Trans advocacy in Victoria and Australia - part 3 of a 3 part series

The trilogy wraps up with a look at national developments in the last 5 years.
National co-operation

While state issues were the main focus during the decade 2000-9, there was little hope for trans (or GLBTI issues overall) nationally until 2007. The socially conservative LNP government of John Howard, elected in 1996, showed no interest in reform and was most noted for amending the Marriage Act (a law, not part of the Constitution) to specifically state “man and woman.” From a trans-specific perspective, in 2006, the limited but valuable flexibility on passports for trans people travelling overseas for surgery was removed without consultation or warning, meaning passports were based totally on birth certificates, resulting in inconvenience and probably risk for trans people.

The Howard government lost office in 2007 and was replaced by the ALP, led by Prime Minster Kevin Rudd. In its first term it focussed on removing discrimination at a national level against same-sex couples, amending around 100 laws in the process (although not making any attempt at marriage equality). There was better news on passports, with moves back towards flexibility that countered the 2006 reversal and went a little further.

 In mid 2010, Kevin Rudd was replaced by Julia Gillard as ALP leader and Prime Minister, and after the August 2010 election the ALP formed a minority government with the support of independents. This was incredibly timely as in April 2010 came the beginnings of combined efforts at national trans advocacy.

This took place at the national Health in Difference conference in Sydney. WA trans man Aram Hosie organised the session “Moving Beyond Talking” (which received a participants choice award). The foundations established at this session created the basis of national co-operation and progress and these have been built on since then.

The first policy breakthrough took place in September 2011. The government announced passports would be based totally on affirmed identity for trans and gender diverse people, gave an X option and also announced reforms for intersex people. Draft guidelines were presented to representatives of TGV, A Gender Agenda (an organisation in the Australian Capital Territory), Western Australia Gender Project and Organisation Intersex Internationale Australia. These guidelines needed only minor modification before being released (after public consultation with the trans community).

This was the biggest policy or legal change in Australian history up to that point in time to base documentation on affirmed identity. With hindsight, it was also a clever strategic “testing of the waters” that laid the ground for the 3 areas of federal reform that occurred in 2013. Public backlash was virtually nil, even on conservative talk-back radio stations. One caller, after a TGD person was interviewed on Melbourne radio, even asked why it hadn’t happened earlier. Trans was no longer a shock value issue; people had a basic understanding and were able to accept policy reforms were needed. The trans advocacy movement had reached a major milestone. It was also worth noting a unanimous High Court decision (AH and AB’s case, AH and AB being 2 trans men in Western Australia) was handed down in the same month as this policy changed. This also reinforced the principle that surgery was not a vital part of recognising all trans people for being who we are.

Another major development, which assisted trans advocacy, was the receipt of ongoing funding for two paid roles in the LGBTI Health Alliance. The organisation prioritised 2 areas: one being intersex, trans and gender diverse people (the other being LGBTI seniors). This resulted in the formation of what ultimately became known as the Intersex, Trans and Gender Diverse working group to work with the paid employee. The impact of having someone paid to assist largely voluntary efforts has been large and the support of a large organisation with resources and networks will continue to make a positive impact.

In June 2012, history was made with a 2-day roundtable in Sydney of 18 intersex, trans and gender diverse people from all states and territories and also a range of backgrounds e.g. indigenous/sistagirl, sex workers. The roundtable prioritised 5 key priority areas for progress after brainstorming every possible issue. The result was the Diversity in Health document which was launched in November 2012. This was effectively a 3-5 year strategic plan for intersex, trans and gender diverse people. Importantly, it was launched at a function for the Parliamentary friends of GLBTI in Canberra. To have the focus of a cross-section of all federal politicians on trans and gender diverse, and to some extent intersex, was a major breakthrough. Many were not aware of the grave social difficulties still facing trans and gender diverse people and as such, by hearing stories and meeting with us, many had a major paradigm shift.

There was a significant side note to the Sydney meeting. At the end of the second day, those from beyond Sydney caught cabs together to the airport and were having a quiet (non-alcoholic) drink together before catching flights home. All noted that while intersex, trans and gender diverse were making progress, bisexual issues were probably further behind in understanding and support than intersex, trans and gender diverse. It is significant that a group of people still striving for major reform had the leadership quality of empathy to consider others and it was a small yet powerful indicator of the increasing strength in the national trans and gender diverse movement.

Meanwhile the federal government was pressing ahead with an overhaul of federal discrimination protections which also aimed to add sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status at national level. A draft national bill was presented in November 2012 while at the same time the state of Tasmania was moving to insert a better definition of gender identity into its existing state laws. The Tasmanian definition was simpler and gave more coverage to the trans and gender diverse kaleidoscope, in particular to those identifying in non-binary ways. The federal attorney general readily accepted the Tasmanian definition was better and supported its inclusion. The positive contrast when compared to the difficulties in Victoria in 2000 showed advocacy and the trans movement had clearly been effective in getting the basics across. Trans issues were simply not controversial any more. The resulting legislation, while not the original major overhaul, gave federal protection after at least 17 years of previous effort. Further, no state law was weakened, and many were strengthened due to the previously mentioned provision in the federal constitution. There was no controversy in adding these attributes with at least 95% of the Parliament being supportive and a formal vote was not required. Most of all, the co-operation between advocates across GLBTI was perfect and was a factor that helped put the world first intersex protections into law as well.

At the same time, the federal government announced two further policy changes. The principles of the 2011 passport reforms were extended to sex and gender guidelines with all national departments and agencies been given 3 years to comply. Also, changes were announced to the government health insurance system Medicare to make some processes gender-neutral. The health care provisions can help to pave the way for eventual public funding of trans surgeries and the documentation guidelines are easily applicable to states and territories.

Conclusion

While it is understandable that the need for change is pressing for trans and gender diverse people, the lessons learned from all of the above simply reinforce basic human principles such as trust and patience. By building trust, people have worked together. By taking the time to communicate and build a true picture of trans and gender diverse lives, advocacy is then made easier in the long run.

It has also been fantastic to see the greater visibility of indigenous, sistagirl and brothaboy culture. While many people such as Crystal Johnston have worked intensely in this area for many years, the leadership of sistagirl Starlady Nungari and brothaboy Kai Clancy have taken this to higher levels.

As noted, non-binary issues, while moving rapidly forward, still face many challenges. As an example, a supposedly safe conference on BGILT in schools recently began with the words “welcome...ladies and gentlemen,” thereby making non-binary people invisible. Again, education and communication will be needed. This is a critical point given 33% of young trans and gender diverse people identified as non-binary in the research piece “from Blues to Rainbows” released in September 2014.

It is fantastic to see the emergence of trans and gender diverse young people and their involvement in advocacy. The Victorian-based group Ygender has grown exponentially in the last 3 years. Coverage of trans and gender diverse issues for young people has improved from the pathologising attitudes of 10 years ago to listening to those willing to speak publicly. And overall, media coverage has increased in balance and is more respectful.

The future is not without challenges. Different states and territories are at different levels of progress both within the community regarding both levels of lateral violence within the trans and gender diverse community and re acceptance in the wider community. It is important to ensure that existing work is built upon rather than having these regions re-invent the wheel, particularly given the largely voluntary nature of those involved.

Overall, the future is bright for trans and gender diverse advocacy in Australia. So long so communication and co-operation continues and grows, it is firmly believed that the trans movement in Australia can keep moving – and definitely move in the right direction.

Trans advocacy in Victoria and Australia - part 2 of a 3 part series

Forward:

Last week, I wrote of the success of achieving state anti-discrimination protection. Sadly, after the success, there was a "blip."

Trigger warning: lateral violence

Part 2: Victoria 2001 to present

Unfortunately, dark days ensued from around 2002 to 2004 when the Victorian trans community was set back, almost permanently,  by a series of “label wars” e.g. transgender vs. transsexual, as part of intense lateral violence. Some people objected strongly to the idea of transgender as an umbrella term and were quite derogatory to those who had not completed surgery while others saw surgery as “mutilation.” While everyone has a right to define/ label themselves and live as is their need, it was forgotten that other people also have that right and there may be differences. People experiencing intersex were also dragged into this situation.

The effects were, to be frank, horrible, noting first and most of all, the toll on trans and intersex people’s health, well-being and morale. Further, on a practical level, the ALP government had been re-elected in 2002, this time with a comfortable majority in both houses of Parliament. They had promised to make the next trans reform in relation to birth certificates, which for trans people were still based on body at birth and without any possibility of change. We had a great chance to get birth certificates based on affirmed identity rather than surgery which would have been the first state or territory in Australia to do so. The in-fighting resulted in key public sector officials and politicians threatening – and reasonably so – “to take the whole thing off the table.” Public sector officials were being bombarded by rude angry emails and were understandably upset.

The result was that the legislation that came into effect in January 2005 could be best described as minimalist in that it was based on surgery, a married trans person had to divorce so as not a “create a same-sex marriage” and minors (those under 18) could not change their birth certificate at all. It was a major opportunity lost. Some close allies among gays and lesbians still remind us of those difficult times nearly ten years on.

The only good thing to come out of this was the trans community learnt its lesson and in Victoria, the community has co-operated professionally and amicably since then and grown to be one of the strongest in Australia. People do their best to sort out issues away from politicians and then present a united voice. Even if that is not possible, people can agree to disagree respectfully. Now, a coalition of 10 Victorian, trans, gender diverse and allied (family member) groups works together to hold workshops and ensure good communication.

There was during this period, one ray of light, proving that trans people can be strong and resilient when we need to be. In July 2003, word leaked of the first known trans applicant to enter the Victorian police academy. The relatively tabloid Murdoch daily newspaper the Herald-Sun ran with the headline “sex swap cop.” Commercial talkback radio only interviewed the head of the police union rather than asking trans people for their views. Discussion focussed on doubts about the applicant’s suitability and pathologising ideas as to whether trans people could handle the stress of police life. TGV had to “cold call” into one program to get any voice. Others monitored radio while at work. And then state Opposition leader Robert Doyle uttered the infamous phrase “In my view, there are some things which would discriminate against people joining the police force, I mean, are you allowed to join the police force if you’ve been found guilty of an indictable crime? The answer is no...” Trans people immediately called radio stations and Doyle withdrew the comments. The prejudice was largely defeated.

This was probably the first time the Victorian trans community had acted primarily on its own initiative and with our gay and lesbian mentors sitting back and letting us take the lead. We had grown up and were now well on our way.

As a postscript, the applicant, since identified as Bernice Canty, graduated easily and also received a medal for bravery for actions in the terrible situation that was the Black Saturday bushfires in 2009, proving she could easily handle the pressure. Bravo Senior Constable Canty, you are a pioneer by just being yourself.

In 2010, the state government, still the ALP, aimed to streamline the Equal Opportunity Act. TGV was called on for its opinions by a range of human rights organisations and we were able on occasions to offer ideas to them in return. Trans people were now firmly established as a valuable part of the whole human rights community, a situation that grows stronger to this day.

To finalise this section, the ALP lost office in 2010. The new LNP government seemed to allow ministers to run their departments according to their own philosophical leaning and as such legal reform for trans people stopped due to the conservative nature of the Attorney-General Robert Clark. On a positive note, the ministers for health and mental health have been highly supportive of trans issues and prioritised them after reconvening the health advisory committee in 2013. Credit goes to a young trans person, Sim Kennedy, who at the first meeting of the committee raised trans and gender diverse issues with a combination of fact and passion that was a brilliant piece of advocacy. Progress is likely to resume given the election of the ALP in 2014.

next week - part 3 - national co-operation

Bruce Jenner

My personal take on the Bruce Jenner scenario...

Bruce is a person experiencing gender identity issues like all other trans/gender diverse (TGD) people world wide and that needs to be met with compassion and empathy - same as for all TGD people.

I fully acknowledge the celebrity family aspect makes this more difficult for some people, both TGD and wider community, to deal with story. I ask people to at least try to make the effort to distinguish between the gender journey and the celebrity aspects and take each aspect on its merits. To completely look at this one way or the other is binary thinking - I think we as TGD and allied people want to break down binary thinking, right?

I also would like to acknowledge the issue, as someone who trains in LGBTI aging and aged care, the issues faced by seniors. Bruce had no internet and search engines growing up and has lived for 65 years in a way that wasn't best for the person inside. I think that long period of inner torment is worth noting and respecting.

Yes, there are elements of privilege (income, class, celebrity status) for Bruce that many other TGD people don't enjoy. (The celebrity status may have some downsides). Maybe not every sentence in the Sawyer interview was word perfect. I'd like to see any human who is perfect all the time. Bruce acknowledged that he would like to work with advocacy types which is a good approach.

I think it boils down to dignity and respect. I think if we come from that perspective we can achieve the best outcome for everyone.

Love and peace to all.

Trans advocacy in Victoria and Australia - 1st in a 3 part series

Introduction 
I recently wrote an article on my historical perceptions of TGD advocacy in Victoria & Australia.

I though that as the TGD community continues to emerge and evolve it might be helpful to look back and see what we could learn to ensure we continue to move ahead effectively.

The background is written to ensure understanding from a perspective beyond Australia.

All opinions are my own.

Part 1 - Background & Victoria to 2001
Part 2 - Victoria 2001 to 2014
Part 3 - National Co-operation

On with the show!


Background

Australia is a country covering a large geographical area with a small population. Our current population of 23.5 million is 10% more than New York state’s population - in an area slightly less than that of the United States.  As well, our country has a 3-level system of government being the federal (dealing with matters such as defence and foreign affairs), 6 states and 3 territories (the difference between states and territories not being of relevance for this paper) and local government.

Further, the evolution from 6 colonies in the 1890’s to a federation in 1901 is of relevance. Australia’s constitution, rather than largely enshrining freedoms or human rights has on occasions been described as a power-sharing arrangement between the colonies which were to become states and the federation-to-be. As a result, similar legislation e.g. anti-discrimination protection (often called equal opportunity law in Australia) needs to be achieved 9 times - in each state or territory and at the national level. Further, different jurisdictions have different wording for their laws e.g. definitions around gender identity, birth certificates. With tongue wedged firmly in cheek, getting nine groups of politicians to agree to standardise matters can be a challenge. Finally, Australia’s constitution provides that in the event of an inconsistency between a state and a federal law, federal law overrides state.

Local government, similar to counties in the United Kingdom or the USA, has the role of service provision. However, it has little relevance to legislation and advocacy. Work done at this level is becoming more relevant as policy and law reforms are achieved at state/territory and federal levels.

The result of this has been that until at least 2005, most trans movements were focussed on state/territory reform and there was little communication and co-operation around the country. The shift in the last 5-10 years has in part due been due to the advances of internet, email, social media and expanding technology e.g. Skype and decreasing telecommunications costs. While the full benefits of face-to-face communication will remain as long as the human race exists, technology has been critical for Australian trans people.

It is also worth introducing the political background in Australia. Similar to the UK and USA, Australia is largely a 2-party system with party lines enforced relatively rigidly. The Australian Labour Party (ALP) is roughly a centre-left social democrat party (approximately the equivalent of the US Democrats or British Labour Party), although critics would argue in recent times it has struggled to stick to a cohesive philosophy. The Liberal/National Coalition (LNP) represents the right of centre (similar to the UK conservatives and USA republicans). The National Party was until 1974 named the Country Party in line with its rural origins. The Liberal Party, despite its name, has become more conservative since the late 1980’s and the “small-l liberal” wing has declined in influence. The Liberal and Nationals are very similar in philosophy and therefore mostly work together in coalition, whether in government or not.

Until around 2004, the third largest party was the Australian Democrats, a largely centrist party founded by a small-l liberal and former Liberal government minister (Don Chipp) who was concerned about increasing conservatism. The Greens have since assumed the third-party mantle after rising to prominence in the 1980’s and 1990’s. Both these parties have been key supporters of LGBTI rights.

Further, compared to the USA and Europe the philanthropic sector is relatively small and our tax system also tends to limit funding available to advocacy. The voluntary nature of most advocacy work remains a major challenge

Finally: a note on definitions. Through most of this paper transgender and trans are used as umbrella terms for those people whose sense of gender identity or expression differs from broader societal expectations given their body at birth. This expands to trans and gender diverse towards the end of the paper to note the rapid expansion in numbers of those more comfortable identifying in non-binary ways. These terms are used for consistency rather than because they are “more correct” than others and acknowledgement is given to the right of people to use labels (or none at all) that authentically represent their own life experience.

In light of this background, I have chosen to focus on the history of the trans movement in the state of Victoria and expand this to a national perspective from around 2010.

The story of Transgender Victoria (TGV)

The story of TGV begins around 1996 with the demise of a Victorian group called GLAD (Gays and Lesbians Against Discrimination). This group had played some part in achieving the inclusion of the attribute “lawful sexual activity” in Victoria’s Equal Opportunity Act in 1995. (This development emerged following the 1994 Tasty nightclub raid, which was a case of systemic harassment by Victoria Police similar to the events at Stonewall in 1969). While this gave, albeit with very poor wording, some protection for people in the area of sexual orientation, it did nothing for trans people. This was despite the great efforts of Victorian advocacy pioneer Julie Peters, a trans woman who had also run many times for state and federal parliament for the Australian Democrats.

In the latter part of 1997, community members held 3 public meetings to form a new advocacy organisation. According to Julie and others, there was much debate about for whom the new body should advocate. Some said it should cover trans people rather than simply avoid us; the other argument was trans issues would be subsumed and progress delayed because gay and lesbian issues would receive priority. (It was unclear where bisexuality came into this scenario, if it all).

A better alternative arose from the excellent leadership from the two people who became the founding co-convenors of the Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, Braith Bamkin and Janet Jukes. They promised to help the trans community set up their own organisation and to offer mentoring and community development until the new organisation was able to stand on its own feet. As a result, TGV was eventually formed in 1999. The vision and foresight of that kindness resulted in a great foundation for trans people Victoria and a close partnership that lasts until this day. Trans people were able to have an organisation that focussed on specialised issues while working with gays and lesbians to combat common issues e.g. harassment and violence. This outcome paid dividends very quickly.

In late 1999, the LNP state government, which had won huge majorities in 1992 and 1996, experienced a huge drop in popularity. As a result, the ALP won 43 of 88 seats in the Legislative Assembly (the lower and governing house of the state parliament) and with the help of three independents, two of whom being very conservative, was able to form government.

The ALP had promised at community meetings and during the election campaign to introduce two new attributes to the Equal Opportunity Act, namely sexual orientation and gender identity. It moved very quickly to fulfil this promise, with progressive Attorney-General Rob Hulls introducing the bill to Parliament in March 2000.

The bill was delayed for eight weeks by one of the two conservative independents. It was understood this member was heavily influenced by religious fundamentalist thinking. Two days before the end of the (southern hemisphere) autumn session of Parliament he proposed amendments that would have watered down the proposed laws e.g. exempting trans people who worked in contact with the public from protection, proposals re toilets that are unmentionable. Over the winter, parliamentary secretary to Mr Hulls, Richard Wynne, spent 2 days negotiating with him (the independent refused to meet with trans people, claiming he didn’t meet with “paid lobbyists”). To Mr Wynne’s immense credit, using a combination of fact, logic and social justice arguments most of the proposed amendments were withdrawn. Any subsequent adjustments had little effect on the effectiveness of the law and when Parliament resumed, it comfortably passed both houses in early September 2000.

The effects of having this law were hugely positive. Trans people had a seat at state ministerial advisory committees on law reform and health. A police GLBTI liaison unit was established as well as a GLBTI police reference group. TGV was either directly represented on these groups or had people who were able to report back to TGV and the community. Further, individuals facing alleged discrimination had access to the processes for conciliation offered by Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission rather than outing themselves in a court process. The tide had started to turn.

Next week - part 2 - Victoria 2001-2014

Abbott breaks down: I am an ALP insurgent

Tony Abbott has finally given the clearest and most concise explanation for his behaviours over the years – he is actually an ALP man!

Abbott broke down after a rare happening in Australian media today, that being intelligent and balanced questioning, when he was asked simply “are you for real?”

“No one has ever known I was the greatest double agent since Rene Artois in “'Allo 'Allo! I have told no-one until now. I was Howard’s head-kicker for years and Peta worked closely with me but I hid my double life completely.”

He admitted he came close to breaking down once before. “During Julia Gillard’s misogyny speech in October 2012, I was so close to breaking cover. The torn look on my face was due to being the SNAG that I really am; I was so hurt by being called a misogynist. I managed to keep it together because I knew I had so much more sabotage of the coalition to do.”

Former Prime Minister John Howard’s remaining fringe of hair went even whiter on hearing the news.

ALP leader (sic) Bill Shorten as usual tried to be invisible but was in the end forced to actually say something for once. Media on hand heard something mumbled to the effect of “does this mean we now have a government of national unity?”

A Greens spokesperson who refused to be named publicly said they were looking at legal action over Abbott’s remarks. “There is the possibility Abbott has done so much damage to the coalition he could really be a Green but hasn’t been able to admit it.”

Attempts to reach Palmer United Party via their mobile number received “the number you have called has been disconnected...it’s not worth trying again later.”

Further reaction as it comes to hand.