Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
1–10 of 19 posts
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#2[flagged]
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#3I don't read The Guardian, so here is another link https://qnews.com.au/victorian-lesbian-group-cannot-exclude-...
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#4Full title: "Victorian lesbian group cannot exclude transgender and bisexual women from events, tribunal rules"
Seems to apply to public events only
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#5The original is: "A Victorian lesbian group cannot exclude transgender and bisexual women from its public events".
The HN title here has been re-written to change "transwomen" to "males" and to remove the qualifier "from its public events."
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#6[flagged]
Interesting, thinking from a man’s perspective, I could only come up with one reason to join a lesbian group in the first which would involve harassment of some kind so I agree. I’m unfamiliar with Australia’s constitutional system and protections though It seems to be a malicious use of a loophole in a free-speech type of law.
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#7[flagged]
Interesting, thinking from a man’s perspective, I could only come up with one reason to join a lesbian group in the first which would involve harassment of some kind so I agree. I’m unfamiliar with Australia’s constitutional system and protections though It seems to be a malicious use of a loophole in a free-speech type of law.
This is simply because its 'public'.
A straight man or woman can go to a gay club or bar, and they can't block or ban you. since it's a public place.
If you want to restrict access, you need to make it private. - this is sensible and not weird. It's weird people claim something to be 'public' but then want to restrict access.
And for the record, it can be alot of fun going to a lesbian or gay event or club or bar or whatever if you are straight. good times are good times - these are often really fun places. Had lots of laughs in my time going to places in amsterdam. - initially just to 'see what is there' - curiosity, then having a lot of laughs and coming back for 'gezelligheid'.
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#8> Anna Brown, the CEO of Equality Australia, welcomed the tribunal’s finding "which recognises discrimination laws exist to protect all of us, especially communities that have experienced historical discrimination and marginalisation".
Does that description not include those who are female and homosexual?
> The commission argued that granting the LAG an exemption from usual gender discrimination laws could contribute to heightened health risks among transgender lesbians.
I wonder what their reasoning is here. How would excluding individuals who are male and heterosexual from lesbian events cause risks to their health?
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting, thinking from a man’s perspective, I could only come up with one reason to join a lesbian group in the first which would involve harassment of some kind so I agree. I’m unfamiliar with Australia’s constitutional system and protections though It seems to be a malicious use of a loophole in a free-speech type of law.
This is simply because its 'public'. A straight man or woman can go to a gay club or bar, and they can't block or ban you. since it's a public place. If you want to restrict access, you need to make it private. - this is sensible and not weird. It's weird people claim something to be 'public' but then want to restrict access. And for the record, it can be alot of fun going to a lesbian or gay event or club or bar or…
> If you want to restrict access, you need to make it private. - this is sensible and not weird. It's weird people claim something to be 'public' but then want to restrict access.
Why is it "weird" to want to restrict an event to only lesbians? It only seems to be "weird" if you impose a false public/private dichotomy on it. But, presumably, the lesbian group doesn't care about "public" or "private", only "lesbian" or "not lesbian".
Re: Australian lesbian group cannot exclude males and bisexuals, tribunal rules
#10> Anna Brown, the CEO of Equality Australia, welcomed the tribunal’s finding "which recognises discrimination laws exist to protect all of us, especially communities that have experienced historical discrimination and marginalisation". Does that description not include those who are female and homosexual? > The commission argued that granting the LAG an exemption from usual gender discrimination laws could contribute…
You are, I think, too focused on the transwoman part of it, and leaving how how the group also wants to exclude bisexual women (including non-transwomen) from public events.
Why should an anti-discrimination law allow a lesbian group to exclude bisexual women (trans or otherwise) from a public event?
If you think that's okay, then you are fine with gender discrimination. If you think that's an issue, then apply the same logic to transwomen.
You should bear in mind a few comments from the link to the previous reporting, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/... :
> But Dr Daye Gang, the commission’s counsel, said taking trans women out of the protections of the SDA was a high bar to meet.
> She said every group under the SDA was guaranteed the same bundle of rights and there was no “hierarchy” of protected groups. “This is not a contest of who is most marginalised,” she said.
as well as:
> The tribunal heard that there were many subsets of lesbians, some more exclusionary than others.
> Dr Elena Jeffreys, a sex worker advocate and academic, told the tribunal that lesbians who believed transgender women were men, were not a large group.
Why should one marginalized group get to discriminate against another marginalized group for public events?
Since most of those who are "female and homosexual" regard transwomen as women, you really shouldn't use the broad category of "female and homosexual" to justify discrimination against transwomen at a public event.