Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

Anyone concerned about the trans tsunami destroying everything in its path — especially here in Australia — will know about the brave women’s rights campaigner Sall Grover. I have written about her often, including this piece posted just last month discussing how she had lost her Federal Court appeal.

Many of you know that she has recently tried — in vain — to have an opinion piece published in “Our” ABC.

Of course it is not ours, except for the $1.3 billion that us taxpayers have to cough up each year to keep this wretched media institution alive. Because it is a public broadcaster, fully supported by our hard-earned tax dollars, then public citizens like Sall should have every right to have their side of the story told there.

“The editorial comments that came back [from the ABC] about this piece were that terms like ‘biological reality’ & ‘truth’ were offensive. If that’s the standard we’re applying, I don’t think there’s going to be any pieces published by the ABC critical of gender ideology.” pic.twitter.com/i0MBM7v1jz

— Sall Grover (@salltweets) June 22, 2026

ABC Refuses to Publish Piece by Sall Grover

But no, the ABC rejected it — repeatedly — even after Sall made major edits and revisions to keep the censors there happy. One article on this madness explains the situation:

“The ABC has declined to publish an opinion article on sex-based women’s rights by Sall Grover, The Australian reports. “The rejection came despite Grover exchanging 37 emails over the course of more than three weeks — predominantly with ABC Religion & Ethics Editor Scott Stephens — and extensively redrafting the article twice in an attempt to meet the ABC’s requirements for publication,” The Australian said this week.

“Last month, Grover, founder of Giggle for Girls, lost her appeal in her case against transwoman Roxanne Tickle, with the Federal Court finding that she directly discriminated against Ms Tickle by rejecting her from the female-only networking app on the basis of her ‘masculine’ appearance.”

As she recently tweeted on X: “For the past 3 weeks, I have been trying to get an op-ed published at the ABC. The suspicion has long been that the ABC is ideologically captured but when the editorial director assured Senators during the recent Estimates that ABC does publish diverse views, I said let’s see…”

For the past 3 weeks, I have been trying to get an op-ed published at the ABC. The suspicion has long been that the ABC is ideologically captured but when the editorial director assured Senators during the recent Estimates that ABC does publish diverse views, I said let’s see… pic.twitter.com/OX7JwSnDa4

— Sall Grover (@salltweets) June 21, 2026

She is to be praised for trying I guess, but we all know that the ABC is a far-left outfit that does NOT allow any competing points of view to be heard. For decades sensible voices have been calling for the privatisation of most of the ABC, with Pauline Hanson being among the most recent to do so. Except for some regional radio, she said subscribers, and not taxpayers, should subsidise the ABC — and then see how that works out.

The Australian Does What the ABC Refused to Do

Back to Sall Grover. Since the ABC has refused to publish her piece, we can be thankful that one media outlet that IS much more even-handed has chosen to run it in full. The Australian newspaper featured it yesterday. Since it is behind a paywall, I will also feature it in full here:

“Some readers will find this uncomfortable. Others will dismiss it as unkind. But here is the undeniable biological fact that underpins this entire debate: the only prerequisite to being a “trans woman” is to be male.

“I cannot be a trans woman, no matter how I feel, because I am female. This is not hatred; it is grammar, biology and reality meeting in plain English. Paula Gerber and Anna Cody, in their recent contributions to ABC, insist otherwise. They are wrong, and understanding precisely why matters more than ever.

“Gerber’s piece on the Giggle v Tickle judgment celebrates it as a win for both trans rights and women’s rights. Cody condemns proposals to restore biological definitions in the Sex Discrimination Act as a “retrograde step”. Both treat sex-based rights as negotiable, and both frame disagreement as bigotry rather than a necessary defence of hard-won protections.

“The truth is simpler and more uncomfortable. Trans women’s rights, rights predicated on male bodies identifying into female categories, and women’s sex-based rights are in direct conflict. One cannot expand without the other contracting.

“Women have fought for single-sex spaces, services and sports not because we are delicate flowers offended by existence, but because male-pattern violence, strength and sexual dimorphism make mixed-sex environments risky or unfair for the female sex, either way necessary.

Data, not theory

“This is not theory. It is data from prisons, refuges, change rooms and sport. Rape victims rebuilding lives in female-only recovery groups should not have to audition their trauma to justify basic dignity.

“A woman should not need to recount the worst day of her life at the hands of a man simply to say this space is for us. No means no, remember? That principle applied to consent. It applies here too.

“The law once understood this. The Sex Discrimination Act once defined “man” and “woman” by reference to biology before those definitions were quietly removed. The full federal court in the Giggle v Tickle appeal effectively ruled that a male who identifies as a woman is a woman for the purposes of the Act.

“In doing so, it admitted the very thing it denies. If you must redefine “woman” to include men, then trans women are not, in the ordinary meaning, women. You cannot have it both ways.

“Accurate definitions are not bigotry, they are the foundation of coherent law. Without them, female-only spaces become meaningless. Prisons, shelters, sports and even apps such as Giggle become mixed-sex by stealth.

“Consider the women who rely on these rights. Survivors of male violence. Women in crisis accommodation. Teenage girls in school change rooms. Female athletes watching records and scholarships evaporate. Muslim and religious women for whom modesty is non-negotiable. Disabled women needing intimate care from their own sex. These are not abstract categories. They are millions of ordinary Australian women who never asked to surrender their boundaries for someone else’s identity.

“Gerber suggests that excluding males who identify as women risks excluding “unfeminine” lesbians or others who defy stereotypes. This is a sleight of hand. Sex is not a stereotype. It is observable, immutable reality. Lesbians remain female.

“The solution to rigid gender norms is not to dissolve sex, it is to stop enforcing stereotypes on either sex. Cody claims women have fought “not to be defined only by biology”. Yet the women’s movement fought precisely because of biology, reproductive capacity, vulnerability to male violence, physical differences. To pretend biology is incidental is to erase the reason single-sex provisions exist.

“We are told trans rights are about compassion. But compassion that demands women absorb male bodies into every female category is not kindness, it is entitlement dressed in progressive clothing. Trans-identified people deserve dignity, mental health support and protection from violence.

“They do not deserve to rewrite reality or override the sex-based rights of half the population. The idea that disagreement equals hatred has chilled debate for too long. Courts awarding aggravated damages for “misgendering” or courtroom demeanour only deepen the chill.

“This issue will not disappear because activists wish it so. Women are noticing. Polling shifts. International reversals, from the UK Supreme Court to growing sporting policy updates including the Olympics, show the tide turning.

“Australians deserve open conversation, not slogans. We can support distressed individuals without dismantling sex-based protections. We can affirm that trans women are males with an identity while refusing to pretend that identity erases sex.

“Women’s rights were never guaranteed by feelings or redefinitions. They were won through evidence, courage, and clarity about material reality. To deny that clarity is to admit the emperor has no clothes and, in this case, that the emperor is male. Parliament must act. Define sex clearly. Protect female spaces unapologetically.

“The alternative is not inclusion. It is the slow erosion of the very category of “woman” until it means nothing at all. And that serves no one.”

Well done Sall Grover and well done The Australian.

___

Republished with thanks to CultureWatch. Originally titled “They Do Not Want You to Know the Truth”.

Images via Wikimedia Commons and screenshot of YouTube/Sky News Australia.