Flinders gets festive

SNIFFER DOGS
Fair enough to have Police and their three sniffer dogs at the entry of a dance party. Why I ask though, such a waste of police and resources!
But on Saturday at Summer Gay Day the police and their three dogs then proceeded to patrol around inside the party sniffing us all. Such an invasion I ask. It was a wonder the Police and their three dogs were not thrown into Lake Kippax. It would have made my Summer Gay Day! There were some very irate and angry partygoers due to this internal party patrolling by sniffer dogs.
And having police and their sniffer dogs at parties will end up with a tragic end to a partygoer who swallows all their drugs prior to going into a party.
It is about time the Government and the police realise drugs are used at dance parties. And we know what we are doing by taking these drugs. It is our choice and yes we are responsible citizens with excellent jobs. There is usually no violence at our dance parties. But at straight parties, with some drug use, but lots of alcohol consumption there is violence galore. When will common sense on drug use come into play?
-” Paul, Surry Hills

JUST DROP IT
A very big (cynical) thank you to security and the very intimidating wall of police and sniffer dogs at Summer Gay Day for confiscating my friend’s eye drops. Someone could have been killed if this life-threatening substance got through unchecked. And a (sincere) thank you to all involved for organising a fantastic day. Thoroughly enjoyed myself.
-” Luke, Surry Hills

BAD CUT
The Deputy Prime Minister’s partner, Tim Mathieson, has been appointed as a paid men’s health ambassador, by the Federal Minister for Health, Nicola Roxon. And today I read that two other men’s health ambassador appointees have endorsed ignorant, anti-gay views, such as homosexuality is a mental illness.
Mr Mathieson said he believes his experience as a hairdresser has qualified him for a role in advising on men’s health policy. He said this was because men had opened up to him while he trimmed their hair more than to a psychologist or psychiatrist.
I have been working with men in hospitals and community health services for 20 years as a qualified social worker, including working with men living with HIV/AIDS, mental illnesses and men who have suffered strokes and survived cancers. On a daily basis I discussed with these men and their families the intimate details of their health concerns.
I doubt that the conversations Mr Mathieson has had while cutting men’s hair is more revealing and unguarded than the expressions of distress and fear I and other qualified counsellors are confronted with in our work. I would also add that while Mr Mathieson might hear about health concerns from his male hairdressing clients, he’s hardly in a position to offer any useful assistance or advice, beyond a suggestion of hair length or whether to keep the sideburns or not.
It could be argued that Mr Mathieson has something to offer men’s health policy makers, by the simple fact that he is a man. However it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Mr Mathieson’s appointment is not based on the fact that he has a penis, but rather where he puts it.
It was reported that Mr Mathieson and the other health ambassadors’ role will be to talk to men about why they are reluctant to seek medical assistance. I would suggest one of these reasons is men’s loss of faith in the effectiveness of health services to meet their needs. I would further suggest that Mr Mathieson’s acceptance of a paid position as men’s health ambassador, with the inevitable perception that he has been granted this position because of his relationship with the Deputy Prime Minister, will only further erode men’s confidence in health services and the policy makers who are responsible for delivering them.
As for the hateful and ill- informed homophobic views of two of the other appointees, can the Health Minister please provide an explanation of how such people will be used to inform HIV/AIDS policy? Or are we to assume they will simply see this area of health as governed by the wrath of God?
Nepotism, ignorance and homophobia are now to underpin federal policy on men’s health. And we are just a few days out from this government’s one year anniversary. Now I wish I hadn’t voted for them.
-” Robert, Newtown

THINK TWICE
I think it’s obvious that those in our community who are reliant on welfare assistance are fairly stigmatised. The negative impact on them as most same-sex couples benefit from the recent reforms is an issue I raised years ago when gay marriage first began to arouse excitement.
Naturally, there was little interest in those who will lose out. The response was why should GLBQTI couples have any special advantage?
The answer is that acts of positive discrimination are allowed for under anti-discrimination laws, based on the premise that justified discrimination is needed in some situations for disadvantaged people to have the opportunity to become equal within society. We should have been lobbying for the implementation of new terms in the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth). such as couple relationship, de facto relationships and registered relationships etc, in order to spare those on welfare the loss of their income. In other words, a caveat that recognises different levels of relationships. No one was interested, in the rush to the bridal registry. No one is interested now.
ACON responded that they had little to do with Centrelink but suggested there be a period of adjustment.
Senator Ludwig, Minister for Human Services, suggested that such couples caught up in the welfare nightmare might require some independent advocacy support. And good luck with that.One in three PLWHA is still living in poverty, and the loss of their welfare benefit will be a disaster for them.
Centrelink is not looking at all the factors that indicate that no relationship exists -” it makes judgements based on moral, not legal, grounds and prejudicial attitudes. The reasons that many of the dis-advantaged share accommodation include considerations such as physical security, isolation etc, and the high costs of renting alone. They are more important considerations than gay marriage.
Centrelink will look at where they live and who they live with, their financial arrangements, who they socialise with, any sexual relation
ships they have, how their friends and family see them, etc. Centrelink can also find out this information by contacting neighbours, the DoH, estate agents, energy suppliers, council, or any person they think can provide them with details of a relationship, including BGF and ACON. They will rely heavily on you being dobbed in by callers to their new hotline.
So, here’s some free advice for GLBQTI couples where one or both are on benefits. Do not register your relationship. You cannot afford the luxury of same-sex partner recognition that the rest of the community does. Obviously a person will automatically be considered to be the de facto partner of another person if they are in a registered relationship.
While I am not affected by these changes personally, I like to think that community means that we look after each other, particularly our most vulnerable, not whether you wear Zanerobe and hang out at Stonewall. After all, there but for the grace of some higher power, perhaps, might go any one of us.
-” Shayne, Potts Point

DEAR MR REES
I’ve noticed, as I’m sure you have too, the turbulent economic times we are living in.
The talk of recession, or worse, depression, seems to be getting louder and louder, and with consumer confidence plummeting, it’s difficult to see how we’ll avoid it. Comrade Rudd has been going on about handouts and bailouts and the War on Recession. He just wants us to spend more money to lift Australia out of the doldrums. I’ve noticed that you’ve had your fair share of troubles too, what with the $900m deficit, and so on. Well, Mr Rees, have I got the ticket for you.
You may remember, back when you were just the Minister for Toongabbie, that same-sex marriage ban that Howard forced on the gays and lesbians. Well, in light of the fact that Comrade Rudd is unlikely to overturn that, it falls to the states to implement a state-based civil union partnership scheme. I know that Mr Hatzistergos has dealt with this before, but let’s look at it this way.
NSW is in $900m deficit. Rudd wants us to spend more. Imagine if NSW implemented the first state-based civil union scheme. It would be an instant vote winner with the gay community, and given our reputation with the pink dollar, why not capitalise on that? If NSW were the only state with one in place, people from all over Australia would flock here to get their civil union.
That means money, people. Not just the licence, but catering, floristry, the works. It’s not like gays and lesbians would suddenly become stingy once they were granted the right to be recognised as a legal couple. And remember, with our divorce rate, at least 1/3 would likely be divorcing within two years, meaning more dollars into the system. Who gets that $3000 Armani jacket?
Of course, you’d make sure that priests and rabbis and such who refused to legally bind these people wishing to do so under the scheme weren’t sacked or whatever as a result. I can respect that. It’s their religion and their belief. Just so long as they respect the fact that gays and lesbians can still legally bind together in a civil ceremony. If it’s a state-based affair, and not a religious one, I can’t see what their objection would be.
So, I ask you, not just as a part of the gay and lesbian community, but as a New South Welshman and an Australian citizen to grant us the right of legal civil union recognition. Not just for gays and lesbians, but for all of us in this great country. To inject some much-needed cash into the NSW and Australian economies is a win-win for all of us.
-” James, East Hills

NO RIBBONS
Dear Mr Turnbull,
Although it was never in question that you would be wearing a red ribbon for World AIDS Day, it was disappointing to watch Senate Question Time today (Dec 1, ABC 1 from approx 2 to 2.30pm) and after half an hour not to have spotted a single red ribbon on any Opposition senators.
In contrast, the entire Government front bench wore ribbons, and many of the senators behind them. If any Coalition members were actually wearing them, they were very well camouflaged.
A call to Senator Minchin’s electoral office in South Australia drew a blank as to why he, in particular, chose not to wear one.
Given that World AIDS Day is a well-publicised, international event of many years standing, and that the UN Secretary General stated in his 2008 World AIDS Day message that it is as real, as urgent as ever to lead, empower, deliver on AIDS, why have Coalition senators so obviously refused to wear the ribbons?
-” Scott, Paddington

WELFARE RORTING
The long-winded letter by David (SSO 946), in which he calls people from Centrelink parasites, and urges people to use false names, is typical of those in the gay community who have been exploiting the inequality in the recognition of same-sex relationships to claim benefits which have never been available in recognised relationships.
Equality will bring with it certain responsibilities, and it will be a big wake-up call for some. For too long, many gay couples have been quite happy to claim benefits in relationships where joint income is quite high, and they are often the first to join protests, marching to the beat of equality.
My long-term partner and I have always worked and paid our taxes, our rent, and our medical expenses. When one or the other is temporarily not working or under financial strain, the other steps in with support. That is what a relationship is all about, and it is how heterosexual couples have always had to cope.
We know gay couples in which one partner does nothing or very little and claims either unemployment benefit, rent assistance or invalid pension due to HIV while being seemingly healthy enough to go out half the week partying, while the other partner gets 80 or 90k per year and is quite happy to share the spoils of his partner’s tax-funded indulgence.
David, if your 30-year relationship looks like coming to an end purely because you will suddenly be subject to the same financial equality which has always applied to most of the population, than your relationship must surely be based on nothing more than the free financial ride.
If equality puts an end to the rorting of the welfare system by many gay couples, I say bring it on.
-” Jeff, Chippendale

FREE VIAGRA?
I am an old queen.
I have HIV and I’m not too flash.
I live with my ex-lover, also with HIV and very sick.
I hear Mr Rudd’s Centrelink is going to cut my pension by $45 a week because I share a flat with a friend.
I have no feeling of ill-will or jealousy to anybody who is not in our boat. We are both crook and have made mistakes. Our fault alone.
I live with my ex-lover because we are compatible. He’s honest, I love him still and he’s a good cook.
I am told if I want to keep my $45 per week, we will have to live separately.
I thought we would turn to Premier Rees’ Dept of Housing for help. Big mistake. I’m sure they wrote the book on reverse racism, homophobia and double-meaning words and enjoy stripping us of any shreds of dignity or self-respect we had left. We left that office in fear! We went home, held each other and cried.
I don’t know how we can be classed as a couple when we can’t have sex.
I haven’t seen my sexual organ angry for 20 years or so.
I would be willing to allow Mr Rudd’s appointed Centrelink person to watch us attempt this act of coupling. If we fail to couple, will we be exempt from getting a reduced pension?
I wonder if Mr Rudd’s Centrelink supplies free Viagra.
I wonder if Mr Rudd’s free Viagra would react with my nine pills a day or my flatmate’s 15 pills.
I penned this letter after reading David’s terrifying letter last week (SSO 946). You’re not alone, David.
I don’t know how we will cope when Mr Rudd’s Centrelink takes $45 per week off our pension.
I would love a cup of tea with you, David. I have a used teabag we could share (No Frills, of course).
-” Name and address supplied