• In short: Transgender woman Roxanne Tickle is suing social media platform Giggle for Girls after she was excluded from the women-only app.
  • She is alleging unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender identity while the app’s founder has denied she is a woman.
  • What’s next? The hearing is expected to run for four days.

A transgender woman who was excluded from a women-only social media app should be awarded damages because the app’s founder has persistently denied she is a woman, a Sydney court has heard.

In February 2021, Roxanne Tickle downloaded the Giggle for Girls social networking app, which was marketed as a platform exclusively for women to share experiences and speak freely.

Users needed to provide a selfie, which was assessed by artificial intelligence software to determine if they were a woman or man.

Ms Tickle’s photograph was determined to be a woman and she used the app’s full features until September that year, when the account became restricted because the AI decision was manually overridden.

  • john89@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    6 months ago

    I don’t understand.

    It’s okay to discriminate against men but not transgender women?

    • prof@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      86
      ·
      6 months ago

      While I certainly agree with you that discrimination based on sex is unacceptable im most contexts, I believe that gender exclusive spaces, unless they hinder people directly, sometimes are a good thing.

      My dad is a mental health professional and founded a weekly ‘only-men’ self help group. He found that some things they talked about there wouldn’t have worked with women involved. That group existed for about 5 years or so and helped quite a few struggling men.

      So yeah, unless there’s any maliciousness involved, I’d argue that gender exclusiity is not bad in every context.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s a bit different. A little private group is not a for-profit company. The difference between not being invited to a family only event when you aren’t family and not being allowed into a restaurant chain because of your race.

        • prof@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          6 months ago

          The group I referenced had a paid membership. Scale that up and make it digital and you may end up with a gender exclusive social media app.

          I get what you mean though, but I feel there’s a bit more nuance than what you imply.

      • Taohumor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        6 months ago

        I remember back in high school I had a teacher in an all male classroom because it was a stem field but for kids like an introductory course. A girl showed up in the 2nd year and he sort of joked about how it changes the dynamic cuz now all the guys will need to flex for her so the point of the class was sort of ruined. I remember that class was actually fucking amazing because you would make friends with guys regardless of your social circle or wealth background. Like I talked to multiple demographics and we all treated each other equally and we were all there to learn the trade. It was an amazing experience that I’ve never found anywhere else, especially not any circle where there were women. Hell even guys who were in that class there were a few if you met them outside the class it was just different. I made some close friends there where we kept spending time together outside the class that I otherwise would not have met but others when they got back to “the rest of the world” that hierarchy set back in and they couldn’t bring themselves to talk to you on that level anymore. Women invading male safe spaces under the guise of glass ceilings or whatever was extremely toxic for men, it’s as if men started barging into women’s bathrooms honestly saying it’s a glass ceiling to their right to stare at women in their own private moments. Stupid example but it’s all I could come up with.

        The point is I would love to find another environment like that and even I wish I looked for more like that as a kid and to have appreciated it for what it was more at the time. Men need to learn to see each other as brothers and not as opposition, that’s the only way we get out of this mess is to unionize properly. I think we had it once but we lost it because of this fucking propaganda painting men as inherently predators.

        • 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          34
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          So… Men act like dicks when there is a woman around or when they are back in “the rest of the world”? At which point their sense of brotherly love and cameraderie disappear? How is that a woman’s fault?

          How is that the fault of, “fucking propaganda painting men as inherently predators”?

          Sounds like a problem with that group of men…

          I have tons of male friends who dont “flex” or act like dicks when they are outside of an all-male setting

          I’m not against men’s clubs, btw… But the idea that men cant be toxic outside of a men’s club is a terrible premise for a men’s club

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Women invading male safe spaces under the guise of glass ceilings or whatever was extremely toxic for men, it’s as if men started barging into women’s bathrooms

          So the class wasn’t a “men only” class, it just was a class women generally weren’t interested in. And a woman deciding she is interested was the same as men barging into women’s bathrooms.

          Jfc, who are the snowflakes again?

        • AnalogyAddict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s not a male safe space if the purpose is to learn. No one gets to have a “safe space” to gain advantage over others. That’s not what female safe spaces do.

          I mean… safe from what? What did the women do that changed the dynamic?

      • endhits@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        If women have gender exclusive spaces, men also should have them. Women have invaded male spaces for decades.

        • iegod@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          6 months ago

          ‘Invaded’ lol what. Dude the boys club is a real thing. And it’s everywhere.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            In pretty confident this person would agree with you. They’d also say women shouldn’t be allowed there. They don’t want the boys club to go away and think it’s being threatened because women are allowed in the workplace or whatever.

        • AnalogyAddict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          There is a vast difference between men getting together to vent and talk, and men getting together to make decisions that affect everyone and preserve power amongst themselves.

          The minute it is the latter, it no longer qualifies as a men’s space. Women don’t want to invade a genuine men’s space. And women don’t want to invade a men’s space in order to exploit and prey upon men.

        • Plague_Doctor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s true though. Gender is a performance, and as a woman your womanhood is always under scrutiny from everyone else. You can get your identity as woman taken from you if you don’t “look woman enough”. Which if you say have more masculine features, cut your hair short as a cis woman you become less woman. For example Butch lesbians are actually the most often de-womanized. Same goes for less masculine men. It’s a box no one fits into perfectly and having certain genitals doesn’t include or exclude you from either.

          This person wanted a safe space where they wouldn’t have to deal with cis straight men. Which makes it that if men want inclusion in such spaces they need to be better.

          Another question for you all, why as cis men do you want inclusion in these spaces?

          • Taohumor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            You’re talking about gender expression as opposed to biology.

            As a cis man the only point of wanting inclusion is to either A demonstrate how gender identity being subjective is an easy way to exploit systems, or B to be one of few men smart enough to have access to a bunch of women in a female safe space. One of these is informative, the other is predatory.

        • zbyte64@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          “trans women are women” is pointing out this isn’t about men vs women but the given sex at birth.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            We all accept that trans women are not cis women. The obvious point by the poster was why is it okay to discriminate against men but not trans women?

            • zbyte64@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m just pointing out the obvious difference between the two categories: one is based on gender the other is based on sex. It’s like asking: “if they’re allowed to discriminate on gender, then why not this other instance (that is based on sex)?” But without making what is in the parenthesis explicit - when someone responds “trans women are women” they are saying what is in the parenthesis.

              • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                So it’s okay to discriminate based on sex, but not gender? I don’t see how this really addresses the point.

                • zbyte64@awful.systems
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I’m not directly addressing whether it’s okay but that there are categorical differences in the examples given. We might as well ask why we can’t discriminate based on hair color, since that too is categorically different than gender. That being said, bathrooms discriminate based on gender and not sex, so maybe ask why people think that is okay.

                  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    I ultimately disagree, because one could easily argue that they are discriminating based on biological sex, so in both cases the discrimination is exactly the same, and the question remains consistent categorically as well.

                    But even if we disregard that point, then the answer should be easy “because they are categorically different and thus the reason discriminating against one category is okay and the other is not is xyz.

                    You haven’t answered their question, you just shifted what you believe the question is precisely about, rather than actually address the question itself.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        6 months ago

        Real /r/unpopularopinion moment.

        I think the thing that the TERFs ultimately miss is that this person was initially welcomed in as a woman and treated as a woman by her peers. She did not disrupt the community or harass any of the participants, until she voiced support for Trans Rights.

        It was at this point that a handful of moderators decided to interrogate her on her original gender and use that as an excuse to boot an active and in-good-standing member.

        So she wasn’t removed for “not being a woman”. She was removed for “disagreeing with the political views of the admin”.

        Anyone familiar with Reddit politics should be able to sympathize.

        • Taohumor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          That’s literally how it always goes is if you don’t like x persons politics you are a bad person.

    • tatterdemalion@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m not familiar with discrimination laws in Australia. In the US there are exceptions in the Civil Rights Act (1964) for “private clubs” though I don’t think courts have consistently defined what that means.

      I’m very curious to hear how this case turns out under Australian law. Personally I think it’s counterproductive to exclude trans women from a women-only social club. But if a US court ruled this social club was in fact a “private club” then they could legally discriminate in whatever way they desire, be that by excluding men or trans women.

        • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          A “private” club can exclude protected classes. Like the other poster mentioned, what constitutes “private” is a grey area.

          Back in the 90s Augusta National Golf Club was still excluding blacks even though they hosted the Masters… ( They finally gave in )

        • tatterdemalion@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I believe so, but I’d have to do a little more research to say with certainty. There is a particular supreme court case that serves as an example. See Tillman v Wheaton-Haven Recreation Association.

    • zbyte64@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Discriminating against men is based on gender, discriminating against trans women is based on sex (at birth).