Recently, former High Court Justice Michael Kirby came out in opposition of a plebiscite on equal marriage. He stated that it would set a dangerous precedent in Australia where MPs could opt out of making difficult and politically contentious decisions by putting such matters to popular vote.
I have to agree. Last year, Ireland held a referendum on marriage equality. I was one of the 62 per cent who voted "Yes". However, our victory was hard-fought and painful to those on both sides of the debate. And though we "won", I adamantly believe that holding a referendum on issues like this represents bad practice and weak leadership. It is also incredibly irresponsible, divisive and wasteful.
![Rory O'Neill as his alter ego Panti Bliss campaigning for the gay marriage plebiscite in Ireland.](/web/20160916094538im_/http://www.theage.com.au/content/dam/images/g/r/9/1/f/b/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.grgn3l.png/1473924008390.jpg)
Kirby believes that a plebiscite would drive hatred and abuse towards gay and lesbian Australians. He is not wrong. Not everyone who is unsure about marriage equality is homophobic but to ignore that homophobes exist is to ignore a very real problem in our society. And a plebiscite gives them tacit "permission" to promote their hateful views and in many cases hateful acts. I can easily draw the comparison with the UK Brexit vote which saw a rise in racist-motivated incidents and increased vocalisation by those who felt vindicated in their hateful ideals. This happened despite the fact that the majority of Brexit voters are not racist.
In Ireland, it was the same. As a member of the LGBTI community I felt like my value and equality as a human being was dissected in the public arena. And while a large part of the discourse was respectful, the old false equivalence of consensual adult same-sex relationships with paedophilia and bestiality was pervasive.
For me and my friends this was the first time in our lives that our identities were so thoroughly discussed in public. And for each of us it was deeply personal. There was something inherently offensive about having your relationships debated across media outlets. And the concept of having your civil rights validated by popular vote is not a comfortable one. It hurt us deeply and left us feeling raw and exposed. Many people we engaged with day to day, who we may have smiled and laughed with … just didn't quite believe that we deserved the same rights as them. We learned who our allies were.
We were placed front and centre in our homes, communities, schools and workplaces and asked to justify our existence. We also had to remain respectful and without anger, to be "balanced" in our approach. As though we did not have something very real at stake. It takes a superhuman strength to remain dignified when swathes of people you have never met question your ability to parent or imply that you are a danger to children.
In Ireland, every major political party, children's, women's and human rights organisations supported a "Yes" vote. But the "No" side was vociferous in its campaign. Their arguments were cutting. Rather than focusing on consensual adults seeking to enter into a partnership – most of us are raised to believe is the highest form of commitment – they focused instead on issues of surrogacy, adoption and the "morality" of same-sex relationships.
In turn, we became unified. We became closer with our allies and we had difficult conversations with parents, grandparents, neighbours and strangers. Our emphasis on our common humanity was the fundamental aspect of our successful campaign. This referendum was a litmus test for how we were viewed in Ireland. And while we won, we are all too aware that 38 per cent of Irish voters voted "No". Victory softened that number but if we had lost, that rawness would remain. We would "know our place" several steps down the rungs of society … and those wounds heal hard.
In the end, the plebiscite passed, as opinion polls had long indicated it would. The government was able to wash its hand of the cries of defeated "No" campaigners, and ignore the exhausted if jubilant walking wounded of the "Yes" campaign. The people had spoken after all, and the purpose of representative democracy was rendered moot. A centre right-leaning government that preached austerity was able to stand back and smile. Many saw it as an abdication of responsibility and accountability, of a government afraid of a backlash.
Now Australia looks to follow suite by scrambling to enact legislation to hold a referendum. To avoid enacting legislation granting greater equality, the Australian government is working around the issue rather than confronting it directly. Should the plebiscite fail, the LGBTI community won't simply go away and stop seeking equal rights, but a referendum will sow greater animosity and division. The hard-fought battle for equality and respect, earned since decriminalisation, will be frayed. From my Ireland experience, I know, relationships will be strained, painting a stark picture of a divided, conflicted and distrustful Australia.
Jensen Byrne is an international consultant on LGBTI and human rights issues.
3 comments
New User? Sign up