Trans woman wins 'landmark' discrimination case against app

A transgender woman (a biological male who identifies as female) from Australia has won a discrimination case against a women-only social media app, after she was denied access for being male.

The Federal Court found that although Roxanne Tickle had not been directly discriminated against, she was a victim of indirect discrimination, when a decision disadvantages a person with a particular attribute. It ordered the app to pay her the equivalent of £5,100 plus costs. The case is both a landmark ruling about gender identity and addresses the increasingly contentious question: what is a woman?

Speaking exclusively to en, a spokeswoman for Christian Action Research and Education (CARE) said: ‘The Tickle case is causing concern beyond Australia as it could be cited in other jurisdictions seeking to resolve similar conflicts. It saw an Australian judge make the wholly false claim that sex is "changeable and not necessarily binary" before upholding the right of a biological male to access a service where vulnerable women seek help from other women. As elsewhere, gender ideology is here being endorsed to the detriment of women and children. This trend should be clearly opposed by the church.’

In 2021, Tickle downloaded ‘Giggle for Girls’, an app marketed as an online refuge where women could share their experiences in a safe space, and where men were not allowed. To gain access she had to upload a selfie to prove she was a woman, which was assessed by gender recognition software designed to screen out men. But seven months later – after successfully joining the platform – her membership was revoked.

Because she identifies as a woman, Tickle claimed she was legally entitled to use services meant for women, and that she was discriminated against based on her gender identity. She then sued the social media platform for just over £100,000.

Giggle’s legal team argued that sex is a biological concept. They conceded that Tickle was discriminated against – but on the grounds of sex, rather than gender identity – and that refusing to allow Tickle to use the app constituted lawful sex discrimination. But the judge found that case law has consistently found sex is ‘changeable and not necessarily binary’, dismissing Giggle’s argument.

The outcome of this case could set a legal precedent for the resolution of conflicts between gender identity rights and sex-based rights elsewhere. Crucial here is the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), an international treaty adopted in 1979 by the United Nations which is effectively an international Bill of Rights for women. The Tickle case will be significant for all 189 countries where CEDAW has been ratified.

This is because national courts often look at other countries’ approaches when interpreting international treaties. And this case is likely to have global repercussions, as if still more courts rule in favour of gender identity claims it is more likely that other countries will in turn follow suit.