Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Giggle v Tickle Friday 15th May 2pm AEST

644 replies

impossibletoday · 11/05/2026 06:40

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

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
30
SinnerBoy · 15/05/2026 11:11

If I've understood this, it follows that, in Australia, women have no, or much reduced protection under the 2013 Sex Discrimination Act. Also, lesbians have no right to free association.

Its beyond me to see how anybody can honestly claim that this is a worthy thing.

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 11:49

JulesJules · 15/05/2026 09:47

As long as it's not a V neck tshirt because that would make you a woman

Has that been stated by the barrister or the judges in that court case?

NebulousSupportPostcard · 15/05/2026 11:57

NotBadConsidering · 15/05/2026 08:54

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.

I've just watched his speech outside the court ( on sky news) Horrifying. Tagged in disabled women, First Nations women in long list of women including "trans women" who are now safe from discrimination. Did smug smile when talking about how proud "young Roxy" would be of his "bravery". Startlingly contradicted himself by saying his trans journey actually only began in 2017 (when "young Roxy" was already a pensioner?!l)

Just grim seeing him flanked by young women as he makes his speech clearly looking and sounding like an older man.

JulesJules · 15/05/2026 11:58

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 11:49

Has that been stated by the barrister or the judges in that court case?

His legal team argued that Sall should have known he (Tickle) was a woman as he was wearing a V neck tshirt

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 12:01

Helleofabore · 15/05/2026 10:06

That really was one of the most ridiculous comments made. I mean, I had to tell my husband to give me his v neck Bonds t-shirt because v neck = woman.

A lot of my husband’s white t-shirts are v neck. I’m wondering if I would be viewed in Australia as being in a same sex marriage. Mind you I have lots of round neck t-shirts (I daren’t ask what polo necks signify). Under Australia, would that would turn him into the woman, and me into the man.

Goodness, I won’t bring his light pink check shirt into the mix, along with my possession of sky blue garments.

Helleofabore · 15/05/2026 12:04

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 12:01

A lot of my husband’s white t-shirts are v neck. I’m wondering if I would be viewed in Australia as being in a same sex marriage. Mind you I have lots of round neck t-shirts (I daren’t ask what polo necks signify). Under Australia, would that would turn him into the woman, and me into the man.

Goodness, I won’t bring his light pink check shirt into the mix, along with my possession of sky blue garments.

I know, right? Crazy stuff.

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 12:05

NebulousSupportPostcard · 15/05/2026 11:57

I've just watched his speech outside the court ( on sky news) Horrifying. Tagged in disabled women, First Nations women in long list of women including "trans women" who are now safe from discrimination. Did smug smile when talking about how proud "young Roxy" would be of his "bravery". Startlingly contradicted himself by saying his trans journey actually only began in 2017 (when "young Roxy" was already a pensioner?!l)

Just grim seeing him flanked by young women as he makes his speech clearly looking and sounding like an older man.

That wouldn’t give most women (the real kind) the creeps at all. I’ve read there is such a thing as a duper’s delight smile.

CassOle · 15/05/2026 12:06

OMG @Cailleach1 you have baby pink, white and baby blue clothes!

BananaPeels · 15/05/2026 12:06

Out of curiousity, What would happen if a biological women walked topless in the streets in Australia but when stopped said they were self ID’ing as male?

ConstanzeMozart · 15/05/2026 12:15

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 12:01

A lot of my husband’s white t-shirts are v neck. I’m wondering if I would be viewed in Australia as being in a same sex marriage. Mind you I have lots of round neck t-shirts (I daren’t ask what polo necks signify). Under Australia, would that would turn him into the woman, and me into the man.

Goodness, I won’t bring his light pink check shirt into the mix, along with my possession of sky blue garments.

(I daren’t ask what polo necks signify)
Public intellectual? Grin
I don't know of what sex/gender though.

ConstanzeMozart · 15/05/2026 12:16

BananaPeels · 15/05/2026 12:06

Out of curiousity, What would happen if a biological women walked topless in the streets in Australia but when stopped said they were self ID’ing as male?

Any MNetters in Oz willing to try this out and see?

Cailleach1 · 15/05/2026 12:16

CassOle · 15/05/2026 12:06

OMG @Cailleach1 you have baby pink, white and baby blue clothes!

Depending on what I wear, I suppose some would lead you to believe my biology changes daily. I have a burnt orange/ coppery top. I guess I’m an oran utan when I put that on. Maybe a badger if I wear white with black. A cornflower in my blue jeans.

Not ‘what will I wear today’. More ‘what biological metamorphosis will I pretend I am enacting today?’

BananaPeels · 15/05/2026 12:18

ConstanzeMozart · 15/05/2026 12:16

Any MNetters in Oz willing to try this out and see?

I’m honestly surprised no one has tbh. I’m trying work out how the police, who no doubt would be called, would square the circle. it would completely show the absurdity of the law?.

ConstanzeMozart · 15/05/2026 12:19

BananaPeels · 15/05/2026 12:18

I’m honestly surprised no one has tbh. I’m trying work out how the police, who no doubt would be called, would square the circle. it would completely show the absurdity of the law?.

Honestly, if I were there I'd be tempted to do it myself.

KnottyAuty · 15/05/2026 12:26

stickygotstuck · 15/05/2026 09:35

And actually, it should be simple enough by their own logic.
"I am a man, look at my gender-related appearance, I'm wearing jeans and a T-shirt".

I think you should be able to wear whatever you want and just wear a badge to say what your identity is. "Man" should be sufficient to claim an identity

I thought the whole point was that "gender related appearance" are regressive stereotypes that noone should have to follow and are therefore not immutable, so can't be the basis for a protected group?

KnottyAuty · 15/05/2026 12:34

NebulousSupportPostcard · 15/05/2026 11:57

I've just watched his speech outside the court ( on sky news) Horrifying. Tagged in disabled women, First Nations women in long list of women including "trans women" who are now safe from discrimination. Did smug smile when talking about how proud "young Roxy" would be of his "bravery". Startlingly contradicted himself by saying his trans journey actually only began in 2017 (when "young Roxy" was already a pensioner?!l)

Just grim seeing him flanked by young women as he makes his speech clearly looking and sounding like an older man.

https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/roxanne-tickle-wins-landmark-ruling-against-femaleonly-app/video/eb4e3c124e2092c39692f15b741762e4

ElenOfTheWays · 15/05/2026 13:40

GermaineBloodyGreer · 15/05/2026 05:34

Entirely unsurprising result. TWAW is enshrined in Australia - it's just as bad there as it is in Canada, and I don't see it changing any time soon. I like Sal but this isn't a fight she's ever going to win (in my opinion).

It's always worth fighting. Today the world saw Australia make an absolute fool of itself because of Sal Grover fighting back. Every fight, win or lose, sheds a little more sunlight on this nonsense. It was not for nothing. I'm glad she's fighting on

Datun · 15/05/2026 13:59

ElenOfTheWays · 15/05/2026 13:40

It's always worth fighting. Today the world saw Australia make an absolute fool of itself because of Sal Grover fighting back. Every fight, win or lose, sheds a little more sunlight on this nonsense. It was not for nothing. I'm glad she's fighting on

💯

miri1985 · 15/05/2026 14:05

JulesJules · 15/05/2026 09:26

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.

Had a look on his twitter and can't see anything, would you mind linking I'm interested to hear his reasoning

impossibletoday · 15/05/2026 14:14

miri1985 · 15/05/2026 14:05

Had a look on his twitter and can't see anything, would you mind linking I'm interested to hear his reasoning

The only post I saw was from 2 years ago which some people are reposting today

OP posts:
ThatCyanCat · 15/05/2026 14:15

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...

musicalfrog · 15/05/2026 14:15

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

OP posts:
SnoopyPajamas · 15/05/2026 14:17

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.

GenderlessVoid · 15/05/2026 14:29

SnoopyPajamas · 15/05/2026 14:17

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.

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?

Swipe left for the next trending thread