Still waiting for the Giggle v Tickle appeal outcome on sex and gender

[TheKhakiQuail]

Eight months and still waiting for the outcome of the Giggle v Tickle appeal. I am starting to wonder if it's a good sign, maybe the 3 judges are still debating the outcome. I am not overly hopeful about the outcome of this round, Perry seemed very clearly aligned with all the standard ideology and rather hostile to the legal teams of Giggle & LAG. However, in reading through the case again, there are 2 tiny glimmers of hope.

1. The arguments by the AHRC side are absolutely bonkers from a logic perspective. They've basically defined sex as being a very broad category that not only includes biological factors, but also 'sex change' surgeries...and also people without surgeries but paperwork changes...and also people without surgeries or paperwork changes (can include social roles etc). In other words, they define sex as being defined by self-id gender identity with additional options such as ga surgery, documentation etc thrown in to make it sound weightier. They then drop men (and trans men) completely out of the discussion and focus on Gender Identity, with trans women and cis women as the only 2 groups of interest, and argue that gender identity discrimination often involves looking at a trans woman, seeing the male physical characteristics and mannerisms and deciding she is "not female enough". In other words, they are using gender identity as 'Sex' in the act, and aspects of sex (looking biologically male) as Gender Identity. Along with the purple t-shirts and hair length and which section of K-mart one shops in.
2. While the lead judge said a lot and the other 2 didn't, one little question makes me think Kennett is thinking about the issues. While the AHRC was talking, he asked who the comparator is, and if there are a number of different gender identities that could be affected. The reason this gives me hope is the AHRC want the only comparison to be trans women and cis women. But if he even stops to consider all the gender identities (trans women, cis women, cis men, trans men, non-binary etc etc at the very least) then 'cis men' becomes the 'socially advantaged' group that all the other groups should be weighed against. Special measures for race would be allowed for say Aboriginal people even if African people were excluded from it. Likewise special measures would be allowed for gay men without saying they have to include lesbians because lesbians have 2 protected characteristics and gay men only have one. The AHRC went off on a long one about comparators and cis women, and the judge didn't push it. It was just one tentative question. But whenever anyone actually thinks this through it unravels, so a question is always a good sign...

I keep checking the Fed Court website.

How much longer can it take? I'm imagining Perry enthusiastically wrote up a ruling on why CEDAW and Australian law agree there's no need for female people to have words and rights and things of their own, and Kennett took one look and said in polite judge speak "This is insane, no way am I putting my name on that", and now they're trying to rewrite it in a way they can all agree on.

It's very obvious that the Establishment in Australia wants to punish Sall Grover for putting her head above the parapet, and I think the ridiculous level of delay in providing a judgment in this case is part of that attitude of putting an uppity woman in her place.

Besides, even if the judgement goes in Sall's favour, Tickle will simply appeal to the next highest level. so activist judges have nothing to lose by getting this judgment out asap.

The longer it takes, the more cracks appear. Since the first T v G, there's been the UKSC ruling, I think the Deeming defamation case, all the nurses cases, the Olympic Committee decision, the LAG appeal, ABC have dropped out of ACON, the media have stopped routinely calling women's rights groups 'anti-trans'. The longer it takes to get to the highest level, the more chance the judges will have already started to question the narrative.

@TheKhakiQuail and that father in Victoria won custody of his son over his ex wife as she was wanting to transition her son. That judge was excoriating of Michelle Telfer et al and the evidence of their procedures. I thought that was a really good event.