Donate SIGN UP

Man Gets $10K For Not Being Allowed In Women Only Club....

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 13:29 Fri 23rd Aug 2024 | News
32 Answers
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 32rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

It's infuriating.

this is the modern world

"But Justice Robert Bromwich said in his decision on Friday that case law has consistently found sex is “changeable and not necessarily binary”,"

I think Judge Bromwich, and anybody else involved in the case law he mentions,  needs to brush up on their 'O' Level biology before becoming involved in similar cases. 

Sex is determined at conception. There are only two variants (bar the extremely rare incidences of hermaphroditism, which it seems was not an issue here) and it is immutable. It certainly cannot be changed by "declaring" yourself one or the other and growing your hair. I think Giggle's CEO Sall Grover has it right.

When Tickle’s lawyer Georgina Costello KC cross examined Grover, she said:

Even where a person who was assigned male at birth transitions to a woman by having surgery, hormones, gets rid of facial hair, undergoes facial reconstruction, grows their hair long, wears make up, wears female clothes, describes themselves as a woman, introduces themselves as a woman, uses female changing rooms, changes their birth certificate – you don’t accept that is a woman?”

“No”, Grover replied.

She also said she would refuse to address Tickle as “Ms,” and that “Tickle is a biological male.”

It seems the goalposts have been moved. According to Judge Bromwich, his ruling did not address the question of gender (which is meaningless and largely a matter of opinion) but sex (which is absolute and a matter of fact).

Dangerous territory indeed when judges begin to rule against immutable fact. 

Maybe the comments were composed over an agreeable lunch

Grover is spot on

“There isn’t a woman in the world who’d have to take me to court to use this woman only space. It takes a man for this case to exist.”

This is a very dangerous ruling imo. 

Australia has lost it's collective mind.

Clearly you are not creating a safe space for women if you let those who have deluded themselves such that they think they're women, in.

They should find a sane court to lodge an appeal.

Question Author

"Australia has lost it's collective mind." - we ain't far behind and the septics are already drugging their kids as toddlers. Radio rental.

Question Author

what suddenly possesses an old bloke to wake up one day and say "right I'm a Shiela"? - He must see some adavantage, probably all the attention he's managed to generate by trying to gate crash a womens club. The sooner we wake up to this collective madness the better.

Rather than women only, they should have made it a members only club. Anyone applying to be a member that is suspect to have a member could be refused

One assumes many have always been under the delusion that they were a "Shiela" but previously kept that quiet. Now they feel less embarrassed to admit it.

anyone so minded can read the whole judgment here - 

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2024/2024fca0960

.....my head hurts.......

Man gets preference over women - again.

 

Grover's comment, in chelle7272s post, is an absoultely brilliant quote and neatly sums up the absurdity.

Hold on, let me get this straight...

Tickle sues Giggle?

🤣🤣

A smart move to shave her beard off before the photo op 🫤

His beard gromit.

Indeed Naomi.

 

Calling this man, who is very clearly a man, a woman is just patently absurd.

 

But I have to be careful - a few years ago I posted a thread about a man, who was clearly a man pretending to be a woman, and referred to him as him and he, and the AB Editor posted "she, Deskdiary, it's not that difficult". So I was being told how to think.

At least he hasn't had to put on the red light.

but did he have his red panties on?

naomi,

I think you will find that he is a she...

Take a walk on the wild side 😀

This travesty happened because the Australians passed a law in 2013 which undermined Womens' rights.

This judgement is the natural conclusion of that idiotic law.

Sall Grover will be appealling the decision and every right-thinking person, not just in Australia, ought to be praying that sanity is restored.

1 to 20 of 32rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Man Gets $10K For Not Being Allowed In Women Only Club....

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.