Survey of 2022 Victorian State Election candidates

LGB Alliance Australia is surveying candidates in the Victorian election on 26 November 2022 for their opinions on sex-based rights. »» Results are published here. ««

We asked four questions which we hoped would help to expand the discussion of sex, gender, and self-id issues in Victoria.

Questions about gender are important, but they are not the final word on human relations or relationships. ‘Gendered violence’ is mostly violence by men against women. Sex discrimination doesn’t go away by hiding it with other social problems. And puberty blockers don’t solve gender problems: they create new problems by stopping normal sexual development. Sex-based rights are important for everyone—men, women, and children.

The questions and the reasons we asked them

Question 1

Should an elderly or disabled woman who needs intimate, personal care, always be permitted to specify she must have a female carer?

We expect almost everyone would want to answer Yes to this question. High rates of violence against women and the disabled demand effective response. The law in Victoria allows some discrimination in relation to sex in cases that are ‘exceptions.’

<https://www.humanrights.vic.gov.au/for-organisations/exceptions/> (Retrieved 31 October 2022)

Also, see the report on Sexual abuse/assault of older women (PDF), which was a submission to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety.

Such cases are important in states, like Victoria, where the gender status of people can be changed simply by declaration and providing a supporting statement from a friend. More information on gender status is at ‹https://bit.ly/3FqD2NY›.

Lesbians, in particular, find themselves under increasing pressure to permit men into their spaces, their social media apps, and their meetings. This trend is likely to continue and worsen in Australia, as it has in other countries.

Question 2

Should a natal male person convicted of a crime, or crimes, of violence against women ever be detained within a women’s prison?

We expect that most people will find this question distressing but might be inclined to answer No. Sympathy for people with gender dysphoria, or adults who have decided to begin a gender transition process, can quickly evaporate when the person in question has committed crimes of violence against women, rape, or sexual assault.

The government’s answer to this question is Yes. The commissioner of Corrections Victoria has outlined the requirements for management of such prisoners.

Commissioner's Requirements for management of prisoners who are trans, gender diverse, or intersex, published at ‹https://files.corrections.vic.gov.au/2021-06/2_63.docx›, retrieved on 31 October 2022.

The document has many references to the traumatic experiences of trans and gender-diverse persons in a variety of circumstances in prison environments. There is no discussion of the traumatising effects on women of being imprisoned with sex offenders.

The difficulties and absurdities arising from this policy are already clear in Victoria through cases that have reached the attention of the public:

Question 3

Should a young person’s gender identity be affirmed at school against the wishes of the parent(s)?

We think many people will find this question very difficult to answer with Yes or No.

In Victoria, the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021 is written is such a way that it is possible for parents to be prosecuted for obstructing their children's efforts to obtain puberty blockers, for example. The legislation has not so far been tested in the courts. The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission is very explicit, and lists this as an example of what is illegal:

a parent refusing to support their child’s request for medical treatment that will enable them to prevent physical changes from puberty that do not align with the child’s gender identity and denying their child access to any health care services that would affirm their child’s gender identity

—Published at ‹https://www.humanrights.vic.gov.au/change-or-suppression-practices/for-families-and-friends/›, retrieved 1 November 2022.

Of course, the intent of the legislation is correct: there is nothing wrong or broken about being gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

However, as experience in other countries is beginning to show, pre-pubertal boys and girls, and adolescents generally, sometimes go through a ‘transient phase’ (the term used by the NHS in the United Kingdom) in which they explore, and are often confused by, their sexual orientation and the gender stereotypes associated with it.

Victoria’s affirmative model of protecting young people from discrimination removes parental ‘guardrails.’ It makes schools and teachers agents in an already difficult situation where they may be required by law to contradict parental concerns.

The medical and therapeutic environments using an affirmative model of care have given up trying to diagnose gender dysphoria. There is still very little open discussion of how a young person’s awareness of their sexual orientation develops, and the ways that orientation might be expressed socially as ‘gender.’

This psychotherapist in the United Kingdom outlines the problem:

Other links:

Question 4

Do you think that gay men should be allowed to host male-only community events, and lesbians to host female-only community events?  

We hope that people would agree Yes is a reasonable answer to this question, given there are alternative mixed-sex events, as well as events exclusive to other minority communities.

The Victorian Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021 amended the definition of sexual orientation in the Equal Opportunity Act 2010, legally redefining homosexuality, bisexuality and heterosexuality. Homosexuality, or exclusive same-sex attraction, was redefined as attraction to persons of “the same gender.” Under this definition, gay men are men attracted to those with a masculine gender identity, regardless of whether that person is of male or female sex, and lesbians are women attracted to those with a feminine gender identity, regardless of whether that person is of female or male sex. Bisexuality, the attraction to both sexes, was similarly redefined to be attraction to “more than one gender.” Such definitions dismantle homosexual and bisexual orientation and have no relation to the actual experiences of LGB people, particularly homosexuals, who are not attracted to the opposite sex. 

Changes to the protections of LGB people have negative repercussions for our community. As minorities, it is essential that we are able to meet for community building and in a safe place, free from unwanted advances from the opposite sex, discrimination, and abuse.

The sexual orientation of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals has been redefined in Victoria to be based on gender, rather than sex, under law. This redefines LGB as an ‘identity’ rather than as a shared reality of same-sex attraction. Consequently, distinctions about who can or should be allowed to enter spaces intended only for lesbian women, or for gay men have been discarded — single-sex spaces that were for community building and safety.

LGB Alliance Australia supports the existence of trans-only spaces, as well as spaces for other minority groups, whether it be on the basis of race, culture, or religion. 

We are interested to know whether candidate legislators and politicians support the right of our communities to offer single-sex events intended only for gay men, or for lesbians, in addition to the numerous and varied all-inclusive LGBT events that can be found all across the state. We believe these events are essential for the wellbeing of our community. 

Why only YES or NO answers? Isn’t the answer sometimes ‘MAYBE’?

The parliamentarians who represent us don’t get to vote ‘maybe’ when decisions are made about legislation: the answer is always Yes or No.

Surveys of candidate politicians are usually set up like ‘purity tests’ and try to establish whether a candidate comes up to standard. LGB Alliance Australia does not want to do that. We understand these issues are difficult. We’ have provided a dialog box for candidates to provide comments and links they think are relevant.

How the survey was conducted

Candidates were emailed about the survey using publicly available email addresses. The Victorian Electoral Commission communications team did not respond to our request for up-to date candidate information, even though we later discovered contact details of candidates are published on the VEC site on a page for candidates, where no-one would expect to find them. We started with data gleaned from the Australian Broadcasting Commission web site, and updated it with VEC later. We noted that many candidates, especially those associated with major parties, only provide organisation/party emails to the VEC (e.g., info@party.org.etc). We decided not to permit parties to answer for individual candidates, because voters elect individuals, not parties, to the parliament. To ensure that party policies were reflected in the results, if the parties wished it, we wrote to parties and offered to publish statements from them on the survey results page. Candidates listed in the VEC contact lists were emailed again to remind them a survey was being conducted. Links to a public version of the survey asking the same questions was briefly posted on Twitter using hashtags related to the Victorian election in order to provide a comparison with candidate survey respondents.