This is from David and Roslyn Phillips of Family Voice Australia’s Voxpoint, August, 2016. “Is the Census – not to mention SBS – politically biased? You be the judge! An SBS TV journalist phoned FamilyVoice recently, wanting to interview us about the 2016 Census question on gender. In previous years, the Census has asked Australians whether they were male or female. But in 2016, we have been given three choices: male, female or “other”. “What do you think of this change?” the SBS journalist asked us. We replied promptly, with full references – saying (in part): The three gender options in the Census – “male”, “female” or “other” – officially endorse the unproven view that humans can have a sex different from that of the chromosomes in every cell of their body. When a boy, with male genitals and other sex characteristics, says he feels he is a girl, he is said to suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is not a condition he was born with. Research shows that identical twins may include one twin with gender dysphoria and the other without, even though each twin has the exactly the same genes and hormone exposure in the womb. Life experiences – including bullying by peers or older siblings, or mental illness in a parent, may contribute to this condition. Studies show that the vast majority of children with these feelings lose them before reaching adulthood. Encouraging irreversible interventions in childhood could be harmful. Gender dysphoria is similar to body integrity identity disorder, where a person feels uncomfortable with one of his or her healthy limbs, and seeks to have it amputated. Like gender identity disorder, body integrity identity disorder is a condition of the mind. It should be treated with compassion, but like other identity confusion issues, should not be affirmed. Gender dysphoria should not be given official endorsement in a Census question. But this compassionate, evidence-based answer was not what the SBS was looking for. A few days later the journalist got back to us, saying they no longer wanted an interview. They had decided to take a “slightly different angle”, she said, but declined to tell us what that angle was. Perhaps we did not fit the “bigot” image SBS was hoping to portray. Not long after this knock-back, The Australian (20/7/16) and other media revealed the irony that girls at Cheltenham Girls High School in northwest Sydney were no longer allowed to be called “girls”. At a staff meeting called to discuss the implementation of the controversial “Safe Schools” program, teachers were told they could be breaking the law if they did not support decisions of LGBTI (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Intersex) students. Terms such as “girls”, “ladies” and “women” were to be replaced by gender-neutral language. Daily Telegraph columnist Miranda Devine commented (19/7/16, in part): “This is presented as a way to make a small minority of LGBTI students feel comfortable, but its insidious effect is to impose a transformation of the traditional view of male and female. “We are told that it is bigotry to have a ‘hetero-normative’ view of gender as binary — male or female — or to believe that heterosexual attraction is the norm. But children who don’t go along with the illogical sexual and gender fluidity agenda are finding themselves excluded.” Miranda quoted Joe Carolan, a former maths teacher at Wollongong High School of the Performing Arts, another “Safe School”. He quit his job in protest at the program, saying the banning of “hetero-normative” language such as “mum and dad” is just the start. “The whole program is marketed as being about creating safe schools but it’s creating the opposite,” he said. “It’s promoting extreme gender ideology that’s harmful to students in adolescence who are already going through issues and this is complicating things a lot more.” Cheltenham Girls High has a significant number of Asian students whose parents have been deeply upset by the ostracism and bullying of those who disagree with the “Safe Schools” agenda. Chinese concern about “Safe Schools” is believed to be a key reason why two inner-west Sydney electorates with many Chinese constituents re-elected Liberal MPs, while nearby seats went to Labor. Labor had fully endorsed “Safe Schools”, promising to increase federal funding. By contrast, the Coalition announced significant restrictions, including a requirement for parental consent. Education minister Birmingham said funding would cease when the contract signed by Labor in June 2013 ended next year. But the evidence of harm is already so great that the program and its funding should be cancelled immediately.”

“Reprinted from VoxPoint by permission of FamilyVoice Australia, 4th Floor, 68 Grenfell Street, Adelaide SA 5000.”