Transgender woman sues women-only social media platform she was excluded from
www.abc.net.au
Social media platform Giggle for Girls is being sued by transgender woman Roxanne Tickle after her access to the women-only app was revoked. The app's owner has denied Ms Tickle is a woman.
  • In short: Transgender woman Roxanne Tickle is suing social media platform Giggle for Girls after she was excluded from the women-only app.
  • She is alleging unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender identity while the app’s founder has denied she is a woman.
  • What’s next? The hearing is expected to run for four days.

A transgender woman who was excluded from a women-only social media app should be awarded damages because the app’s founder has persistently denied she is a woman, a Sydney court has heard.

In February 2021, Roxanne Tickle downloaded the Giggle for Girls social networking app, which was marketed as a platform exclusively for women to share experiences and speak freely.

Users needed to provide a selfie, which was assessed by artificial intelligence software to determine if they were a woman or man.

Ms Tickle’s photograph was determined to be a woman and she used the app’s full features until September that year, when the account became restricted because the AI decision was manually overridden.

  • zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish
    21·
    8 个月前

    I’m not directly addressing whether it’s okay but that there are categorical differences in the examples given. We might as well ask why we can’t discriminate based on hair color, since that too is categorically different than gender. That being said, bathrooms discriminate based on gender and not sex, so maybe ask why people think that is okay.

    • EatATaco@lemm.eeEnglish
      31·
      8 个月前

      I ultimately disagree, because one could easily argue that they are discriminating based on biological sex, so in both cases the discrimination is exactly the same, and the question remains consistent categorically as well.

      But even if we disregard that point, then the answer should be easy “because they are categorically different and thus the reason discriminating against one category is okay and the other is not is xyz.”

      You haven’t answered their question, you just shifted what you believe the question is precisely about, rather than actually address the question itself.

      • zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish
        21·
        8 个月前

        It should be obvious that I don’t agree with the question because of what I perceive to be a categorical error.