The UK’s Supreme Court ruling in April, which affirmed that the legal definition of a woman and a man is determined solely by biological sex, has sparked significant concerns within the architectural community regarding its implications for trans people and the built environment. Lenny Rajmont, founder of the Queerscapes platform for queer and trans spatial designers, emphasises that architecture institutions must respond swiftly and decisively to address the ruling’s profound impacts.

Rajmont argues that architectural institutions, including the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and other professional bodies, have a responsibility to review their codes of conduct, update guidance, and actively engage with trans and non-binary individuals. Without such leadership, he warns, the ruling risks deepening exclusion and jeopardising the safety, dignity, and visibility of trans people both within the profession and the spaces architects design. He highlights that issues such as retrofit strategies, single-sex spaces, changing facilities, and toilet provision are now profoundly affected, necessitating urgent attention in architectural practice.

Following the Supreme Court decision, the UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issued interim guidance instructing that trans women should not use women’s facilities and trans men should not use men’s facilities according to their gender identity, but rather their biological sex. While this directive encourages the provision of mixed-sex or gender-neutral facilities as alternatives, many trans individuals continue to express fears over their safety and exclusion. Rajmont notes a growing avoidance of single-sex spaces by trans people, some resorting to carrying radar keys to access disabled, typically gender-neutral toilets. This practical shift underscores the need for architects to reconsider design standards and building codes to better accommodate gender diversity and inclusion in public and workspaces.

In response to these concerns, Queerscapes has addressed an open letter to major built environment organisations, calling for concrete actions to protect the safety and inclusion of trans professionals in architecture. While these bodies have reaffirmed their commitment to fostering inclusivity, they acknowledge the complexity of the ruling’s implications and the time needed to deliberate appropriate responses. Rajmont, however, stresses that hesitation or silence from professional bodies may be perceived as disengagement at a critical moment when visible leadership and actionable commitments are urgently required.

This ruling and its consequences also resonate with broader calls for a reimagining of architecture to embrace queerness more fundamentally. Gem Barton, leader of the Architecture LGBT+ Academic Champions Network, advocates for a radical transformation of the profession—challenging its conservative traditions, rethinking pedagogy, hierarchies, and normative assumptions. Such a shift would foster an inclusive and equitable built environment that better represents queer voices and experiences, currently underrepresented in architectural education and practice.

The legal and cultural context of the ruling is layered with wider complexities. While the decision defines gender legally by biological sex, legal experts like Cathy Jaquiss of Rainbow Migration clarify it does not revoke trans people’s rights to asylum or refugee status, though it has created an uncertain and hostile environment for trans individuals seeking protection. Similarly, scholars and activists highlight how the ruling aligns with a broader anti-trans rhetoric and colonial legacies that erase and marginalise gender-diverse communities, not just in the UK but with global reverberations.

In architectural discourse, some have begun exploring how trans and queer metaphors can challenge heteronormative frameworks and inspire new ways of imagining space. This approach could transform not just how buildings are designed but how architecture critiques and understands gender and identity, fostering more inclusive and dynamic environments.

Lenny Rajmont’s call to action sits within these wider movements for advocacy and transformation, urging architectural institutions to incorporate trans and non-binary perspectives comprehensively. Without such measures, the built environment risks becoming increasingly inaccessible and unsafe for trans people and other marginalised groups. He warns that inaction could exacerbate discrimination within the profession, resulting in legal liabilities and a loss of valuable talent, while undermining the social cohesion and reputation of architecture as a whole.

📌 Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services