|
senate vote 2021-03-16#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2021-03-18 13:52:52
|
Title
Motions — Gender Language- Motions - Gender Language - Concerns about "distorted" language
Description
<p class="speaker">Malcolm Roberts</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That the Senate—</p>- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2021-03-16.107.2) introduced by Queensland Senator [Malcolm Roberts](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/queensland/malcolm_roberts) (One Nation), which mean it passed. Motions like these don't make any legal changes on their own but are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.
- ### Motion text
- > *That the Senate—*
- >
- > *(a) notes that:*
- >
- >> *(i) our fundamental biology and relationships are represented through the following descriptors - mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister, boy, girl, grandmother, grandfather, aunt, uncle, female, male, man, woman, lady, gentleman, Mr, Mrs, Ms, sir, madam, dad, mum, husband, wife,*
- >>
- >> *(ii) broad scale genuine inclusion cannot be achieved through distortions of biological and relational descriptors,*
- >>
- >> *(iii) an individual's right to choose their descriptors and pronouns for personal use must not dehumanise the human race and undermine gender,*
- >>
- >> *(iv) Dr Lyons from Logan (Queensland) reports incidences of young children feeling stressed and panicked about whether it is okay to use the words boy and girl, and*
- >>
- >> *(v) pushing gender-neutral language is no replacement for appropriate emotional and psychological support for children while growing up; and*
- >
- > *(b) calls on the Federal Government to:*
- >
- >> *(i) reject the use of distorted language such as gestational/non-gestational parent, chest-feeding, human milk, lactating parent, menstruators, birthing/non-birthing parent, and*
- >>
- >> *(ii) ensure all federal government and federal government funded agencies do not include these terms in their material, including legislation, websites, employee documentation and training materials.*
<p class="italic">(a) notes that:</p><p class="italic">(i) our fundamental biology and relationships are represented through the following descriptors - mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister, boy, girl, grandmother, grandfather, aunt, uncle, female, male, man, woman, lady, gentleman, Mr, Mrs, Ms, sir, madam, dad, mum, husband, wife,</p><p class="italic">(ii) broad scale genuine inclusion cannot be achieved through distortions of biological and relational descriptors,</p><p class="italic">(iii) an individual's right to choose their descriptors and pronouns for personal use must not dehumanise the human race and undermine gender,</p><p class="italic">(iv) Dr Lyons from Logan (Queensland) reports incidences of young children feeling stressed and panicked about whether it is okay to use the words boy and girl, and</p><p class="italic">(v) pushing gender-neutral language is no replacement for appropriate emotional and psychological support for children while growing up; and</p><p class="italic">(b) calls on the Federal Government to:</p><p class="italic">(i) reject the use of distorted language such as gestational/non-gestational parent, chest-feeding, human milk, lactating parent, menstruators, birthing/non-birthing parent, and</p><p class="italic">(ii) ensure all federal government and federal government funded agencies do not include these terms in their material, including legislation, websites, employee documentation and training materials.</p> <p class="speaker">Jonathon Duniam</p><p>I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Jonathon Duniam</p><p>The government supports the rights of individuals to make use of any pronouns or descriptors they prefer while encouraging respect for the preferences of others. The government will use language in communications that is appropriate for the purpose of those communications and respectful of its audiences.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The question is that motion No. 1055 be agreed to.</p>
|