Channel 7 slammed by trans advocates for its Safe Schools coverage
TRANS advocates and allies have criticised Channel 7鈥檚 Sunday Night program for its recent coverage of the Safe Schools debate, saying that it provided a damaging platform for bigots.
On last night鈥檚 , Kirra Carmichael and her trans daughter Briella were interviewed about how the Safe Schools program had positively impacted their lives.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 understand why anyone鈥檚 putting them down, this could be anyone鈥檚 child,鈥� Carmichael said.
鈥淲hen your child comes to you and says I鈥檓 born in the wrong body am I meant to crush my child every day and say no you can鈥檛 live the gender you feel inside 鈥� what kind of parent would do that?
鈥淭hey don鈥檛 go too far, they save lives.鈥�
However, the program then featured noted homophobe Kevin Donnelly who had previously called LGBT people unnatural, along with mother-of-four Cella White who inaccurately said young kids were being exposed to highly sexualised content through the program.
鈥淚 just have a strong belief in biology, that sex and gender are binary, and I think anything else confuses children,鈥� White said.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 understand [Safe Schools] confusing children at such a young age, they鈥檙e all trying to develop healthily.鈥�
The program also dead-named Briella 鈥� referring to her name pre-transition 鈥� via voiceover multiple times.
The show comes after a recent petition signed by 5,000 people was , based on many false claims.
Author of trans children鈥檚 book Introducing Teddy, Jessica Walton, was also featured in the program and said it wasn鈥檛 portrayed in the way she was led to believe it would be when asked for the interview.
鈥淪ometimes the Australian media has this obsession with presenting a balanced view 鈥� every time an LGBTI person speaks about their identity, they need an anti-LGBTI bigot,鈥� she said.
鈥淚 was really disappointed that they included extreme anti-LGBTI bigots like Cella and Kevin, and gave them a platform to misrepresent Safe Schools.
鈥淭he story of Briella and her family was wonderful and they didn鈥檛 need to surround it with bigotry.鈥�
Trans advocate Jo Hirst said it was damaging to portray the story as a valid debate, and even more so to give increased airtime to those against Safe Schools.
鈥淭he Sunday Night program using our children as tabloid fodder to boost their ratings is at best irresponsible and at worst extremely dangerous,鈥� she said.
鈥淭hey had hounded me to part of the program and I said no unless they could assure me it would be positive, and they couldn鈥檛.
鈥淚t鈥檚 a very dangerous thing to do for ratings, as there were so many inaccuracies 鈥� the only reason Safe Schools go to primary schools is when there鈥檚 a trans child so they can help work out policies to support the child.
鈥淭he program misled the audience to believe there was sex education at that level but no.鈥�
Hirst added that Cella White used to troll her on Facebook and send her horrible transphobic messages on Twitter before she deleted her account, and that Kevin Donnelly was wrongly portrayed.
鈥淭here have been guidelines set up by medical and health professionals about how to support gender diverse children,鈥� she said.
鈥淭he airing of opinions by someone like Kevin as though he鈥檚 one of these professionals is misleading.鈥�
Fellow trans advocate Leanne Donnelly said she didn鈥檛 watch the program after finding the promotion for the episode frightening.
鈥淎s the parent of a transgender kid I perceived a tone that indicated the program was anti-Safe Schools and anti-respect for trans kids,鈥� she said.
鈥淐hannel 7鈥檚 slant and twist and use of uneducated commentators may have scared other families from coming forward in the future.
鈥淚f others saw only the promo and not the program, their glimpse of Safe Schools could be negative when in fact Safe Schools is a wonderful appropriate resource.鈥�
Trans person Ti Butler said it was disappointing to hear the misinformation about Safe Schools presented by not only those interviewed, but by the presenter as well.
鈥淚鈥檇 love to know where the allegation that Safe Schools includes a 鈥榩olicy of sexual openness鈥� came from 鈥� it seems that line was a direct attempt to infer children are being abused, and it was used not by a guest but by the reporter, presented as fact,鈥� they said.
鈥淧arents against the Safe Schools program have probably never met or known anyone who is LGBTI are just scared of something they have no awareness of.
鈥淪eeing a program like Safe Schools exist means the world to me.
鈥淲hen I was at school I didn鈥檛 have the words to explain who I was, and I was terrified to tell anybody for fear of how they might react.
鈥淪afe Schools means kids going through what I went through don鈥檛 have to live in feat of the very person they are.鈥�
In Australia聽545 schools are currently registered for the Safe Schools program.
It was again heteronormative behaviour at its best. Referring sex education linking to LGBTIQ community. When it’s a education system to support all families and provide a safe place for all to attend.
It was amazing to me a parent with disability child, had such a narrow view because it is clearly obvious because safety, didn’t effect her anymore these things that effect LGBTIQ kids don’t exist. Yet her bigot views heard loud and clear. Especially her views on bathrooms which again was surprisingly a narrow perspective.
Same gendered bathrooms exist in family homes, in gyms, disability, and with mass events with porta loos. Yet bring this into schools some views how it’s politically minded by the LGBTIQ community. From a business perspective it saves money. One stop for all. And most that have this is place already no one really cares.
The only real thing any of us care about even now as adults is, close the door! That goes for bigoted behaviour as well.