正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

This is an interview on ABC News with Australia’s governor general Sam Mostyn about being a woman in such a role. *ahem* Sam Mostyn is the first listed patron of Equality Australia, the leading “LGBTQI+” organization that, just last week, intervened in the Giggle v Tickle federal court appeal...

salltweets's profile picture

Sall Grover

186,802 subscribers

52,355 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

健康养生新闻政治教育
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

“Sam Mostyn the governor general is on the board of Equality Australia... The GG is not supposed to be involved in organizations that could bring negative focus to her role. She’s on the board of an organization that is in court saying sex is a spectrum & men can be lesbians.🤪”
0:37

“Sam Mostyn the governor general is on the board of Equality Australia... The GG is not supposed to be involved in organizations that could bring negative focus to her role. She’s on the board of an organization that is in court saying sex is a spectrum & men can be lesbians.🤪”

Sall Grover

38,467 次观看 • 4 个月前

Ian Thorpe, a patron of Equality Australia 🌈, talking to Allegra Spender about discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. *ahem* Equality Australia intervened in Giggle v Tickle against Lesbian Action Group to deny lesbians spaces & events free from men who claim to be women. Equality Australia 🌈 is discriminating against lesbians on the basis of sexual orientation & gaslighting the public that they’re against it.
1:14

Ian Thorpe, a patron of Equality Australia 🌈, talking to Allegra Spender about discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. *ahem* Equality Australia intervened in Giggle v Tickle against Lesbian Action Group to deny lesbians spaces & events free from men who claim to be women. Equality Australia 🌈 is discriminating against lesbians on the basis of sexual orientation & gaslighting the public that they’re against it.

Sall Grover

54,047 次观看 • 9 个月前

“I can define a woman… I just take an inclusive approach.” This means she includes men in her definition of women. Ffs. There is a lot to unpack in this snide & immature clip. First of all, Amanda Camm MP is correct: you cannot protect women if you can’t define them. Otherwise, who are you protecting? How are you catering to specific needs? How are you helping a woman whose protection involves single-sex care? Words only purpose is that they have objective meaning. Next, an inclusive approach to the definition of women is… only including women. That’s what inclusivity actually is. Allowing men to be classed as women simply turns the category of woman into a mixed sexed category. It dismantles the category. It’s not inclusive, it’s destructive. Then, she calls defining a woman as importing Trumpian-style politics to Australia. This is laughably stupid. Trump didn’t decide what a woman is, he acknowledged that accurately defining women in law & society was a no brainer political win & ceased upon the opportunity. If you do want to talk about importing American ideologies, that conversation will be about gender ideology. You don’t have an issue with importing problems, only the solution. Not wanting to stop with the stupidity, she then says that it’s all a distraction from the actual issue: men’s violence against women. Who and what are you talking about? If those words aren’t defined, the statement makes no sense. I’ll prove it: in the event there is male violence against men who claim to be women, that is going to be for a very different reason than men’s violence against women, requiring different plans & solutions. See, even to defend your stupid ideology it’s important to have correct definitions so everyone gets the correct help. Finally, she mocks being told it’s tokenistic to wear purple to support the “queer community”. It’s so pathetic, I’m not even going to bother commenting on it. When she was the Minister for Women, Shannon Fentiman blocked me because I said that a woman is an adult human female. She ignored pleas from me and many Queensland-based women to meet with her to discuss our opposition to self ID laws. She says she is not ashamed of her stance but she should be. She is ignoring women in favor of men, proving in actions instead of words that she knows *exactly* what a woman is.
0:48

“I can define a woman… I just take an inclusive approach.” This means she includes men in her definition of women. Ffs. There is a lot to unpack in this snide & immature clip. First of all, Amanda Camm MP is correct: you cannot protect women if you can’t define them. Otherwise, who are you protecting? How are you catering to specific needs? How are you helping a woman whose protection involves single-sex care? Words only purpose is that they have objective meaning. Next, an inclusive approach to the definition of women is… only including women. That’s what inclusivity actually is. Allowing men to be classed as women simply turns the category of woman into a mixed sexed category. It dismantles the category. It’s not inclusive, it’s destructive. Then, she calls defining a woman as importing Trumpian-style politics to Australia. This is laughably stupid. Trump didn’t decide what a woman is, he acknowledged that accurately defining women in law & society was a no brainer political win & ceased upon the opportunity. If you do want to talk about importing American ideologies, that conversation will be about gender ideology. You don’t have an issue with importing problems, only the solution. Not wanting to stop with the stupidity, she then says that it’s all a distraction from the actual issue: men’s violence against women. Who and what are you talking about? If those words aren’t defined, the statement makes no sense. I’ll prove it: in the event there is male violence against men who claim to be women, that is going to be for a very different reason than men’s violence against women, requiring different plans & solutions. See, even to defend your stupid ideology it’s important to have correct definitions so everyone gets the correct help. Finally, she mocks being told it’s tokenistic to wear purple to support the “queer community”. It’s so pathetic, I’m not even going to bother commenting on it. When she was the Minister for Women, Shannon Fentiman blocked me because I said that a woman is an adult human female. She ignored pleas from me and many Queensland-based women to meet with her to discuss our opposition to self ID laws. She says she is not ashamed of her stance but she should be. She is ignoring women in favor of men, proving in actions instead of words that she knows *exactly* what a woman is.

Sall Grover

40,674 次观看 • 11 个月前

The woman that wrote that “lowkey, I chose to be a lesbian” article is over on tiktok saying she’s more of a lesbian than lesbians who work in corporate because she….is an artist.
1:02

The woman that wrote that “lowkey, I chose to be a lesbian” article is over on tiktok saying she’s more of a lesbian than lesbians who work in corporate because she….is an artist.

Shay 🌈🌸✨

701,608 次观看 • 5 个月前

Due to the Australian sex discrimination commissioners interpretation of the law women are having to: • Go to the high court to reestablish that we are still included in the legislation that was created specifically for us • Lesbians have to go to a tribunal for a second time to reestablish that heterosexual men are not lesbians • A woman is being dragged through a state tribunal for saying that men who claim to be women cannot breastfeed • Women are losing both employment & volunteer positions for asserting the *fact* that men are not women • A woman is appealing a $95,000 fine for using publicly available information to inform people that there are men in women’s sport • Women are being threatened with punishment if they don’t compete with the men in sport • School aged girls are not drinking water at school - or not attending at all for the week of their period - so they don’t have to use unisex bathrooms • Women currently & formally in prison are revealing the sexual assaults they have experienced due to men who claim to be women locked in cells with them The current *interpretation* of Australia’s sex discrimination act - accepted by the full federal court for reasons known only to them - is not creating less discrimination. In fact, it’s creating much more. Interestingly, it’s simultaneously proving that everyone knows exactly who the women & girls actually are, because we’re the ones being punished. Gender ideology has failed and is being rejected in almost every other country it attempted to thrive within. It has brought down the careers of many politicians who didn’t have the metaphorical balls to acknowledge reality and fix the problem. To think that Australian is any different is as ignorant as it is insane. This is not a “culture war”, Anthony Albanese. It’s a war on women & girls.
7:01

Due to the Australian sex discrimination commissioners interpretation of the law women are having to: • Go to the high court to reestablish that we are still included in the legislation that was created specifically for us • Lesbians have to go to a tribunal for a second time to reestablish that heterosexual men are not lesbians • A woman is being dragged through a state tribunal for saying that men who claim to be women cannot breastfeed • Women are losing both employment & volunteer positions for asserting the *fact* that men are not women • A woman is appealing a $95,000 fine for using publicly available information to inform people that there are men in women’s sport • Women are being threatened with punishment if they don’t compete with the men in sport • School aged girls are not drinking water at school - or not attending at all for the week of their period - so they don’t have to use unisex bathrooms • Women currently & formally in prison are revealing the sexual assaults they have experienced due to men who claim to be women locked in cells with them The current *interpretation* of Australia’s sex discrimination act - accepted by the full federal court for reasons known only to them - is not creating less discrimination. In fact, it’s creating much more. Interestingly, it’s simultaneously proving that everyone knows exactly who the women & girls actually are, because we’re the ones being punished. Gender ideology has failed and is being rejected in almost every other country it attempted to thrive within. It has brought down the careers of many politicians who didn’t have the metaphorical balls to acknowledge reality and fix the problem. To think that Australian is any different is as ignorant as it is insane. This is not a “culture war”, Anthony Albanese. It’s a war on women & girls.

Sall Grover

78,780 次观看 • 2 个月前

Anna Cody, Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner, intervened in a federal court case against women only spaces, the accurate definition of woman & biological sex, instead in favor of men who claim to be women. All while school aged girls are not drinking water at school to avoid having to use bathrooms with boys in them, while women are being charged with vilification for accurately calling men men, while women are being injured on sports fields by men who claim to be women, while lesbians are denied their own events, while women have their lives turned upside down & have to raise almost $2million to fight for women only spaces in court, she has sided specifically with men who claim to be women. She has attended “trans rights” speaking events but never “women’s rights” events. I know she has heard the voices of women who rely on women only spaces because we submitted affidavits from these women in the Tickle v Giggle court case. Women who have been abused, women who are in recovery, women whose faith relies on sex segregation, women with trauma, women whose day to day needs require woman only spaces, lesbian women denied lesbian only events. She has ignored it all in favor of men who claim to be women. In the Giggle v Tickle appeal, it’s Giggle saying that the law can serve everyone. Have your trans only spaces, have gay only spaces, have male only spaces, have women + men who claim to be women spaces if you want, just also have female only spaces. The sex discrimination commissioner is actively against this, in favor of whatever men who claim to be women want. When you allow school girls to go without adequate single sex bathrooms, lesbians to be denied to right of single sex association, every woman who needs woman only spaces to go without, you are discriminating against women, and you’re doing it on the basis of sex. Yes, the sex discrimination commissioner is discriminating against women on the basis of sex. So for her to stand on stage and say that she not only listens to women but centers women who have experienced discrimination in her work is a demonstrable lie. I know this because I have the receipts. The sex discrimination commissioner should be forced to resign because she is not accurately doing her job. She is welcome to be a trans rights activist elsewhere but it certainly shouldn’t be in the office of the SEX discrimination commission.
1:31

Anna Cody, Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner, intervened in a federal court case against women only spaces, the accurate definition of woman & biological sex, instead in favor of men who claim to be women. All while school aged girls are not drinking water at school to avoid having to use bathrooms with boys in them, while women are being charged with vilification for accurately calling men men, while women are being injured on sports fields by men who claim to be women, while lesbians are denied their own events, while women have their lives turned upside down & have to raise almost $2million to fight for women only spaces in court, she has sided specifically with men who claim to be women. She has attended “trans rights” speaking events but never “women’s rights” events. I know she has heard the voices of women who rely on women only spaces because we submitted affidavits from these women in the Tickle v Giggle court case. Women who have been abused, women who are in recovery, women whose faith relies on sex segregation, women with trauma, women whose day to day needs require woman only spaces, lesbian women denied lesbian only events. She has ignored it all in favor of men who claim to be women. In the Giggle v Tickle appeal, it’s Giggle saying that the law can serve everyone. Have your trans only spaces, have gay only spaces, have male only spaces, have women + men who claim to be women spaces if you want, just also have female only spaces. The sex discrimination commissioner is actively against this, in favor of whatever men who claim to be women want. When you allow school girls to go without adequate single sex bathrooms, lesbians to be denied to right of single sex association, every woman who needs woman only spaces to go without, you are discriminating against women, and you’re doing it on the basis of sex. Yes, the sex discrimination commissioner is discriminating against women on the basis of sex. So for her to stand on stage and say that she not only listens to women but centers women who have experienced discrimination in her work is a demonstrable lie. I know this because I have the receipts. The sex discrimination commissioner should be forced to resign because she is not accurately doing her job. She is welcome to be a trans rights activist elsewhere but it certainly shouldn’t be in the office of the SEX discrimination commission.

Sall Grover

90,143 次观看 • 10 个月前

Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner was asked whose side she would be on if a woman filed a court case because a man was in the woman’s bathroom. She couldn’t answer the question. While this is shocking to many people hearing all this bullshit for the first time, this is exactly what I have been in court with for 3.5 years of Tickle v Giggle/Giggle v Tickle, and not once has she been confused over which side to be on. Hint: it’s not women’s. For anyone who wants to read the what the SDC has been saying to the court, all of the submissions are available on the federal court website. Spoiler: the word “female” does feature frequently, but only when attributed to a man. Imagine if all the media had been paying attention to all the bullshit 3.5 years ago… 🩷
0:38

Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner was asked whose side she would be on if a woman filed a court case because a man was in the woman’s bathroom. She couldn’t answer the question. While this is shocking to many people hearing all this bullshit for the first time, this is exactly what I have been in court with for 3.5 years of Tickle v Giggle/Giggle v Tickle, and not once has she been confused over which side to be on. Hint: it’s not women’s. For anyone who wants to read the what the SDC has been saying to the court, all of the submissions are available on the federal court website. Spoiler: the word “female” does feature frequently, but only when attributed to a man. Imagine if all the media had been paying attention to all the bullshit 3.5 years ago… 🩷

Sall Grover

77,745 次观看 • 10 个月前

The Full Federal Court ruled that a women-only app illegally excluded a biological male. 2 of the judges were women. The law, written by a woman. A Sex Discrimination Commissioner who is a woman. The legal architecture that once protected women was not dismantled by men. It was dismantled by women who mistook the performance of compassion for the substance of it. This is what suicidal empathy looks like in practice, and women are paying for it with their safety.
2:58

The Full Federal Court ruled that a women-only app illegally excluded a biological male. 2 of the judges were women. The law, written by a woman. A Sex Discrimination Commissioner who is a woman. The legal architecture that once protected women was not dismantled by men. It was dismantled by women who mistook the performance of compassion for the substance of it. This is what suicidal empathy looks like in practice, and women are paying for it with their safety.

Carlz J Söda 📸

22,574 次观看 • 2 个月前

** An open letter to Anthony Albanese ** Dear Prime Minister Albanese, Let’s get one thing clear: women are adult human females. You know it, I know it, you even said it in the lead up to the last election when asked “what is a woman” by Piers Morgan. But we have a big problem. I’m sure you have heard, last week, the Federal Court delivered its judgment in Giggle v Tickle, the “what is a woman” legal case that has been fighting in federal court for the past four years. To put it very simply, there are two sides to this case: women, adult human females, who want to ensure that woman is a single-sex category in law and women & girls have access to single sex spaces. The other side, which includes your human rights commission, insists that men who claim to be women are women in the eyes of the law. The full Federal Court sided with the man who claims to be a woman. Yes. A male won the “what is a woman” court case. Giggle v Tickle has turned Australia into an international laughing stock. This decision is seismic. It means women cannot run women-only businesses for women. It confirms that the ordinary meaning of sex has been twisted beyond recognition. It means men can be women in law. The Australian Human Rights Commission, captured by ideology, has weaponised the sex discrimination act against women, the very demographic it was enacted to protect. They’ve even argued in court that men who claim to be women need pregnancy protections. They’ve pushed the view that sex is a spectrum, changeable, and that anyone objecting is the bigot. Is this something you agree with? Do you, Mr Prime Minister, think men need pregnancy protections in the law? And there are real-world stakes here: Girls at school are holding their bladders all day, refusing to drink water, because boys who claim to be girls are in their bathrooms and they don’t want them there. Women prisoners are locked in cells with male sex offenders who simply “identify” as women. Female athletes are losing podiums, matches and safety. This isn’t inclusion - it’s the demise of women’s rights. Prime Minister, some of your ministers say, “we need to protect trans rights”. With all due respect, sir, your government can protect so called trans rights without stripping rights from women and girls. Every other citizen manages to exist without demanding access to the opposite sex’s protected spaces. Why not try to get “trans rights” without destroying the rights of women and girls? Have you ever even tried? The fact that Labor hasn’t even mentioned Giggle v Tickle and women’s rights - while Liberals, Nationals, and One Nation politicians speak out - tells us everything. This week has been silence from the Labor Party. No trans visibility day parades on this one. No pride posts. Why? What don’t you want Australians to know? You boast about your 50 per cent women in cabinet. Good for you - you can accurately recognise what a woman is when it suits you. But the rest of us aren’t allowed to without fear of punishment. And can I ask, if you filled that cabinet with 50 per cent trans women, would you still call it equality between men and women? Think about that. While the UK, the United States and even New Zealand are waking up, rolling back the nonsense and restoring sanity and realizing that gender ideology is a failed experiment, your government is turning Australia into the laughing stock of the world. “Giggle v Tickle” isn’t just a punchline overseas - it’s proof Australia is upside down. I want to tell you something really important: If you will lie about something as obvious as men being women, we can assume you will look us in the eye and lie about everything. Tell the truth. Fix the Sex Discrimination Act. Reinstate clear biological, accurate definitions of man and woman. Protect women, girls and single-sex spaces. Actually do something. Because, at the moment, Mister Prime Minister, I’m doing your job for you.
5:22

** An open letter to Anthony Albanese ** Dear Prime Minister Albanese, Let’s get one thing clear: women are adult human females. You know it, I know it, you even said it in the lead up to the last election when asked “what is a woman” by Piers Morgan. But we have a big problem. I’m sure you have heard, last week, the Federal Court delivered its judgment in Giggle v Tickle, the “what is a woman” legal case that has been fighting in federal court for the past four years. To put it very simply, there are two sides to this case: women, adult human females, who want to ensure that woman is a single-sex category in law and women & girls have access to single sex spaces. The other side, which includes your human rights commission, insists that men who claim to be women are women in the eyes of the law. The full Federal Court sided with the man who claims to be a woman. Yes. A male won the “what is a woman” court case. Giggle v Tickle has turned Australia into an international laughing stock. This decision is seismic. It means women cannot run women-only businesses for women. It confirms that the ordinary meaning of sex has been twisted beyond recognition. It means men can be women in law. The Australian Human Rights Commission, captured by ideology, has weaponised the sex discrimination act against women, the very demographic it was enacted to protect. They’ve even argued in court that men who claim to be women need pregnancy protections. They’ve pushed the view that sex is a spectrum, changeable, and that anyone objecting is the bigot. Is this something you agree with? Do you, Mr Prime Minister, think men need pregnancy protections in the law? And there are real-world stakes here: Girls at school are holding their bladders all day, refusing to drink water, because boys who claim to be girls are in their bathrooms and they don’t want them there. Women prisoners are locked in cells with male sex offenders who simply “identify” as women. Female athletes are losing podiums, matches and safety. This isn’t inclusion - it’s the demise of women’s rights. Prime Minister, some of your ministers say, “we need to protect trans rights”. With all due respect, sir, your government can protect so called trans rights without stripping rights from women and girls. Every other citizen manages to exist without demanding access to the opposite sex’s protected spaces. Why not try to get “trans rights” without destroying the rights of women and girls? Have you ever even tried? The fact that Labor hasn’t even mentioned Giggle v Tickle and women’s rights - while Liberals, Nationals, and One Nation politicians speak out - tells us everything. This week has been silence from the Labor Party. No trans visibility day parades on this one. No pride posts. Why? What don’t you want Australians to know? You boast about your 50 per cent women in cabinet. Good for you - you can accurately recognise what a woman is when it suits you. But the rest of us aren’t allowed to without fear of punishment. And can I ask, if you filled that cabinet with 50 per cent trans women, would you still call it equality between men and women? Think about that. While the UK, the United States and even New Zealand are waking up, rolling back the nonsense and restoring sanity and realizing that gender ideology is a failed experiment, your government is turning Australia into the laughing stock of the world. “Giggle v Tickle” isn’t just a punchline overseas - it’s proof Australia is upside down. I want to tell you something really important: If you will lie about something as obvious as men being women, we can assume you will look us in the eye and lie about everything. Tell the truth. Fix the Sex Discrimination Act. Reinstate clear biological, accurate definitions of man and woman. Protect women, girls and single-sex spaces. Actually do something. Because, at the moment, Mister Prime Minister, I’m doing your job for you.

Sall Grover

96,262 次观看 • 2 个月前

Thank you to Sex Matters for asking Julia Gillard if sex matters. See, it’s Gillard’s amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act that removed the definition of “woman” & added “gender identity”, muddling the whole thing & allowing men who claim to be women to interpret the act to their advantage. The amendments took effect in 2013 but it’s not like the act has been working for the past 11 years. With the help of the Australian Human Rights Commission, many people & businesses have been intimidated into accepting men as women. I say “intimidated” because it is intimidating to receive an Australian Human Rights Commission complaint on the basis of alleged “gender identity discrimination” (under the Sex Discrimination Act… yes, none of it makes any sense) and have to either do everything the AHRC says or fight a lengthy & expensive Federal Court battle. The AHRC wanted me to pay the man who made the complaint against me $20,000, attend “sex & gender education”, allow him onto a female only platform & allow all men who claim to be women onto a female only platform. I said no. Not just because I want the platform to remain female only but because I am a woman & I reserve the right to say NO to men when they trespass my boundaries. So I said NO to the AHRC. What resulted has been an almost 3 year long battle. It started when I was 15 weeks pregnant. My daughter will be turning 3 when the appeal to the first Federal Court decision is heard in appeal to the Full Federal Court (3 judges). She will be 4 years old if/when it goes to the High Court. But I want her to grow up in a country where she has rights, including the right to say NO to a man in a dress. What mother would ever stop fighting for her daughter? In the Tickle v Giggle decision, the judge said that “indirect discrimination” occurred “on the basis of gender identity”. It didn’t. He was blocked from the app on the basis of sex - and his sex is male. A simple DNA test would prove that. My eyes clearly saw it. The judge, with the help of the AHRC’s absurd interpretation of the law & reality, said that “sex is changeable”. It isn’t. Sex is immutable. However, Gillard’s amendments along with state-based changes to birth certificate legislation that allows men to edit their BC to the opposite of their biological sex has created the concept of “legal sex”. Legal sex is gender identity aka gender ideology. It obliterates women’s rights to say NO to men if that man declares himself to be a woman. And that leads to verdicts of “indirect discrimination on the basis of gender identity”, despite not knowing or caring that he has a gender identity. Sex matters. This law has to change, and it will, in part because of Giggle v Tickle & everyone who supports the case, but also because of the hard work of every woman who is speaking up and saying NO to this absurd situation. We’re saying what Julia Gillard should have said in 2013. While she (evidently) can’t answer the question, I know that sex matters to Julia Gillard. I know this because she basked in being Australia’s first woman Prime Minister and has dined out on the fact for almost 10 years. Without the reality of sex, her achievement becomes obsolete. With what she did with her achievement, her legacy has become devastating. I have a lot of respect for people who admit they got something wrong. It happens. We’re all only human (and humans don’t change sex). I hope Julia Gillard takes the opportunity to admit it some time. In the meantime, women around Australia (and the world) will continue to do the work to ensure that we can say NO to men who claim to be women. Sex matters. Gender identity does not.
2:35

Thank you to Sex Matters for asking Julia Gillard if sex matters. See, it’s Gillard’s amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act that removed the definition of “woman” & added “gender identity”, muddling the whole thing & allowing men who claim to be women to interpret the act to their advantage. The amendments took effect in 2013 but it’s not like the act has been working for the past 11 years. With the help of the Australian Human Rights Commission, many people & businesses have been intimidated into accepting men as women. I say “intimidated” because it is intimidating to receive an Australian Human Rights Commission complaint on the basis of alleged “gender identity discrimination” (under the Sex Discrimination Act… yes, none of it makes any sense) and have to either do everything the AHRC says or fight a lengthy & expensive Federal Court battle. The AHRC wanted me to pay the man who made the complaint against me $20,000, attend “sex & gender education”, allow him onto a female only platform & allow all men who claim to be women onto a female only platform. I said no. Not just because I want the platform to remain female only but because I am a woman & I reserve the right to say NO to men when they trespass my boundaries. So I said NO to the AHRC. What resulted has been an almost 3 year long battle. It started when I was 15 weeks pregnant. My daughter will be turning 3 when the appeal to the first Federal Court decision is heard in appeal to the Full Federal Court (3 judges). She will be 4 years old if/when it goes to the High Court. But I want her to grow up in a country where she has rights, including the right to say NO to a man in a dress. What mother would ever stop fighting for her daughter? In the Tickle v Giggle decision, the judge said that “indirect discrimination” occurred “on the basis of gender identity”. It didn’t. He was blocked from the app on the basis of sex - and his sex is male. A simple DNA test would prove that. My eyes clearly saw it. The judge, with the help of the AHRC’s absurd interpretation of the law & reality, said that “sex is changeable”. It isn’t. Sex is immutable. However, Gillard’s amendments along with state-based changes to birth certificate legislation that allows men to edit their BC to the opposite of their biological sex has created the concept of “legal sex”. Legal sex is gender identity aka gender ideology. It obliterates women’s rights to say NO to men if that man declares himself to be a woman. And that leads to verdicts of “indirect discrimination on the basis of gender identity”, despite not knowing or caring that he has a gender identity. Sex matters. This law has to change, and it will, in part because of Giggle v Tickle & everyone who supports the case, but also because of the hard work of every woman who is speaking up and saying NO to this absurd situation. We’re saying what Julia Gillard should have said in 2013. While she (evidently) can’t answer the question, I know that sex matters to Julia Gillard. I know this because she basked in being Australia’s first woman Prime Minister and has dined out on the fact for almost 10 years. Without the reality of sex, her achievement becomes obsolete. With what she did with her achievement, her legacy has become devastating. I have a lot of respect for people who admit they got something wrong. It happens. We’re all only human (and humans don’t change sex). I hope Julia Gillard takes the opportunity to admit it some time. In the meantime, women around Australia (and the world) will continue to do the work to ensure that we can say NO to men who claim to be women. Sex matters. Gender identity does not.

Sall Grover

33,164 次观看 • 1 年前

In this video, a woman police officer is talking about a strange case. An old acquaintance came to meet her. That woman is married, but she is also having an affair with a married man. Now the twist is that the woman feels that her boyfriend is also involved with another girl. So she is asking the police officer what she can do in this situation and what help she can get from the law. What's your take on this ?😂🤔
0:40

In this video, a woman police officer is talking about a strange case. An old acquaintance came to meet her. That woman is married, but she is also having an affair with a married man. Now the twist is that the woman feels that her boyfriend is also involved with another girl. So she is asking the police officer what she can do in this situation and what help she can get from the law. What's your take on this ?😂🤔

AnuCreate.in_

133,795 次观看 • 3 个月前

Jennifer Siebel Newsom: Well, there has historically been a war on women in our country. While we’ve made tremendous progress in terms of gender equity, we are increasingly seeing—especially with the current federal administration—a rollback of women’s rights. So whether it’s investments in child care, investments in reproductive care, SNAP funding, ICE raids that have separated families, a dismissal of violence against women, a reduction in support for victims of sexual assault—there’s just a normalization that if something happens to women, it’s just part of being a woman, which is horrific.
1:44

Jennifer Siebel Newsom: Well, there has historically been a war on women in our country. While we’ve made tremendous progress in terms of gender equity, we are increasingly seeing—especially with the current federal administration—a rollback of women’s rights. So whether it’s investments in child care, investments in reproductive care, SNAP funding, ICE raids that have separated families, a dismissal of violence against women, a reduction in support for victims of sexual assault—there’s just a normalization that if something happens to women, it’s just part of being a woman, which is horrific.

Acyn

54,806 次观看 • 4 个月前

“What is disgraceful is it’s been put on the shoulders of women to fight [‘what is a woman’] cases to get judgements in favor of women’s sex based rights when our politicians could enact new legislation for women’s rights. They haven’t, because they’re gutless” - Rachael Wong
8:33

“What is disgraceful is it’s been put on the shoulders of women to fight [‘what is a woman’] cases to get judgements in favor of women’s sex based rights when our politicians could enact new legislation for women’s rights. They haven’t, because they’re gutless” - Rachael Wong

Sall Grover

44,450 次观看 • 1 年前

**Giggle v Tickle updates** • Tickle has applied to cross appeal, wanting the decision upgraded from “indirect discrimination” to “direct discrimination” + more $$$ in damages and $$$ in aggravated damages. • The Australian Human Rights sex discrimination Commissioner has once again applied to intervene. They intervened as amicus curiae in Tickle v Giggle and interpreted the law to favor gender identity over sex/legal sex over biological sex. • The Australian Christian Lobby has applied to intervene on the side of sex based rights. • The case management hearing is scheduled for February 12 at the Federal Court in Sydney. • It is likely that the appeal will be heard in August, 2025. This appeal is to the full Federal Court. That means 3 Federal Court judges not 1. Due to the cross appeal, the hearing is likely to go for 3-4 days rather than the usual 1 in an appeal. • The reason the Giggle appeal is to the full Federal Court and not the High Court is because the Tickle v Giggle decision got both facts about the case & facts about the law wrong. So it remains a Federal Court matter. • After a full Federal Court appeal decision, the side who didn’t get the decision in their favor can apply to go to the High Court. As I have said from the very beginning, I am willing to do that if that is what is necessary. • The Giggle legal team is Stuart Wood AM KC, Bridie Nolan, Anca Costin and Katherine Deves. • The next updates will be after the case management hearing & will address whether the cross appeal & interveners were permitted. • As always, thank you everyone for the endless support. It is invaluable to me. This has been a very long & stressful process for 3 years and it’s not over yet. Ultimately, I am very optimistic. In part because I know I am right - men are not women - but also because it is clear that the global capture of gender ideology is falling. • For more information & donations, please visit 🩷
1:02

**Giggle v Tickle updates** • Tickle has applied to cross appeal, wanting the decision upgraded from “indirect discrimination” to “direct discrimination” + more $$$ in damages and $$$ in aggravated damages. • The Australian Human Rights sex discrimination Commissioner has once again applied to intervene. They intervened as amicus curiae in Tickle v Giggle and interpreted the law to favor gender identity over sex/legal sex over biological sex. • The Australian Christian Lobby has applied to intervene on the side of sex based rights. • The case management hearing is scheduled for February 12 at the Federal Court in Sydney. • It is likely that the appeal will be heard in August, 2025. This appeal is to the full Federal Court. That means 3 Federal Court judges not 1. Due to the cross appeal, the hearing is likely to go for 3-4 days rather than the usual 1 in an appeal. • The reason the Giggle appeal is to the full Federal Court and not the High Court is because the Tickle v Giggle decision got both facts about the case & facts about the law wrong. So it remains a Federal Court matter. • After a full Federal Court appeal decision, the side who didn’t get the decision in their favor can apply to go to the High Court. As I have said from the very beginning, I am willing to do that if that is what is necessary. • The Giggle legal team is Stuart Wood AM KC, Bridie Nolan, Anca Costin and Katherine Deves. • The next updates will be after the case management hearing & will address whether the cross appeal & interveners were permitted. • As always, thank you everyone for the endless support. It is invaluable to me. This has been a very long & stressful process for 3 years and it’s not over yet. Ultimately, I am very optimistic. In part because I know I am right - men are not women - but also because it is clear that the global capture of gender ideology is falling. • For more information & donations, please visit 🩷

Sall Grover

1,642,539 次观看 • 1 年前

“In a free society, people can believe whatever they want. If you want to believe men can be women or you’re a man who wants to call himself a woman, that is your business. What you cannot do in a free society is force anyone else to accept it. What is at stake here is the ability to lawfully acknowledge reality. If you care so much about “trans rights” you can work out a way to get them without destroying the category of women in law, female spaces, sport, services, the entire reality of lesbianism, and punishing citizens for acknowledging reality. The fact that you haven’t even tried makes it appear that destroying the rights of women is the goal. Any politician who will look an Australian citizen in the eye and tell them that a man can be a woman is admitting that they will lie about anything and everything because the most obvious lie has already been told. If no one in this room can acknowledge reality and fix an obvious problem you are either malicious or incompetent. The days of dismissing this issue are over. This is not a culture war. It’s reality.” - my words, read by Alison Penfold MP, in parliament today. Contact politicians are tell them to BACK THE BILL - “Sex Discrimination Amendment- sex based rights bill 2026”
1:09

“In a free society, people can believe whatever they want. If you want to believe men can be women or you’re a man who wants to call himself a woman, that is your business. What you cannot do in a free society is force anyone else to accept it. What is at stake here is the ability to lawfully acknowledge reality. If you care so much about “trans rights” you can work out a way to get them without destroying the category of women in law, female spaces, sport, services, the entire reality of lesbianism, and punishing citizens for acknowledging reality. The fact that you haven’t even tried makes it appear that destroying the rights of women is the goal. Any politician who will look an Australian citizen in the eye and tell them that a man can be a woman is admitting that they will lie about anything and everything because the most obvious lie has already been told. If no one in this room can acknowledge reality and fix an obvious problem you are either malicious or incompetent. The days of dismissing this issue are over. This is not a culture war. It’s reality.” - my words, read by Alison Penfold MP, in parliament today. Contact politicians are tell them to BACK THE BILL - “Sex Discrimination Amendment- sex based rights bill 2026”

Sall Grover

656,722 次观看 • 2 个月前

Meet IIM Graduate Prathyusha Challa from Hyderabad. Our Law, Judiciary and Women Commission will not consider her a Woman because she is the sister of a MAN. What kind of Gender Equality is this which discriminates even against the woman on the basis of her relationship with a MAN.
5:40

Meet IIM Graduate Prathyusha Challa from Hyderabad. Our Law, Judiciary and Women Commission will not consider her a Woman because she is the sister of a MAN. What kind of Gender Equality is this which discriminates even against the woman on the basis of her relationship with a MAN.

NCMIndia Council For Men Affairs

39,438 次观看 • 1 年前

This is absolutely heartbreaking, EFF supporters assaulting an elderly woman, who is old enough to be their grandmother. Utterly shameful, a representation of the dark reality that is endured by women from the EFF in South Africa. This is the DNA of the party. It’s all about violence, abuse of women and corruption. The EFF hates South Africa and it’s people
0:29

This is absolutely heartbreaking, EFF supporters assaulting an elderly woman, who is old enough to be their grandmother. Utterly shameful, a representation of the dark reality that is endured by women from the EFF in South Africa. This is the DNA of the party. It’s all about violence, abuse of women and corruption. The EFF hates South Africa and it’s people

Goolam

122,973 次观看 • 2 年前

Case Study: Why do Women Go Along with Trans Ideology This woman has an audience on TikTok of over half a million followers. Much of her content is focused on supporting women and girls to have boundaries. She says some of the same things that I do about the fact that there are no “special men” who deserve to bypass women and girls’ consent, whether that is a husband or brother. However, she, like many women, have a blind spot when it comes to men who claim a trans identity. She tells a story of when she herself is confronted by a man (in women’s style clothes) in the locker room. Although she initially has a fear response instinct, she disregards this and tells herself a story that explains the man’s presence in her space. This is a great example of the exact thing Gavin de Becker repeatedly warns about in The Gift of Fear: do not make rationalizations that talk yourself out of responding to your instincts!
12:34

Case Study: Why do Women Go Along with Trans Ideology This woman has an audience on TikTok of over half a million followers. Much of her content is focused on supporting women and girls to have boundaries. She says some of the same things that I do about the fact that there are no “special men” who deserve to bypass women and girls’ consent, whether that is a husband or brother. However, she, like many women, have a blind spot when it comes to men who claim a trans identity. She tells a story of when she herself is confronted by a man (in women’s style clothes) in the locker room. Although she initially has a fear response instinct, she disregards this and tells herself a story that explains the man’s presence in her space. This is a great example of the exact thing Gavin de Becker repeatedly warns about in The Gift of Fear: do not make rationalizations that talk yourself out of responding to your instincts!

Amy E. Sousa, MA Depth Psychology

13,964 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨BREAKING NEWS: Stunning And Brave™ Jason Tickle Declared Official Woman After Court Rules Biology Is Hate Speech SYDNEY — In a landmark victory for the mentally ill dude in a dress community, the Full Federal Court has ruled that Jason Tickle… a biological male who spent a decade in men’s hockey before discovering his inner woman… was the victim of direct discrimination when excluded from a women-only app. The judges, channelling the spirit of Julia Gillard’s 2013 Sex Discrimination Act amendment, declared that “sex is changeable” and that any woman who objects is guilty of gratuitous, disrespectful conduct. Tickle, who now boasts one-third the testosterone of an actual female and claims women’s hockey “saved my life,” celebrated by telling the radical leftist ABC and SBS that he brought the case to show other confused men they can be brave™. The progressive Marxist Australian government and the Australian Human Rights Commission have hailed the decision as a triumph of Diversity Is Our Strength™. Biological women? Irrelevant. Their spaces, their safety, their sports… all now open to any man who says the magic words. The court was clear: men are women now. Women are optional. And anyone who notices the difference is guilty of a hate crime against progress itself. Sall Grover Julia Gillard ABC News SBS Australia Australian Human Rights Commission Australian Labor
1:36

🚨BREAKING NEWS: Stunning And Brave™ Jason Tickle Declared Official Woman After Court Rules Biology Is Hate Speech SYDNEY — In a landmark victory for the mentally ill dude in a dress community, the Full Federal Court has ruled that Jason Tickle… a biological male who spent a decade in men’s hockey before discovering his inner woman… was the victim of direct discrimination when excluded from a women-only app. The judges, channelling the spirit of Julia Gillard’s 2013 Sex Discrimination Act amendment, declared that “sex is changeable” and that any woman who objects is guilty of gratuitous, disrespectful conduct. Tickle, who now boasts one-third the testosterone of an actual female and claims women’s hockey “saved my life,” celebrated by telling the radical leftist ABC and SBS that he brought the case to show other confused men they can be brave™. The progressive Marxist Australian government and the Australian Human Rights Commission have hailed the decision as a triumph of Diversity Is Our Strength™. Biological women? Irrelevant. Their spaces, their safety, their sports… all now open to any man who says the magic words. The court was clear: men are women now. Women are optional. And anyone who notices the difference is guilty of a hate crime against progress itself. Sall Grover Julia Gillard ABC News SBS Australia Australian Human Rights Commission Australian Labor

mdtlion

34,930 次观看 • 2 个月前