trans women are men

>>43580095
? I don't understand bongland law at this point, it's confused nonsense

>>43580234
Should have made clear, this is in Australia, not UK.

>tickle v giggle
australia isn't real

>>43580245
>this is in Australia
woo, only viable remaining anglosphere nation represent!

>>43580234
The UK doesn't use dollars.

>>43580391
americans have the one and only
>United States v. Article Consisting of 50,000 Cardboard Boxes More or Less, Each Containing One Pair of Clacker Balls

>>43581430
i thought australia was britain but hotter
like how canada is britain but colder

>>43580193
doesn't matter. you excluding them on the basis of their identity is discriminatory in nature and discrimination on the basis of their identity falls in line with sex based discrimination wherein because they don't behave or present in a way that is acceptable to you, you think you have the right to exclude them. you don't. that's sex based discrimination.

>>43581503
>britain but hotter
absolutely not, australians are a relaxed, joyful and good natured people

>>43580095
>20k in damages
How are these bullshit amounts calculated? "I felt bad I couldn't get cis pussy so I'm owed 20k"?

>>43581518
except when it comes to the browns imported by their anglo masters to depress their wages while still making them pay the most in the developed world
>while being used as a testing ground for every new privacy-robbing authoritarian measure
idk the antivaxxie concentration camps were funny

>>43581508
Why is sex based discrimination in an app for a specific sex wrong?

>>43581555
These people think it's "discrimination" to not let men in women's bathrooms.

>>43581569
no we think it's discrimination that you call them men. it's disrespectful. do you go up to black people and call them the n-word?

>>43581577
Yes, but I'm a black man.
So that example probabaly didn't work as well as you'd hoped, huh?

>>43581528
the equivalent cost in prostitutes ms. tickel could've procured to oust her sexual frustration if she were not so misled by the app

>>43581580
Haha gay nigga on this board
Laugh at the gay nigga

>>43581586
It seems my superiority has caused some commotion.

>>43581580
no you're not. don't lie.

>>43581596
>"n-no! you're lying about being black!!"
>"but you HAVE to believe me when I lie about my sex!"
This nigga for real?

>>43581607
i didn't make the rules:
pics or gtfo

>>43581580
what happens if someone bigger and blacker than you says you can't use the N word anymore

>>43581607
Post bbc and vocaroo telling by me I'm a bnwo slave or else you're lying

>>43581612
>Dance, monkey, dance!
No. Slavery is over.

>>43581621
Your posts smell of mayonnaise

>>43581617
What do you think would happen?

>>43581577
So an objective term for someone who is a grown human male (man), which is what trans women actually are, is the same as a slur?

>>43581636
Trans people reject reality and substitute their own.

>>43581636
how do you know that is a grown human male beyond a shadow of a doubt without the assistance of any tools?

>>43581650
Why is that important in this scenario? Just seems like goalpost shifting.
Please elaborate.

>>43581632
i don't know that's why im asking

>>43580234
>TERF activist makes TERF app for TERFs
>tranny gets past their garbage tranny detector and makes an account
>posts on twitter that they made an account and the tranny detector is shit
>CEO TERF directly goes into the wires to find the tranny and ban her account
>Gets sued for discrimination
>CEO TERF spends her life being a TERF micro twitter celeb which is all evidence for the courts
>CEO TERF loses on indirect discrimination but gets off on the claim of direct discrimination
>ordered to pay 10k + tip (court costs)
>CEO TERF appeals loss
>CEO TERF continues to spend her life being a TERF micro twitter celeb which is all evidence for the courts
>Tranny cross-appeals and wants a finding on direct discrimination
>CEO TERF loses on both this time ordered to now pay 20k + tip + legal costs (about 100k all up for the tip + tranny legal costs)
>Can now only appeal to the High Court who will definitely refuse to hear her case because the law is abundantly clear + if she somehow gets it heard she will lose again and create an incontestable precedence from the apex legal authority on top of the abundantly clear law
>CEO TERF has now created an iron clad legal precedence from the second highest legal authority on top of the abundantly clear which has basically one shotted all other ongoing TERF trials

>>43581659
what do you mean why is it important? if you go to the bathroom out in public, how do you know if it's a tranny pissing in the stall next to you or not without the assistance of either tools or otherwise compromising their privacy in an effort to conduct an illegal search.

>>43581674
>No answer
We can't move on until you tell me why this is relevant to your argument.
Please, go ahead.

>>43581688
becauss you can't define a man or a woman without engaging in circular logic which is why your definitions are meritless.

>>43581690
>becauss you can't define a man or a woman without engaging in circular logic
Can you demonstrate this? Thanks.

>>43581692
i can. the burden of proof is on you as you were the one questioned. as the question partitioner it's obvious i have an answer. the reason you deflect is you've conceded you don't.

if you're asking me to demonstrate for you, then do you concede that your definition is bollucks? if your definition is bollucks, then your entire argument falls apart.

if you specifically state your concession, sure i'll give you a definition that encompasses reality rather than your irrationally held beliefs.

>>43581705
>No answer
If you can't demonstrate your statement is true, you lose.
Facts presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, wouldn't you agree?

>>43581670
>>tranny gets past their garbage tranny detector and makes an account
The issue was thay apps ai classified the tranny as male and tranny did not like it

Of I were to made a dating app I would have options to choose: cis female, cis male, troon, poon, nonbinary afab, nonbinary amab and you could exclude any of these categories if you wished. There would be no woman or man categories

i did demonstrate my statement. i said you calling them men is discriminatory on the basis of sex as you're using arbitrary sex stereotypes as your reasoning for the exclusion of the individual.
you said that's not discriminatory because you're calling them what they objectively are, men. i said they're not men. i asked you to define what a man is and you said the burden of proof is on me to define what a man is. so simply put: a man is someone with a phenotype derived from androgenic exposure and reception during maturation. did that use too many big words for your smooth brain to understand? that's what basic biology is in implementation.

>>43581748
Who are you talking to?

>>43581726
no the issue is the apps AI classified her as a woman and then she had her account manually deactivated by Sall Grover after she made a post about getting on the app on twitter + Sall Grover is a TERF activist who spends the entirety of her life talking shit about trannies online which is all fair game for the court to consider + the sex discrimination act is abundantly clear about discrimination on gender identity under section 5B

>>43581767
Does the troon have a penis? She should not be there if she had male parts

basically:
there's this thing called geometric facial pattern recognition. the ai used that to sort through applicants for the app to say who was male or female. the tranny got past the ai and made a post on twitter about it. the owner of the app heard about it and deliberately sought their account out to ban it. this was considered discriminatory in the basis of sex because they were able to get through the ai filter of the app, meaning they changed the rules and conditions of the apps based on discriminatory prejudiced beliefs in the removal of the plaintiffs account.

instead of admitting any wrong doing transpired you guys are like, but they're a man! the ai didn't think they're a man. that means you're the one with the irrationally heald belief founded in prejudice.

>>43581792
Why are you too scared to reply to the person you were talking to?
Spamming into the void isn't good for anyone

>>43581792
I'd also like to point out that they had to start manually approving nonwhite women to avoid a racial discrimination lawsuit because the AI said all nonwhite people are men

>>43581781
No you're wrong, sorry. 5B(1)(c) of the sex discrimination act specifically prescribes that as discrimination.

>>43581809
Which country's law is that?

it's more like: you're not really allowed to ask people about their genitals. that's considered an invasion of privacy and is inappropriate.

>retatd is trying to argue and doesn't know the basic facts of the case
This is why you don't reply to retards

>>43581836
i mean. the tranny won. chuds mad. chuds are like what do you mean?! because they're retards and some of you guys are exposing yourself as chuds for siding with the terf. the terf lost. that means the opinion is not valid in the court of law. maybe in your kangaroo court of feels on discord you guys can circle jerk off, but in reality the terf was proven to be discriminatory. if you can't understand why, then you're part of the problem.

Love to see a roastie cunt get fucked. More terfs need to be knocked down like this. They should fear us and keep their insane bigotry to themselves.

>>43581621
when the majority of walmart workers collect government assistance i disagree with you at a foundational level. slavery is still alive and well. we call the wage cucks now and tether their healt insurance to employment so they can't leave.

>>43581792
Not actually how it went down, Sall got off on the direct discrimination claim the first time and only got whacked with indirect discrimination i.e
>she discriminated against trannies in general
>she didn't have a reason to discriminate against trannies in general i.e the prescribed reasons under section 7D of the SDA
on appeal they upheld the original indirect discrimination claim + they found that direct discrimination occurred. They could of used a range of sources including sall grover shit talking this person on social media for the better part of a decade + generally being an anti-trans maniac as her career to make this determination. They likely synthesized everything together to make the determination of direct discrimination since its a much harder thing to prove in theory than indirect discrimination. Court docs aren't up so i don't know how they made the determination yet. Anyway regardless of what happened any tranny could have sued the giggle app and won the case on indirect discrimination.

>>43581824
Australia, the country that this court case took place in

>>43581876
so basically: she got off with just indirect because the court didn't consider her social media pressence. on appeal she lost because the court took her social media into consideration. meaning. had her social media pressence not been so deeply ingrained in terf ideology she may have won the appeal, but because her social media pressence was so derrogatory she lost on direct discrimination.

it's like these people don't understand how character profiles are built or what the impact they have in a court of law is.

>>43581875
>Get's paid for their work
>Allowed to leave
>Not someone's property
>Have human rights
Then it's not slavery.

>>43581832
No, its not.

5B) Discrimination on the ground of gender identity

(1) For the purposes of this Act, a person (the discriminator) discriminates against another person (the aggrieved person) on the ground of the aggrieved person’s gender identity if, by reason of:
(a) the aggrieved person’s gender identity; or
(b) a characteristic that appertains generally to persons who have the same gender identity as the aggrieved person; or
(c) a characteristic that is generally imputed to persons who have the same gender identity as the aggrieved person;

the discriminator treats the aggrieved person less favourably than, in circumstances that are the same or are not materially different, the discriminator treats or would treat a person who has a different gender identity.

(2) For the purposes of this Act, a person (the discriminator) discriminates against another person (the aggrieved person) on the ground of the aggrieved person’s gender identity if the discriminator imposes, or proposes to impose, a condition, requirement or practice that has, or is likely to have, the effect of disadvantaging persons who have the same gender identity as the aggrieved person.

(3) This section has effect subject to sections 7B and 7D.

>>43581902
>look i let my slaves live in their own house
>and if they want they can stop working for me and go die in a ditch of starvation after losing their home
>this definitely isnt slavery

>>43581937
Define slavery in your next post.
Don't be scared.

>>43581908
by the merit of that law, asking someone about their genitals because you don't accept they're the gender they identified as would fall in line with a disciminatory action. banning them from the platform disadvantges the individual.

indirect is like oh we didn't mean to discriminate.
direct means they were deliberate in their discrimination or otherwise acted knowingly in acting out their prejudice.

>>43581945
the subjugation of an individual by another individual without adequate compensation or exchange.

no one makes a billion dollars. they steal it from workers by abusing their labor.

>>43581956
>by the merit of that law, asking someone about their genitals because you don't accept they're the gender they identified as would fall in line with a disciminatory action
Which exact part? I don't see the connection, do you mind spelling it out for me? Thank you.

>>43581893
yeah, sort of. its conceptually hard to prove both direct discrimination and indirect discrimination at the same time. Its the difference between
>Person discriminating against trannies that happens to actually effect some discrete (amount of) tranny(s)
>Person discriminating specifically against a single trans person because they are trans
There is alot of overlap between these 2 things and its a exercise in legal hair splitting but a finding on one can undermine the other. Even though TERF ceo directly went and manually shutdown this persons account after they got through the anti-tranny filter that can easily be explained by indirectly discriminating against all trans people which was the original finding. They have almost certainly synthesized that action with this persons foul behaviour online in the preceding time and found that on top of indirectly discriminating she holds a specific animus to this person on the basis of her gender identity i.e direct discrimination. Its actually a fairly impressive fuck you to be found to have both directly and indirectly discriminated against a person at the same time regarding the same instance, usually its one or the other. I'm not sure of any other instance of this happening but it has effectively created a precedence that will allow the SDA to double tap people that discriminate on matters prescribed under the act (and more broadly).

>>43581970
c

>>43581967
So by your definition, if I cheat someone out of some money in a game of poker, they are my slave?
That's moronic.

>>43582047
?
Are you gonna do it?

>>43581956
indirect means "all trannies are banned from my app so you the specific individual tranny are therefore banned from my app"
direct means "i have gone after you solely because you are a tranny"

>by the merit of that law, asking someone about their genitals because you don't accept they're the gender they identified as would fall in line with a disciminatory action

no, not necessarily. you would have to prove the intent was to discriminate i.e

>the discriminator treats the aggrieved person less favourably than, in circumstances that are the same or are not materially different, the discriminator treats or would treat a person who has a different gender identity.

A doctor, for instance, could perfectly ask the genital status of a trans person because there is no intent to discriminate.

Regardless, no one in this case was asking for the genital status of anyone. The case was about the giggle app indirectly discriminating against transwomen in general by their specific policy of only being for cisgendered women and directly discriminating against the specific individual transwoman Tickle based on the actions and intent of the CEO Sall Grover.

>>43582080
what do you mean? i did. article c of the law as written.

>>43582122
what's your point?
they discriminated on both accounts

>>43582143
I asked you to explain how it relates to your statement in more detail, please.
Are you gonna do it?

>>43582154
my point is:
>it's more like: you're not really allowed to ask people about their genitals. that's considered an invasion of privacy and is inappropriate.
is broadly wrong and not pertinent to the case, discrimination is prescribed throughout the SDA under division 2 and 3 and you are incorrectly interpreting 5B(1)(c) as the determinant principle when discrimination is actually the determinant principle specifically for this case. discrimination is concerned with lack of access or otherwise discriminatory negative targeting in regards to jobs, education, social clubs, etc etc. What you are eluding to is harassment and / or victimization (div 3 and 5) which again is not relevant to this case and no findings on that basis has been made against Grover.

>>43581569
foids believed and sued (and won) to no longer be "discriminated" against from men's locker rooms.
that ship sailed a long time ago, anon.
as long as single-sex spaces for men are illegal, then absolutely any and all single-sex spaces for women should be torpedoed and I support the troons in this moral endeavor of correcting societal discrimination.
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episode-409-kavanaugh-and-rape-reporting-getting-gritty-women-in-sports-journalism-saving-haida-and-more-1.4839202/40-years-after-winning-the-right-to-report-from-men-s-locker-rooms-melissa-ludtke-still-sees-work-to-be-done-1.4839285

>>43582533
>moral endeavour
Morals are a religious construct, aren't they? I thought most most trans people were aethiests.

>>43582573
I am not a tranny though. And you are wrong to think morality is the strict domain of religion.
Either way, given that foids destroyed every single male-only space, I absolutely support retaliation for that and by consequence support troons just like I support anyone else actively destroying foids-only spaces.
Even gay men's nude resorts can't ban foids, anon - https://www.metroweekly.com/2023/07/florida-gay-nude-resort-cant-ban-women-judge-rules/
In this climate, supporting troons is the logical option.

>>43582587
>And you are wrong to think morality is the strict domain of religion.
Uhhh, so where do morals come from, scientifically?

File: HIXaWqdXYAAQ3gD.jpg (108 KB, 498x534)

108 KB JPG

>>43582595
From reason, civilizational practice and ultimately from power. Religion in fact does the same - shoves its own version of morality by claiming superiour/higher power.
Prior to religion we humans were more realistic and just understood power. We're slowly getting back there actually as religion fractures. And religion fractures for the same reason- they're also slowly understanding power again.
Anyway, this is a tangent. You either try to defend the misandrist/TERF argument or accept that foids are at fault and troons are doing good for the moral progress of civilization. Religious gobbledygook and circlejerk philosophizing are a boring distraction.

>>43582671
That doesn't follow the scientific method.
How can you test it, in reality? How can you repeat the results? Where does it exist in physicality?

>>43581670
Kekekekekek

t.ranny lawyer