THIS IS NOT ABOUT TELSTRA
Point to ponder:
Maybe the Government doesn’t want to change the law to grant homosexual people equal discrimination rights, because if we were able to make complaints under any discrimination category (rather than just employment), we could then complain to the Australian Human Rights Commision that our human rights have been violated by the Australian Government itself.
Being denied the ability to Marry because of where you are positioned in a social demographic, is a denial of personal liberty and an intentional thwarting of the potential for one’s own individual happiness.
When I discovered that the Australian Human Rights Commission would not hear any sexual preference discrimination complaints (other than employment complaints), I wrote the Minister Tanya Plibersek a Letter.
I was stupid, in that I mentioned the Telstra Ad that had spurred me to look into making a complaint when I wrote the letter, and of course, this is what The World and Tanya focused on.
I asked Tanya to explain to me why there was a discrepancy at www.humanrights.gov.au surrounding sexual preference discrimination. Tanya had assured me in person a few weeks earlier that there were NO DIFFERENCES between Homosexual people and Heterosexual People in terms of Government Policy (Apart from Marriage). So I was shocked and confused to find this discrepancy on their website.
My issue is that the Australian Human Rights Commission WILL NOT handle a complaint made about Sexual Preference Discrimination (Unless it is specific to Employment, and only employment).
Why can’t they handle sexual preference complaints?
Because it’s the Law.
Who can change the Law?
Politicians.
Who is a politican?
Tanya Plibersek.
What does Tanya Plibersek say about the fact that the Australian Human Rights Commission is bound by a discriminatory law that has supposed to have been fixed?
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for emailing me with your concerns about the Human Rights Commission’s scope for responding to discrimination based on sexual preference.
While I share your opposition to discriminatory advertising, the ability of the Human Rights Commission to respond to complaints is governed by acts of parliament, in this case the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986. Advertising is not a jurisdiction covered by any of the four Acts administered by the Commission – including sex, race and disability.
I would recommend you take up your complaint with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (www.acma.gov.au) since they are the appropriate body to represent your interests in this case.
Thank you again for emailing me, I appreciate you raising your concerns with me.
Best wishes,
Tanya
The Hon Tanya Plibersek MP
Federal Member for Sydney
Because I was stupid enough to preface my letter by mentioning Telstra, Tanya went on to give me advice on how to complain about the Telstra Commercial. I really wish I had not mentioned it, because it subsequently meant that Tanya did not answer my question as to WHY the Australian Human Rights Commission is not legally capable of handling Sexual Preference Discrimination complaints that fall outside of the realm of Employment Issues.
I want to know why this law has not been changed?
I will have to respond and ask Tanya again.
If you choose to comment on this Article, do me, the world, and yourself a favour, and don’t mention Telstra or their stupid Ad.
08/01/2009 Permalink
Hi there,
I see your current point and think it’s valid, but the fact is that the whole issue was apparently spurred by the Telstra ad, and people aren’t going to forget that. The ad itself simply wasn’t offensive, and those who are offended by it (who I can only assume are few and far between) need to realize that they are clearly the more sensitive types and do, in fact, need to “get over it”, for lack of a more sympathetic term.
So even if your current position is one that should be addressed, it’s not going to be discussed seriously at this point. Sad, but true. I’d say just let it go and start again from a new angle if this is something you’re serious about.
And not that it should make much of a difference, but I am a gay man myself. And I was sent the link to the ad and associated news stories by one of the many gay men who was responsible for creating the ad in the first place.
Cheers.
Zander
19/12/2008 Permalink
Andrew.
So far there have been some actual, ‘real’ comments that have been posted by people who have indeed read what you’ve written, and those are the ones that matter.
How indicative of ‘non-homophobic’ Australia that, as soon as the opportunity presents itself through what is essentially the tabloid media, all the anger and hatred is vented behind the mask of internet anonymity. Such as the one above, no doubt written by someone who is a bona-fide proud Aussie.
The treatment you’ve copped has been a fucking disgrace and a real wake up call as to how developed the people of this country like to think they are. Australia’s history has shown that as soon as a serious issue is brought up regarding rights and/or equality, out come the cavemen with their rocks and spears. Fuck them. And given that it was the Telegraph that decided to misrepresent you in the first place, I suppose you can’t expect the highest of standards in terms of readership of your blog then, eh? These idiots are setting THE COUNTRY back 20 years if not more (or should that be 200?)
As a God-believing hetero male, I apologise on behalf of all those so-called ‘religious’ folk who have abused you so disgustingly with such passionate vitriol, especially right upon Christmas time. If their ‘faith’ encourages such vitriol, fine, but it is not representative of me or the decent human beings out there with/without a spiritual persuasion. At the end of this whole sordid saga, the real people who matter will be the ones by your side. You have our support, let the haters hate, it’s all they’re good for.
19/12/2008 Permalink
What a crock of shit, you do not have rights and should not have rights you sick twisted faggot. for fuck’s sake see a doctor you’re not well…..