Member-only story
Tickle v Giggle — Gender critical voices lose, again
![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:700/1*GGvYJ5LG6TrAgn_E26n2Sg.jpeg)
In the way only a judge can deliver Roxanne Tickle got legal vindication that her identity was legally valid and should be protected from discrimination. Online, the losing respondent Sall Grover and other self-proclaimed TERFs vowed to fight on, to protect their understanding of reality. A whole ocean of salt was spilt on Twitter, with comments egging Sall to continue the fight. Amidst it all no-one bothered to read the actual judgement or listen to precisely what the judge said as any appeal can only succeed if the judge erred in a point of law. Judge Bromwich was precise, reasoned, and laid out the fact: Sall Grover and her company were proven to be discriminating indirectly and that at law it was possible for a person to change their sex under the Australian legal system.
It should also be noted that this was the case in which Helen Joyce was rejected as an expert on all matters trans and Kathleen Stock’s evidence was dismissed as irrelevant. This highlights the significant gap between political posturing and legal understanding, which is especially acute with Joyce as she has been riding the gender critical movement for every pay check she can muster. For her part Grover appears to be unfazed by the case, yet as she is going to pay at least $AUS50,000 in costs and compensation it will hit her were it truly hurts, the bottom line.