The head of a female-only social app says she refuses to acknowledge an excluded trans woman’s gender identity, despite a birth certificate listing her as female.

Sall Grover defended the actions of her company and its platform, Giggle for Girls, in the Federal Court on Wednesday during a landmark transgender-rights case.

Roxanne Tickle is suing the platform on the grounds of gender-identity discrimination after having her access blocked in September 2021.

But Ms Grover said that Ms Tickle was, in her eyes, a biological male and it was “not polite” that she tried to access an app intended only for females.

Ms Tickle’s lawyer, Georgina Costello, said Ms Grover’s denial of Ms Tickle’s identity by repeatedly referring to her as a man bordered on gender discrimination.

Ms Grover defended her statements, saying it was unkind “to expect a woman to see a man as a woman”.

The court previously heard Ms Tickle had lived as a woman since 2017, including having surgery, taking hormones and telling family and friends of her decision.

“Up until this instance, everybody has treated me as a woman,” she said.

The app uses gender detection software to examine a selfie uploaded by the user and rejects applicants deemed to be male.

Ms Tickle was initially admitted but later excluded when a human moderator assessed her photo.

Her legal team has said evidence to be presented to the court will show she is a woman.

Ms Tickle sent eight emails between October 4 and November 5, after she was blocked from the platform, while Ms Grover responded once.

In that reply, the Giggle founder requested that the blocked user send her phone number so that she could personally investigate what happened.

Ms Costello said Ms Grover had created an “unfair characterisation” of Ms Tickle when she labelled her emails and phone calls a form of harassment in interviews with UK and Australian media outlets.

But Ms Grover said no other app user had ever called her and she had not previously received emails of a similar nature.

When asked if she would have an issue if a woman – based on her definition – contacted her in the same way as Ms Tickle, she said the question was difficult to answer.

“I wouldn’t be in this position with a female … there would be no reason to,” Ms Grover said.

It is the first time the Federal Court has heard a case alleging gender identity discrimination.

The hearing continues.

This post was originally published on Michael West.