A transgender woman from Australia has won a discrimination case against a women-only social media app that denied her access because she is male.

The Federal Court ruled that while Roxanne Tickle had not been directly discriminated against, she had suffered indirect discrimination, which is when a decision disadvantages a person with a particular characteristic. The court ordered the app to pay her AUD$10,000 ($6,700; £5,100) plus costs.

It is a groundbreaking ruling when it comes to gender identity. At the heart of the case was the increasingly controversial question: what is a woman?

In 2021, Tickle downloaded “Giggle for Girls,” an app marketed as an online haven where women could share their experiences in a safe space, where men were not allowed.

To gain access, she had to upload a selfie to prove she was a woman, which was then evaluated by gender recognition software designed to pick out men.

However, seven months later, after she successfully registered with the platform, her membership was revoked.

Because Tickle identifies as a woman, she claimed she was legally entitled to services intended for women, but was discriminated against based on her gender identity.

She sued the social media platform and its CEO, Sall Grover, seeking $200,000 in damages, claiming that Grover’s “persistent misgendering” had caused her “constant anxiety and occasional suicidal thoughts.”

“Grover’s public statements about me and this case have been disturbing, demoralizing, embarrassing, exhausting and hurtful. They have resulted in individuals posting hateful comments about me online and indirectly inciting others to do the same,” Tickle said in a sworn statement.

Giggle’s legal team argued throughout the trial that sex is a biological concept.

They openly admit that Tickle has been discriminated against, but on the basis of sex rather than gender identity. They say that refusing to let Tickle use the app was a legitimate form of sex discrimination. The app was designed to exclude men, and because the founder identifies Tickle as male, she claims that refusing her access to the app was legitimate.

But Judge Robert Bromwich said in his decision Friday that case law has consistently held that gender is “fluid and not necessarily binary,” and ultimately rejected Giggle’s argument.

Tickle said the ruling “shows that all women are protected from discrimination” and she hoped the case would be “healing for trans and gender diverse people”.

“Unfortunately, we got the verdict we expected. The fight for women’s rights continues,” Grover wrote on X, responding to the decision.

The case, known as “Tickle v Giggle”, is the first time a federal court in Australia has heard a case involving alleged discrimination based on gender identity.

It shows how one of the most heated ideological debates – transgender inclusion versus sex-based rights – can play out in court.

Tickle was born as a male, but changed her gender and has been living as a female since 2017.

Testifying in court, she said, “Until now, everyone has treated me like a woman.”

“I get occasional frowns, stares and questioning looks, which is quite disconcerting… but they let me do my thing.”

However, Grover believes that no human being can change their gender. That is the pillar of gender critical ideology.

When Tickle’s lawyer Georgina Costello cross-examined KC Grover, she said:

“Even if a person who was assigned male at birth, through surgery, hormones, facial hair, facial reconstruction, long hair, makeup, women’s clothing, describes themselves as a woman, presents themselves as a woman, uses women’s changing rooms, changes their birth certificate – you don’t accept that this is a woman, do you?”

“No,” Grover replied.

She also said she would refuse to address Tickle as “ma’am” and that “Tickle is a biological male.”

Grover is a self-proclaimed “TERF”—an acronym that stands for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist.” TERFs’ views on gender identity are widely considered hostile to transgender people.

“I am being sued in federal court by a man claiming to be a woman because he wants to use a women-only space that I created,” she posted on X.

“There is no woman in the world who should take me to court to use this women’s space. It takes a man to make this place exist.”

She says she created her app “Giggle for Girls” in 2020 after receiving a lot of abuse on social media from men when she worked in Hollywood as a screenwriter.

“I wanted to create a safe, women-only space in the palm of your hand,” she said.

“It is a legal fiction that Tickle is a woman. His birth certificate has been changed from male to female, but he is a biological male, and always will be.”

“We stand up for the safety of all women-only spaces, but also for the basic reality and truth that the law should reflect.”

Grover has previously indicated that she will appeal the court’s decision and will fight the case all the way to the High Court of Australia.

The outcome of this case could set a legal precedent for resolving conflicts between gender identity rights and sex-based rights in other countries.

Crucial to understanding this is the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). This is an international treaty adopted by the UN in 1979 – essentially an international bill of rights for women.

Giggle’s defence argued that Australia’s ratification of CEDAW obligates the state to protect women’s rights, including male- and female-only spaces.

Today’s ruling in Tickle’s favor will be significant for all 189 countries that have ratified CEDAW – from Brazil to India to South Africa.

When interpreting international treaties, national courts often look to the way other countries have done so.

How Australia interprets the law in a case that has received so much media attention is likely to have global implications.

As more courts rule in favor of gender identity claims over time, it is likely that other countries will follow suit.