• 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.

  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

    I’d love to know the story behind the manual overriding.

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Apparently she defended trans people in a conversation, someone complained, and moderators got involved and manually overrode the ai. Paraphrased hearsay.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        If the AI is the good guy in a situation, you gotta be doing something very wrong.

  • john89@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t understand.

    It’s okay to discriminate against men but not transgender women?

    • ZK686@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Why not just create a “trans” app and make your own people happy too?

        • ZK686@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Lol…what? I’ve read like 3 comments saying that the app is in the right, the overwhelmingly majority are siding with the trans…

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Real /r/unpopularopinion moment.

        I think the thing that the TERFs ultimately miss is that this person was initially welcomed in as a woman and treated as a woman by her peers. She did not disrupt the community or harass any of the participants, until she voiced support for Trans Rights.

        It was at this point that a handful of moderators decided to interrogate her on her original gender and use that as an excuse to boot an active and in-good-standing member.

        So she wasn’t removed for “not being a woman”. She was removed for “disagreeing with the political views of the admin”.

        Anyone familiar with Reddit politics should be able to sympathize.

        • ZK686@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t understand? Reddit politics is ultra liberal, they would eat this women’s app alive for discriminating against the trans.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I down voted, not because I disagree with the claim, but because it doesn’t make any sense in the context and just reads as a knee-jerk dismissive response of a valid point.

        • Plague_Doctor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s true though. Gender is a performance, and as a woman your womanhood is always under scrutiny from everyone else. You can get your identity as woman taken from you if you don’t “look woman enough”. Which if you say have more masculine features, cut your hair short as a cis woman you become less woman. For example Butch lesbians are actually the most often de-womanized. Same goes for less masculine men. It’s a box no one fits into perfectly and having certain genitals doesn’t include or exclude you from either.

          This person wanted a safe space where they wouldn’t have to deal with cis straight men. Which makes it that if men want inclusion in such spaces they need to be better.

          Another question for you all, why as cis men do you want inclusion in these spaces?

          • ZK686@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            So, what about those who are born with a uterus? Where can they go? What if they decide, only those who were born with a vagina at birth, are women and we want only those to be part of our organization? I mean, are they wrong?

          • ZK686@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            That’s silly and you know it. She still had one to begin with. That’s like saying “if a dude cuts off his penis, he’s no longer a dude!”

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I define a woman as a female who has a uterus

              Your definition. Has a uterus. You said nothing about a female who had a uterus.

              And you haven’t defined female.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It’s not my fault that your definition excluded women who had a uterus at one time but didn’t later.

                  How about women who have two X chromosomes but were born without a uterus? Not women?

  • ZK686@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Welcome to 2024, women can’t have their own things anymore… (and I’m talking about REAL women, you know, the individuals have two X chromosomes).

  • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I think she will win this. They didn’t require a genital photo so what’s even their proof? Arbitrary requirement anyways. Rules like that only leave people out. I understand the want for a space like that though. I hope this woman finds a space where she can feel safe.

  • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wow an app based on gender descrimination is being sued for gender descrimination. I’m shocked

    • Taohumor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You know what this means though? It means that no one ever needed to push back against it at all just not engage in it themselves. Cuz they just eat each other in a vacuum. Without some enemy to band together against like the boogeyman of boogeymen whitey, their inner chaos is all they’re left with with no enemy to project it on, so they eat each other and everything just crashes and falls apart. No one needed to do anything, not even complain, just look at it in amusement and take another sip of their coffee and go about their day thanking god that’s not you.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It sounds like you’re trying to argue nobody should fight discrimination while there are still ditches to dig and toilets to scrub.