An appeal hearing is underway to overturn a federal court judgment that found a women-only social media app discriminated against a transgender woman. The appellants claim the Sex Discrimination Act limits the definition of men and women. A barrister for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner argued that 'woman' should encompass transgender women, suggesting a broader ordinary meaning. The appellants insist their platform’s discrimination against men is a special measure to counter historical inequities, while ongoing debates revolve around the conventional definitions based on dictionary references and gender identity.
The case was the first gender identity discrimination case to reach the federal court and centred on the definition of sex and what it means to be a woman.
Celia Winnett, representing the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, argued the definition of 'woman' now includes transgender women, reflecting a broader ordinary meaning.
Grover's barrister contended that the Macquarie dictionary still defines 'woman' in reference to natal women, associating the term with those assigned female at birth.
Giggle for Girls claims the app's discrimination against men serves as a special measure to address historical disadvantages between men and women.
Collection
[
|
...
]