As was widely expected, entrepreneur Sall Grover is challenging August’s controversial Federal Court ruling, in the case brought against her by a transsexual. ‘Controversial’ is a frankly generous description of Justice Robert Bromwich’s judgement, which ruled that ‘sex is changeable’. This goes beyond even the self-contradictory claim that ‘sex and gender are different’ and spills right over into biological denialism.
The case was brought about when a man claiming to be a woman tried to join a women’s-only social media app. When the app’s owners recognised his profile picture as obviously male, his application was denied. So he rushed to the courts.
Thanks to Bromwich’s weird, anti-science judgement, he won the first round. But businesswoman Sall Grover is no pushover: she’s bravely putting her reputation and fortune, small as it may be, on the line to challenge the repressive and intolerant ‘transgender’ ideology.
Sall Grover is challenging a controversial Federal Court ruling that “sex is changeable”, after a judge found excluding a transgender woman from the women’s-only social media app Giggle for Girls amounted to indirect discrimination.
In August, transgender woman Roxanne Tickle won a landmark case against Giggle for Girls when Justice Robert Bromwich found Ms Grover had indirectly, but not directly, discriminated against Ms Tickle when she removed her from the app because she did not look sufficiently female.
Ms Grover was ordered to pay the Ms Tickle $10,000, as well as her legal costs.
A ‘transgender woman’ is, in fact, not a woman at all, but a deluded man. But that’s just the start of the avalanche of twisted thinking and denial rampant in this case.
In his ruling, Justice Bromwich found that “sex is changeable” and non-binary, saying the “concept of sex has broadened over the 30 years since the SDA”.
The binary distribution of human sex is in fact one of the most widely established facts of human biology. If Bromwich really believes this, I challenge him to, for example, put his wife on the same dose as a male of a drug like Digoxin, which has a significantly higher mortality rate for females. Or never have a prostate exam, on account of ‘changing’ his sex on a legal certificate.
In a statement on Thursday, Giggle for Girls and Ms Grover said they would argue the court “misinterpreted the legal definition of ‘sex’ under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), expanding it beyond biological realities, which could undermine protections meant for women and girls” […]
Ms Grover will also argue the app serves as a special measure, which is “aimed at fostering equality between men and women”. Under the Sex Discrimination Act, special measures are actions that promote equality for disadvantaged groups.
“By providing a dedicated space for women, we are not just protecting their rights but championing the values of fairness and safety for all,” the statement said.
“The recent ruling of Justice Bromwich in the Federal Court of Australia … misinterprets the fundamental rights of women and girls, and the principles of single-sex spaces essential for their safety and dignity.”
Yes, well, sorry girls: in this brave new world, you just have to accept that fetishistic and mentally confused men are allowed to get naked right next to your daughter in the change rooms. Otherwise, you’re just a ‘bigot’.
