Same-Sex Discrimination

06/07/2011

The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (17:56): I wish to place on the record my brief but strong support for the Hon. Ms Franks’ motion, and to thank her for bringing it to the attention of the council. I will not take up too much time of the council as I wholeheartedly agree with the comments the Hon. Ms Franks made to this motion when she introduced it on 8 June, and I know that there is little point in rehashing her sincere sentiments.

As the Hon. Mr Wade has already pointed out, discrimination is something that plays a big role in my work, but I will not touch on that too much given that we have already had that covered. However, I would like to point out that I hope that there is a time when programs like Evolve and Inside Out are no longer needed.

I hope that in our lifetime we will be able to see a day when discrimination against people who are same-sex attracted and/or gender or sexuality questioning no longer exists. When that is the case programs like those run by the Second Story will be able to be put to rest. Unfortunately, it is clear that that time is not now. Discrimination is still rife out there and it is heart-wrenching for same-sex attracted people or gender or sexuality questioning people to be vilified because of who they are or who they love.

I have made speeches to this effect previously but I cannot say it enough. There is never a good reason to marginalise a healthy, consensual, loving relationship regardless of who the parties of that relationship might be, and there is never a good reason to belittle someone because of who they perceive themselves as.

These are basic individual rights that we should all be free to exercise and enjoy without feeling the weight of social stigma; and, to that end, I would like to mention how horrified I was at hearing the anecdotes the Hon. Ms Franks told when she introduced this motion regarding violence towards same-sex attracted people and/or couples. I know that it is a hackneyed phrase, and I would hope that it goes without saying to every person in this place, but violence is never a solution to anything.

To me, violence towards someone on the grounds of their sexuality, violence with the idea that we can bash a person’s sexuality out of them, is just as archaic as the idea that we could scrub the colour of someone’s skin off, or that we could get rid of a headache by drilling a hole in our head, as was the ancient Egyptians’ belief.

It is because these rights—that is, the right to be who you are and to be with the person you love—are so basic and so core to our ability to function as people that there is such terrible damage done when these rights are violated. When you are told that it is wrong to love the person you love or wrong to be who you are it is, of course, hard to carry on, regardless of how much self-esteem you may or may not have. Unfortunately, the voices of others can play a big role in how we see ourselves.

This is exactly why the Second Story programs are so important. By giving people a place to explore their sexuality and gender safely, and offering the opportunity to share the weight of discrimination and the joy of self discovery with others, the Second Story is providing a truly life-affirming service—and potentially lifesaving as well, as we have already heard. Without this service some of these young people would feel like there was no place to turn and no-one who wanted to share their pain.

As Ms Franks says in this regard, one-on-one counselling cannot replicate the value of the current Second Story model, and that is why group support should be retained and encouraged as an integral part of the programs offered. I believe that for as long as discrimination exists this kind of program should exist too, and for that reason I strongly support this motion.