In my Ancient Egyptian culture, many of my favourite divine representations are women.
Nut, the goddess of the universe and sky, is depicted as a woman with her arms outstretched over the Earth (as in, ‘Mother Earth’). Ma’at, whom we named our law firm after, is the goddess of truth and law, and it is only by walking through Ma’at’s ‘Hall of Justice’ that we can proceed from this life to the next.
Nut and Ma’at aren’t female goddesses for trivial reasons. In my tradition, the very fabric of creation (Nut) and the very fabric of truth (Ma’at) are feminine. Whilst Thoth, Ma’at’s husband, was tasked with directing, protecting and acting upon Ma’at’s truth, the truth itself was embodied in his wife. She held it for him to act upon; and he made sure nothing defiled it.
When it comes to creation (Nut), the importance of her being female is very obvious. It is through the female form, and the womb, that a soul embarks on its journey in this reality. The woman is the portal through which we enter this life. She is beautifully and specifically designed to perform that miraculous function, and so the human species has the privilege of continuing on and on. She is considered sacred by most ancient traditions from around the world for that reason.
The famous symbol of life, the ‘Ankh’ amplifies the place of femininity (and its marriage with masculinity) in another way.
First, observe the image:
The Ankh is made up of two parts. The first part, pointing downwards, is the ‘shaft’. The second part, the oval shape above the shaft, as per the proper translation, is the ‘womb’. Notice that the womb (woman) sits atop the shaft (man). There are many layers of meaning in this, which I will leave you to think about.
The Ankh does not just represent life; it represents the union of man and woman as an essential element of that life. Through the sacred connection of man and woman, energy flows up the shaft, around the oval down again, and then up again. The shaft enters the womb, and energy flows.
And, at the most literal interpretation, babies are born and the human species continues. Obviously, that is how we are designed to procreate - shaft and womb, man and woman, joined together in sacred union and generating life from the seed of the man and the soil of the woman.
Given the particular and intentional design of everything in the universe, we can be sure that not only is this arrangement no accident, but that it is fundamentally important for the survival and thriving of our species.
Tickle v Giggle
(and the Sex Discrimination Act)
One of the biggest human rights cases of the year is Roxanne Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd & Anor. There, in the Federal Court, Roxanne Tickle, the Applicant, born a man, is claiming discrimination on the basis of gender identity. Specifically, Roxanne argues that being denied access to a women’s only social media app (‘Giggle') despite being a natal male constitutes a contravention of Section 5B of the Sex Discrimination Act (the SDA), which reads as follows:
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.
Section 5B was not always a part of the SDA. In 2013, that section was added in via an amendment introduced by Australia’s first female Prime Minister, Julia Gillard. Before that amendment, the Sex Discrimination Act sought to protect women (primarily) from discrimination on the basis of their sex. Now, it also protects people who have assumed a gender identity from discrimination on that basis, which is why Roxanne Tickle, born a man, is able to sue a women’s only app for not being allowed access to it.
This is the first time a case involving discrimination on the basis of gender identity has been brought anywhere around the world. Its implications, for women and men, are huge.
The Defendants, Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd and Sally Grover, the app’s founder, are making an interesting and technical legal argument in response, which is summarised well in this video. In brief, human rights legislation in Australia is made under the authority of the external affairs power in the Australian Constitution, which authorises Parliament to pass human rights laws which enshrine the rights Australia has covenanted into via the various international human rights treaties Australia is signatory to. When it comes to the Sex Discrimination Act, the Treaty whose rights it is supposed to enshrine, and which thus gives it its legitimacy, is The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly. As you might be able to tell from its name, CEDAW is focussed on women, and doesn’t say anything about gender identity. So, the argument goes, Gillard’s Government acted beyond the scope of their power when they amended the SDA and extended it into territory not supported by the Act’s underlying international treaty. The amendment is thus unlawful.
The Australian Human Rights Commission disagrees; filing an intervenors submission in the case to that effect.
For the record, I agree with the legal argument put forward by Giggle for Girls and Sally Grover. I believe that Section 5B of the SDA is unlawful in that it represents an extension of power beyond that provided by the external affairs power in the Australian Constitution because CEDAW does not say anything about gender identity. At law, the SDA is only allowed to operate to protect women, not men who assume a female identity.
We will know if the Court agrees with this position very soon: the decision is taking quite a long time to be released, but it will have to be released soon.
‘A woman is not a thought’
In the hearing, lawyers for Tickle argued that because so many alterations had been made to Tickle’s body, such as surgical alterations, that Tickle is now a woman, not a man.
In response, Bridie Nolan, Counsel for the Defendants, argued as follows:
“What is a woman, if thinking one is a woman, means one is a woman? A woman is not a thought.
The applicant’s lawyer’s summation of a woman is not only deeply offensive but absurd – how one dresses, where one shops, etc.
Both sexes can shop on the opposite side of the aisle.
The more troubling and insidious aspect of the applicant’s evidence, is that there is this entitlement to access spaces where the female sex go, proving incontrovertibly that the applicant does not have the psychology of a woman.
Our society recognises the importance of single-sex spaces in certain circumstances – female-only toilets, dormitories etc – to keep women safe from male violence. These are the very places the applicant says he goes.
When a woman who is biologically born and always so - whether she has had her reproductive organs removed or not, whether she thinks she’s a male or not - walks through a dark park in the middle of the night, she does not stop to think: I wonder what side of Kmart this person shops from, have they had their facial hair removed, have they told people in the workplace whether they’re a woman or not?
She doesn’t do that. She doesn’t stop for one second to do that.
She senses instinctively what she perceives to be a threat. She tightens her fingers around her keys. She speeds up.
If a man truly had the psychology of a woman, he would know that and not enter female-only spaces.
This proves the applicant lacks the psychology of a woman. That the applicant is not a woman”.
The bottom line
The word law comes from a latin term meaning ‘immutable truth’. Whether we like it or not, and whether the societies we live in like it or not, there is such a thing as truth - and that is the truth that underpins our existence here as human beings.
If there wasn’t, nothing would have any meaning at all, and there would be no point trying to strive for anything in life individually or collectively, and no point building societies and communities based on shared ideals of what is right and what is wrong.
I prefer to speak only from the context of my own knowledge of my own cultural law and heritage. From that lens, as a keeper of that law, I acknowledge that femininity and womanhood is sacred. In my tradition, women have a particular and beautiful role in the cosmic fabric of life, that men by virtue of being men cannot perform, and men have a particular and beautiful role in the cosmic fabric of life, that women by virtue of being women can’t perform.
And, being a man, if a person, ideology or institution seeks to defile or poison or mock or disrespect women and womanhood, one of my jobs is to oppose that. And so I say this:
Only an adult human female, with the biological and chemical function and makeup of an adult human female, can be a woman.
From my own indigenous lens, I will call Roxy Tickle anything Roxy Tickle wants, but I can not call Roxy Tickle a ‘woman’. Womanhood is a divine designation, not a human one. To deny that Law is to disrespect my mother, my wife, my daughter and my sisters. It is to disrespect the long line of women that I am the biological product of, including Mother Earth herself. Women deserve more than that.
At the cellular level the script is written from conception. The rest is dress ups. Thank you Peter Fam, for standing ground!
This is so beautifully written. Thank you for summoning your cultural heritage, your legal scholarship and your deep humanity. Should be read by every high school student.