One brave woman, Sall Grover, accompanied by her well established and accomplished friends, has taken a stand against true toxic masculinity.
Tickle, the transgender man, seems to think he’ll get something out of this, considering of course that the something that he’ll get is not just an autogynephilic high that is… But there is no way for him to win now, as even winning this case is a loss in the grand scheme of things.
His best-case scenario, it would seem, is a win that gets him access to a platform that will likely be shut down, either that or he’ll get a payout, which his lawyers will probably take most of, and then he’ll never be able to be seen in public again, considering how much he is hated now by both the right wing and feminists.
If he does win however, respect in the courts will be further eroded. Further pushing Australians towards fringe movements and fringe ideologies, and splintering the Australian political landscape even more than it currently is.
And if he loses… well he would have lost a lot of money and he’ll also be hated by possibly over a million people and would have permanently damaged transgender rights and the publics perception of transgender people everywhere.
It’s looking like a massive lose-lose for Tickle, and it wouldn’t just be his loss alone either, but also for all men in woman-face, everywhere.
Alex James.
—————————–
Quotes and Transcripts:
Lawyer: You have previously said that you would be kind to Ms. Tickle if you met her in real life?
Sall: Yes.
Lawyer: Would you call her Ms. Tickle?
Sall. No, I would not.
Lawyer: But that’s not kind, is it?
Sall: I don’t think it’s kind to expect a woman to see a man as a woman.
Lawyer: Ms. Tickle is a woman, isn’t she?
Sall: Tickle is a biological male.
Lawyer: 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 do you?
Sall: No.
Lawyer: I suggest to you that in Australian society, the normal meaning of a woman is someone who has changed their birth certificate to say woman, what would you say to that?
Sall: I don’t agree.
——————————-
Birdie Nolan, Sall’s Barrister, dismantles the case that Roxy Tickle is ‘psychologically’ a woman:
“What is a woman, if thinking one is a woman, means one is a woman? A woman is not a thought.
The applicant’s lawyer’s summation of a woman is not only deeply offensive but absurd – how one dresses, where one shops, etc.
Both sexes can shop on the opposite side of the aisle.
The more troubling and insidious aspect of the applicant’s evidence, is that there is this entitlement to access spaces where the female sex go, proving incontrovertibly that the applicant does not have the psychology of a woman.
Our society recognizes the importance of single-sex spaces in certain circumstances – female-only toilets, dormitories etc. – to keep women safe from male violence. These are the very places the applicant says he goes.
When a woman who is biologically born and always so – whether she has had her reproductive organs removed or not, whether she thinks she’s a male or not – walks through a dark park in the middle of the night, she does not stop to think: I wonder what side of Kmart this person shops from, have they had their facial hair removed, have they told people in the workplace whether they’re a woman or not?
She doesn’t do that. She doesn’t stop for one second to do that.
She senses instinctively what she perceives to be a threat. She tightens her fingers around her keys. She speeds up.
If a man truly had the psychology of a woman, he would know that and not enter female-only spaces.
This proves the applicant lacks the psychology of a woman. That the applicant is not a woman.”