Sall Grover, CEO of Giggle for Girls (Photo: ADF International)
Australia may follow the UK in legally determining that biological reality is the ultimate determinant of what constitutes a man or a woman.
The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia is conducting a four day hearing centred on a biological male who goes by the name of “Roxanne Tickle” and claims to be a woman.
Tickle claimed unlawful discrimination after being barred from joining the women-only networking app known as Giggle for Girls. The subsequent court case, which took place last summer and was popularly known as “Tickle v Giggle”, ruled in favour of Tickle.
While Giggle for Girls argued that women had a right to single-sex spaces, the court rejected this defence, saying, “…sex is not confined to being a biological concept referring to whether a person at birth had male or female physical traits, nor confined to being a binary concept, limited to the male or female sex…”
Giggle for Girls was ordered to pay Tickle’s legal costs as well as 10,000 Australian dollars in compensation.
The company, supported by legal advocacy group ADF International, is appealing the decision.
Sall Grover, CEO of Giggle for Girls, said, “I am optimistic. I know we are right and I know that reality always wins – eventually. Reality is inescapable. The law has to reflect reality. In reality, no man is a woman so therefore no man should legally be a woman.”
Legal representatives for Giggle for Girls have said that if the current judgment is upheld, the concept of women’s rights would be threatened as there would effectively be no way of determining who should, and who should not, have them.
Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, said, “By ruling that a biological male was discriminated against for being excluded from a women’s app, the court delivered a flawed judgment that undermines protections for women.
“Sex is not a feeling – it is a biological fact, and it cannot be changed. This appeal is a defining moment: the Court must choose between ideology and reality.”
Australia may also rule in favour of biological reality
