In the article: Attack on Freedom of Speech (also published under the headline Women say they’re being stopped from speaking at a forum over opposition to Tasmania transgender laws) by Matthew Denholm
The Australian reported on a dispute concerning Women Speak Tasmania’s invitation to speak at a Human Rights Week event organised by the Tasmanian branch of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF).
According to the article, Women Speak Tasmania representatives Bronwyn Williams and Isla MacGregor had been invited to present a talk titled “Transgenderism and the impact on the human rights of women and girls.” At the time, the organisation was publicly campaigning against aspects of proposed Tasmanian gender law reforms then before Parliament.
The article reported that former Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commissioner Robin Banks, a supporter of the proposed reforms, had written to senior members of WILPF expressing concern about the organisation providing Women Speak Tasmania with a platform. According to the reported email, Banks argued that hosting the speakers could be viewed by many within the LGBTIQ community as an endorsement of views she considered harmful and warned that it could damage WILPF’s reputation. She also offered assistance in helping the organisation navigate what she described as a difficult situation.
Williams and MacGregor told The Australian they regarded the email as an attempt to “no-platform” Women Speak Tasmania and described it as an attack on freedom of expression and women’s ability to participate in public debate on issues affecting their rights.
Robin Banks rejected that characterisation. She told the newspaper that it had not been her intention to prevent the Women Speak Tasmania speakers from appearing, but rather to encourage WILPF to provide balance by including additional perspectives.
The article reported that WILPF confirmed the event would proceed with the Women Speak Tasmania speakers while also considering the inclusion of another speaker to provide an alternative viewpoint.
The report also outlined the broader context of the dispute, noting that Women Speak Tasmania opposed proposed legislative changes concerning birth certificates, legal recognition of gender, and anti-discrimination law, while Robin Banks was a prominent advocate for those reforms.
The article concluded by reporting that Robin Banks had characterised Women Speak Tasmania’s public campaign as harmful to members of Tasmania’s gender-diverse community, while Women Speak Tasmania rejected those claims and maintained that its advocacy was focused on protecting women’s sex-based rights.
Source: the Australian
Archive link: