I found this tweet heartening, from user Jess (anonotanon).
x.com/anonotanon/status/1826772020107108503
Here's the thing, #TickleVGiggle was always going to turn out this way. If you're surprised, let that go now. The verdict was always going to be weak and frustrating: "Tickle is a woman becausebecausebecause, gender identity mumblemumble adjourned".
Sall knew this better than anyone. Australia, young as we are, is in general short-sighted yet legacy-obsessed. Julia Gillard, Australia's first female Prime Minister, proved herself in 2013 to be no different. Without public consultation, she altered Australia's Sex Discrimination Act. She had biological definitions of sex removed, added gender identity as a protected characteristic (i.e., you're a woman/cat/magical air fryer if you simply identify as that), and conflated sex and these magical genders as the same thing. What does this mean? That apparently people have rights based on their actual sex, and yet have equal rights based on their made-up sex. It's a critical contradiction-- nobody can rely on protection from discrimination on the basis of their sex while anybody can identify as that sex.
If a real woman tells a man-who-identifies-as-a-woman to get out of her work bathroom, who does the law protect? The woman on the basis of her sex? Or the man on the basis of his identity? This is what Tickle V Giggle addressed, but with a female-only app instead of a bathroom. And, again, the verdict was always going to be "Tickle is a woman becausebecausebecause, gender identity mumblemumble adjourned".
A judge was asked to decide what takes precedent in Australia’s newly-crayoned discrimination laws: Sall’s rights as a woman, or Tickle’s rights as a man who calls himself a woman. But, unfortunately, there was always a third option and it was always going to be the one Bromwich chose: to not answer the question at all. He could simply ignore the gross conflicts in the laws, blast past the unconstitutionality of those laws, the conflict with the UN CEDAW treaty (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women), and just choose either Sall’s rights or Tickle’s rights with a hand over one eye. Australia’s sex discrimination laws are Choose Your Own Adventure, and Bromwich chose the easiest road. The one we always knew he would.
If you think this verdict damns Australian women, you’re wrong. It’s disgusting of course, there is no avoiding the sting of being dismissed and gaslit by our very justice system, but I cannot stress enough: This was always going to be outcome. And this was never the hard target. The hard target is getting our broken systems fixed so this never happens again.
So if you’re wondering what happens next, it’s that. It's the appeal. It's the High Court. Better still, the farce that was Tickle V Giggle is the perfect launchpad for what happens next. So buckle up. This is when it gets really interesting. #IStandWithSallGrover