Rodney Croome . gay advocate

Heave ho

If Nicola Roxon is to rescue her shredded reputation she must appoint an LGBT health advisory committee.

Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, is in a pickle for selecting two gay-hate mongers to be mens’ health ambassadors.

Crikey.com identified mens' rights advocates Warwick Marsh and Barry Williams as co-authors of a document which calls homosexuality a pathology and accuses homosexuals of being more likely to abuse drugs, children and their partners.

The Age and the Australian quickly picked up the story, Roxon quickly responded saying she is disgusted by the claims in their paper, and at least one of the MHA’s quickly (and very disingenuously) backtracked.

You’d think Roxon would have learnt by now.

In 2004 she announced Labor’s support for banning same-sex marriage at an anti same-sex marriage meeting in Parliament House sponsored in part by the groups that Marsh and Williams represent.

That meeting degenerated into a hate-fest and Roxon was pilloried at LGBT community meetings across the country for lending it her credibility.

Even if the Marsh and Williams appointment was an honest mistake, that mistake will cement Roxon’s already-low estimation in the eyes of many LGBT people.

To recover some standing, Roxon must dismiss Marsh and Williams.

The views they have endorsed are precisely the myths and misconceptions which lead to increased levels of self-harm and suicide amongst young gay and bisexual men.

Further, she must show she takes gay health seriously by appointing an ambassador who is a gay mens’ health specialist or role model (a just-honoured Matthew Mitcham perhaps?), and establish a departmental advisory committee on LGBT health (such committees already operate in some states, but none exist nationally).

Once that’s done she needs to sit back and take a good hard look at some of the dubious, ideologically-motivated hate groups her Government felt the need to appease to win office.

It’s time to give them the heave ho.

For a petition to have Marsh and Williams removed visit this site.

*

Crikey isn’t the first to expose these men.

In October the Muriels highlighted a Senate Committee submission from the same fellows making the same claims about the evils of “gender disorientation pathology”.

I blogged on this made-up illness, and even noted its US source.

Two things are important about the fact this hate-mongering has now been exposed and condemned at a national level.

It is the first time, to my recollection, that these all-too-common myths and stereotypes about gay and bisexual men have been subject to such strong condemnation in the mainstream press. This can only be a good thing. The haters who had free rein under Howard will now think twice before infecting national debate with their bigotry.

Second, there is a remarkable similarity between the Marsh/Williams document and the case put to the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Tribunal by the Red Cross in defence of its current gay blood ban. Gay monogamy is a myth, gay men are irresponsible and diseased, same-sex attraction is a “lifestyle choice”, only 1.6% of the population is gay: all views of the Red Cross and all views today condemned by the national Health Minister and the national press as “disgusting”, “vitriolic” and “hateful”. Not only the gay blood ban, but all prejudice-based exclusions of LGBT people, just took a hard knock.

***

In other news,

The Human Rights Commission has called for submissions on "Freedom of Religion and Belief in the 21st Century", including “religion, cultural expression and human rights”.

Amongst other things, it wants to know

"How is diverse sexuality perceived within faith communities? How can faith communities be inclusive of people of diverse sexualities? Should religious organisations (including religious schools, hospitals and other service delivery agencies) exclude people from employment because of their sexuality or their sex and gender identity?"

If you would like to tell it, go to this site.

While you’re there you may like to note this…

The Federal Government’s new workplace laws, enacted this week, prohibit employment discrimination on the grounds of sexual preference.

This is fine except that discrimination is still allowed if it is

“…in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a particular religion or creed...” or if it is undertaken “…to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion or creed.”

This is exactly the green-light-to-religious-bigotry exemption that Labor included in its draft sexuality bill released while it was still in opposition (by coincidence, by Nicola Roxon).

It was wrong then, and it is still wrong.

Exemptions like this may have made sense 40 years ago when anti-discrimination law was new and untested. But they have no place in a 21st century law.

They especially have no place at a time when so much public money is being funneled through the kind of anti-gay faith-based "charities" that still practise horrific mediaeval rituals like exorcism.

Clearly this will be a major issue of contention when FedGov turns its mind to the kind of comprehensive national sexuality and gender identity discrimination law recently flagged by Senator Wong.

Just as clearly, the Government has a long way to go before it has shed its deference and/or adherence to the idea that religion has a privileged place in our secular society.