Extract from The Guardian
This
past week the nation again faced the nasty truth that a foul strain of
sexism exists in Australian culture. It lurks at a shallow depth, and it
takes but a little ripple for it to bob to the surface.
Yes, the frat boy behaviour exhibited by Jamie Briggs and Peter Dutton excited the nation’s commentariat. Rightly so, too, as neither man exhibited the judgment or conduct we ought to reliably expect from a federal minister in the 21st century. Their behaviour linked itself to undeniable and shameful evidence of misogyny and sexism in politics in recent times: Peter Slipper’s texts, reports into the sexualised and chauvinistic cultures in the NSW Labor party and the Liberal party of Australia, and Tony Abbott’s validation of what could only be described as an actual witch-hunt by an ugly mob.
And please don’t plead to me that Dutton acknowledged his actions and apologised. He only did so because he was caught out by his own stupidity. And don’t tell me it’s all OK because Samantha Maiden says she wasn’t offended. Why should she be? She’s a journalist at the top of her field, and she’s not embarrassed or shamed by the behaviour of others. Because a woman chooses not to be offended doesn’t make the offending behaviour alright.
Remember when Malcolm Turnbull said only days after taking the prime ministership that not all disrespect for women ends in violence, but all violence against women begins with disrespect?
I’m not claiming that Briggs and Dutton are on par with men who violently abuse women. I’m not claiming that any of the men who occupy high office and have been called out for their misogynistic actions are on a path to commit acts of violence. But I am claiming Turnbull’s words are true: a culture that disrespects women is a culture that accepts acts of violence against women.
In the midst of the hullabaloo about the immature and disrespectful behaviour towards women that Briggs and Dutton exhibited this week, all of us – including the prime minister – seem to risk forgetting that admonishment.
In this same week Queensland domestic violence services have seen a threefold increase in demand for services. To put that in raw numbers, that is 2,200 calls to family violence services since New Year’s Day. 2016 is not even a week old and already we are setting horrible new records.
I believe Turnbull really does care about the issue of domestic violence. He was right to call it our national shame. I also believe that Abbott meant it when he said that a real man doesn’t hit a woman.
But what have they done? The data is terrifying. According to the ABS in 2012, one in six women is subject to domestic violence. One woman is killed each week in Australia by her partner or ex-partner. Women from an Indigenous background or women who are intellectually or physically disabled face even higher risks. Women are at greatest danger when they make the decision to leave, and if there aren’t enough family violence services available at that time then the risk of being subjected to violence is magnified.
Annabel Crabb said that “if a man got killed by a shark every week we’d probably arrange to have the ocean drained”.
Australian of the Year Rosie Batty argues we should respond to domestic violence in the same way we respond to terrorism: then maybe the same flurry of action, legislation and funds that go into keeping Australians safe from Islamic State could go into keeping Australian women safe from terror, violence and death in their own homes.
I’m not discounting Turnbull’s commitment of $100m for domestic violence services. It is a good start. And by all means, Coag, take several years to develop that national advertising campaign to change cultural attitudes. But let’s be blunt: there is a war going on out there in Australian homes. Women, and their children, are facing violence and abuse on a scale that is revoltingly high.
In a war you do first things first. So let’s start by ensuring long-term, increased funding to meet rising demand for help. Let’s not leave calls unanswered or women without anywhere to go when they decide to leave. When some 2,000 women are ringing domestic violence services in four days in one state, that’s a cry for help to which we should hear and respond.
But here’s a blunt reality of government: if a problem can be ignored, it will be, especially if it is complex, multifaceted and expensive to solve.
Terrorism of the kind practised by Isis is comparatively easy for the Australian government to tackle. Our relative isolation from the Middle East and Europe and our high-quality police and security agencies means we do not face the same challenges and dangers as many other nations.
The federal government can strip a few people of their citizenship, pass a few tough-but-rarely-used laws and assure people they are now safer from a threat that really wasn’t all that threatening to them anyway in Frankston or Mosman or Stafford Heights. Especially when compared with the statistical likelihood of having the crap beaten out of them by their partner.
Deeds, not words.
That is how Emmeline Pankhurst exhorted her followers to acts of political violence 100 years ago to demand the right to vote for women.
A lot has changed for women since then. And yet far too much is still the same. We can reach the top offices in our land, and yet too many men see us as only objects for sexual gratification, as “mad fucking witches”, or as punching bags.
Turnbull said “we have to make it as though it was unAustralian to disrespect women. We must become a country which is known for its respect for women”.
Briggs and Dutton fell short of that standard. And if what’s going on in Queensland is any indication, the culture of disrespecting women is creating violent consequences.
So a genuine thank you for your words, prime minister. Now the women of Australia would like to see your deeds.
And women of Australia, let’s take note too: I’m not exhorting us to a Pankhurstian political violence campaign. We’ve got the vote. Next federal election, let’s use it to demand the government take greater action to make Australian women safer in their own homes.
Yes, the frat boy behaviour exhibited by Jamie Briggs and Peter Dutton excited the nation’s commentariat. Rightly so, too, as neither man exhibited the judgment or conduct we ought to reliably expect from a federal minister in the 21st century. Their behaviour linked itself to undeniable and shameful evidence of misogyny and sexism in politics in recent times: Peter Slipper’s texts, reports into the sexualised and chauvinistic cultures in the NSW Labor party and the Liberal party of Australia, and Tony Abbott’s validation of what could only be described as an actual witch-hunt by an ugly mob.
And please don’t plead to me that Dutton acknowledged his actions and apologised. He only did so because he was caught out by his own stupidity. And don’t tell me it’s all OK because Samantha Maiden says she wasn’t offended. Why should she be? She’s a journalist at the top of her field, and she’s not embarrassed or shamed by the behaviour of others. Because a woman chooses not to be offended doesn’t make the offending behaviour alright.
Remember when Malcolm Turnbull said only days after taking the prime ministership that not all disrespect for women ends in violence, but all violence against women begins with disrespect?
I’m not claiming that Briggs and Dutton are on par with men who violently abuse women. I’m not claiming that any of the men who occupy high office and have been called out for their misogynistic actions are on a path to commit acts of violence. But I am claiming Turnbull’s words are true: a culture that disrespects women is a culture that accepts acts of violence against women.
In the midst of the hullabaloo about the immature and disrespectful behaviour towards women that Briggs and Dutton exhibited this week, all of us – including the prime minister – seem to risk forgetting that admonishment.
In this same week Queensland domestic violence services have seen a threefold increase in demand for services. To put that in raw numbers, that is 2,200 calls to family violence services since New Year’s Day. 2016 is not even a week old and already we are setting horrible new records.
I believe Turnbull really does care about the issue of domestic violence. He was right to call it our national shame. I also believe that Abbott meant it when he said that a real man doesn’t hit a woman.
But what have they done? The data is terrifying. According to the ABS in 2012, one in six women is subject to domestic violence. One woman is killed each week in Australia by her partner or ex-partner. Women from an Indigenous background or women who are intellectually or physically disabled face even higher risks. Women are at greatest danger when they make the decision to leave, and if there aren’t enough family violence services available at that time then the risk of being subjected to violence is magnified.
Annabel Crabb said that “if a man got killed by a shark every week we’d probably arrange to have the ocean drained”.
Australian of the Year Rosie Batty argues we should respond to domestic violence in the same way we respond to terrorism: then maybe the same flurry of action, legislation and funds that go into keeping Australians safe from Islamic State could go into keeping Australian women safe from terror, violence and death in their own homes.
I’m not discounting Turnbull’s commitment of $100m for domestic violence services. It is a good start. And by all means, Coag, take several years to develop that national advertising campaign to change cultural attitudes. But let’s be blunt: there is a war going on out there in Australian homes. Women, and their children, are facing violence and abuse on a scale that is revoltingly high.
In a war you do first things first. So let’s start by ensuring long-term, increased funding to meet rising demand for help. Let’s not leave calls unanswered or women without anywhere to go when they decide to leave. When some 2,000 women are ringing domestic violence services in four days in one state, that’s a cry for help to which we should hear and respond.
But here’s a blunt reality of government: if a problem can be ignored, it will be, especially if it is complex, multifaceted and expensive to solve.
Terrorism of the kind practised by Isis is comparatively easy for the Australian government to tackle. Our relative isolation from the Middle East and Europe and our high-quality police and security agencies means we do not face the same challenges and dangers as many other nations.
The federal government can strip a few people of their citizenship, pass a few tough-but-rarely-used laws and assure people they are now safer from a threat that really wasn’t all that threatening to them anyway in Frankston or Mosman or Stafford Heights. Especially when compared with the statistical likelihood of having the crap beaten out of them by their partner.
Deeds, not words.
That is how Emmeline Pankhurst exhorted her followers to acts of political violence 100 years ago to demand the right to vote for women.
A lot has changed for women since then. And yet far too much is still the same. We can reach the top offices in our land, and yet too many men see us as only objects for sexual gratification, as “mad fucking witches”, or as punching bags.
Turnbull said “we have to make it as though it was unAustralian to disrespect women. We must become a country which is known for its respect for women”.
Briggs and Dutton fell short of that standard. And if what’s going on in Queensland is any indication, the culture of disrespecting women is creating violent consequences.
So a genuine thank you for your words, prime minister. Now the women of Australia would like to see your deeds.
And women of Australia, let’s take note too: I’m not exhorting us to a Pankhurstian political violence campaign. We’ve got the vote. Next federal election, let’s use it to demand the government take greater action to make Australian women safer in their own homes.
No comments:
Post a Comment