• Stop Mark Latham's Anti-Trans Education Bill!
    Young transgender people face enough hardship without the attacks of transphobic politicians. More than half of non-binary and transgender youth have considered suicide, according to studies [1] - and that's why it's vital that we ensure this harmful bill is voted down. The Education Legislation Amendment (Parental Rights) Bill 2020 would "prohibit schools, teachers, and training courses from teaching gender fluidity", which the bill defines as “a belief there is a difference between biological sex and human gender and that human gender is socially constructed.” This means that a teacher or counsellor would be sacked and disaccredited if they: a) used a students' preferred pronouns b) mentioned transgender issues in the classroom c) opposed transphobic bullying in the playground d) did not hide that they themselves were transgender Although Mark Latham may seem like a fringe crackpot, he is a powerful figure in state politics. Latham's anti-trans bill now has the open and uncritical support of the NSW Liberal parliamentary secretary for education. [2] In December 2020, he got his way with a "clean out" of 42,000 professional development courses for teachers based on whether they taught gender and sexuality content. [3] A second bill by Latham, which acts as a state version of the federal government's proposed "Religious Freedoms" bill, would give bigots in public positions immunity from consequences of spouting their anti-LGBTI, anti-abortion and anti-women bigotry. This bill has been supported by 11 of 14 members of a parliamentary committee, including 3 out of 4 ALP members on the body. [4] All of this shows that this is not a matter of letting the politicians stop him. If we do not challenge Latham publicly, his bills will only appear more and more safe for other MPs - especially the huge Liberal majority - to entertain them, and eventually pass them either in part or in whole. The community must come out publicly and in large numbers to defeat this bill, and put pressure on all politicians to back down from his discriminatory legislation. References: [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawnstaceyennis/2020/07/15/largest-survey-of-transgender-and-nonbinary-youth-says-more-than-half-seriously-considered-suicide/?sh=2444b33f3404 [2] https://alastairlawrie.net/2021/03/11/nsw-liberal-parliamentary-secretary-for-education-supports-bill-to-erase-trans-kids/ [3] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/20/is-mark-latham-running-education-policy-in-nsw-no-but-the-direction-is-concerning [4] https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/shield-not-a-sword-committee-backs-new-religious-freedom-laws-20210331-p57fni.html
    383 of 400 Signatures
    Created by Community Action for Rainbow Rights
  • Kmart: Replace the "boys" and "girls" clothing sections with an inclusive kids' section
    Young children are told which colours, clothing styles and even interests they are permitted to have through the choices they have available in their respective gender’s clothing department. Many parents of young boys will tell you their son loves pink, rainbows and flowers but simply cannot wear clothes in these styles like girls do without taking them from the girls’ section, which sends them a strong message that the things they like are “wrong”. Similarly, many parents of girls lament the lack of dinosaurs, trucks, and non-frilly styles in the girls’ section. This is a problem that has already been addressed by many smaller and independent retailers, who have done away with “girls” and “boys” sections entirely, in favour of an inclusive children’s one. It is time for Australia’s biggest retailers to follow suit. Nobody really believes that boys’ interests are limited to cars, diggers, dinosaurs and sharks. Nobody honestly thinks girls only like rainbows, flowers, unicorns and ice cream. Nobody reasonably considers certain colours to belong exclusively to a certain gender. Enough. Get rid of the gender separated clothing sections, and let kids choose exactly what they like without arbitrary boundaries. _________________________ FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ***Why can’t you just pull things from the opposite section?*** Firstly, that’s not always possible. Cut and style are issues (consider e.g. a boy who wants a colour or pattern from the girls’ section but doesn’t want the fitted cut). More importantly, having the clothes separated in the first place sends a strong message to kids that there is an appropriate or a “normal” way for them to dress based on their gender. Any child who wants to wear something from the “other” section gets a strong message that their desire is, at the very least, “weird”, and at worst, straight-out wrong. We can’t expect a young child to overcome these arbitrary barriers on their own. If we truly believe that it’s OK for boys to wear pink, and for girls to like cars and trucks, then let’s do away with two sections and let them pick exactly what they like. ***But sizing for boys and girls is different!*** What many refer to as “sizing” is really a difference in the style and cut of clothes. There is no difference at all in sizing for young children (in fact, designers use one form/mannequin for girls and boys). As they get older, children’s bodies change shape - but they change as much from each other as they do from those of the “other” gender. We are all very different from each other in our body sizes and shapes, which is why sometimes we struggle to find things that fit even though it is made for our gender. When clothes are sorted by style (e.g. fitted t shirts on one rack; box cut on another), and then by size, there is no issue in sizing at all. Consider the multitude of unisex kids’ and adults’ clothing companies (a quick google will return lots of them), who have no trouble with sizing. ***Won’t it be hard to find what I want to buy?*** Not at all! Clothing is organised by type, then by style or colour. Some shops already organise their clothes this way. So do a ton of online retailers of kids' clothing. We already organise toys by type, which used to be separated by gender. ***What do other parents think?*** Since this campaign began, parents have shared many examples of times they were frustrated with the kids' clothing options available in store - from a toddler's hat with a whale on it labelled "boys' hat", to the lack of bright colours in the boys' section, to the lack of practical, durable clothing in the girls'. ***I just want more variety; I don’t want to put both sections together.*** We agree that more variety in children’s clothing is absolutely needed generally. That is part and parcel of this campaign. Having two sections is a bit of a self-perpetuating gender loop - before designers even begin they have to choose if they're designing for the "girls" or "boys" section, which immediately limits their options and makes it more likely for them to "over-gender" the clothes. If we unify the sections we are encouraging much more variety in children’s clothes generally, and on the way we’re taking down any barriers that might cause a child to feel “wrong” for wanting clothes that previously “belonged” to the other gender. Win-win! ***Isn't it natural for girls to like e.g. pink and boys to like e.g. blue?*** No, it isn't. A hundred years ago it was the exact opposite - pink was considered "robust" and suitable for boys, and blue "softer" and appropriate for girls. Before that, parents dressed all young children in dresses - it was considered distasteful to gender them with clothing as this brought attention to their sexuality at such a young age. This all began to change in the middle of the 20th Century, largely as a reaction to male homosexuality. People believed that dressing boys like "little men" would stop homosexuality. Ha! In any case, we know that girls are not born with a love for glitter and unicorns. Similarly, infant boys show no aversion to pink, and no preference for dinosaurs over bunny rabbits. It's all made up. Why don't we let them have exactly what they like - glittery, neutral, bunnies or bulldozers?
    846 of 1,000 Signatures
    Created by Sarah Rogers
  • Preventative Health Screening - Group Bookings
    People tend to delay their own check ups because they don’t have others holding them accountable to make and attend appointments. If we were able to shift the focus from individualised health care to “get everyone together” and collectively book longer group sessions with friends, family and/or colleagues; and even combine the appointment with something fun and community-focused like a morning tea, a lot more people would probably make an effort to keep up to date with preventative/early diagnostic testing.
    2 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Eleanor Rhynsburger
  • COURT OUT! LOVE ALL!
    Everybody deserves to be loved, and sport should not be a platform to support and spread misinformation and discrimination against anybody. Full recognition should be given to sportspeople who promote inclusion and love, such as Evonne Goolagong Cawley, and the arena should be renamed after her, or, at the least be called the Love All Arena. The supporters of this petition stand in solidarity with the people of Burundi, especially in the LGBTQ+ community, and people all over the world who have endured human rights abuses and persecution. COURT OUT! LOVE ALL!
    69 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Ant Benedyka