bill requires the language in New Zealand legislation to recognise that a woman is an ‘adult human biological female’ and a man is an ‘adult human biological male’. A similar Bill has now passed into law in the U.K.
Submissions close very soon, on Thursday 2 July 2026, at 11.57 p.m.
We recommend that Christian people make a submission in SUPPORT. Please ensure that any comments you make are clear, considered, and respectful in tone. Submissions which are hostile, or which demean others, or which could easily be construed as ‘hateful’, are counter-productive. Use your own words, as cut and paste submissions carry much less weight.
The preamble to the Bill states:
‘This Bill ensures clarity and consistency in New Zealand law by defining “woman” as “an adult human biological female” and “man” as “an adult human biological male”, with corresponding definitions for “male” and “female”. By establishing these definitions in the Legislation Act 2019, the Bill provides a clear and biologically grounded meaning of “woman” and “man” across legislation’ and that ‘The purpose of this amendment is to uphold legal certainty, protect the integrity of sex-based rights, and ensure that language in law reflects biological reality. This definition will apply in all contexts where the terms “woman” and “man” are used, unless explicitly stated otherwise in specific legislation.’
The Bill itself (which is very short) amends the Legislation Act 2019 with two new clauses:
3Principal Act
This Act amends the Legislation Act 2019.
4New section 13A inserted (Meaning of woman or female)
After section 13, insert:
13AMeaning of woman or female
In any legislation, regardless of gender identity,—
(a)
woman means an adult human biological female; and
(b)
female means a human biological female.
13BMeaning of man or male
In any legislation, regardless of gender identity,—
(a)
man means an adult human biological male; and
(b)
male means a human biological male.
The Bill reflects the undeniable reality that there are two biological human sexes, male and female, and that the language, interpretation and application of legislation should fully respect that common reality and not distort it.
The Bill does not, however, affect in any way the right of people to self-identify with a ‘gender’ that differs from the sex they were born with (and implicitly recognises that right).
This law would help protect women from the obvious danger of biological males who self-identify as women being permitted in such contexts as girls’ and women’s changing and bathroom facilities, women’s sports’ events, women’s emergency accommodation, and women’s prisons.
More broadly, the proposed law could help protect in New Zealand important freedoms of belief and expression. In recent years, the increasing tendency in this country has been for law and policy to be seen through the lens of gender ideology, in which biological sex is unhelpfully conflated with chosen ‘gender’. This has led to ideologically-driven interpretations of the Human Rights Act (1993) and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (1990), interpretations which pose a growing risk towards everyday freedoms of belief and expression of many people.
This Bill is not about ‘hating’ transgender people, as some claim. Nor should it be. From a Christian perspective, we are called to love others, and no one should be hated.
If enacted, the Bill would not restrict the existing rights of people who identify with a gender that differs from their biological sex to live their own lives how they wish, and – if they want – to access hormonal or surgical interventions. But in a just and free society, such a way of seeing things should not be imposed on everyone else, in either language or in law.
The Bill is limited in its scope, but we think it is very reasonable.
0 Comments