Tony Abbott has been physically assaulted in Hobart. He was head butted by an alleged ”Yes’ supporter.
To those who commit this crap, I have a few words for you.
You are a disgrace. Don’t DARE say you speak for me or any LGBTQ+ people that I know and love. You are NOT doing ANYTHING good for the cause. Rack off!!! Don’t display a ‘Yes’ t – shirt or anything because you don’t care for the cause. YOU are the reason why the ‘Yes’ campaign may very well lose!
So, forget the banners, T – shirts, merchandise, etc and rack off. We do not need you!!!
In this socio – political climate, it’s easy for LGBTQ+ people to get discouraged. It’s easy to get angry, tearful or maybe even hopeless. To have the lives and relationships of LGBTQ+ people debated 24/7 in the media and social media alike.
Through our stresses and tears, I believe we should say one thing: thank you.
Thank you for those who have been vocal about same – sex marriage and other rights on our behalf.
Thank you to counsellors who are dedicated to helping those in distress.
Thank you for all the teachers, counsellors and support staff who have and continue to help LGBTQ+ youth without judgement. To admit being LGBTQ+ or that your unsure as a young person can be scary. Thank you for sticking by us through the struggle
Thank you to the parents who’ve decided to stick by their LGBTQ+ children, even when the cost was great.
To peers and friends who have embraced the LGBTQ+ people among you. Thank you to those who have allowed us to come out when we wanted to. You’ll never know how much that means to us.
From a personal note, to all those who’ve stood by me when I’ve struggled and have given me a soft place to fall, thak you so very much. You’re in my heart always.
Another personal note: I’d like to thank those who have offered support on my blogs or on social media. It’s not always easy writing about this sort of stuff. In fact, at times, it’s terrifying. But you all make it worthwhile. So thank you. This includes peoole who supported my blog Asexuality in a Sexual World.
Once again a simple vote for marriage equality turned into a fight for survival by Bolt and the hard right.
Still no mention of those horrible posters, Andrew?
“Nicholas” has a point. It’s the principle not the side that counts, right?
True, true, Bolt has condemned homophobia in the past, including on the assault of Qantas CEO Alan Joyce last year. He has also criticised Mark Latham and Ross Cameron for making unsavoury comments about LGBTQ people. Good on him for that. He has also spoken with compassion toward LGBTQ+ he personally knows during this debate.
There have been other times when, at least to my knowledge, he’s missed an opportunity, such as the threats against Melbourne’s Joy 94.9 FM last year.
I know, I know I keep bringing these things up. But, what is it, the principle or the side that is important.
Even more important than that, who wants to be told (falsely) that their LGBTQ+ loved ones are more likely to abuse children? I don’t think for a second that Bolt thinks that’s true. So, why silence?
I think this is more that the posters are more than just a bit off or espousing an unpopular or controversial opinion. The posters used the F word meant for gay people, especially gay men. Not only is the term considered to be a form of verbal abuse by members of the LGBTQ+ community, but it is often associated with physical homophobic violence.
The myth that LGBTQ couples are more likely to or are the equivalent of child sexual abusers needs to be stamped out, too. The aftermath of the Orlando Pulse Night Club last year sparked fear in the LGBTQ+ community. What wasn’t talked about in Australia was that people —non Muslims, mind you — praised the gunman, saying that the victims should be executed. In their venom, these people equated gay people to pedophiles. One preacher said from the pulpit that “Orlando, Florida is a little safer tonight”. Yes, he and others did receive condemnation, but it still freaks me out. It shows that words do matter. Regardless of your views on same – sex marriage or even LGBTQ+ people in general, comparing LGBTQ+ people and their families to pedophiles, as well as derogatory terms, must be condemned. And it needs to be called out by people with a major social and political influence and voice, like Bolt has.
People have scoffed at the idea that LGBTQ+ have negative feelings about the plebiscite. To be quite honest, for a while, I was in favour of it, even the postal one. Since the postal plebiscite is likely (if it passes the Supreme Court), then LGBTQ+ must be supported. Abuse must be condemned. These posters are not just a matter of “free speech”. This is purporting a dangerous view of LGBTQ+ people, which for too long justified violent attacks on people based on their sexuality or perceived sexuality or gender. In the name of ‘debate’, it’s about time people started calling this out and condemning it.
If this post has raised any issues with you, you can contact Lifeline: 13 11 14 or Beyond Blue: 1300 224 636. For emergencies, ring 000.
I love watching Paul Murray Live, but to be honest, I’m sick of the whole line ‘if the plebiscite wasn’t voted down by Labor and the Greens, we’d have same – sex marriage/ marriage equality (depending which term they use) in Australia by now”. Even Daily Telegraph’s Sharri Markson jumped on that bandwagon last night. Host Paul Murray then parrots statistics by “The Essential Poll”, which suggests that 61% say that there should be a national vote and 60% want same – sex marriage to be legal. OK, The Guardian Isn’t a ‘right – wing’ publication, true, but can anyone tell me how many people were polled?
I am not a complete opponent of plebiscite and in an earlier post, I did say that Labor was guilty of treating the LGBTQ+ community like a political football. But here’s the thing, if a plebiscite was such a good — and harmless — option for the LGBTQ+ community, why was it sold so poorly? Why did a poll by PFLAG (however small), show a fall in support for a plebiscite when people were told (correctly), that it was legally non – binding? Why didn’t the Coalition ensure that the result would be respected?
Going back to the first point, I believe that LGBTQ+ need to be included in the debate, preferably without being screamed down. Seriously, why shouldn’t gay/ bi people like Molly Meldrum have a say about issues like gay marriage and the Margaret Court controversy if straight people are demanding the same? That’s what a ‘debate’ is — people expressing opposing views. Yet, we hear echo chambers of people mostly saying that the plebiscite should have happened. They can have that view, sure, but what about have a member of PFLAG or an LGBTQ+ add to the discussion and maybe expressing some worries that they have? Why not have a counsellor/ social worker, etc who works with LGBTQ+ people? (I’ve seen the ABC do that once). I’m not saying that people like Paul Murray, Andrew Bolt, Rita Panahi or anyone else shouldn’t have a say. They can. But I think there is another side. There is concern on how it may have turned out, and I think they need to be heard as well. Because ultimately, LGBTQ+ people will be the ones affected by the result and, possibly, the process.
For Australians, do you think the same – sex marriage has been hijacked? Leave your thoughts below.
I watched the controversial show “Hack Live – Is Male Privilege Bulls***” and I’ve got to say while it caused controversy in which the ABC kind of apologised for, the discussion on male privilege on the panel show “Hack Live” was actually very interesting.
One interesting panellist was *Adrian* (not his real name), who was a part of the Men’s Right’s movement. He, more than other panellists, emphasised what many men face in Australia more than women. These included homelessness and suicide. It was also pointed out that men are over represented in work related deaths as well as the alleged gender pay gap and domestic violence.
So, does male privilege exist?
It’s complicated. Economically, there may be a historical bias that favours men. But in areas like family law, mental health and other areas, these things have generally favoured women – from what I can gather. In the UK, there is a severe lack of appropriate shelters for male domestic violence victims. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was similar here. You don’t hear about domestic violence against men in the media as frequently as you hear about women.
I think another factor to talk about is male victims by sexual assault at the hands of both men and women. While there is a slow increase in awareness and female who abuse boys are finally getting exposed, I believe there is still a long way to go, especially on reducing stigma faced by many male victims, both as adults and children.
So, does ‘male privilege’ exist?
Like I said men may have some economic and professional advantages over women – depends who you believe on the age wage gap and poverty after retirement. But, I think there are areas in which women have the upper hand, including custody disputes and family law, awareness on domestic violence and mental illness and relevant services for these men.
In other areas, I think “white privilege” isn’t an overblown concept either, to be honest. I think, while things are improving for people of colour in countries like Australia, I don’t doubt that that some may still face racism in a way that Caucasian people generally don’t have to think about. I believe that there are people of colour who face racial profiling. People of colour and of Asian backgrounds do get stereotyped in a way that Caucasian people generally don’t get. I have also heard a few years ago that a survey (I think) pointed out that some employers tend to look past resumes that have a non – English sounding name. Whether this has improved over the three or so years since the story was on The Project, I’m not entirely sure. I hope it has.
Did anyone else watch “Hack Live”? What did you think about it? What do you think about the concept of male privilege? Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments.
The Ariana Grande concert massacre in Manchester, U.K stirred up such anger in me yesterday. Those killers, one that died in the blast, are nothing but scum. How DARE these mongrels attack children. The youngest known casuality was Saffie Roussos, aged only eight.
And it begins. Speeches by world leaders, solidarity, there will no doubt be vigils. And an inevitable debate over migrant and refugee intake from Africa and the Middle East.
Same old, same old. Then, we go back to square one.
But what can we do? Even if we ban migraation from countries such as Libya (that’s allegedly where the parents from the bomber was from), what about the Internet? Compulsory filtering, anyone? From what I understand, many of the terrorists – the one that decapitated soldier Lee Rigby in broad dalight in 2013 spoke with a distinct British accent, the Boston bombers, although from a Chechen background, were raised and educated in the U.S. And the Orlando shooter was born in New York to Afghani parents. So hasn’t that horse already bolted? Not to mention that there are many victims of terrorism from Africa and the Middle East, many of which are Muslim.
So, what do we do? What can we do? At the moment, I really don’t have an answer. It just keeps happening again, again and again.
I’m usualky a person who likes to offer solutions, or at least more information and arguments, butvI think I’ll leave this post where it is. I just haven’t got any words to say except that may heart goes out to the victims that survived and the families of those who lost loved ones, especially young children like Saffie. You’ll never be forgotten, sweetheart. ❤️😥