Australian womens rights activists recieve death threats in the lead up to a Sydney Womens rights rally

[Manyanamanyana]

Sal Grover and Kirralee Smith, both recently fined ($100k and $95k) for misgendering men imposing on womens spaces, have recieved death threats from a range of transactivist organisations. Sal Grover, a single Mum, has pulled out. I don't blame her one bit. It is sickening that women exercising free speech in this country are subject to this bull sh*t. Kirralee has decided to proceed and both are Warriors. Let Women Speak events in Australia require (and tbf, recieve) considerable police presence in order to defend these (usually middle-aged) women from the "be kind" crowd, who have in the past been violent and are always abusive and disruptive. What Government boasts about having sex-parity with the party, and yet sides with Men who behave like this towards women asking for their rights? All of them, actually. In Australia our sex discrimination act was altered beneath the radar to remove the definition of women and men, and elevate gender identity, meaning that a man who identifies as a woman is for all purposes, a woman in law. This is what Sal and Kirralee are fighting for: a repeal of the changes. Our Prime Minister and his tribe of handmaidens call this a culture war. It is in fact a war on womanhood.
https://archive.md/Eaeru

Sal has been through so much, it is entirely understandable that she feels unable to attend due to heinous threats.
It is hard to conceive that the people who got hurty feelings from being “misgendered” are the same people who send vicious threats against women standing up for their rights.
I bet those threatening Sal and the others aren’t investigated or prosecuted for their actions…

So depressing.

It's awful seeing what’s going on in Australia, and grimly, it's a warning of course; rights once lost are hard to claw back. You gotta make a lot of noise, and that's what's happening.

I believe she is suing them for libel as the flyers they distributed described her as racist as well. I have no faith that the legal system will support her, but we will do some dutiful gardening.

I've never understood what's kind about death and rape threats against women. I mean, to me those seem very unkind indeed.

In Australia our sex discrimination act was altered beneath the radar to remove the definition of women and men, and elevate gender identity, meaning that a man who identifies as a woman is for all purposes, a woman in law. This is what Sal and Kirralee are fighting for: a repeal of the changes. Our Prime Minister and his tribe of handmaidens call this a culture war. It is in fact a war on womanhood.

Utter nonsense.

Special exemptions/exceptions to discriminate in favour of natal women still exist in Australian law for sports, prisons, refuges, hospitals & any other areas that require differential treatment or targeted measures for women primarily on the grounds of achieving substantive equality (affirmative action), protecting health, safety, and welfare, and addressing historical disadvantage or specific physiological needs. Networking apps understandably (for anyone with a working brain) aren't considered to meet this standard.

And stop spreading disinformation. Grover was fined for banning a trans woman on a media app & Smith for vilification of a trans person not misgendering.

Special exemptions/exceptions to discriminate in favour of natal women still exist in Australian law for sports, prisons, refuges, hospitals & any other areas that require differential treatment or targeted measures for women primarily on the grounds of achieving substantive equality

No they don’t, stop spreading disinformation. If this were true there would be no men in women’s sports, prisons etc in Australia, but there has been and there still is.

Sall Grover was fined for refusing to allow a man into a women’s only space, and Kiralee Smith was fined because it was deemed “vilification” for calling a man a man, who was a man on a women’s sports team in a women’s sport competition, thus immediately invalidating your claim.

This is what you came here to say? Not, "yeah that treatment of women is terrible, I wish transactivists were not aggressive and violent towards the women they wish would accept them". You are an apologist obviously, for this behaviour.
The SDA now requires that women seeking exemptions must fight lengthy expensive legal battles to access rights we used to have. Even the lesbian action group lost their case to exclude men who wish they were lesbians. It is being interpreted to assume men can become women. The problem is the altered SDA, and the captured legal and political system. But you knew that.

I'm an Australian gender critical woman but sometimes I feel quite isolated from the movement simply because I'm not a feminist nor do I think this issue has anything to do with misogyny (I think the TRA fight back would be just as fierce if the issue were over transmen in mens spaces). Nonetheless I am a massive supporter of keeping single sex spaces single sex, and making is so women dont have to deal with men in their spaces. I don't fear men, I just don't want to share a bathroom with them. Dignity and comfort is enough of a reason to not want them there.

I also wear my 'proud terf' hat around the neighbourhood. Yes, I know I'm not feminist, but gender critical couldn't fit on the hat (and I like to think I'm reclaiming the word).

As it stands, in Australia, this issue is sadly pretty low in priority for voters which is why labour has not been forced to change their policy. If only, people would come together and say we will not vote for a party that supports gender ideology, then labour would abandon their policy in a milisecond. The greens will never abandon GI as they are fucking crazy (and I say that as a former greens member)

No they don’t, stop spreading disinformation. If this were true there would be no men in women’s sports, prisons etc in Australia, but there has been and there still is.

Stop lying.

https://www.ausport.gov.au/integrity_in_sport/transgender_and_gender_diverse_people_in_sport/guidelines/what_does_the_law_say#43-when-is-discrimination-allowed

In terms of prisons, prison authorities must balance anti discrimination obligations against safety, security, and risk assessments. In other words the individual trans woman concerned must not be a risk to natal women which as stated above is aligned with the reasons for exceptions.

Sall Grover was fined for refusing to allow a man into a women’s only space,
That's not misgendering.

and Kiralee Smith was fined because it was deemed “vilification” for calling a man a man, who was a man on a women’s sports team in a women’s sport competition, thus immediately invalidating your claim.

Stop lying.

Smith did much more than misgender she accused an individual of harming when they did not.

Regardless of what that link says, organisations do not, are not able to, and are not willing to exclude men from women’s and girls’ sport. How do you explain that there are men in women’s soccer (the aforementioned Riley Dennis) and a current argument about a man in women’s AFL in South Australia?

Are you saying these organisations are in breech of the law you claim?

And with prisons: how do you explain that rapists, violent men and paedophiles have been put in women’s prisons? Either the law allows it or the organisations are failing their “safety, security, and risk assessments“.

Or do you think these men passed these assessments and it’s okay?

Sall’s refusal to call Tickle “she” was counted against her.

What “much more” did Kiralee do then?

Regardless of what that link says, organisations do not, are not able to, and are not willing to exclude men from women’s and girls’ sport. How do you explain that there are men in women’s soccer (the aforementioned Riley Dennis) and a current argument about a man in women’s AFL in South Australia?

It might help to read the link. There's no automatic disqualification for trans women. Certain criteria need to be met. In other words there has to be a legitimate reason dependent on the particulars involved which vary why the trans woman should be excluded.

And with prisons: how do you explain that rapists, violent men and paedophiles have been put in women’s prisons? Either the law allows it or the organisations are failing their “safety, security, and risk assessments“.

Prisons, like any where else with human involvement are not infallible. That they make mistakes doesn't change the fact that the policy exists & they are legally liable.

Sall’s refusal to call Tickle “she” was counted against her.

Nope. She broke a very clear law AND she knew it but fought it to fund raise.

What “much more” did Kiralee do then?

I already told you. Read the comment or link.

You are way out of your depth here. Calling people liars and interpreting laws and making excuses to suit your agenda. Such a lovely chat.
On another unrelated note, Transactivists appear to be among the most spiteful women-hating people on the planet. Women recieve death threats for defending our rights, and we are labelled liars, and told we are speaking nonsense, kind of aggressive too, anyone notice a pattern?
Won't be replying to you again @Gretel346

It might help to read the link. There's no automatic disqualification for trans women. Certain criteria need to be met. In other words there has to be a legitimate reason dependent on the particulars involved which vary why the trans woman should be excluded.

This just proves the point. They're considered a woman in law and you have to try and justify why they shouldn’t be considered a woman and excluded from women’s spaces. Which is the point you claimed was false.

Prisons, like any where else with human involvement are not infallible. That they make mistakes doesn't change the fact that the policy exists & they are legally liable.

So it has been a repeated mistake to repeatedly treat these men like women in the law?

Nope. She broke a very clear law AND she knew it but fought it to fund raise.

Ah, so it makes sense now. You’re actually angry because you see her behaviour as deceptive. What “clear law” did she break? It’s perfectly reasonable to assume that a space specifically for women and girls should be allowed to exclude men. It’s not clear to most why the courts have ruled a man cannot be excluded.

I already told you. Read the comment or link.

You haven’t told me, and you haven’t linked anything about Kiralee. What, in your opinion, was “much more” than correctly sexing a man?

You are way out of your depth here. Calling people liars and interpreting laws and making excuses to suit your agenda.

Show us where the law says I'm wrong then?
You can't can you? That's why you're crashing out.

Exactly, the law allows men in womens prisons, only 2 Australian states have amended their assessment policies to deny men who seek the protection, validation and intimidation of women through gender identifying into female prisons. And you are right, the "crimes", although dressed up as vilification or discrimination, of Sal and Kirralee were simply stating the truth - that those were men in womens spaces.

I'm not a lawyer or anything so this could be wrong, but I thought in Australia you could say you think a transwoman is a man but you can't harass them nor deny them entry to a single sex space (unless it is proportionate means to a legitimate ends)

This just proves the point. They're considered a woman in law and you have to try and justify why they shouldn’t be considered a woman and excluded from women’s spaces. Which is the point you claimed was false.

What are you talking about? You are completely out of your depth here. Anti discrimination laws provide exemptions/exceptions for natal women as detailed in the links.

So it has been a repeated mistake to repeatedly treat these men like women in the law?

What's your point? Its not as if there's no legal recourse if they mess up. You act as if they can do what they want with no consequences AND that's false.

Ah, so it makes sense now. You’re actually angry because you see her behaviour as deceptive. What “clear law” did she break? It’s perfectly reasonable to assume that a space specifically for women and girls should be allowed to exclude men. It’s not clear to most why the courts have ruled a man cannot be excluded.

Um, its clearly illegal to discriminate on gender identity in Australia unless a special exemption applies. Networking apps don't qualify under special exemptions AND I have already explained what those are.

You appear not to be able to process information very well.

You haven’t told me, and you haven’t linked anything about Kiralee. What, in your opinion, was “much more” than correctly sexing a man?

This is what I said:
"Smith did much more than misgender she accused an individual of harming when they did not."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-08-28/transgender-soccer-riley-dennis-versus-kirralie-smith-court/105694528

Listen, no offence but I'm no longer replying to your posts that are repetitive.

You don't seem to be able to comprehend how special exemptions work. You just don't automatically get one for being a natal female. The conditions listed here:

"that require differential treatment or targeted measures for women primarily on the grounds of achieving substantive equality (affirmative action), protecting health, safety, and welfare, and addressing historical disadvantage or specific physiological needs."

You appear to be operating under some illusion of entitlement just because of sex when it a ctually depends upon whether there's a disadvantage because of sex which isn't always the case. When it comes to prisons it depends on the potential risks that apply in the individual circumstances which aren't all the same particularly in low security non serious crimes housing.

I'm not a lawyer either but with self-Id in every state (I believe), and hate speech/vilification laws including gender identity as protected, there are continuous cases in the courts (Jasmyn Suxxex, Kirralee Smith, Sal Grover, and there's a guy in Qld whose name I can't remember, ex politician who wrote a blog post questioning drag-queens in public libraries delivering children's storytime), are well known examples where stating that these people are men appropriating womens spaces and appearance have landed them in court for vilification. With the SDA no longer excluding female identified men from the category of "woman", and a very captured judiciary, human rights association, Attorney General and many many state governments, these court cases are going in favour of the men bringing these vilification charges, and the chilling effect on free speech is visible to anyone looking.
I will say, there is a lot of commentary from different sides on what the SDA now allows or doesn't allow, but the outcome in Sal's case and the lesbian action group case show that the exemptions are no longer accessible to women who wish to exclude men from spaces based on the reality of sex, if the courts accept trans-identified men as women fullstop.

What are you talking about? You are completely out of your depth here. Anti discrimination laws provide exemptions/exceptions for natal women as detailed in the links.

So how, in Australia, are exemption requirements to be met when in the most obvious circumstances that they should be met - sport and prisons - they aren’t? This just proves that men are treated as women and it’s impossible to meet any purported exemptions.

Um, its clearly illegal to discriminate on gender identity in Australia unless a special exemption applies. Networking apps don't qualify under special exemptions AND I have already explained what those are.

Grover did not discriminate on gender identity. She discriminated on sex, because Tickle is male, and it is logical to everyone that this should be allowed for single sex everything.

If you’re saying that networking apps don’t count, that demonstrates that for networking apps, men are treated as women, again, thus proving the point that in law, for networking apps, regardless of whether they are single sex, men are treated as women.

What's your point? Its not as if there's no legal recourse if they mess up. You act as if they can do what they want with no consequences AND that's false.

My point is, is prisons are an appropriate exemption to keep men out, why does it keep happening that men are put in women’s prisons?

What legal recourse has anyone faced for breaching this?

This is what I said:
"Smith did much more than misgender she accused an individual of harming when they did not."

How is that vilification?

You’re just repeating nonsense. You obviously don’t care about death threats to women. It seems you think they deserve it.

I think lots of people who don't identify as feminists support the fact that men are men and women are women. And you are exactly right, our rights to privacy should be enough. We shouldn't have to reach a threshold of fear to state that we want spaces that are female only. There are lots of reasons, and dignity and privacy are good enough. Good on you for wearing your hat 💚 I've been writing to politicians regularly for a couple of years. The shadow Attorney General is on our side, but I don't think they are going to make much traction in the next election. Luckily everyone seems to have clocked onto the fact the Greens are no longer about the environment and are hopelessly captured (Im also a former Greenie). PH has some leverage, and she has made a few attempts to have the SDA changes appealed. I send her thank-you cards everytime she speaks about it because it takes real bravery here in our parliament to do so.

Already answered.

If we could get a sizeable number of people to come out and commit to only voting for parties that refuse gender ideology, then we would get this all fixed tomorrow. Labour sticks with this policy because they know its doesn't cost them a lot of votes. Being in favour of putting men into women's spaces should cost them elections.