ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Inquiry into Sexuality Discrimination

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Senator B. Brown, Australian Greens

The Sexuality Discrimination Bill goes a long way towards addressing many of the concerns of bisexual, gay, and lesbian people in Australia. It is a means of bringing the law into alignment with the changes in public attitude that have seen sexual orientation towards members of one's own sex more accepted and understood in the community as an aspect of human diversity. Ignoring the debates about why some people have such orientation, this bill reflects the understanding in the community that all societies in all nations at all times have included people with such orientation, and that these people have been valuable, and valued contributors to society. It recognises that public opinion supports an end to tolerance of discrimination, vilification and violence against this segment of society, and that there is widespread support to end systemic discrimination embodied in law and directed against this part of our community. We heard that the shift in understanding and acceptance even goes as far as the many major Christian churches, such as the Catholic, Anglican and Uniting Churches. They may not support same-sex marriage, because this is seen as a quasi-religious institution, but submissions by the Australian Conference of Catholic Bishops have supported recognition of same-sex couples at least to the extent that de facto heterosexual couples are recognised. A major regret is that the main report of the committee did not make that broad acceptance more obvious.

This Bill, and the majority report of the committee, is one of the first attempts by Federal Parliament to actually address the issue of transgendered people. The majority report does not fully represent the situation and issues of transgendered people, although paradoxically, it deals better with transsexuals than other transgendered people. This is reflected with the focus on `stability' of gender identity. The point of inclusion of transgendered people is so that people were not discriminated against on the basis of their gender identification, or of someone else's perception of their gender identity. Transsexuals are the group who most strongly assert a definite gender identity, and go to great lengths through surgery, hormone regimes, and other things to bring their appearance into line with established gender identification. But they are only a part of the transgendered community, which includes people for whom gender is ambivalent, and people who are effectively, or biologically, of mixed gender, and people with a gender-neutral identity. These people do face discrimination, and a range of assumptions and presumptions and generalisations about who they are, and how they behave. There should not be discrimination against them simply because they seem different. Difference is not a crime. This is the principle behind human rights and anti-discrimination legislation.

Those who innerly have a dissociation with identification of their gender of birth represent a diversity of experience, identification and solutions to their personal issues. As long as what they do harms no-one, there should be no discrimination directed against them.

I support the initial broad approach of the Sexuality and Gender Identity Discrimination Bill in respect of transgendered people, and call on others to recognise that all people who are subject to discrimination on the basis of simple difference need protection against such discrimination, in an Australia which is all-embracing and caring.

I demur from recommendation 8, chapter 6. Serious discrimination and disadvantage in matters relating to superannuation is well documented and was dealt with by the Senate Select Committee on Superannuation in 1995. Asking the Senate Select Committee to revisit the matter reflects unnecessary equivocation and delay. The committee's recommendation in 1995 was "that the superannuation regulations be amended so that those in bona fide domestic relationships and single people are treated in the same manner as married and de facto superannuants." It should be adopted.

BOB BROWN

Australian Greens Senator for Tasmania

27 November 1997