Talk:LGBT rights in Australia

message: Article and information on adoption and summary tables been updated and sources. Still some areas that could be improved, but overall a much improved effort based on the previous criticism stated below; more encyclopaedic than it's ever been. Note similar updating in LGBT rights in (name Australian state or territory here) articles.
(Jono52795 (talk) 13:53, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 2013 article cleanup

message: The intro is poorly written, the result of several edits I'm guessing, and needs to be reworded to make it clearer. I would but honestly don't understand it. Cheers, Rothery 05:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: intro and whole article have been re-written.207.69.137.28 19:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: The Australian federal government has recently passed leglislation which removes discrimination in around 100 laws, hence the government finally reconising same-sex couples and there children. The current info on the website does not seem to acknowledge the updated federal leglistation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.127.41 (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've updated the intro and the Commonwealth section to take into account these new laws. Ikzing (talk) 04:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Information 

message: Why don't we have a section devoted to the parties and organizations whom support LGBT rights? Such as the Labor party which controls every single state government and the national government? --Saffron831 (talk) 04:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We do, at the top of the page. If you would like to get a list of supportive political parties, you're welcome to add them. I think the Greens may be more supportive than Labor. Ikzing (talk) 04:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The ALP can't realistically be labelled as supporting LGBT rights; a US politician with Rudd's record wouldn't be labelled as such. At best they can be said to partially support them. Rebecca (talk) 06:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: To the ALP's credit, they did eliminate financially discriminatory laws that the previous federal government would never even have considered, but they do not support gay marriage or various child-bearing rights... much like the US democrats. Timeshift (talk) 06:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opposition groups only? 

message: This article says, of MSM discrimination practices, “No other countries or jurisdictions have such policies or have repealed them”. The MSM blood donor controversy article lists many countries has having harsher restrictions then Australia! (at least in 2005). In addition, I recently gave blood in Germany and one of the questions I was asked is if I've had male-to-male sex (or female-to-male sex where the male's had male-to-male). —Felix the Cassowary 16:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  MSM blood donors? 

message: The New South Wales Government announced today, that they will be introducing a relationship register for same sex and opposite sex couples. It will be the same as the relationship registries in Victoria, Tasmania and the A.C.T.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.225.48.197 (talk) 05:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NSW registry announced 

message: This section duplicates some of the entries in Recognition of same-sex unions in Australia, so I have added a reference to it and ensured that these two sections are consistent. 
It would be better to refer to separate sections for Relationships/Adoption etc rather than duplicating these sections and maintaining them in two places (as these are areas of constant change). 
Updates for consistency and accuracy to this section:-
The State and Territory section to include NSW (Relationships Register Bill 2010 - Royal Assent received in 2010). 
Registered relationships convey "the same benefits" afforded to de facto couples in each of the states, according to LGBT Rights in New South Wales. Whether or not exactly the same benefits are afforded to same sex couples as de facto couples, is  not covered 
The paragraph now refers to "same-sex" couples rather than "de facto" couples, since "de facto" generally refers to the laws afforded to opposite sex couples. Some states (SA) have replaced "de facto" and categorised couples as "domestic partners", so the term "de facto" is still legally ambiguous.
Since this paragraph is referring to the new laws afforded to same-sex couples and not opposite sex couples, this distinction is important.
PjThompso 08:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In New South Wales, and in most other Australian jurisdictions, "de facto" does not refer only to opposite-sex couples, but now also includes same-sex couples. That is, the actual statutory definition of "de facto couple" is gender-neutral, so same-sex and opposite-sex de facto couples have the same rights. Ronline ✉ 14:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Registered Relationships 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :LGBT rights in Australia's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "lamb":
From Homosexuality: Michael Lamb, Ph.D.: Affidavit – United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (2009)
From Same-sex marriage: Michael Lamb, Ph.D.: Affidavit – United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (2009)
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:LGBT rights in Australia]] 

message: The topic begins with the follwing: "Family Law in Australia with regards to children is often based on what is considered to be in the best interest of the child. The traditional and often used assumption is that children need both a mother and a father, which plays an important role in divorce and custodial proceedings, and has carried over into adoption and fertility procedures, even though those assertions find no support in the scientific research literature.[81][82][83][84][85] In fact, the promotion of this notion, and the laws and public policies that embody it, are clearly counter to the well-being of children.[83] As laws within the whole of Australia since 1 July 2009 have only begun to recognise de facto same-sex couples under the Family Law Act 1975,[86]" However Wikipedia's policy is to write as neturaly as possible, and since there are clearly two different view points here- Traditional Family Law and the more recent view. The way it is currently written clears gives a bias towards the LGBT side. I propose rewriting the two sentences as follows, or something similar. "Family Law in Australia with regards to children is often based on what is considered to be in the best interest of the child. The traditional and often used assumption is that children need both a mother and a father, which plays an important role in divorce and custodial proceedings, and has carried over into adoption and fertility procedures, even though scientific research literature shows little support. [81][82][83][84][85] The research shows that the promotion of this notion, and the laws and public policies that embody it, can be clearly counter to the well-being of children.[83] As laws within the whole of Australia since 1 July 2009 have only begun to recognise de facto same-sex couples under the Family Law Act 1975,[86]" I'm not suggesting that exact wording, just something less bias.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.222.201.121 (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Less bias under Adoption and laws relating to having children. 

message: New SSM bill to be introduced next week? — kwami (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taz 

message: User:Sam56mas has asserted in an Edit Summary that "There are hundreds of Australian organisations using the terms LGBTQI and LGBTQIA. The Sydney Mardi Gras alone, by any measure, is one of the most notable such organisations in Australia. The utility of these variants is as equally relevant as LGBTI." A scout around of web searches certainly shows a multitude of blogs and Tumblr pages using those terms but, in my view, there is no evidence of hundreds of Australian organisations using terms other then LGBT, or LGBTI (or different orders of those letters). I don't wish to engage in an edit war, so I'm bringing this assertion here, in the hope that more evidence will be forthcoming. Trankuility (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this whole argument is really trivial. There are all sorts of variants in use, with LGBT or LGBTI the most common ones; to the extent we need to use the acronym that would be the obvious choice. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sort of trivial, I understand, until someone changes the name of the article and other people argue about the legibility of the change. The thing is, too, that it might be trivial to the LGBT persons included in an acronym, but organisations like ACON, QAHC, the National LGBTI Health Alliance and Mardi Gras had debates about including intersex people (a distinct different community) leading to their inclusion. The same happened historically with bisexual and trans people. There's no evidence of that with the "A", and the "Q" has been controversial in many settings. Trankuility (talk) 03:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novel terms 

message: The definition of intersex is wrong: "with the I denoting intersex people, born with atypical physical sex characteristics." No, a major group of types are born with typical sex characteristics but at puberty they develop toward the other sex. Intersex needs to be thought of in the complete context of sex: external genitalia, sex organs, hormones and hormone receptors and the development of secondary sexual characteristics. The page on intersex covers this well but doesn't do so well when it is put succinctly. Try intersex 'is a variation in sex characteristics including chromosomes, gonads, or genitals that mean an individual may not be distinctly male or female' Avoid the phrase "that do not allow an individual to be distinctly identified" as there is a very long history of medicine and family choosing identity for intersex people, heavily biased toward female and not very accepting of intersex as an identity for sex or gender. Ericglare (talk) 08:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Intersex term

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on LGBT rights in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227163241/http://www.centrelink.gov.au:80/internet/internet.nsf/individuals/same_sex.htm to http://www.centrelink.gov.au/internet/internet.nsf/individuals/same_sex.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110706112305/http://www.ssonet.com.au/display.asp?ArticleID=8583 to http://www.ssonet.com.au/display.asp?ArticleID=8583
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080221204149/http://www.news.com.au:80/story/0,10117,18693256-1242,00.html?from=rss to http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18693256-1242,00.html?from=rss
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080220030838/http://www.news.com.au:80/story/0,10117,18483128-1244,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18483128-1244,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:02, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on LGBT rights in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140607044415/http://www.mardigras.org.au/homepage/about/ to http://www.mardigras.org.au/homepage/about/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C10117%2C18483128-1244%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060222150409/http://williamapercy.com/pub-EncyHom.htm to http://williamapercy.com/pub-EncyHom.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on LGBT rights in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170202053600/http://www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/doifinder/10.1057/9781137476159.0009 to http://www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/doifinder/10.1057/9781137476159.0009
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160115130147/http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/intersex-advocates-address-findings-of-senate-committee-into-involuntary-sterilisation-12237.html to http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/intersex-advocates-address-findings-of-senate-committee-into-involuntary-sterilisation-12237.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150523133259/http://www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/Pages/Samesexreforms.aspx to http://www.ag.gov.au/RightsAndProtections/HumanRights/Pages/Samesexreforms.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090310020053/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/Snowdontpl.cfm?CurrentId=8624 to http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/Snowdontpl.cfm?CurrentId=8624
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325201405/http://home.vicnet.net.au/~alga/ to http://home.vicnet.net.au/~alga/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080718210403/http://www.unilife.curtin.edu.au/sexualdiversity/documents/MappingHomophobiainAustralia.pdf to http://unilife.curtin.edu.au/sexualdiversity/documents/MappingHomophobiainAustralia.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi everyone, the article has grown considerably and covers several issues that would seem more appropriate in an overarching "LGBT in Australia" article, such as the section on statistics. I propose we move relevant sections over to that article, which could have a similar scope to LGBT in New Zealand for example. What sections do people think would be appropriate to move across? Goldcactus (talk) 13:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to be a good idea. No doubt the statistics and social conditions sections of this article more properly belong to your proposed article, and that could be coupled with some more information of things like demographics and LGBT-Australian culture. Beyond the two sections mentioned though, I think everything else in this article belongs here. Though detailed, there's no doubt they relate to the rights of LGBTI Australians, both in law and in practice. Global-Cityzen (talk) 10:08, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed "LGBT in Australia" article