Giggle V Tickle in court August 4

[TheKhakiQuail]

Feminists in the UK seem to have an enormous amount of momentum in the UK - the wins keep coming. Here in Australia, things are moving very slowly. However, the Giggle v Tickle appeal is coming up on 4-7th August before a Federal Court panel. It will be livestreamed.

I will add the link below if anyone is up for some gardening it is much needed.

I am not close to the case, but there are some pleasing updates - the Lesbian Action Group has been given permission to intervene, and they have a very clever and well-versed in feminism legal team of Megan Blake and Leigh Howard. I wasn't particularly impressed with the legal arguments put forward in court in the first round, but there is a new SC (like a KC) on the team - don't know of him except he does work for the richest woman in Australia, so hopefully he knows how to make a good case too.

In other developments, Jillian Spencer, a psychiatrist in Queensland who was suspended for criticising pediatric gender medicine at her hospital is bringing several lawsuits, including discrimination on the grounds of belief. She is probably an excellent claimant for lawfare. And a convicted murderer in NSW applied to be moved from a male to a female prison, but the NSW government seems to be ruling that out despite having just brought in self-id and having allowed it before (maybe the sexual assault allegations that occurred previously would be more damaging if repeated in the current climate). It may have opened some eyes though.

We’re back live.

Lol, I said we like I was there. I’m not. Justing watching on Youtube.

Chief judge wants to read the SDA in a sensible, practice manner. Nope, not happening.

Which is exactly why we are all watching this.

All right, you bright people. Please help me.

What is an unbiological birth.

Good luck Sall. Hope it's a good day for Aussie women!

That's exactly what I was thinking Sandgroper. When the head judge said, what it (sex the baby) was at Biological birth? I was thinking uh oh is this the next latest thing for GI - that there's biological birth; which is the sex assigned at birth, then there's Transgender Birth; where you become / come out as the sex you always knew you were / should have been.....

Oh FFS! The pregnant transman problem was raised, and the presiding judge said "but not all women can get pregnant" and (approximately) "what's the problem with having woman having a different meaning in the general parts of the SDA and the very specific, biological aspects of pregnancy discrimination and breastfeeding?". So woman is just meant to include and exclude various people in different parts of the SDA law, with no guidance on who is included / excluded in different parts. FFS!!!!

“On simple terms” again. Where the fuck is Daryl? I am waiting for the vibe.

Just checked in. This sounds shit from the judges.

‘ Biological birth’

‘what's the problem with having woman having a different meaning’

’cis’

They aren’t independent at all. JFC. 🤮

"What woman means..." FFS

"What did she mean by woman?" asks the judge

I really, really hope Madame Judge is rolling her eyes internally and thinking to herself “JFC, I can’t believe what’s coming out of my mouth today”.

Might she be taking a big one for the team, do you think?

I’m trying to work that out myself. There’s vaginal, instrumental and Caesarean births. Unassisted and assisted births. Drug free and medicated births. They’re all biological. They all involve a woman’s body, a baby, blood, placenta, amniotic fluid, probably poo, sweat, tears and an umbilical cord. That’s pretty damn biological. No other way for a baby to be born. Yet.

The male judge is quiet. Has the other female judge said much? I’ve been listening but not necessarily watching. Maybe protocol is that mainly the lead judge gets to talk.

Yes... if you are born as a female, you remain a female. Jesus fucking christ. Only females born as females are females... and yes you can look at a picture of RT and see this person is not a female.

letting women and transmen in?

Oh no. The main judge is on board with the trans stuff. She was on a diversity and inclusion council.

https://x.com/009Kat/status/1952240139637494122

I wondered whether biological vs biological birth referred to being a born again Christian.

We just need one dissenting judge to smooth the way to appeal.

Might she be taking a big one for the team, do you think?

no my impression is she's either not grasping it or is deep in the genderwoo/ be kind

She’s looking to find Sall didn’t put in a criterium detailing a thing Sall didn’t know was a thing. ‘Cos until the last ten years, it wasn’t a thing.

What’s the deal with three judges? Is it majority rules for the verdict? So if one disagrees then the losing side can use that judge’s opinion as a basis for an appeal of the appeal?

Sall was apply the ordinary every (common man ) meaning of woman ( like we would all do)

DD is home from school and wanting the iPad. Told her no, that I’m listening to a court case that could determine whether we can have women and girls only spaces. The sulky teen has stopped asking. Talked to her about the case last night.

Any law experts know if other laws based on harassement/abuse/protection of the person that is based on a persons subjective view of their identity, or are all based on objective reality.

Could be both. It possible she is being so pedantic in which to draw out the proper arguments so they can't be overturned, but the KC isn't biting or he genuinely doesn't understand how she doesn't understand what a common use of the word woman is.

I am looking into the HRC in NZ now who recognise gender identity as part of sex, and its impossible to understand how you can write a law based on that.