“Sex is not confined to being a biological concept” rules Australian Court

  • Biological male “Roxanne Tickle,” who identifies as a woman, sued “Giggle for Girls” app and founder Sall Grover over female-only membership policy
  • Federal Court of Australia holds that Tickle was unlawfully discriminated against when rejected for membership on the women’s app; ADF International supported Giggle’s defence

SYDNEY (23 August 2024) – The Federal Court of Australia has ruled in Roxanne Tickle v. Giggle for Girls (“Tickle v. Giggle”) that “Roxanne Tickle,” a biological male who identifies as a woman, experienced unlawful discrimination when prevented from joining female-only networking app “Giggle.” 

The court found that Tickle experienced “indirect discrimination,” ordering $10,000 AUD in compensation and the covering of legal costs for Tickle. 

Tickle sued on the basis that, being “legally permitted to identify as female” and having had his birth certificate amended, he should be permitted into spaces reserved for biological women. The defence maintained that women have a right to single-sex spaces, both online and offline. 

“In ruling that Tickle, a biological male, was a victim of discrimination when prevented from joining a woman’s app, the court has delivered an egregiously flawed judgment that removes protections for women."

- Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, who supported Giggle's defence

The Court rejected Giggle’s defence that Tickle was not unlawfully discriminated against, but instead disqualified from joining the app due to his male sex.  

In the judgment, the court stated “…sex is not confined to being a biological concept referring to whether a person at birth had male or female physical traits, nor confined to being a binary concept, limited to the male or female sex…”

ADF International supported Giggle’s defence on the basis that Australian law must uphold the truth of biological reality and in line with the protections for women enshrined in international human rights law.

At the time of the hearing, Katherine Deves of Alexander Rashidi Lawyers, legal representatives for the Respondent, said: “The stakes are high in this case. Women’s international human rights will be lost if “woman” now includes any male who identifies as such. This decision matters not just in Australia but also to the watching world.” 

Sall Grover, CEO of Giggle and respondent in the law suit, also commented at the time of the hearing:

“For decades, women’s movements have fought for the right to have female spaces in society. Yet today, the clock is being wound back.    

“I designed my app to give women their own space to network. It is a legal fiction that Tickle is a woman. His birth certificate has been altered from male to female, but he is a biological man, and always will be. A woman’s-only app isn’t about discrimination. It’s about freedom of speech, belief and association.    

“We are taking a stand for the safety of all women’s only spaces, but also for basic reality and truth, which the law should reflect.” 

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

Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, which provided support for the case, reflected on the judgment: 

“In ruling that Tickle, a biological male, was a victim of discrimination when prevented from joining a woman’s app, the court has delivered an egregiously flawed judgment that removes protections for women. 

“Contrary to what the judge held, sex is never changeable. The judgment is a severe setback for women and girls, failing to uphold the basic truth of biological reality—that men cannot become women. Tickle did not experience unjust discrimination, but was simply disqualified from membership on the Giggle app because he is not a woman.” 

Court ignores international legal protections for women’s rights

The defence had argued that the Australian government acted unconstitutionally in amending the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 to include “gender identity” as a protected characteristic, against the purposes for which the Act was designed, and for which there is no basis in international law.   

The Court found that Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act section 5b, which prohibits discrimination on the ground of “gender identity,” is in line with the discrimination provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR makes no reference to “gender identity,” and instead prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex.  

Further, the Court rejected the defence’s argument with regard to the disqualification of Giggle on the basis that Australia was obligated to protect women’s rights, including single-sex spaces, under the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. 

“The judge has read in a faux right to protection on the basis of ‘gender identity’ in international law where none exists. The ICCPR is clear that discrimination is to be prohibited on the basis of sex. There is no mention of ‘gender identity’ in the treaty. 

The ruling is not only anti-women and disingenuous, but also it creates a dangerous precedent for conjuring up false rights to the detriment of real rights. Here the real rights in jeopardy are those of women. By ignoring Australia’s obligations under CEDAW to protect women’s rights, the court is positioning Australia in direct violation of its basic human rights obligations toward women,” stated Clarke. 

Challenges across Australia

Tickle v. Giggle is one of a number of legal proceedings in Australia challenging protections for women. Chris Elston, “Billboard Chris”, is in a legal battle with Australian authorities alongside “X”, after his tweet challenging gender ideology was censored by the E-Safety Commissioner. ADF International are supporting his case. 

Canadian street advocate, Billboard Chris, also awaiting court proceedings in Australia, commented on the judgment: 

“The judgment in Tickle v. Giggle turns back the clock on women’s rights and exposes the deep ideological distortions that have permeated our societies and our legal systems. It is a fiction that Tickle is a woman. While his birth certificate may have been altered, no man can ever become a woman.

“Preventing a male from joining a woman’s only app has nothing to do with discrimination. It’s about staying true to biological reality and women’s rights to their own spaces, both online and in real life. I hope further legal steps can be taken to correct this grave injustice and I stand with Sall Grover and the Giggle team.” 

Billboard Chris challenges gender ideology in Australia

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Sall Grover, Robert Clarke, Chris Elston (“Billboard Chris”), Katherine Deves

Christian Woman Arrested for Silent Prayer Receives Compensation from Police

  • West Midlands Police pay out £13,000 to Christian volunteer “unlawfully” arrested for praying silently near an abortion facility

  • UK Government reportedly set to strengthen silent prayer crackdown by expressly labelling it as “criminal” in upcoming “buffer zones” guidance

BIRMINGHAM (19 August 2024) – In a victory against UK censorship, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce – the Christian charitable volunteer who was seen being arrested twice for praying silently in viral videos – has received a payout of £13,000 from West Midlands Police in acknowledgement of her unjust treatment, and the breach of her human rights.

With support from ADF UK, Vaughan-Spruce issued a claim against West Midlands Police for two wrongful arrests and false imprisonments; assault and battery in relation to an intrusive search of her person; and for a breach of her human rights both in respect to the arrests, and to the onerous bail conditions imposed on her. 

“There is no place for Orwell’s ‘thought police’ in 21st Century Britain, and thanks to legal support I received from ADF UK, I’m delighted that the settlement that I have received today acknowledges that. Yet despite this victory, I am deeply concerned that this violation could be repeated at the hands of other police forces."

- Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, compensated by police after being unlawfully arrested for silent prayer

Further crackdown on silent prayer anticpated

The news comes days after reports that the Home Office will strengthen the crackdown on silent prayer near abortion facilities by expressly criminalising it in upcoming “buffer zones” legislation, set to come into force imminently.

Ministers are set to review the initial guidance published by the previous government which protected the human right to freedom of thought, reading: “Silent prayer, being the engagement of the mind and thought in prayer towards God, is protected as an absolute right under the Human Rights Act 1998 and should not, on its own, be considered to be an offence under any circumstances.”

You are currently viewing a placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.

More Information
Unblock content Accept required service and unblock content

A breach of human rights

Vaughan-Spruce was first arrested in November 2022 for silently praying in a censored “buffer zone”. The zone, covering several streets in the Kings Norton area of Birmingham, was installed by local authorities via a Public Spaces Protection Order and banned all expressions of “approval or disapproval with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means” within a large vicinity of an abortion facility.

In what is widely thought to be the first “thoughtcrime” case prosecuted in 21st Century Britain, Vaughan-Spruce was searched by police (including through her hair); arrested, criminally charged and tried – even though she had prayed imperceptibly and not expressed any opinion outside of her own mind.

In February 2023, Vaughan-Spruce, was fully acquitted of all charges at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court after the prosecution were unable to offer evidence to support the charge. ADF UK supported her legal defence.

Yet only a matter of weeks later, Vaughan-Spruce was arrested for the same activity yet again – silently thinking prayerful thoughts on a public street within the censored “buffer zone”. Six police officers attended the scene, with one confirming to her that “you’ve said you’re engaging in prayer, which is the offence”.

Vaughan-Spruce’s ordeal has sparked international outcry, including most recently from a U.S. government agency, which highlighted the case as an example of European governments “targeting individuals for their peaceful religious expression.”

Commenting on the news of the settlement and payout from West Midlands Police, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce said:

“Silent prayer is not a crime. Nobody should be arrested merely for the thoughts they have in their heads – yet this happened to me twice at the hands of the West Midlands Police, who explicitly told me that “prayer is an offence.”

“There is no place for Orwell’s ‘thought police’ in 21st Century Britain, and thanks to legal support I received from ADF UK, I’m delighted that the settlement that I have received today acknowledges that. Yet despite this victory, I am deeply concerned that this violation could be repeated at the hands of other police forces.

“Our culture is shifting towards a clamp down on viewpoint diversity, with Christian thought and prayer increasingly under threat of censorship. A ‘buffer zone’ policy is set to be rolled out by the government imminently – the language of which is inherently unclear, and will likely lead to further violations against the freedom to pray, or peacefully converse or offer help near abortion facilities.”

Nationwide “buffer zones” to be rolled out imminently

The Public Order Act, adopted in 2023, is set to be rolled out by the Labour Government, and will ban all forms of “influencing” within 150m of all abortion facilities nationwide.

The ambiguous wording of the ban has worried volunteers that engaging in consensual conversation, praying, or simply offering a leaflet about help services available will lead to a criminal conviction, in further breach of rights to freedom of speech and thought.

Already, two further members of the public have been charged and are set to face trial in relation to locally-imposed “buffer zones”.

Adam Smith-Connor, a military veteran who prayed silently about his own encounter with abortion near a facility in Bournemouth, will face trial at Poole Magistrates’ Court on the basis of his silent thoughts. Livia Tossici-Bolt, a retired scientist, will face trial in the same location for having held a sign reading “here to talk, if you want”. Both individuals are receiving legal support from ADF UK.

Commenting on the cases, Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF UK, said:

“The fact that the government is reportedly set to name “silent prayer” as a criminal offence, brazenly contrary to their commitment to international human rights law, exposes the crisis of free speech and thought in the UK today. Law enforcers are dutybound to vigilantly protect, not prosecute, the peaceful exercise fundamental rights. 

“Yet across the country, Christians exercising their basic rights to peaceful expression have faced criminal charges for silently praying, or offering consensual conversations to, women in need. We are delighted that West Midlands Police have acknowledged wrongdoing and injustice in the treatment of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce. 

“We now await the judgment of the court in the case of Adam Smith-Connor – another individual arrested for his silent thoughts. Britain’s future depends on our ability to accommodate different beliefs and viewpoints. Censorship violates human rights.”

Deputy Leader of Reform UK Richard Tice said:

“The arrests of Ms Vaughan-Spruce for silent prayer are another clear example of two-tier policing in the UK. Nobody should be criminalised for their thoughts. It is right that she has received compensation from the police.

“This case is yet another reason why we need a Free Speech Bill that would prevent such ridiculous arrests from taking place in the first place.

“It is becoming increasingly difficult to deny that mainstream Christian beliefs are not treated fairly by our elites, while other beliefs are given privileged status. 

“This is especially worrying in light of the Home Secretary saying Labour will crack down on people ‘pushing harmful and hateful beliefs’. 

“Yvette Cooper should answer: does she include mainstream Christian beliefs in this category?”

Lord Frost, the senior Conservative peer and former cabinet minister, said: 

“It is incredible that people have been arrested for thoughtcrime in modern Britain. I am very glad Ms Vaughan-Spruce has received compensation for her unjust arrest for this so-called offence. 

“But if a recent report is correct that the Government is considering formally criminalising silent prayer outside abortion centres, then there will be further such cases, and then not just freedom of speech but freedom of thought will be under threat. It is hard to imagine a more absurd and dangerous situation.

“It would be much better to stick to the sensible approach in the previous Home Secretary’s draft guidance, which proposed a much better balance between the various competing rights and interests. If the government scraps it, then it will be clear to all that its commitment to civil liberties and fundamental freedoms is paper-thin.”

Lord Farmer, Conservative peer and former treasurer of the Conservative Party, said:

“A country like ours, which places such a high value on human rights and freedom of speech should be horrified at its citizens being arrested for their silent thoughts or prayer. 

“What happened to Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was a travesty of justice and it is right that West Midlands Police make some compensation for the hardship she has endured.

“But the wider issue remains that we are living through an undemocratic clampdown on Christian speech, expression and thought in the UK which is set to intensify when the government rolls out “buffer zones” nationwide. If pro-life thought is considered prosecutable today, what other thought crimes might face similar measures tomorrow?”

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Isabel Vaughan-Spruce; Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF UK

“This is insane” – Elon Musk and others react to Swiss authorities separating child from parents who refuse to give her puberty blockers

  • Public figures worldwide comment on the “terrifying” case of the teenage girl in Geneva separated from parents simply for seeking to protect her from gender ideology
  • Father: “The story is truly a nightmare. Swiss authorities have taken our child, our daughter, who’s 16 years old.”
  • ADF International is supporting the parents in seeking justice in court – support the parents here

GENEVA (12 July 2024) – Elon Musk has weighed in after a teenage girl was separated from her parents by Swiss authorities, because her parents refused her puberty blockers. The girl has been housed in a government shelter for over a year.

“This is insane,” commented the owner of “X” and Tesla CEO, adding, “This suicidal mind virus is spreading throughout Western Civilization”.

The case, currently unfolding in Swiss courts, centres on parents who responded to the mental health struggles of their daughter, who expressed “gender confusion,” with care and support, including obtaining mental health care. 

Concerned that their daughter was being pushed to make hasty and potentially irreversible decisions, they declined “puberty blockers” and explicitly rejected her school’s attempt to “socially transition” her. The school disregarded the parents’ explicit instruction. 

The school and the state child welfare agency, Service de Protection des Mineurs (SPMI), then brought a case against them in court.

“And that has meant for us many sleepless nights, a lot of deep pain, and a sense of hopelessness,” the father said.

“This is insane - This suicidal mind virus is spreading throughout Western Civilization"

- Elon Musk

For seeking to protect the health and wellbeing of their daughter, they now face a legal stand-off over their fundamental rights as parents to care for their child who, residing in a government shelter, is being encouraged to pursue dangerous medical interventions to “transition.”

Also commenting on the case, parental rights campaigner Billboard Chris said: “No child has ever been born in the “wrong body”. As parents, we have the duty to guide and protect our children as they navigate puberty – steering them away from harmful ideologies, and empowering them to feel confident in their own skin.”

Billboard Chris also asked: “Where are the Swiss politicians condemning this child abuse and violation of parents’ rights?”

“Their child has been taken away simply for trying to protect her from harm.”

Dr. Felix Boellmann, lead lawyer on the case for ADF International, said: “Children who experience discomfort with their biological sex deserve to be treated with dignity and need compassionate mental health care, which these parents have gone to great lengths to provide.

“As a result, they are now living every parent’s worst nightmare. Their child has been taken away from them simply for trying to protect her from harm.

Amy Gallagher, the mental health nurse who is suing the UK Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, said: “This case is terrifying. These parents have had their child taken from them by a State that is captured by gender ideology. I trust in faith and hope that the parents, with support from ADF International, will convince the legal authorities in Switzerland that this is not the path to take and the child is united with her parents swiftly. The Swiss authorities should take in to account the outcomes of the Cass Report and the increasing view that affirmation of transgenderism is dangerous.”

Kellie-Jay Keen: “global push to destroy families and access our children.”

Women’s rights campaigner Kellie-Jay Keen sees “a global push to destroy families and access our children.  The erasure of female language, particularly around motherhood is part of this.  Mothers are the protectors of children, fathers are the protectors of families.  The state does not know or love our children better than parents. 

“Similar stories of state kidnap of children who have parents who recognise the harm of the quasi-religious authoritarian cult of trans have been reported in Canada, USA, Australia and I suspect many have gone unreported elsewhere.

“I have been raising the alarm for some time about this overreach.  One must ask who is pushing this and why they might be doing it.  Nothing I’ve come up with is anything other than malevolent.

“Parents must not sleepwalk into surrendering our most important duty, protecting our children.  Trust your instincts and talk to your children.

“In the UK, many schools refuse to use “son”, “daughter”, “child” or “children”, and prefer to use “your young person”.  We must fight this creep of erasing both the relation to our children and the fact they’re children.”

More reactions, quotes and full background can be found here. To support the case and the parents click here.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Swiss authorities demand parents legally endorse gender “transition” of teenage daughter who has been separated from family for over a year 

  • Parents ordered by court to hand over legal documents to allow their daughter to “transition,” appeal is pending 

  • Backed by ADF International, parents seek reinstatement of their parental rights and to reunite with daughter, now 16, living in a government shelter since April 2023

  • Members of the public are invited to support the parents’ legal defence here

GENEVA (11 July 2024) – The teenage daughter of parents residing in Geneva, Switzerland, has been separated from her family for over a year after her parents objected to her gender “transition.” 

The case, currently unfolding in Swiss courts, centres on parents who responded to the mental health struggles of their daughter, who expressed “gender confusion,” with care and support, including obtaining mental health care for her.  

Concerned that their daughter was being pushed to make hasty and potentially irreversible decisions, they declined “puberty blockers” and explicitly rejected her school’s attempt to “socially transition” her. The school disregarded the parents’ explicit demand. 

For seeking to protect the health and wellbeing of their daughter, they now face a legal stand-off over their fundamental rights as parents to care for their child who, residing in a government shelter, is being encouraged to pursue dangerous medical interventions to “transition.” 

For safety reasons and to protect their children, the parents are speaking anonymously.

“The story is truly a nightmare. Swiss authorities have taken our child, our daughter, who’s 16 years old."

- Father

“My daughter now lives in a government home. Our access to her is regulated by the government.” 

The parents added: “I can’t believe we live in a society where your child can be taken away from you simply for trying to protect her.” 

“We want our daughter back home. We love her and we miss her,” the girl’s mother pleaded. 

Dr. Felix Boellmann, lead lawyer on the case for ADF International said: “Children who experience discomfort with their biological sex deserve to be treated with dignity and need compassionate mental health care, which these parents have gone to great lengths to provide. 

“These parents are living every parent’s worst nightmare. Their child has been taken away from them simply for trying to protect her from harm. 

“The implications of this are devastating not only for them as a family, but also for all of society. No society can claim to be free if parents can lose their daughter solely for affirming biological reality.” 

Parents plea for reunification and reinstatement of their rights 

The parents said: “As parents, we would do anything to protect our children from harm. We want the best for our kids.” 

“We love them and want to raise them to be honest, kind, and self-confident adults—both our daughter and our son, each in their own way.” 

“But right now, our daughter is still a minor, and she rightfully belongs in our home where we can help her navigate through life’s struggles in a way that is best for her long-term health and happiness.” 

Commenting on the case, parental rights campaigner Billboard Chris said: “No child has ever been born in the “wrong body”. As parents, we have the duty to guide and protect our children as they navigate puberty – steering them away from harmful ideologies, and empowering them to feel confident in their own skin. 

“This chilling case exposes the troubling grip of Western authorities: trampling over the health and wellbeing of a child for the sake of an ideology, and remaining severely out of touch with the leading science – including the evidence brought forward by the recent Cass Report about the harmful impact of puberty blockers on young females. The world should pay attention: the right outcome here is significant in the fight to protect kids everywhere.”

Billboard Chris challenges gender ideology in Australia

 

Background and the ideological “gender unicorn”  

In 2021, following other mental health concerns, the then 13-year-old told her parents that she felt her “gender identity” was male. This happened following the Covid pandemic, when she had spent a significant amount of time alone in her room and online.  

The parents took their daughter to a hospital for help. After a quick 30-minute meeting with doctors, in which she was shown the ideological “gender unicorn” diagram, the doctors said their daughter may be experiencing “gender dysphoria”.  

The “gender unicorn” is a controversial diagram based on the false premise that a person’s gender can change and that their gender is based on their feelings and will rather than biological reality.

The doctors told the parents their daughter should take puberty blockers, which the parents declined. They instead chose to obtain private mental health care for her.  

“The story is truly a nightmare.” 

During this period, the school, against the explicit wishes of the parents, began to “socially transition” the daughter. “Social transition,” as has been shown in the Cass Review, paves the way for irreversible physical interventions, such as the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical mutilation. 

The parents shared with the school peer-reviewed medical and scientific literature raising serious concerns about “social transitioning.” They also shared revised government policies from the increasing number of European countries that are moving away from “gender affirmative treatment” due to growing evidence of its harms. 

Following the parents’ objections to their daughter’s “transition,” the school liaised with the state child welfare agency, Service de Protection des Mineurs (SPMI).

They convened a meeting with the parents in which the parents were accused of abuse for seeking alternative care for their daughter. The child welfare agency would later tell the parents to “just accept that you have a son.” 

The daughter was separated from her parents in April 2023 following a court order placing her in a government-funded youth shelter. 

Legal challenge backed by ADF International 

The parents are appealing a court order, issued 28 February 2024, to hand over documents, which would allow their daughter to apply for a change of the “legal sex” in the civil register. The demand for the documentation followed the parents’ failed appeal to recover legal authority over the appointment of their daughter’s medical professionals, which had been granted to the child welfare agency by the court. 

“Not only have these parents committed no wrong, they absolutely must have their child returned home and are under no obligation to consent to the authority’s demands to allow dangerous medical interventions."

- Dr. Felix Böllmann, Director of European Advocacy for ADF International

The parents are currently awaiting a decision on their appeal on the matter of the documents.  

The parents seek to stop their daughter from “legally transitioning.” This would pave the way for irreversible medical interventions, such as the use of cross-sex hormones and body mutilating surgery, which would have grave consequences for her health and well-being.  

Amy Gallagher, the mental health nurse who is suing the UK Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, said:

“This case is terrifying. These parents have had their child taken from them by a State that is captured by gender ideology. I trust in faith and hope that the parents, with support from ADF International, will convince the legal authorities in Switzerland that this is not the path to take and the child is united with her parents swiftly. The Swiss authorities should take in to account the outcomes of the Cass Report and the increasing view that affirmation of transgenderism is dangerous. Hopefully Europe will follow NHS England in asserting the important of an evidence-base for treating children experiencing distress in relation to their biological sex.” 

Switzerland in violation of international 

Women’s rights campaigner Kellie-Jay Keen sees “a global push to destroy families and access our children.  The erasure of female language, particularly around motherhood is part of this.  Mothers are the protectors of children, fathers are the protectors of families.  The state does not know or love our children better than parents. 

“Similar stories of state kidnap of children who have parents who recognise the harm of the quasi-religious authoritarian cult of trans have been reported in Canada, USA, Australia and I suspect many have gone unreported elsewhere.

“I have been raising the alarm for some time about this overreach.  One must ask who is pushing this and why they might be doing it.  Nothing I’ve come up with is anything other than malevolent.

“Parents must not sleepwalk into surrendering our most important duty, protecting our children.  Trust your instincts and talk to your children.

“In the UK, many schools refuse to use “son”, “daughter”, “child” or “children”, and prefer to use “your young person”.  We must fight this creep of erasing both the relation to our children and the fact they’re children.”

International law holds that a child shall not be separated from her parents against their will, except in cases of abuse. 

Dr Boellmann states: “Swiss authorities are in clear violation of international and national law in separating this girl from her parents. 

“Not only have these parents committed no wrong, they absolutely must have their child returned home and are under no obligation to consent to the authority’s demands to allow dangerous medical interventions.  

“Further, they have the right and the duty to protect their daughter from the harms of this ideology. 

“Switzerland must act now to restore this child to her parents and address the egregious overstepping on the part of the school, hospital, and child welfare agency that allowed this nightmare scenario to unfold.” 

Steven Edginton, a GB News journalist who has reported on progressive ideology in the UK civil service, including transgender ideology, said:

“It is outrageous that the Swiss government has separated a child and their parents due to them objecting to the child’s wishes to ‘transition’.

“Children with mental health problems deserve love and support from their parents, not ‘affirmation’ from the state confirming their misplaced belief that they can change genders with life-changing puberty blockers and even surgery.

“The parents’ authority must trump the state over their own children, otherwise we live in a very sick society indeed. It is morally abhorrent that the Swiss authorities are attacking parental rights and pushing trans ideology on children.” 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Internet sensation ‘Billboard Chris’ in legal battle for right to debate “harmful” gender ideology on “X”

Billboard Chris' case will be heard in Australia in March
  • Father of two, global campaigner, and internet sensation ‘Billboard Chris’ appeals Australian censorship orders, with support from ADF International
  • “X” post highlighting unsuitability of transgender activist serving on WHO “panel of experts” currently geo-blocked in Australia
Billboard Chris' case will be heard in Australia in March

MELBOURNE (10 July 2024) – ‘Billboard Chris’ – the activist known for wearing a sandwich board reading “children cannot consent to puberty blockers” and engaging in conversations in viral videos across the world – has mounted a legal defence of free speech in Australia, with support from ADF International.

Chris Elston, known as Billboard Chris, a Canadian father of two, took to “X” (formerly Twitter) on 28th February 2024 to share a Daily Mail article titled “Kinky secrets of a UN trans expert REVEALED”.

The article, and accompanying tweet, criticised the suitability of transgender activist Teddy Cook to be appointed to a World Health Organization “panel of experts” set to advise on global transgender policy.

"As a father, I have grave concerns about the impact of harmful gender ideology on our children’s wellbeing...we need to be able to discuss it."

- "Billboard Chris", in a legal battle for free speech with support from ADF International

Cook complained about the post to Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, who requested that “X” remove the content. The social media platform owned by free speech advocate Elon Musk initially refused, but following a subsequent formal removal order from the Commission, later geo-blocked the content in Australia. X has since also filed an appeal against the order at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Melbourne.

Billboard Chris, with the support of ADF International and the Australian Human Rights Law Alliance, and alongside X, is appealing the violation of his right to peacefully share his convictions.

Members of the public are invited to join in supporting Chris’s legal case here: https://adfinternational.org/campaign/supportbillboardchris 

“No child has ever been born in the wrong body. As a father, I have grave concerns about the impact of harmful gender ideology on our children’s wellbeing. This is a serious issue with real world implications for families across the globe and we need to be able to discuss it.

“Children struggling with distress regarding their sex deserve better than ‘guidelines’ written by activists who only want to push them in one direction,” Billboard Chris, engaging in a legal battle for free speech with support from ADF International.

Next steps

The legal team representing Elston have filed a statement of facts and contentions, and the evidence which Elston will rely on with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The Tribunal now awaits the response from the eSafety Commissioner, due August 8th, before moving to set a hearing date.

You are currently viewing a placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.

More Information
Unblock content Accept required service and unblock content

“It is vital we challenge the global spread of censorship. We’re used to hearing about governments punishing citizens for their ‘wrong’ speech in parts of the world where strict blasphemy laws are still enforced – but now, from Australia, to Mexico, to Finland, we see Western governments increasingly take authoritarian steps to shut down views they don’t like, often by branding them as “offensive”, “hateful”, or “misinformation.”

“In a free society, ideas should be challenged with ideas, not state censorship. We’re proud to stand with Billboard Chris – and others around the world punished for expressing their peaceful views – in defending the right to live and speak the truth,” commented Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, who is serving as part of Billboard Chris’s legal team.

“Vital we challenge the global spread of censorship”

The Australian case comes at a time of increased suppression of views shared on “X” at the hands of governments across the world.

In Mexico, former congressman Rodrigo Iván Cortés and sitting congressman Gabriel Quadri have been convicted of “gender-based political violence,” and placed on an offenders’ register, for Twitter posts. For expressing their views on biological sex, both have been ordered to publish a court-written apology on X every day for 30 days, 3 times a day, as a form of public humiliation. ADF International is seeking justice for both men at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

In Finland, parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, a former government minister and grandmother, is currently being prosecuted before the Supreme Court, having been criminally charged for “hate speech” for a 2019 Bible-verse tweet. She was charged under the Finnish criminal code’s section on “War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity,” carrying a maximum sentence of 2 years imprisonment. ADF International is supporting her legal defence.

At the international level, the European Commission is advancing efforts to make “hate speech” an EU crime, on the same legal level as trafficking and terrorism. Initiatives such as the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation could have significant implications for how governments police speech, especially as European Commission VP Věra Jourová singled out X for “the largest ratio of mis/disinformation posts”.

In November 2023, free speech champions across the world signed an open letter to Elon Musk, coordinated by ADF International, requesting he back legal cases against government-enforced censorship of posts on X.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only