Gender Ideology

The Hon. S.L. GAME (15:32): I rise to speak today about gender ideology—the doctrine that preaches the belief that children can be born in the wrong body. I am on the record in this place as saying that I support the view that there are only two sexes, male and female. I have spoken publicly about the danger of the concept of gender fluidity, and I oppose it being taught in schools.

I am deeply concerned about the one-size-fits-all approach to gender affirmation therapy, and the lives it has irreversibly ruined. I believe that children and adults who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria have a medical condition that requires ongoing professional support, evidence-based treatment and the care that they and their families deserve. We need an inquiry into the gender curriculum being taught in schools, and an inquiry into the care of young people with gender dysphoria in South Australia.

Maintaining the family unit and ensuring the welfare of children is necessary for the wellbeing of society. Biological sex is a fundamental human identity. There is good reason why it is long established. Any attempt to undermine this by redefining gender can only be harmful. Gender-fluid ideology is causing untold harm, particularly to children and teenagers. It is condemning children to lifelong medical interventions, plastic surgery and hormone dependence. Irreparable damage is being inflicted on a generation of confused children wrongly diagnosed as transgender. These misdiagnosed children are not discussed by proponents of gender ideology, but that needs to change.

Affirmation therapy for gender dysphoric children places them on a pathway of lifelong medicalisation. This includes the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and irreversible body-harming surgery. Countries, including the US, the UK, France, Denmark, Finland and Sweden, are reviewing, re-evaluating and even banning affirmation treatment for gender dysphoria in children and adolescents. A Compass poll conducted in October 2023 on the question of gender affirmation mandates produced strong evidence of an increasing anti-woke sentiment in Australian society:

74 per cent of Australians oppose the use of irreversible puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones or body-altering surgeries on children under the age of 18;

78 per cent of Australians oppose primary school children being taught that they can change their sex and gender through social transitioning, puberty blockers, hormone treatment and surgery;

64 per cent of Australians oppose primary school children between the ages of five and 10 being taught about opposite sex and same-sex practices in the classroom as part of the curriculum;

74 per cent of Australians oppose boys who identify as girls being allowed to access girls' change rooms and sports teams and vice versa; and

77 per cent of Australians do not believe that teachers should be disciplined or lose their registration if they fail to use the preferred pronouns of a child identifying as a gender other than their biological sex.

Until recently, it has been generally accepted that gender is only a social construct while sex is a biological reality. Now we are told that gender identity is real while biological sex is now the social construct. If medical science is to recognise that gender identity determines sex in humans, how will the use of medicinal agents that have different effects on males and females be determined? Should the medical industry regulate that the proper dosage of medicine depends on the patient's gender identity?

Why are we being told to accept that feelings of gender dysphoria define reality? What is wrong with receiving help in coming to identify with and accept one's bodily self? Gender ideology dictates expressive individualism where people are free to do whatever they want and to find the truth however they see it. If gender identity is intrinsic, how can it be fluid? How can our reality be determined by our feelings when it comes to our sex, but on little else? I choose not to give in to extreme demands for society to accept subjective reality claims. While these claims are manifestly false, it will take the silent majority to raise their collective voice to prevent the spread of these harmful woke ideas.