International Women’s Day and… traffic lights and other trivialities.

So, it’s International Women’s Day. A day that is supposed to celebrate and advocate for women. But now, it’s turned into a trivial laughing stock, at least here in Australia. Example: the Andrews Labor Government of Victoria has this bright idea (sarcasm in case you didn’t know) about changing traffic lights across Melbourne because they allegedly spark an “unconscious bias”. I kid you not. These things are causing sexist attitudes, apparently.

Design

Memo to the Andrews Government, women do wear pants, you know!

Secondly, the ABC has come up with the idea that today, all the news, current affairs and radio stations are filled with all women. Men, apparently, get the day off. Now, I’ve talked in the past about women in the media and controversies that have occurred over the years about women over a certain age (usually 40’s and above), being replaced by younger women or men. I understand why that ruffled feathers, although, luckily, I haven’t been hearing about that happening lately. But what does this achieve, really? Supposedly it all will go back to normal tomorrow anyway.

It’s this sort of trivial garbage that scares millennial women off feminism. Feminism doesn’t seem to be about fighting for equality anymore, nor is it about confronting issues facing women either here or abroad. For example, former Chief of Staff, Peta Credlin has repeatedly condemned underage girls who get married off to older men in some Muslim communities. Child marriages have also known to happen in the U.S. as recently as 2010 and, while it’s “rare”, Pew Research acknowledged that 5 in every 1,000 of girls between fifteen and seventeen. While rare, as of 2016, it is legal in all American states. In most states, 16 and 17 – year – old teenagers can marry and in Massachusetts and New Hampshire,  children can marry as young as 12. In some states, such as Florida, a minor can get a court’s permission to marry if a party is pregnant. Fortunately, last year, Virginia finally outlawed the practice. Let’s hope other states follow suit soon. As for Australians, migrants, as well as citizens need to know it’s condemned here. Every time it happens, the perpetrators need to be prosecuted legally and face fierce criticism by society.

The issue of domestic violence is raised quite a bit. We should stick to that – make sure that there are adequate services to help women (and men) leave abusive marriages and relationships. But then again, this issue has also been hijacked by ideologues and conflicting claims about the rate often takes all the time, rather than funding services. Case in point from a few years ago:

Not to mention that domestic violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women is rarely discussed by women who claim to be “feminists”, including those in the media. Not to mention the ignorance around Keysar Trad’s comments a few weeks ago on “The Bolt Report”. Look, domestic violence needs to be condemned. All of it. Full stop. No ideology, religious, political or otherwise should stop us from condemning domestic or other violence and helping victims find safety and justice.

There is a lot that young girls face too. When I was researching for my last blog post, I was horrified at the number of links to stories surrounding severe  abuse of young girls I found. And that doesn’t take into account atrocities like female genital mutilation (FGM), which happens in the West too, by the way. A few days ago, wrote about the horrific number of trans women that have been murdered in the U.S. this year alone – and we’re not even a quarter into the year yet. More globally, Saudi Arabia has come under the spotlight when it was reported that two Pakistani trans women were beaten and tortured to death by Saudi police. Saudi police has since acknowledged that two trans women died in custody, but denies that they were tortured.

 

These sorts of issues are what should be talked about on a day like International Women’s Day – plus a lot more I didn’t mention that affect both cis women and trans women around the world. Society doesn’t need more token gestures by feminists for anyone else, for that matter. We need real change, both here and around the world. Unfortunately, I think culture wars and a lack of honesty prevents us from getting done what needs to be done to help women and their loved ones. I’m starting to get sick of it. Can we all forget the tokenism, forget political correctness and work out ways to help ALL people achieve their potential and live their lives in safety and fulfilment?

 

So, what do you think? Have you/ are you doing anything for International Women’s Day? Feel free to put your thoughts in the comments section. 

 

Racial Discrimination Act: change? Scrap?

The raging debate over 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act is still still red hot to some commentators, especially Andrew Bolt. The case involving seven students from Queensland University of Technology – three of which were taken to court by Cindy Prior – after the students were told to leave a computer lab allegedly reserved for Aboriginal students. The boys protested on Facebook, calling it “fighting segregation with segregation” and one asking sarcastically where the “white supremacist” computers were. One of the defendants Callum Thwaites was also accused of using the “N” word, but has emphatically denied it.

While the case was dropped and Prior was demanded that she pay thousands in legal fees, which allegedly sent her bankrupt. While the defendants were ruled as being innocent of any crime, their careers have allegedly being trashed. According to Bolt, Alex Wood explained how his future had been badly damaged and his chosen career had been destroyed:

At that point in my life, it all sort of hit me at once. I was afraid. I felt that uni had been for nothing. I had studied quite hard and had a GPA of 6.3, and I thought that was going to go down the drain. I thought I was going to lose my job and potentially not be able to get a job after uni. I thought my friends would shun me if they thought I was racist. I honestly believe 18C was extremely close to ruining my life and still has the potential to do so.

There were absolutely no winners in this case. Reading about this case,  especially what Wood has said has made me change my mind about 18C. The fact it got as far as it did and had such devastating consequences on everyone involved.

There are three options that are often brought up when discussing this case and 18C – scrap the section, take the words “insult” and “offend” out of the section or leave it exactly how it is. I wonder if there could be another option – have a blanket anti – hate – crimes act that covers race, religion, sexuality,  gender identity, etc.Currently, Australia has a number of anti – discrimination acts, both State and Federal. Why not make it all one?

I would say too, that words like “offend” should be avoided. Why? Because they are too vague and open to interpretation. So what should an anti – hate crimes act entail. Well, quite simply, it should make it unlawful to attack someone because of race, gender, sexuality, etc. I also think that anti discrimination provisions for employers and services should remain. It’s just that, I believe that QUT case has proven that 18C doesn’t work. Even if you win, you lose. There needs to be a line drawn. There is no room for incitement to violence or deliberate discrimination or abuse in our society. However, what I find so heartbreaking is when well – meaning people are dragged through mud and the mud sticks no matter what they say. That’s what I think about the case against Andrew Bolt in 2011. I didn’t read the two articles that got him sued and were banned by the court, but I have since read his arguments since. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard Bolt being branded a racist. Last night on Sky’s ‘Paul Murray Live’, I saw a clip where Labor Senator, Sam Dastyari – who is Iranian born – ranted against changes to 18C. While he didn’t call Bolt by name, it was obvious, I think, that the tirade was partly aimed at him. Unsurprisingly, Murray condemned Dastyari’s speech.

I just don’t think 18C as it is is working. It may have had it’s place in 1975 when the Act was first introduced, but something has gone off. I think it needs to be mended so it can’t be open to interpretation as easy. Like I said, what about have a blanket anti – hate crimes Act instead plus workplace and services protections?

What do you think about 18C? Do you think it should be mended? Scrapped? To those who are in other countries, what anti – discrimination laws do you have? Do you think they work or are adequate? What changes would you like to see? I know these are quite a few full on questions. Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments. 

Categories
Opinion/Commentary

Junk food ban debate… again.

 

design
Image from Canva
wp-1487736678835.jpg
Food label on a microwave chicken roll. 4. 1 grams of sugar, 13.2 grams total fat, 2.1 grams saturated.

 

According to ‘Herald Sun’, debate on banning junk food in school canteens and sports events has been sparked again. There is a new push for schools, sports clubs and advertisers to ban junk food in a bid to combat the rising number of children and adults who are overweight or obese. Taxes for junk food have also been talked about – again. I’ve got a few thoughts about this.

Firstly, I’m not entirely against banning or limiting junk food advertising at certain times of the day, especially when school – aged children are most likely going to be home. In terms of sport sponsorship and advertising, how it will affect particularly rural or regional football and netball clubs in particular need to be considered. It does make sense that sports events/ training coaches offer healthy food. But like with many issues with advertising, a lack of sponsorship from major companies, including junk food companies (Coca Cola, etc), may bring the sports club to financial ruin. Of course, maybe they can rely on healthier food brands, (Sanitarium, maybe?).
Further taxing junk food may prove problematic in lower socio – economic areas. Instead,  I believe healthy food needs to be more affordable and accessible in these communities. I also strongly believe that food labelling should be more explicit. The unfortunate thing is that, much frozen food that can be put in a microwave has high levels of sugar, a substance that is a major contributor to obesity and other health problems. Yet, due to convenience, many people, which use to include myself, get these foods on a regular basis.It was only when I looked at the ingredients that I was horrified at the amount of sugar in particular that was in it.

 

How many people actually look at the ingredients in the packaging, especially if your in a hurry? Probably not many. I think this maybe where people can get trapped. I know the government has talked about colour – coding food (red for unhealthy for regular consumption, green for good, etc). What happened to that? “Fruit” or “cereal” products have been proven to be just as unhealthy, including Sanitarium’s “Up and Go” – a drink that supposedly can be taken if you don’t have time for breakfast? The catch? Yep, it’s full of sugar. Not really a replacement to (low – sugar) cereal, wholegrain bread, etc. This may sound basic, but I still think it’s deceptive to give people the false impression that certain food isn’t too unhealthy, or worse, food/ drinks that you may think may be valuable, only to be told it’s full of sugar. I guess the only way to go is to buy whole foods, fruits, vegetables, etc.

 

What about fast food? We know about outlets such as McDonalds and KFC are high in salt, fat and sugar. But you should also be careful at places like Subway too.  In 2013, news.com.au reported that a study from University of California discovered teenagers who ate Subway were consuming the same calories and higher amount of salt then those who ate McDonalds. I eat Subway from time to time and haven’t had any problems. I’d advise to stay away from the fatty meats and have plenty of salad. Preferably without cedar cheese apparently (I always have it on mine, though).

 

Healthy eating should be simple and cheap. While “common sense” plays a part, i think supermarkets and fast food outlets have a responsibility as well. Don’t advertise something as “healthy” when in reality, it’s not. Would it hurt companies to put sugar and/ or salt content CLEARLY on the label so people will be more likely to read it? I just think that something can and should be done. We need to take responsibility for ourselves, sure. But retailers can make it a little bit easier. They can at least be  honest about what’s in their products.

What do you think? Should food companies be more transparent about what’s in their food?

 

Heels: lots of pain, but any gain?

image

This month’s issue of Cosmopolitan (Australia), exposed that in the U.S. alone, around 20,000 women have to be admitted to emergency because of injuries caused by wearing stilettos. They offered a few tips on how to avoid those injuries, like foot exercises, taking them off during the day etc. I still wonder why they are so necessary for women to wear them at all.

I don’t think there’s much doubt that for a lot of women, heels do look attractive, especially stilettos. Also, some women gain confidence looking taller, especially women who are naturally very short.

image

What I wonder is, why do women feel the need to put themselves through pain, and possible injury or deformity, to look attractive? Do men find it attractive when women where stilettos (I’d actually like to hear from men on that, do you? Do you care?).

I remember watching Sunrise one day last year (or the year before) and co – host Samantha Armytage and news presenter Natalie Barr were talking about how a producer (I think) who said that the women had to wear heals at work when at Sunrise.(OK, my recollection of actually when it when it was said and who allegedly said it is sketchy, but I remember the bit about heels). Why do women “have to” wear stilettos to work, including in the media? I said this in one of my older blogs when it happened. I wrote at the time, why and also that this may leave some women such as disabled women who can’t wear heels even more marginalised in certain workplaces.

 

The effects heels have on the spine in particular is fairly common knowledge in the medical field and in society as a whole. Heels three inches (7.62 cm), high throws your spine out of alignment, causing back pain and, in the long run, cause bulges in the ankles due to the long term strain.

Sex and the City star, Sarah Jessica Parker admitted in 2013 that wearing heels extensively during Sex and the City took a toll on her feet. According to E! News, Parker was warned against wearing heels any longer to prevent further damage.

 

I find  it ironic that in the exact same magazine that reported the rate of injury from stilettos, is the same magazine that constantly markets stilettos to young women or has models wearing them. I’ve read Cosmopolitan for a few years now and to be honest, I can’t remember any of the models not wearing stilettos. They may have done it once or twice. Mixed messages much? For a magazine that prides itself on women’s empowerment, why promote, almost exclusively, clothes by models in stilettos. Why not promote all shoe types, shoes that all women have a chance of wearing?

 

 

I’m not here to tell you that you should or shouldn’t wear heels. You can wear what you like. Like I’ve written before, it’s the pressure, the “unwritten rules”. It’s the promotion of fashion in which some women will never be able to wear, leaving others left out and marginalised that I have a problem with.

Maybe I’m mistaken. What do you think about heels? Do you wear them? Do you prefer women to wear them? 

Valentine’s Day – what’s it mean in 2017

design

Tomorrow is Valentine’s Day, the day when lovers declare their love for each other and secret admirers tell their crush how they feel. Well, that’s the common narrative.

Of course, the origin of Valentine’s Day goes way back. There are two commonly stories that are thought to be the origin of Valentine’s Day. One was that the ancient Romans had a festival Lupercalia in which, according to NPR, men sacrificed a goat or dog before beating young women who were looking to find a mate. I’ve read elsewhere over the years that a names were drawn in a ‘lottery’ to determine who would marry whom. This festival was believed to take place between the 13 and 15 of February. Things changed when Catholicism became the dominant religion in the Roman Empire and the festival was dedicated to St. Valentine.

Another common theory is that Valentine was a Roman Catholic priest in the Rome around the fourth century AD. At this time, there was a crackdown on Christian traditions, including marriage. Valentine defied the Emperor, and even when he was arrested and inprisoned, continued to conduct weddings in prison. While in prison, he befriended the daughter of a Roman guard. They exchanged letters (a.k.a. ‘valentines’). It’s alleged that Valentine died on February 14, hence the date. However, the exact identity of the Saint Valentine isn’t known (there is more than one St. Valentine).

 

The romantic aspect of the day also has a long history, with tokens being exchanged by lovers as far back as the Middle Ages. The 1800’s was when Valentine’s Day cards started being sold by retail outlets.

Fast forward 200 or so years and I think you’ll find attitudes toward Valentine’s Day split. Some say it’s too commercial, some use it as a day to show love and appreciation to friends, while others use it to spoil their partners or show interest in a crush. I do get that the day is heavily commercialised and it’s mostly linked with American culture, rather than Australian, but I think the idea of celebrating love – either romantic or platonic – is lovely and sonething that the world could use more of, to be honest.For years, I’ve thought that Valentine’s Day was a great opportunity to show love to people who you may not show it on any given day. For lovers, it may be the push you need to propose to your loved one. You may just want to stay home woth your loved one that night, watching ‘The Big Bang Theory’ on DVD. Whatever floats your boat.

For some people, it may cause a genuine pain – that you wish you had someone, or maybe a reminder of a past relationship. I won’t say that this is silly or that you shouldn’t feel that way. If Valentine’s Day is one that brings pain, I hope you’ll find comfort in surrounding yourself with the things and people you love and care about.

 

Ultimately, Valentine’s Day is like any other day. By that, I mean it’s good for others, sometimes a new opportunity and a day that you can make what you will.

What does Valentine’s Day mean to you? How will you spend the day?

Free speech and the responsibility to speak out

Last week and today, Newscorp columnist, Andrew Bolt condemned cartoonist Larry Pickering for anti – Muslim and anti gay slurs. He also slammed former Coalition member, Ross Cameron for not calling Pickering out.

Well done, Mr. Bolt.

No, really I mean it. It means a lot for a respected columnist/ commentator to use his platform to stand up for the LGBTQ+ community, and especially gays that have been persecuted in one of the most brutal regimes. I also applaud him for confronting South Australian Senator Cory Bernardi for his controversial comments on same – sex marriage back in 2012 while he was a guest on Sky’s ‘The Bolt Report’ last Monday night.

It is great that Bolt is being consistent in calling out homophobia, racism, etc when it occurs. I hope he – as well as other journalists – CONSISTENTLY continue to call homophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination when they  occur. As I wrote many times last year, I was very disappointed when Bolt and most other journalists didn’t call out and condemn the threats made toward Melbourne’s only LGBTQ radio station JOY 94.9FM last year during the plebiscite debate. Since it’s a new year, (well another year since that event), I’m willing to believe that Bolt and others are willing to turn a new leaf and call out homophobia when it happens and not excuse it. So far, I have been pleasntly surprised with Bolt and his support for members of the LGBTQ+ community – at least condemning abuse. I hope he keeps it up. I also hope others follow in his footsteps.

In the posts that, Bolt was talking – as he often does – about free speech and not having anti discrimination legislation such as Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 to deal with it and instead, have racists, homophobes, etc, have to face criticism by the wider public. This can only happen if people are willing to speak out. This only works when people refuse to turn a blind eye or deaf ear to what’s happening. People who call out racism or homophobia, including slurs, should be able to do so, without having everyone on their backs. Members of the LGBTQ+ community and racial minorities NEED to be able to tell of their experiences. Some things that are said maybe uncomfortable to hear. Tough! If free speech is the way to comat racism and queerphobia, then members of racial minorities and the LGBTQ+ community need to be able to speak and be heard!

 

Lastly, I think there needs to be an overall community effort to eliminate homophobia and racism – in schools, health and the widercommunity. Generally, I think we’ve done this quite well in Australia, with, for example, the Pride Match between St. kilda Saints and Sydney Swans last year. At the time, I said that I thought it was great for such a major, traditionally macho, pastime and cultural icon in Australia to open their arms out to LGBTQ+ players and spectators.

Of course, the mainstrem media has played a major role in embracing members of the LGBTQ+ community and rallying behind their causes. Over the years, I’ve written about the media’s increasing reporting on asexuality and I think that most of them have done a decent job. I still continue to see articles, most which are pretty well written. They mostly validate the experiences of asexual people, which I think is important. This month, Cosmopolitan has released a special LGBTQ Pride issue. I want to talk about it in more depth at a later date.

 

Maybe with all these advances and perceptions slowly changing around ethnic minorities and the LGBTQ + community, things like 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 won’t be needed. But I  believe that is going to put greater onus on all of us to not accept, and more importantly, call out racism and queerphobia. Are we as writers and a community willing to harbour that responsibility? Are YOU willing?

Bring professionalism back in journalism and commentary!

design

I’m usually an avid listener to Sydney’s 2GB on weeknights when Andrew Bolt is on.  But on Monday night, I nearly turned it off after five minutes and was glad that I missed the first twenty minutes or so. Bolt was on with Daily Telegraph columnist, Miranda Devine. To those who don’t know, they had a feud in 2015 after Malcolm Turnbull ousted Tony Abbott as Australian Prime Minister. Devine slammed Bolt for standing by Tony Abbott and his – then Chief of Staff, Peta Credlin – someone who Devine blamed for Abbott’s fall.

She went on Win’s “Today Show” with Karl Stafanovic insulting Bolt, calling him “delusional”.

From what I heard, there was a lot of mincing words, misrepresenting, talking over each other and it all came to ahead when Bolt spat it and threatened to hang up. Things started to calm down after they had a few callers.

Frankly I couldn’t believe what was going on when I turned it on my iPad. In my view, both Bolt and Devine were at fault. Devine shouldn’t have interrupted Bolt continuously, but Bolt, could have been a little bit more professional and not have thrown a tantrum and threaten to hang up. They could’ve both skipped the word games, too (i.e. lost vs losing and whether the polls mattered or didn’t… it was just ridiculous).

Anyway, last night was a lot more cordial. Devine explained the relationship with Bolt as like brother and sister and how Monday night was a “robust discussion” and “sibling rivalry”. They assured that they they were still really good friends.

design

I still think both of them could have conducted themselves better. They are both professional journalists/ presenters. They both work for one of the largest and last standing commercial media companies in Australia (Newscorp).

I’ll cut them both some slack and say that the way they conducted themselves on Monday night isn’t isolated to them. It grates me how journalists – both from the Left and conservative – make a bad habit of mincing words and talking over the top of others. An example of this in recent years (2015, I think?) was a feud between Weekend Sunrise co – host and “The Chaser Australia” host, Andrew O’Keefe and former Labor senator, Mark Latham when talking about the issue of feminism, domestic violence and the gender pay gap. along with “The Guardian (Australia) columnist,. playwright and author, Van Badham and, again, Miranda Devine. This caused a social media backlash against O’Keeffe, with calls for him to be sacked (he’s still there. by the way. He’s still on “The Chaser Australia”, too.)

Maybe journalists do it for ratings sometimes, or, more likely a clash of personalities, ideas and opinions. Surely you can be “robust” in discussion without being rude, without being condescending and without throwing a tantrum. Again, Bolt, Devine and O’Keefe are professionals. They should act like it. Sure, DEBATE, but also LISTEN. And keep cool headed. Then again, I’m not a professional journalist (yet?… who knows). As a listener and viewer I’m a little bit disappointed at how far it can get.

Since last night was so cordial, I”m hoping that there isn’t a “Round Two” of Monday night.

design

If it does arc up again, I’ll be turning it off and keeping it off, at least until someone replaces Devine (either Price or Michael McLaren).

 

How do you cope with journalists talking over the top of each other? Do you bear it, turn off? Does it turn you off a journalist/ commentator or show completely? Feel free to drop your thoughts down below. If you’re a journalist, I’d love to know what you think, too. 

If One Nation wants to represent all Australians, that includes single – parents and the LGBTQ+ community

It seems like Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party can’t stay away from controversy for very long. It’s not Hanson’s fault. To her credit, she has dealt with some of the cases I’m about to talk about. The thing is, it seems to be happening again and again.

First, Senator for Ipswich, Queensland, Shan Ju Lin was sacked after it was revealed that she falsely claimed that two men who were cleared of sexual abuse of young children committed the crimes because of their sexuality. She didn’t apologise for those comments, but instead doubled down.

Next Glasshouse, Queensland candidate, Tracey Bell – Hensellin, made a number of anti – gay comments on her Facebook page, accusing the LGBTQ+ community of “grooming” after a number of  children’s shirts displayed pro – gay messages and claiming that they set out to “destroy families”. Now, this time, according to “The Courier Mail”, Hanson stood by the candidate, arguing that the comments weren’t anti – gay.

Wait, I’m not finished yet. There’s another one.

Third candidate to come in the spotlight is member for Pilbara, Western Australia, David Archibald. He’s dealt two major blows. Archibald labelled single mothers “too lazy” to attract a partner. He’s no ally to the LGBTQ+ community either, claiming that homosexuality was an “acceptable loss” and that only a “degenerate culture” would legalise same – sex marriage.

 

Australia, this has been a part of your Senate for nearly a year and a half.

Pauline Hanson says again and again that she represents the people of Australia. Well, frankly she should have picked her candidates better, because SURPRISE, “Australian society includes single parents (both mothers and fathers) and members of the LGBTQ+ community. Sure, Archibald, Ju Lin and Bell – Hensellin aren’t alone in their disparaging views against LGBTQ+ people or single parents. But surely politicians should be held to a higher standard. Surely, they can have a little respect for all people in their electorate. That includes single parents – both mothers and fathers and members of the LGBTQ+ community.

 

I’m personally sick of the LGBTQ+ community in particular being attacked. I’m also sick of people getting away with it – well – at least for the most part. And, this even goes on in the Parliament. The people who are meant to represent ALL Australians. I hope that the next three or so years are not just full of  anti – LGBTQ+ abuse spewed by Parliamentarians, often without consequences. I also hope that single parents aren’t so stigmatised that domestic violence victims feel ashamed for leaving their abuser and fear being labelled unfairly. No one knows the personal circumstances of a single parent, so don’t assume and stigmatise. Is that so hard?

 

Now, I can imagine people protesting right now – but what about free – speech? Well, sure they have the right to say what they want without too much government interference, as we all do. Well, maybe that’s debatable since we have 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975… that’s for another post for another day. But generally, we have free speech in this country. However, I do not think that “free speech” should not mean free from criticism and consequences. It does not mean that someone can’t or shouldn’t be sacked because of what they say, including on social media. It does not mean that you can be unapologetic when you get something gravely wrong, especially when it has the potential to cause harm. Also, LGBTQ+ people, ethnic minorities, single parents, etc shouldn’t have to grin and stay silent when being stigmatised.

 

Parliamentarians should be held to a high standard in conduct, including on – line. Also, I’d ask, how much do minorities need to put up with? How many times do LGBTQ people have to be likened to “predators” and “mentally ill” before we can protest? I’ve had it!

Categories
Opinion/Commentary

Conversion therapy still happens in Australia

Buzzfeed exposed ex gay or “conversion therapy” still being practised in Australia. This is despite the practice being condemned by all the major health bodies around the world, including the Australian Medical Association (AMA).

Fortunately, some States, including Victoria have started to clamp down on the unscientific practice. Health services will have a complaints commission. They will have greater powers to investigate any suspect health professionals. Anyone will be able to lodge a complaint, not just a client.

However, the article exposes an underground where the practice takes place and is fairly widespread, especially in evangelical Pentecostal circles. Buzzfeed Oz Politics posted a video on their Facebook page where an Australian Christian Lobby member refused to condemn ex – gay therapy during a debate concerning the “Marriage Amendment (Same – sex Marriage) Bill.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FBuzzFeedOzPol%2Fvideos%2F395422660793463%2F&show_text=0&width=560

I actually find this infuriating. I’m furious that some Christians are so hell – bent (no pun intended), to hold on to their theology that they are willing to cause damage to someone’s life as  a result. I’m more furious that a major political force, the Australian Christian Lobby, refuses to condemn the debunked and unethical practice, which is shown to cause unimaginable pain and suffering to many LGBTQ+ people and their friends and families around the world. Regardless of what you think about same – sex relationships, no one has the right to destroy someone’s life. Ever. I’m going to put it very bluntly and this may offend some people. Those who continually insist on conversion therapy have blood on their hands. The Human Rights Campaign in the U.S. mentions the harmful effects of such “therapy” including depression, alcohol and drug abuse and suicide. Live Science has also highlighted how harmful the so – called “therapy” is.

I get that people want to hold on to their beliefs and some people have genuine beliefs about whether same – sex relationships are moral. Some still hold the view that it isn’t. What I can’t believe is that people still insist that LGBTQ people change their orientation or gender identity when all evidence suggests that it doesn’t work. I can’ t believe how the Australian Government can watch idly as this goes on.

The U.S. is slowly clamping down on the practice, with New Jersey being the first state to ban the “therapy” for minors. Could it ever be outlawed outright? Even survivors of “ex gay therapy”, such as Samuel Brinton admitted that legally, there is a limit that should be done as to not clamp on people’s freedom of choice and beliefs if they are over eighteen. (Watch his speech at Google  on YouTube. For some reason I can’t embed it here. Sorry about that).

I’ll add to that sentiment. Laws, regardless of how strict they are, can only do so much. It’s the culture in some organisations that needs to change. There needs to be a belief that LGBTQ+ have enough value to have a right to dignity and well – being. There needs to be a willingness for people to drop the stereotypes and caricatures that have given people licence to dehumanise and harm the LGBTQ+ community for so long. We need to change thinking on gender and sexuality. Organisations need to be willing to treat people in a way that protects their mental health and overall well – being, rather than use power to abuse people spiritually and psychologically.

Some people may have found this post hard to read. It was hard for me to write. Frankly, I was initially reluctant to write it. But I felt like I can’t let this go on and not say something. Too many lives have already been damaged or destroyed by this. I can’t let another life be ruined without speaking up.

 

 

Categories
Opinion/Commentary

Finally a sane article on Melania Trump

Michelle Andrews wrote an article on Mamamia calling for an end to fake news and misrepresentations of Melania Trump on – line.. Andrews has slammed the “Free Melania” hashtag with no evidence except some opportunistic photos and GIFs.

Finally, a progressive wanting FACTS rather than sensationalism on this.

She is right. We DON’T KNOW what goes on behind closed doors between President Donald Trump and Melania. I wrote on another blog that some of the treatment of Melania had been unfair and wouldn’t be tolerated if it was Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton – especially by the left/ progressive media.

So, what do we really know about Melania? Well I can tell you what I’ve heard that is quite common knowledge:

  1. She’s Slovenian
  2. She is fluent in five languages
  3. Her and Trump have a ten – year – old son.

That’s all I can think of at the top of my head. Can’t even think of the son’s name… starts with B.

 

I hope that the next four years isn’t full of endless rumours and false victim narrative of Melania. C’mon, we may be troubled about Trump (I have my concerns), but portraying his wife in a false light is not going to help progressives/ left, feminists or anyone else. In fact, it will be another thing that will backfire completely.

The “fake news” phenomena over the last couple of months in the lead up to and in the aftermath of the U.S. Election has been pathetic. Some researchers argue that fake news didn’t affect the election result, but it’s still not a good look. Alleged fake hate crimes will NOT help the migrants, Muslims or the LGBT community. It will only embolden vocal opponents.

Be concerned about what’s happening or what will likely happen. Like the bill that Trump was photographed signing. Some people worry about what it’s going to mean for reproductive health for women in other countries that the U.S. sends aid to. I must admit, I think I’ve jumped the gun, especially including on Vice President Mike Pence on LGBTQ+ rights. I’ll try not to do that in the future.

I agree with what Sky’s Janine Perett said a couple of nights ago on Paul Murray Live – wait until President Trump and other Republicans make their first move and something becomes (or is likely to become) law. If you don’t like the policies the Republicans put forward and its made law then protest. If you’re a journalist focus on facts. Don’t journalists have an ethical responsibility to be accurate. Of course, if you are an opinion writer, then, you can afford to be biased. But again, if the biases are based on complete fabrications and things taken out of context, then that doesn’t help your cause or reputation.

 

Back to Melania. Why don’t we treat her like most progressives would’ve treated Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton – with respect. And show respect for their son, like many did with Obama’s daughters Sasha and Malia. Treat Barron (I found the name just before) Trump with courtesy. And remember he’s only ten – still in school.

As for fake memes, GIFs and whatnot, can we stop being so pathetic? People – both from the left and conservative post satirical memes and GIFs featuring famous people on social media all the time. That’s fine. But deliberately creating deliberately fake news/ campaigns out of it does not do anyone any good and only make progressives look spiteful and hypocritical.

 

We’re all edgy about what’s happened. Many are concerned about what the future holds, especially progressives/ those that lean to the left. But step back and let truth trump lies (no pun intended). Because, quite frankly, lies, as well as demonising people unfairly is what has gotten us into here in the first place.