The case of Tickle v. Giggle is the perfect demonstration of what happens when a government decides sex is whatever you say it is.
When you tell gigantic whoopers about what it means to be human as male and female, those lies will reveal themselves in grand and embarrassing ways.
This is what’s currently happening with gender ideology in Australia, and it is worth everyone’s attention in both hemispheres. These incidents serve as a grand demonstration in the madness of gender ideology. On Aug. 1, 2013, it became Australian law that a person’s sex was mutable and self-defined. Of course, this erased any objective meaning of what it means to be male or female.
Australia is now dealing with the fallout, and it is comically infuriating.
What has blown things up down under is a case called Tickle v. Giggle. Seriously. A very feisty female tech entrepreneur named Sally (Sall) Grover is being fined serious money by Australia’s federal court for kicking a bloke off her all-female social media site, Giggle for Girls. That man started posing as a woman in his late 40s and now presents as “Roxane (Roxie) Tickle,” trying desperately to pass as a woman. Few are buying it, and Grover certainly didn’t when her company reviewed Tickle’s personal photograph.
Robert James Bromwich, a sitting judge for the Federal Court of Australia, has declared in a legal ruling against Grover that Tickle’s “sex is now that of a woman” because 1) the man said so, 2) he legally changed his birth certificate to denote this wish along with his newly adopted name, and 3) he had sex mutilating surgery. Grover must now pay more than $20,000 because she does not, according to Judge Bromwich, “accept that a person’s sex can be a matter for self-identification.”
Gender activists in Australia have messed with the wrong woman. Grover is fighting back so fiercely, deftly and truthfully, that she said this week Facebook has permanently banned her from posting to her own page. Grover wryly responded, “I don’t want to labor the irony of being banned on a social networking platform while fighting in court for the right to ban men from a woman-only social networking platform.”