The Guardian - Trans Australian kicked out of toilet

[Justme56]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/15/trans-australian-uk-britain-tolerance

https://www.wheelercentre.com/people/jack-nicholls

The person’s sex seems obvious although they seem to consider the idea of ‘presenting as feminine’ is enough!

*”I had a workplace situation here that a lawyer advised me was going to be very long and stressful to remedy that was a clear cut case in Australia.”

sorry. That should be ‘that would have been a clear cut case’.

Yes this definitely happened although I'm surprised that all the women in the toilet didn't clap at his bravery 🙄

His partner/wife ran as a councillor last year, for the Greens. They've just had a baby and had many publicity shots en famille.

Some people might say a heterosexual couple taking lots of selfies and calling themselves 'queer' is absurd, tasteless, and offensive.

But I guess he does have long hair.

I would love to understand the Guardian’s decision making process when deciding to publish this.

They must have known that

1). The story they published missed key details.
2) it’s easy to find the original Substack story and details of this man’s life.

Would it have been approved for publication in Australia? Does that explain why the incorrect analysis of the SC decision was published, or do they just not check facts in opinion columns?

Or have they just cut too many staff and nobody checks anything?

It is odd that those countries that do so well in the gender equality research have such a bad rep with sexism and harrassment....

They just don't care. They know it will generate clicks and therefore revenue.

Is it?

Or is it that they count harassment cases differently because they take it more seriously?

I don't know.

It could be that every incident gets reported because the victim feels something will be done rather than thinking what's the point nothing will happen and I will be marked as 'difficult'

I also think there is a complacency about fact checking for an audience that is willing to accept absurdities like Jack's frockgender. They've created a news bubble for and with a willing audience.

Perhaps why I now trust the Guardian's news reporting so little, it's become a web comic driven by overwhelming ideological bias.

They've created a news bubble for and with a willing audience.

But don’t seem to realise that Jack is not transsexual in any way that would have been recognised by the courts or legislators in 2004, and highlighting his case isn’t helpful to those making an argument based on vulnerability or commitment to medical treatment.

The story demonstrates that men who wear dresses to access women’s toilets aren’t ‘cis men who would attack women anywhere, why would they go to the trouble’, but just normal men with no respect for the boundaries that women are entitled to maintain in law.

Really bad from the Guardian. The writer has started off on a misunderstanding of the SC judgment, and the editors have let him run with it.

Either he knows, in which case the G is allowing its writers to mislead, or he doesn’t know and it’s allowing them to make fools of themselves in print.

we should possibly send Jack thank you cards - he's been a great help to feminism even if not how he expected

I don’t know who is more manipulative: the author for trying to emotionally manipulate people into allowing men into women’s spaces with this piece of trash fantasy article, or the Guardian, for deliberately editing it to leave out the crucial information about the author being a man who happily uses male spaces in his life.

They can both get in the bin.

Exactly.

And the Guardian knows that it will not get any pushback from IPSO as they are not fit for purpose in this area.

I haven’t been watching the reaction but is Jack getting rightful flack from the UK trans activists for blowing their arguments that only marginalised and vulnerable male people who are ‘living as women’ are those accessing the female toilets?

I think Jack has done a great job. Jack looks to be an ‘influencer’ and this was Jack’s big push at building Jack’s audience. It certainly highlighted heaps of things that the UK activists wanted to deflect attention away from. But there came Jack and Jack has jacked the agreed narrative for Jack’s moment in the spotlight.

Men usually don't talk at all in the gents.

The Guardian aren’t signed up to IPSO. They regulate themselves.

Koko sounds like exactly the sort of place where a man in a dress would be safe in the gents.

On the subject of why countries like Australia, New Zealand, the Norwich countries have such high levels of male on female violence, I think I read somewhere that they all have highly macho cultures alongside all the "wokeness", which actually was put in place specifically because of the macho culture.

The issue in the Norwich countries is actually called "the Nordic Paradox". In Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Nigeria etc they blame colonialism. You can Google for more info on both of these.

Sorry Nordic not Norwich !!

You can tell if so. Just so much nonsense.

Agree

The guardian have form for deliberately misleading stories. I remember one about the poor trans women burglar who wanted to be transferred to a women's prison. The guardian neglected to mention that he was breaking into houses and engaging in sexual acts using the underwear of the female occupants. They also neglected to mention his extensive criminal record for voyeurism and violence.

And who could forget their coverage of the cologne wolf pack attacks.

The days of the guardian being vaguely reputable and reliable are long past.

I’ve just read the whole substack story (minutes of my life that I’ll never get back) and didn’t see the name of the venue?

It has been edited out. What a surprise.