Saying that men can get pregnant BACKFIRED...

With all due respect, President, as a biological woman I am insulted.Utterly insulted by that explanation.That you think that I and the other biological women here need to apply for an exemption so that we can say no to having our own space to biological men.That is an insult to every biological woman, quite frankly.But the good news is what we've established today.is we're talking about the law and the law as it currently stands is an ass and we will change it so we do not have to have these conversations again.

Sex is biological reality.

Today, Australia has become the laughingstock of the world after an insane Senate inquiry went viral.Following the outrageous federal court ruling in the Giggleverse Tickle case, which essentially declared that trans women are legally women, forcing women to accept biological men in female -only spaces, a National's MP introduced a bill into Parliament aimed at protecting women's rights and restoring biological reality to Australian women.

For years Australians from different political traditions have warned that the law was becoming detached from biological reality and increasingly incapable of balancing competing sex and gender identity rights created by the parliament.The ruling in Giggle vs Tickle has proved them right.My bill seeks to restore clarity, certainty and common sense to the law.It starts from a very simple proposition.The law must recognise and favour biological reality.because laws only function properly when they are grounded in objective facts that can be consistently understood and applied.

Biological sex is not a social construct created by parliament.It is not a matter of personal opinion.The role of the law is not to deny reality.It is to responsibly govern within it.Biological sex matters.particularly in sport, health, privacy, safety, and women's services.

If the law loses the ability to distinguish biological sex where it is relevant, then sex -based protections become impossible to apply consistently and fairly.

But apparently not every politician in this country is convinced by something as radical as common sense.

I support the full federal court's recent landmark ruling affirming that the Sex Discrimination Act protects against unlawful discrimination based on gender identity.Many transgender people in my community want us to protect the Sex Discrimination Act, which is why it's concerning that the Leader of the Opposition has vowed that he would lead a coalition government which would seek to amend the Sex Discrimination Act and to insert a definition of biological sex—in other words, a definition of male and female.

You all know how I feel about Monique Ryan.But I think Alison handled her with far more class than I ever could have.

Any politician who will look an Australian in the eye and tell them that a man can be a woman is admitting that they will lie about anything and everything because the most obvious lie has already been told.If no one in this room can acknowledge reality and fix an obvious problem, you're either malicious or incompetent.The days of dismissing this issue are over.This is not a culture war.It's reality.With that, Deputy Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.

So this isn't the first time someone has tried introducing a bill like this into Parliament, but it was the first time it wasn't immediately shut down, triggering the usual suspects, like ABC activists, to bizarrely confront, ironically, one of the only openly gay Liberal MPs over the broad support the bill was receiving, even within the Liberal Party itself.

Your side of politics wants to change the Sex Discrimination Act, which would enshrine a definition of biological women.being women.This would have huge implications, as you know, for transgender women.Do you agree with that policy?Did it go through a proper process?

Well, some people have introduced private members bills, but do I believe that women are entitled to safe spaces?Yes.I believe that people...Do you believe in changing the sex discrimination to redefine what a woman is?I am quite happy to have a definition in the Sex Discrimination Act around what a biological woman is. I don't say that that should be controversial.

It's not that controversial to the average Aussie, but we know.Patricia lives inside the far -left eco -chamber of the ABC, where even hearing basic biological reality spoken out loud now seems to come as a surprise.as a genuine shock.

So just to be clear, you think you should be changing the definition in the law?I think we should be clarifying the law to make sure that it reflects community sentiment, allows people to be treated based on their biological sex where that's appropriate, and to make sure that there's appropriate space for safety for everybody within the community.I believe that women should be able to form communities that are advancing the interests of women that exclude men.

What a radical idea.And I know I'm mocking how obvious this all sounds, but what you need to understand is that there really is a shift happening.Tim Wilson comes from the left faction of the Liberal Party, the very faction that not long ago would never have dared to advocate for protecting women's spaces, which explains Patricia's absolute shock, despite being such a staunch ally of his community.

So is it official Liberal Party policy?It's absolutely policy that we should have a process to recognise that biological sex should be properly respected in anti -discrimination law to make sure we protect the rights and freedoms of all Australians.I don't see that as very controversial.

Some people do, clearly, so that's why it's an issue.

The only people who still find this controversial are left -wing activists.lunatics at places like the ABC and the political class that spent years trying to impose this insidious ideology on ordinary Australians.

Commissioner, as the head of the commission, are you able to answer the very simple question of what is a woman?

An adult female human.

Thank you.

And includes a transgender woman.

And it's not just the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission who can't correctly define what a woman is.Even the Minister of Women struggles to answer that question.

Safe spaces for women.I want women's rights back.

How about you leave that up to us to figure out for ourselves?

Well that's what I'm doing and they're coming to me saying for goodness sake pursue this issue with the Office for Women.

Oh yeah the good old you're a man so you can't advocate for women argument.

Because the irony is that Labor Prime Minister Julia Gillard, the first female Prime Minister in this country, it was her who created the legislation that created this mess and she accused Tony Abbott of being misogynist.One Nation will amend the Sex Discrimination Act, legislated by the Gillard Government, that has created this mess.Why don't you do it before the election and change it?

It's not a matter for the Office of Women.If that's not a matter for the Office of Women, I truly don't know what is.But I guess what can you expect from a Minister of Women who can't even define what a woman is, serving in a government that appointed this Sex Discrimination Commissioner?

If someone is who applies for a job, for example, and it is a trans woman.she may be asked whether or not she intends to have children and if she replies yes I do and then doesn't get the job because that employer doesn't want to employ women who may be of childbearing age then she may have been subjected to unlawful discrimination on the basis of potential pregnancy.

I'm very confused.

A biological male can't become pregnant.But the grounds of pregnancy includes potential pregnancy as well as pregnancy.But if they can't become pregnant, how can you then become potentially pregnant?It's about the unlawful treatment by the employer.If someone is treated unfairly on the basis of pregnancy or potential pregnancy, then that is unlawful discrimination on the basis of pregnancy.

So if a bloke came in and they said, are you going to have children?which is the same question, really, and he said, oh, yeah, maybe.Are you saying that he could also claim that ground?

If he didn't receive the job because...But they can't get pregnant.No, no, not a man who is seeking a position, then it's not going to apply to a man.

They're both biological men.It makes no sense.A biological man, you stated before, a biological man can't get pregnant.Am I correct?Because if I'm not, I've got to go back to school.I seriously do.

Because I missed that lesson in biology.I went to a convent school.The nuns may not have told me about it.But you said a biological man can't get pregnant.

That's correct, Senator.But someone who is a trans woman may be assumed to be pregnant or to be able to be pregnant.

So what stops a man putting on a dress?walking in and claiming the protections?He's now a woman.You've admitted that.

That would be up to a court to decide whether or not it was discrimination on the basis of pregnancy.

And with all due respect, it is the absurdity of the law yet again, which shows, again, the law does need to be changed because for the record, biological men, doesn't matter what way you cut it, you cannot get pregnant.pregnant and quite frankly it is an insult to women who actually are discriminated on because they want to have children when they biologically can get pregnant.But the good news is what we're proving today is the law needs to be changed.

If you enjoyed this report, make sure to like, comment, but most importantly, share it far and wide so more Australians can see what's really happening in this country, in our Senate.Then head to followrv .com or scan the QR code on your screen to join my mailing list and follow me across all platforms, just in case the one you're watching us on right now ever decides to cancel us for daring to stand with women.Followrv .com or scan the QR code right now.