The Australian Sex Party isn’t named well. Reading it, I think of the ‘More Beer Party’ at uni, and the various other single, silly issue parties which seemed to haunt the union building. So will it have policies as silly as its name? Either way, this is bound to be interesting. Before reading their policies, The Gruen Transfer mailing list sent out the adverts for some of the political parties. This was the offering from The Australian Sex Party:
To their policies!
Bring about the establishment of a truly national classification scheme which includes a uniform non-violent erotica rating for explicit adult material for all jurisdictions and through all media including the Internet and computer games. — Source.
While I don’t consider it a particularly hot issue, I do wonder why particularly violent games are fine, but games involving any nudity aren’t. The classic example was one of the Grand Theft Auto games where people complained that you could solicit sex in the game, then bash the prostitute to get your money back. The game was censored so you could only bash the prostitute… Even on television, sex seems to be more morally outrageous than violence.
Actually, I’ve done some digging on this. Here’s the description of the MA15+ classification given on the ‘Classifications Website’:
The content is strong. — Source.
Okay, so the government website isn’t terribly useful. Wikipedia is even more useless, because it’s quoting some invisible source. When I search for those quoted sections, all I get is copies of the Wikipedia page. Wikipedia editors will no doubt consider this proof positive that the content is accurate…
Thus, the National Classifications Code:
Classification decisions are to give effect, as far as possible, to the followingprinciples:(a) adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want;(b) minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them;(c) everyone should be protected from exposure to unsolicited material thatthey find offensive;(d) the need to take account of community concerns about:(i) depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexualviolence; and(ii) the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner. — National Classifications Code 2005, 1.
Which seems rather reasonable. Even rule 4 about computer games doesn’t seem to provide a reason why The Australian Sex Party would be concerned. Rule 4, item 1, is:
Computer games that:
(a) depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified; or
(b) describe or depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not); or
(c) promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence; or
(d) are unsuitable for a minor to see or play
So, in short, I’m confused.
To overturn mandatory ISP filtering of the Internet and return Internet censorship to parents and individuals. — Source.
I’m pro-filter (as discussed here).
We oppose the mandatory retention of all Australian users’ internet browsing history and emails by ISPs for at-will inspection by law enforcement agencies, and support strong judicial oversight over the ability of law enforcement to access individuals’ internet and email data. — Ibid.
At first, I went ‘Yeah, but think of the children!’ before I had a bit more of a ponder. At the moment, in order to access your telephone calls and mail, law enforcement requires a warrant. So why shouldn’t internet communications require the same? Actually, yeah. This policy is completely correct: why are they treated differently?
To bring about the development of a national sex education curriculum as a first step in preventing the sexualisation of children. — Ibid.
I don’t even understand what this means. I would have thought the first step in preventing the sexualisation of children would be to ban the products which create a demand for the sexualisation of children. I’m probably incorrect.
To enact national anti discrimination laws which make it illegal to unfairly discriminate against people or companies on the basis of job, occupation, profession or calling. — Ibid.
Doesn’t this already exist?
To create total equal rights in all areas of the law including marriage for gay, lesbian, bi sexual, intersex, and transsexuals. — Ibid.
100% agree and it’s already far too late.
Overturn racist laws that ban adults living in and visiting aboriginal communities in the NT from possessing erotic and sexual media. — Ibid.
This exists? So I couldn’t show ‘The Piano’ at a cinema in aboriginal communities? I tried to find more information but knew that I’d regret writing ‘erotica’ into Google. No good can come of that search term.
To enact national pregnancy termination laws along the same lines as divorce law — which allow for legal, no-fault and guilt-free processes for women seeking termination. — Ibid.
It’s an outrage that this isn’t already the case.
The listing of Viagra, Cialis and other drugs used to treat sexual dysfunction, on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. — Ibid.
Oh, hell no. There are medications which people desperately need which aren’t listed on PBS, particularly for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. It will be a cold day in a non-Dantean Hell before I support listing Viagra on PBS before serious medications.
Overturn restrictions on aid to overseas family planning organisations that reference abortion. — Ibid.
I’m shocked this restriction exists. After digging around, it seems that it doesn’t… Oh, you rascally Australian Sex Party and your drumming up of fake shock. Don’t play with my emotions like this.
- Convene a Royal Commission into child sex abuse in the nation’s religious institutions.
- Develop global approaches to tackling child pornography which focus on detection and apprehension of the producers of the material. — Ibid.
Both good ideas. These were listed under ‘Protection of Children’. What I find odd here is that a party which is promoting relaxed censorship — especially around material considered pornographic — doesn’t have a better fleshed out policy for women. The party’s shown that it takes children’s welfare seriously: why not women’s? The pornography and prostitution industries exploit women far more than they exploit children, but there isn’t the ramping up of protection frameworks for women in the Australian Sex Party’s policies.
Ending the tax exempt status for religions. — Ibid.
Make it so! Here’s my rant about tax exempt status.
Sanitarium is owned by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. But don’t expect them to be upfront about it on the Sanitarium website. You certainly won’t find any mention in the ‘About Us‘ section. It’s barely a mention on the Seventh Day Adventist Church’s website. So does Sanitarium pay the same corporate taxes as other, hard working Australian companies who aren’t religious? Are those companies playing on an equal field when it comes to the taxation framework?
Weirdly, despite being owned by a cult religion, I received a piece of chain mail which was hating on Muslims because school canteens were offering halal options. The e-mail ended with, ‘What’s wrong with good old Sanitarium?’ It’s odd that the e-mail would treat Muslims with extreme suspicion and yet give a Christian cult a free pass.
Out of the three so far, the Australian Sex Party is head and shoulders above the other two.
1) At least I know for what they stand.
2) There isn’t a huge amount which is objectionable.
3) They offer concrete outcomes.
So all you Greens voters out there, why not switch to a party you can trust?