No, it’s not what you get when you poke the Pillsbury Doughboy in the belly.
Tickle v. Giggle is the actual name of a legal dispute where an Australian Federal Court ruled against women – and in favor of a biological male who goes by the moniker “Roxanne Tickle.”
The court upheld a lower court decision that Tickle was discriminated against when the women-only networking app “Giggle for Girls” denied him access.
Tickle v. Giggle has gained international attention as it demonstrates the disastrous results when being female is redefined to include men claiming to be women. In their rulings, Australian courts eradicated the scientific categories of male and female, stripped women of their privacy and safety, erased womanhood, and punished those who refuse to accept transgender ideology.
Sall Grover created Giggle in 2020. She explained in her affidavit to the Federal Court why she designed the female-only app:
The vision was to create a little corner of the Internet where women from all over the world could have a refuge away from men. It could be for serious reasons, very superficial reasons, or very practical reasons. It would be a place without harassment, “mansplaining,” “d*** pics”, stalking, and aggression, and other male patterned online behaviour.
She added:
During development, I would often say, “I want to ensure that women can have access to a female support network in the palm of their hand whenever they need it” and that is essentially what we were creating.
According to court documents, the conflict between Tickle and Giggle began in February 2021, when Tickle downloaded the app and registered as a female user, which included downloading a photograph of his face. In October, he was blocked from using the app after Giggle software and employees determined he was a male masquerading as a woman.
Tickle claimed that “trans women” “are morally and legally women.”
He then filed a complaint with the Australian Human Rights Commission, saying Grover and Giggle for Girls had violated the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 and accusing both of gender identity discrimination.
The original Act prohibited discrimination based on sex, marital status, and pregnancy or potential pregnancy. But in 2013, the Act was amended to include the artificially fabricatedcategories of sexual orientation and gender identity, putting those social constructs on a collision course with biological sex – being male or female.
Grover stalwartly refused to participate in any reconciliation process with the Australian Human Rights Commission or Tickle, which would’ve meant allowing him on the app. So he sued her and Giggle.
In a ruling as ridiculous as the case’s name, Judge Robert Bromwich said that because Tickle had “a labioplasty and vaginoplasty” – removal of his genitals and inverting his penis to create a faux vagina – his sex changed to “that of a woman.”
Of course, it did not.
In his decision, Bromwich assaulted what we know from science, writing ideologically:
“Sex is not confined to being a biological concept referring to whether a person at birth had male or female physical traits.”
Sex is not “confined to being a binary concept, limited to the male or female sex, but rather takes a broader ordinary meaning, informed by its use, including in State and Territory legislation.”
“Sex can refer to a person being male, female, or another non-binary status.”
Sex “also encompasses the idea that a person’s sex can be changed.”
He is deeply mistaken. Sex is not determined by surgery, legislation, or public usage of the word.
The judge ruled that Giggle and Grover engaged in “indirect gender identity discrimination against the applicant,” ordering them to pay up to $60,000 AUD in damages and legal fees, about $43,000 in U.S. dollars.
Tickle had also demanded a published written apology, but Bromwich said any apology would be “insincere,” adding:
It is plain that any apology given by Ms Grover, and any apology given by her on behalf of Giggle, would be through clenched teeth and utterly devoid of sincerity. She would be doing no more than saying she was sorry, but she would not in fact be sorry at all. She adheres to her sincerely held beliefs.
Grover appealed the ruling to the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, and on May 15, 2026, the judges upheld Bromwich’s ruling.
The ruling is a slap in the face to Australian women and basic reason, as it means that being a woman has no real meaning. It means that any Aussie male who claims to be female has access to all women-only activities and spaces.
To add insult to injury, the court ruling doubled the compensation to Tickle for damages and legal costs. In addition, the court upgraded the offense to direct “gender identity” discrimination.
Grover has said she will appeal the decision. She wrote about the consequences of the ruling in a post on X, “Men who claim to be women have more rights than actual women in Australia.”
She’s right, male transgenderism trumps women’s rights in Australia – and any place where sex is redefined to include “gender identity.” Let’s hope the High Court of Australia has more sense.
The case is Tickle vs. Giggle.
Related articles and resources:
Activist Erin Friday on Protecting Kids and Fighting ‘Gender’ Ideology
Do Not Fall for the ‘Affirm Them or They Will Die’ Lie
ADF International:
“Sex is not confined to being a biological concept” rules Australian Court
Australian court dismisses appeal to uphold biological reality in ‘What is a woman?’ case
Family First New Zealand: Interview with Sall Grover
HHS Releases Report on Harms of ‘Transgender’ Medical Interventions for Minors
How the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue Attacks the Family
Medicalizing Gender Confusion Makes Things Worse, New Research Confirms
Stella O’Malley: Sall Grover – The Woman Who Refused to Lie
Transgender Ideology is Inherently Destructive
Transgender Ideology is Inherently Destructive, Part 2
Why Christians Can’t Avoid the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue
Yes, Girls Care When Boys Take Their Trophies
Yes, Transgenderism is a False Belief System
The post ‘Tickle v. Giggle’: Australian ‘Transgender’ Court Case Is No Joke for Women appeared first on Daily Citizen.
Daily Citizen
