'Flawed judgment': Australian court rules against women-only app, claims sex not merely a biological concept
The Federal Court of Australia has determined that the term “sex” transcends mere biological classification, which the legal advocacy group ADF International has called a flawed judgment.
The court held that the female-only networking app Giggle indirectly discriminated against a man who identifies as a woman and goes by the name Roxanne Tickle by barring him from joining.
In the case of Roxanne Tickle v. Giggle for Girls, the court awarded Tickle 10,000 AUD (roughly $6,800) in compensation for what it recognized as “indirect discrimination.”
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Tickle, who has legally amended his birth certificate to identify as female, argued for access to spaces designated exclusively for women. Giggle’s defense, supported by ADF International, contended that women have a right to single-sex spaces, a principle extending to both physical and digital realms.
However, the court dismissed this defense, stating that disqualification based on male sex constituted unlawful discrimination.
The judgment states that “… 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 … ”
Katherine Deves, representing Giggle, expressed significant concern during the hearing, noting, “The stakes are high in this case. Women’s international human rights will be lost if ‘woman’ now includes any male who identifies as such. This decision matters not just in Australia but also to the watching world.”
Sall Grover, CEO of Giggle and respondent in the lawsuit, emphasized the original intent behind her app. “For decades, women’s movements have fought for the right to have female spaces in society. Yet today, the clock is being wound back.”
Grover continued, “I designed my app to give women their own space to network. It is a legal fiction that Tickle is a woman. His birth certificate has been altered from male to female, but he is a biological man, and always will be. A woman’s-only app isn’t about discrimination. It’s about freedom of speech, belief, and association.”
Robert Clarke, director of Advocacy for ADF International, described the ruling as a severe setback for women’s rights.
“In ruling that Tickle, a biological male, was a victim of discrimination when prevented from joining a woman’s app, the court has delivered an egregiously flawed judgment that removes protections for women. Contrary to what the judge held, sex is never changeable. The judgment is a severe setback for women and girls, failing to uphold the basic truth of biological reality — that men cannot become women. Tickle did not experience unjust discrimination, but was simply disqualified from membership on the Giggle app because he is not a woman.”
The court also found that section 5b of Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination on the ground of “gender identity,” aligns with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, despite the ICCPR only specifically prohibiting discrimination based on sex, not gender identity.
Further controversy stems from the court’s dismissal of the argument that the amendment of the Sex Discrimination Act to include gender identity was unconstitutional.
"The judge has read in a faux right to protection on the basis of ‘gender identity’ in international law where none exists. The ICCPR is clear that discrimination is to be prohibited on the basis of sex. There is no mention of ‘gender identity’ in the treaty,” Clarke said.
“The ruling is not only anti-women and disingenuous, but also it creates a dangerous precedent for conjuring up false rights to the detriment of real rights. Here the real rights in jeopardy are those of women. By ignoring Australia’s obligations under CEDAW to protect women’s rights, the court is positioning Australia in direct violation of its basic human rights obligations toward women,” Clarke added.
Tickle v. Giggle is just one of the several challenges to protections for women that are ongoing across Australia.
Canadian advocate Chris Elston, known as “Billboard Chris,” has voiced his opposition.
The judgment “turns back the clock on women’s rights and exposes the deep ideological distortions that have permeated our societies and our legal systems,” Chris said. “It is a fiction that Tickle is a woman. While his birth certificate may have been altered, no man can ever become a woman.”
