Nathan (SS 110), I am a gay man too – a big flouncy queen (power bottom if you’re interested). You opine that Senator (the Hon. Penny Wong) is reluctant to take a stand on ‘gay marriage’, well darl, she has. Ms. Wong stands against it. Just because she is gay (oh sorry, a lesbian) does not mean there is any requirement for her to support the issue, and it seems clear that she doesn’t. Kind of like high profile people, who happen to be gay do not need to ‘come out’ for the benefit of the ‘gay community’, as some lunatics seem to believe.
*Editor’s note: Senator Wong expressed her support for marriage equality reform at the Sth Aust Labor conference.

Penny’s had plenty of opportunities for this change in her approach – all she ever had to say was that she would express her real beliefs in a conscience vote.
It’s great she’s finally taken this course of action, it will make a difference. Labor needs to address this issue or it will never re-discover its core values and will not win government in 2010. If that happens Penny can hold her head up high and the Plibersek’s of the party will be left to take the blame.
– Michael

For four weeks now, SSO has run the ‘STI check’ column, focussing on chlamyia. I applaud the inclusion of this column as the more correct info that gets out about STIs the better – however I was alarmed at the complete lack of mention of women and chlamydia anywhere in the past four columns.
After digging back through my old editions for the earlier columns and checking out the websites provided, it became clear that the columns were specifically intended for men who have sex with men – however this is really not apparent to the casual reader, and people who didn’t take the time to research further could presume that chlamydia was a men’s-only STI.
Women can get chlamydia and chlamydia can cause all sorts of complications such as pelvic infections and infertility. As with men, women with chlamydia may have no or vague symptons so it’s worth getting a check even if you are feeling fine.
More info can be found at or
— Fiona

The state-by-state approach is not a sound one, it will create a patchwork of varying legislation, as occurred with partnership registers.
Having said that, it is amazing the shop assistants union [SDA], with its many gay members, continues to actively shit on any gay and lesbian reform.
– Ben

The state-by-state approach is an interesting debate to be had. It keeps the issue alive over the next 12 months while we’re waiting for the federal ALP to get their act together.
However, should any particular state actually pass such legislation, we would be doomed to another six years to wait to get back to where we are now. It would give the federal Government the perfect ‘out’ to say the state’s have the power to do it “we can’t.”
Alternatively, the passage of state legislation may actually allow the issue to end up in the High Court and have the inevitable situation of the High Court ruling whether the consitution does actually allow the federal Government to legislate for same-sex marriage, or only allow for the “original intent” which was between a man and woman.
Regardless, the state-by-state process is a high risk, high value approach. It could be the answer to our prays, but it could also be the noose with which we hang ourselves. I dare say it may be the latter.
– Brian

© Star Observer 2022 | For the latest in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTIQ) news in Australia, be sure to visit daily. You can also read our latest magazines or Join us on our Facebook page and Twitter feed.