Giggle v Tickle Friday 15th May 2pm AEST

[impossibletoday]

Giggle v Tickle
Friday 15th May
2pm AEST
Live streamed

https://x.com/i/status/2053669311504642197

The problem with sunlight in this case is that the Australian mainstream media are reporting it as “woman excluded from women’s app”.

It relies on people twigging it’s actually a man.

What a joke. How do they then explain WHY this "woman" was excluded from the app?

Off to read...

I think they must do because any further reporting will necessarily give the information, however much it's coded. And if they include a photo of him.... Dude doesn't even begin to look like a lady.

Here’s the judgment:

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2026/2026fcafc0064

And summary findings:

The declaration made on 5 September 2024 that the appellants engaged in unlawful indirect discrimination against the respondent on the ground of her gender identity contrary to s 5B(2) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) be set aside and in lieu thereof it be declared that:

The appellants, Ms Sally Grover and Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd, engaged in unlawful direct discrimination against the respondent, Ms Roxanne Tickle, on the ground of her gender identity, contrary to s 22 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), when read with s 5B(1) of that Act, by:

(a) excluding Ms Tickle from access to the Giggle App on the basis of her gender-related appearance;

(b) refusing to restore Ms Tickle’s access to the Giggle App on the basis of her gender-related appearance; and

(c) thereby treating Ms Tickle, who is a transgender woman, less favourably than a person designated female at birth seeking access to the Giggle App.

What I can’t fathom is how the Australian law allows this to happen

What is gender-related appearance?
And why is it protected when it’s so changeable

Isn't there something going on with ESB at the moment regarding a challenge to their changing room policy?

I've seen his gender-related appearance.
I'm saying nothing more.

Christ! Just started reading this amd the court was using the term “cisgender” as a way to describe women FFS

Just to flag that Julia ‘I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny’ Gillard is a guest speaker at the Hay Festival on May 25th. Perhaps an audience member could ask her about her amendment to the Australian Sex Discrimination Act and in the light of Giggle vs Tickle if it’s working out as she envisaged?

What is gender-related appearance?

In the case, it was argued that Sall should have recognised he was a woman because he was wearing a V neck top.

Oh fantastic @mb2512cat ! I really hope someone does!

That bloke Beth Ridgy and his non V neck top eh?

Ah shite, I was so hoping she'd win!

This is very rape culture adjacent.

The result is totally expected, but still infuriating and simply unjust. Sal is right that men are still men.

What I can't get out of my head is this quote:

Justice Bromwich said Ms Grover's argument that sex referred to a person's sex at birth conflicted with a "long history" of court decisions going back three decades which "establish that in its ordinary meaning, sex is changeable".

Really?? Three decades?? How? Buy in any case, judge, that flies in the face of millions of years of human history.

Aren't these people ashamed of themselves? And if not, why the hell not?

Absolutely. Lesbians can't congregate if a man says they can't? Women can't shower and change away from men if a man says they can't?

I do apologise for using the UK terms. I was meaning the highest court in the land.

Australian women need to start flooding gay men's groups en masse - false beards, deep voices, the whole lot. Once it starts affecting the men, then they might start to take notice.

Well theres a lot in this judgment worth further examination!

On the direct discrimination claim - Tickle brought a cross appeal on the basis that “knowledge of a person’s gender identity as (relevantly) a transgender man or transgender woman is a necessary element of establishing direct discrimination under s 5B(1) of the SDA”

Wowsers! That goes against the whole European Court principle that someone is trans independent of their appearance or stage of transition.

I don’t see how the state can insist you that you must see someone as a woman if that’s not their perception.

Am I reading this wrong? This is loony if I’m right

If they were actually women then wherever they went in this world they would be women. However, they are not which ultimately means they cannot be.

I pray this woman continues to find the strength to keep up the campaign.

I can only donate again by way of sending my bereft condolences on this news.

Sal Grover is a hero regardless.

Michael Foran has dissected this (see Twitter) - he thinks Sall's legal team took the wrong approach. Other commentators reckon the plan all along was to get the case to the High court. The toll on Sall must be intolerable.

This!
women using the men’s toilets and changing rooms. Into any “male” spaces. Just change your name on a utility bill and off they go!

I know I shouldn’t be surprised, but I still find it mind-blowing that this has happened 🤯

I hope Sall knows how many women are rooting for her in this fight 💪🏾

And I hope Roxanne Tickle knows, whatever deluded courts and politicians say, he will never be a woman.

So long as they print the photos it shouldn’t be difficult for people to twig…