Binary Australia: Human rights boss supports the lie men can be women
Michael Barnett OAM
Human rights boss supports the lie men can be women
Australia Human Rights Commission president Hugh de Kretser believes supporting the lie that men can be women is essential for human rights and doesn’t conflict with women’s sex-based rights.
He said that referring to trans women as biological men amounted to a “denial of their existence” and sees no conflict between their rights and reality.
Melbourne-based group Parents of Adolescents with Gender Distress wrote to Mr de Kretser last week, taking issue with the AHRC’s Equal Identities report and “explainers” on trans and gender diverse young people’s rights. At his inaugural “Australian Human Rights Assessment” at the National Press Club on Wednesday, The Australian asked about the document’s endorsement of gender-affirming care for minors, including puberty blockers, despite major reviews overseas, such as the UK’s Cass Review, having found little evidence for these interventions in children.
“Do you accept that the science is unsettled and there are serious unresolved risks to a child’s rights, and questions over whether a child or adolescent can genuinely give informed consent to interventions that may affect their fertility and sexual function, and if so, how does the commission justify publicly backing the early medical intervention for gender distressed children, rather than urging governments to prioritise non-medical support while the evidence and long term outcomes are still in dispute?” Mr de Kretser was asked.
He responded that the commission approached the issue from a “human rights point of view”. “So if you look at the rights of the child, we prioritise the best interests of the child,” he said. “That is the compass that should guide decisions in this area: children’s right to health, right to wellbeing, and right to their best interests, and so those explainers that you’re talking about, the report that we’ve produced looks at the best available evidence around medical treatment.”
The best interests of the child?
Hardly. We would never affirm a child with an eating disorder, depression, or a tendency to self-harm.
Evidence from around the world continually proves that placing children on ‘affirmation’ pathways for gender distress is indeed harmful and results in irreversible damage that often fails to resolve the gender distress.
Yet de Kretser refuses to consider these points, elevating a child’s desires over facts.
A child in this country cannot consent to or understand the ramifications of underage marriage, tattoos, operating heavy machinery, or even crossing the road on their own in school zones without adult supervision.
Despite this the human rights boss defends children being able to make decisions about their bodies that can render them infertile, losing their sexual function and leaving them with very serious heart, bone and brain development issues.
Incredibly, he also supports the lie that humans can change sex, and that males who wish they were women should have access to female sex-based spaces, services and sports.
“I don’t see great conflict there. I see that improving the rights of women and improving the rights of trans women and trans men are equality objectives that we should aspire to, and we can have a debate and dialogue about some of the issues that you want to speak to.”
The denial of conflict is astounding.
Female athletes in this country are being forced to sign contracts to compete with males while promising not to object.
Female inmates are being sexually assaulted by violent male criminals in their own prisons.
Females are being forced to share private spaces with males exhibiting their sexual fetishes in bathrooms and change rooms.
This human rights boss must live in a bubble.
How is there no conflict when Sall Grover is penalised for operating a female-only app for women, or the Lesbian Action Group is told it must include males with fetishes in public meetings, or I am ordered to pay $95,000 in damages to two males in female sport?
There is a massive conflict when males who wish they were women and who live out their fetishes in public get to ride roughshod over women legally.
No one is denying their existence; we are simply asking that they live out their existence in male spaces, not female sex-based spaces, services or sport.