WHY AM I WRITING THIS?
I grew up in an era when, matters of gender diversity and sexual orientation were rarely discussed except in the context of vulgar and belittling humour. However, after I started my career in Social Work, Social Planning and Research, I began to interact with people who would now be classified as LGBTQIA: folks whose sense of gender identity or sexual orientation differed from that which was generally recognised and accepted as “normal”. Needless to say, I found these folk to be complex multi-dimensional individuals bearing no resemblance to the sexualised caricatures of my youth.
This is probably why I am now concerned and saddened by the confrontational nature of many of the exchanges occurring in the current dialogue about LGBTQIA issues. Whilst some of the stakeholders may have sufficient resilience to cope with the lack of respect and aggression that is generated in “the heat of battle”, other more vulnerable people can become distressed to the point of self-harm. If only we could have a reasoned and respectful dialogue about this! However, I really shouldn’t be surprised by the robust and sometimes angry nature of this debate. Given the factors identified below, social change is often a fraught process:
· Personality. Some people, seem to be psychologically programmed to resist change and, when necessary, resist with passive or open aggression. Early adopters, on the other hand, are often willing to embrace the opportunity to be part of change. Indeed, some become zealous advocates who may react angrily when thwarted by conservatives. This sets the scene for the kind of the kind of fiery struggles that make good tabloid headlines and great television.
· Values. Most of us have an embedded set of values that determines the way in which we manage our lives. These values are often acquired during our formative years and will have an ongoing influence on our attitudes and behaviours. Some people can clearly articulate these values, particularly when they are based on the kind of divinely revealed wisdom that can be found in holy books such as the Christian Bible, the Quran, and the Torah. Others can find it difficult to explain what really guides their direction in life. Perhaps they are simply subject to impulses or content to follow the crowd. Alternatively, some people may have a set of strongly held but ill-defined values, operating automatically, in the background. This is why management training and self-development programs often include values clarification segments.
· Status role and self-interest. While this may sound cynical, it’s probably realistic to consider the possibility that if people perceive social change as a threat to their wealth or role or status in society, then there’s a good chance that they are going to oppose it. Conversely, those who feel that social change will broaden their opportunities and wellbeing they are likely to be supporters. Indeed, for some, the promise of social change may release an outpouring of pent- up emotions that drive militant advocacy.
Clearly the onset of social change is likely to set the stage for a hard-fought contest between various stakeholder groups: conservatives vs progressives, true believers vs heretics, the powerful vs the disadvantaged. Deals will do, coalitions will be formed, and not infrequently dirty tactics will be employed.
The use of conjecture, unsubstantiated rumours and downright lies often seems to be an acceptable tactic in the melee that surrounds unfolding social change. What makes all this more difficulty of forecasting the consequences of social change. As a social researcher I am cognisant of the methodological problems inherent in trying to forecast the probable outcomes of social change and evaluating the actual outcomes. I am therefore in favour of gradual change strategies that can be subject to ongoing evaluation. In this way, it may be possible to identify both the positive and negative aspects of an ongoing change; so that zealots may be cautioned and opponents re-assured.
In this opinion piece, I will identify and briefly discuss some of the key issues that are at the basis of this ongoing struggle. My hope is that this may, in some small way, assist people to contribute to these conversations in a more measured and respectful way.
GENDER
I was born and raised in a rural area, far away from city lights and the complexity of urban life. For I and my peers, the issue of gender appeared quite straightforward and merited little serious discussion. Boys and girls were born with obvious anatomical differences. Then when puberty arrived, we knew that there would be biological changes to equip us for adulthood. We boys would start to look more like men with bigger muscles, deeper voices, and facial hair. Girls would develop a more feminine body structure.
Puberty would also bring sexual maturation and awareness of the tantalising possibility of sexual activity. In that era there was a clear differentiation between the roles of men and women within society. Men were stronger than women which equipped them for hard physical work, fighting in wars, playing contact sports and “being in charge of things”. At home the man was always “head of the household”. Women, on the other hand, were regarded as weaker but more nurturing than men and this equipped them for complimentary roles such as housekeeping, cooking, childrearing, nursing, basic textile fabrication and junior sales positions. In the unlikely event that there was any confusion about gender identity, men and boys always wore trousers while women and girls always wore dresses!
Now, all these years later, the reality of gender differences is radically different:
· Female participation in the paid workforce has increased markedly, although males are still more likely to secure the more senior jobs with higher salaries. There is an increasing participation of women in trades and professions that until recently were regarded as suitable only for men. Women are playing an increasing role in the armed forces including limited numbers of women filling combat positions.
·Girls and women are now engaging in many of the sports, previously considered dangerous and unsuitable for females: football, boxing, body building and weightlifting
·The expectation that a man will head each household has virtually disappeared. Women now have the capacity to manage their own financial and legal affairs. It is commonplace for women to be sole parents; indeed, some now choose to start their families without a male partner.
· Nowadays it’s sometimes difficult to spot the difference between males and females without having as close look! Trousers are now regularly worn by women and girls and “unisex” clothing has become quite common, particularly in the workplace.
I would suggest that these role changes are probably due to a combination of medical, technological, economic, and ideological factors.
The advent of the contraceptive pill has given women much more control over their fertility. This has been complemented by greater access to safe and legal abortions. All of this has facilitated women’s participation in the workforce and afforded them more lifestyle options.
The advent of household appliances such as vacuum cleaners, washing machines and driers, dishwashers and fridge/freezers, microwave ovens etc. has decreased the burden of domestic duties, making it easier for women to work outside the home and enjoy the social freedoms previously enjoyed by men. This freedom has been also enhanced by the widespread ownership of private motor vehicles.
The increasing world - wide focus on gender equity.
It is evident therefore that there have been rapid and significant changes in the status and role of women, whose roles in society are no longer determined principally by their anatomy and physiology. Like it, or not, society now faces the task of re-defining the roles of women in society in a way that matches contemporary economic and social realities and generally has a good “fit” for both genders.
As I see it, one of the major challenges that we face is to identify those characteristics of gender which are biological in origin and those that are socially constructed i.e. attitudes and behaviours learned during childhood and adolescence as a result of parenting, schooling, and community pressures. For example, many of we males have been taught that it is inappropriate for us to show our “our sensitive side”. To do this would be “unmanly” and leave us open to derision and a “push over” in contests with other men. Similarly, until recently many women would have been taught that it was better not to appear too tough or assertive as this might be considered “unfeminine” and unattractive.
There is now an influential school of thought, that as gender identity now seems to be largely, socially constructed, that biological factors need have little actual relevance. In consequence, people should be free to make a personal gender assignment irrespective of their existing biological characteristics. Thus, individuals should be able to identify as being male or female or “nonbinary” (neither gender). They could also decide whether they should be referred to as he, she, or “they”.
When viewed solely from a human rights perspective, this idea of disconnecting gender identity from biological characteristics does have an engaging logic. However, there are probably some “real world “issues that that cannot be ignored. Here are some examples:
·How relevant is gender related biology to the development of workplace and sport safety policy and procedures?
·Do boys and girls have biological differences that affect their capacity for learning in classroom settings?
·What implications has biological gender have for the provision of clinical health services?
For early adopters this idea of post-birth gender promises many liberating possibilities. For entertainers and “influencers” it has become the latest trend. However, there would seem to be merit in proceeding gradually with widespread implementation.
T is for Transitioning
This refers to the process of transitioning from one gender identity to another – from male to female or female to male. Often this process has involved changes in clothing, appearance, and behaviour. In other words, a male may become feminised, and a female may become masculinised. Sometimes this process may be assisted by the use of medication to block or induce certain biological gender characteristics. Perhaps one of the most controversial examples is where a pre-pubertal females may, under certain circumstances, be prescribed “puberty blockers” to prevent the development of breasts and other secondary sexual characteristics. Some people also decide to have surgery as part of this transitioning process. This can include the redesign of the urinogenital system, mastectomy, and various other forms of plastic surgery.
Clearly transitioning is a complex process often making considerable physical and psychological and social demands on the person concerned and therefore not something that is entered into lightly. It would appear that people eventually consider transitioning because of an overwhelming feeling that they are someone who is trapped in a body of the wrong gender. The term gender dysmorphia can be used to describe this phenomenon. However, this may lead to confusion with the term body dysmorphia which is used in psychiatry to describe an unsubstantiated belief that one’s body is some way ugly or flawed.
Until relatively recently the circumstances surrounding gender transition have been hidden from public view. Whilst this may have served to protect the privacy of those involved, it may have prevented informed and reasoned discussion of this issues and stifled the flow of research dollars. I don’t pretend to be particularly knowledgeable this subject, but it seems to me that much more needs to be known about the causes of gender dysmorphia and how the distress of those experiencing it, can best be managed.
I is for Intersex
This term generally refers to individuals born with any of several biological characteristics including chromosome patterns, gonads, or genitals that, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies”. This is a relatively infrequent, naturally occurring phenomenon which is neither a medical condition nor disability per se.
The parents and carers of intersex infants are likely to experience considerable distress when they discover that their child is “different”. They will of course feel concerned about how their child will cope with its future life and may feel some embarrassment or shame about their circumstances. The outcome has often been for the child to undergo gender assignment surgery which will result in a biological configuration that resembles that of a specific gender. Gender assignment surgery does not guarantee that the intersex infant will grow into adulthood feeling comfortable with the apparent gender of their surgically re-modelled body.
Until recently the phenomenon of intersex children, like other LGBTQIA issues has been shrouded in secrecy and is only now begum to be discussed in the public domain. It is clear that some intersex people who underwent gender assignment surgery, now regard this as a gross violation of their human rights Indeed the practice of infant gender assignment surgery has been banned in at least one jurisdiction. This whole issue which would benefit from thorough medical/psycho-social and legal research.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION
This is a term used to describe the direction of sexual/romantic attraction. Most people are attracted only to people of the opposite gender and are referred to as heterosexual or “straight”. This orientation brings together individuals with complimentary anatomical configurations necessary to facilitate sexual intercourse, pregnancy, and child - bearing and has traditionally been regarded as a normal and necessary part of the continuation of the human race. There is no clear answer as to why homosexual behaviour is such a widespread and enduring human characteristic. However, there is emerging scientific evidence that there may be a genetic basis for homosexual attraction.
G is for Gay L is for Lesbian
People who are attracted to people of the same sex are referred to as homosexual. Thus, men who are sexually attracted to other men are now-a-days referred to as Gay and women who are sexually attracted to other women are referred to as Lesbian.
B is for Bisexual
People who are sexually attracted to people of either gender are referred to as bisexual. Some bisexual people may have similar levels of attraction to both men and women. However, others may have stronger feelings for one gender. For example, some bisexual people may have had a sufficient heterosexual orientation to establish an ongoing heterosexual marriage/relationship and parent children only finally to eventually leave this family to pursue the homosexual lifestyle which they had always longed for but supressed in order “to do the right thing”.
A is for Asexual
Of course, there are some people who do not experience any feelings of sexual attraction to either males or females. Whilst this may seem like a safe option, such people may feel deprived of the joy that many of us have been able to experience.
Q is for Queer
This is a confusing term which is sometimes used as an alternative for gay. It may also be used as a general term to describe someone who has a different sense of gender identity and/or sexual orientation.
DISCUSSION
Male homosexual activity has been occurring throughout recorded history. It appears to have been widespread and unremarkable in Ancient Greece. Many other cultures, however seemed, to regard it as an intolerable perversion with participants risking draconian punishments including the death penalty Little historical information is available about female homosexuality, which seems to have been able to operate “under the radar” with few legal consequences. One of the possible reasons for this might be the extent to which people were horrified by the act of sodomy (anal sexual penetration) which is more likely to occur in male homosexual relationships. May first world democracies have now decriminalised homosexuality. There are notable exceptions, however. In Russia, for example, homosexuality remains illegal and is pursued with the full force of the law. This is also the case in numerous developing countries.
The following timeline the tracks Australian legal history relating to homosexuality.
1533 – Britain passes The Buggery Act
1788 – The British colonise Australia and import their legal system, including anti-homosexual laws.
1828 - Britain replaces The Buggery Act with the Offences Against the Person Act - buggery remains a capital offence until 1861, though the last executions were in 1835.
1901 – Australia federates. State and territory governments adopt variations of the UK's anti-homosexual laws.
1949 – Victoria downgrades anal-sex from a crime punishable by death to a crime punishable by 20 years imprisonment.
1978 – Australia’s first Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras
1980/81 – Victoria decriminalises male acts of homosexuality.
1983 - NT decriminalises male acts of homosexuality.
1984 - NSW decriminalises male acts of homosexuality.
1985 - Queensland passes legislation banning bars from serving alcohol to "perverts, deviants, child molesters and drug users," a group likely intended to include homosexuals.
1985 - ACT equalises ages of homosexual and heterosexual ages of consent.
1990 - WA decriminalises male acts of homosexuality.
1990 - Sodomy decriminalised in Queensland
1997 - Tasmania formally decriminalises homosexuality.
This would suggest that societal concerns about homosexuality and bisexuality are decreasing, particularly amongst younger Australians. There seems to be an increasing acceptance that gay, lesbian, and bisexual attraction are private matters which present no more of a threat to society than heterosexual attraction. Mass and social media is now dealing openly with issues of sexual orientation which may result in less anxiety about something that was until relatively recently a taboo.
It is possible that this clear trend may have so alarmed some conservatives that they felt compelled to mount a rear- guard action. Conversely some LGBTQIA activists may have been emboldened by the progress that they have witnessed and, feel that is both safe and opportune to re-double their efforts.
Concluding Comments
Like many other democracies, Australia seeks to maintain a balance between a number of different attributes including:
Human Rights
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Religion.
The Rule of Law based on an Independent Judiciary
The promotion and protection of Health and Wellbeing.
National Security
Economic Development and Wealth Creation.
Creating and maintaining this balance is a complex and demanding challenge which is exemplified when considering LGBTQIA issues. There is little doubt that social policies and legislation concerning LGBTQIA matters should embody the principles enshrined in Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, this is unlikely to be supported by assorted religious and secular conservative groups and individuals. In my opinion these conservatives should be free to express their views and should not be silenced political correctness branding them as homophobic. However, if what they say is deemed to promote hatred, persecution, or unlawful discrimination then they should be subject to legal sanctions.
I also believe that there more transparent and inclusive structures should exist to facilitate the development of social policies such as those relating to LGBTQIA. The parliamentary committee system used in New Zealand is an example of such an approach although it would be probably difficult to adopt this particular approach in a large geographically decentralised country like Australia.
SOME SUGGESTED READING
(Ctrl.+Click to read)
LGBTQAI 365 common terms
The biological basis of sexual orientation
Universal Declaration of Human Rights https://humanrights.gov.au/
New Zealand Parliamentary Engagement Strategy
Comments