Giggle v Tickle Friday 15th May 2pm AEST

I think many people on this thread underestimate just how much this issue has flown under the radar in Australia. Yes we are captured but also it’s just not on the radar for the vast majority of people. This ruling has brought to light the mad legal situation we’ve ended up in and has, at last, reached mainstream media (albeit fairly quietly). I think it has now appeared on the radar and, hopefully, by the time it reaches the High Court, people will have realised the implications of the ‘be kind’ approach. Unfortunately it’s very unsafe to campaign on this issue in Australia and so it will be hard to find ways to raise awareness in the interim. I do wish Sall had got a win, but Australia loves an underdog and I’m hoping the loss will create the outrage needed to get people’s attention.

It might be the other way around. If some significant politicians pick up the ball and make it an issue then some of the media will do so as well. Maybe that's what we're seeing.

The opposition leader has released a statement making this a manifesto item.

https://x.com/senatorcash/status/2055434872035086583?s=46

STATEMENT BY AngusTaylorMP

Yesterday the Full Federal Court confirmed that Australian law does not properly protect single sex spaces for women and girls. Most Australians would find that hard to believe. A coalition government I lead will fix this. We will amend the Sex Discrimination Act to ensure that women and girls (and men and boys) have protections based on biological sex.

We will define biological sex in the Act. Male or female. The sex you are born. And we will protect single-sex spaces across Australian life.

This is not radical. It is common sense.

Let me be clear about what this is not. This is not about targeting transgender Australians. Every protection they currently have remains. We are not removing a single protection from anyone. But we are recognising something that should never have been in doubt: biological sex is real, it matters, and women and girls deserve spaces where it is respected.

This will be a first-term priority.

The Prime Minister now has a simple question to answer. Does he believe women and girls deserve protections based on biological sex?

I feel so bad for Sall Grover. She's been through so much. ☹️

Australia has always been a hotbed of misogyny.

Now Trans Activism is its acceptable face.

The 'establishment' who are steering this revolting movement against women are utterly despicable.

Australia is just like Ireland and Canada; journalists have seemingly decided en masse that the topic of women opposing Genderism is omertà. They refuse to discuss it unless forced to and even then they do a poor job.

Thats the thing, you have to rely on the media making it into a thing so enough politicans are put on the spot and have to nail their colours to the mast. I think moreso than asking a question about Sall, the more salient question is about changing rooms and women like the Darlington nurses and Faye R-C

It’s going to take - what - another year to get back to the highest court? Things can happen - they’ll need their own Lia Thomas or Sandie Peggie moment. And the top court might well conclude (correctly) that their Sex Discrimination Act is incorrectly named if it’s supposed to include females. They probably won’t get the right judgment if the law is that garbled, but losing might be the best outcome because thats going to bring sunlight into the Parliament. When are their next elections?

Yes; but it will have to be an election issue, not a minor thing. One can hope.

I love this. The take on it. Not any negativity about living in a facility, but the mind blowing awesomeness of Germaine Greer being in the next room ❤️

Some politicians are backing her: x.com/PaulineHansonOz/status/2055152784492912953

The law won’t be changed; this case was brought by the Australian Human Rights Commission (or equivalent) - they and the “establishment” obviously think the law is good, and no government is going to overrule its own human rights experts in a hurry. It would need a sea change in the lanyardocracy culture.

How exactly did Gillard change the existing law? Would it be just as simple to change it back?

This is my reading too. I'm wondering if it's only by taking this to the very highest court that the law can be exposed for the piece of harmful nonsense it is and thereby the need to change it established. I'm no legal expert though, especially not on Australian law but hopefully someone can clarify.

From what I’ve read about Australian law (please correct me if I’ve got this wrong) it seems like the issue is that the law has been changed so that sex is no longer a protected characteristic, or rather the legal definition of sex has been changed to mean gender identity. If that’s the case I don’t see how Sall can win in court, unless the law is altered to reflect biological reality.

The last thing I read was that she'd checked herself out of the facility* and was living with her brother in Australia. Happy to be corrected though.

(*Can you imagine living in residential care and having Germaine Greer move in - glorious!)

Edited for double post

Yes, sorry, it is his reasoning regarding the case which has been reposted today - not a reaction from today's judgment.

@GermaineBloodyGreer your name has reminded me of GG. Anyone know how she is these days, she hasn’t been heard from for a long time has she?
I believe she lives in a facility for the elderly - I wonder if she is still able to keep up with the news and pass a pithy comment.

Complaint to the BBC - submitted!

Many think that the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 (as amended) will need to be changed. I haven't read the Act but the High Court will need to interpret what it says, not what it wishes it said.

Is anyone here familiar with the Act and its legal history?

The High Court had better get their arses in gear.

Seriously. My sole hope for this is that the powers that be in Australia have realised they need their own Supreme Court ruling to derail this train.

Australian women's rights were seemingly torn away from them so easily. And now look how hard it is to get them back again.

The Australian Guardian didn't even put a quote from Sall in their (top story) article. Loads from him though. Arseholes.

www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/may/15/giggle-for-girls-app-discriminated-against-trans-woman-roxanne-tickle-appeal-case-ntwnfb

Sall has said that it was always going to end up in the High Court because whoever lost would take it there. The difference being of course that Jason has organisations doing all the work and footing the bill, while Sall is, institutionally, completely on her own (obviously she has support but unlike him, she is a lone agent with everything to lose; he takes on no risk except being barred from women's spaces because he's a man, and of course he can still use male or mixed spaces as he pleases).

If I were JKR, or had wealth like hers, I wouldn't fund Sall's costs upfront; it's very important that people see the success of the crowd fund to show how much support she's got, how right she is and how most people feel about it. It's indescribably awful for her, but it's also important that people see how abusive and ruinous this situation is, that a woman could be destroyed because she knows a man is a man... the potential extent of harm and damage. But I would quietly ensure that whatever happened, she would be secure and all right in the end.

Can't believe this has plagued her pregnancy and the first few years of motherhood for her. The fucking irony...