Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is very welcome that over the past 12 months, the problem of men's violence against women in our community has become an issue of national conversation in Australia. The naming of campaigner Rosie Batty as Australian of the Year for 2015 is symbolic of the rising prominence of this issue in the public consciousness. This conversation is not always easy and can demand difficult conversations with friends. We have had to have one such difficult conversation this week.

White Ribbon is a national, campaign that is led by men to end men's violence against women. Given that the root cause of men's violence against women is gender inequality, the engagement of men in the fight against this scourge is crucial. Many years of academic research has shown that the promotion of gender equality and respectful relationships is crucial to changing the community attitudes that enable violence against women. White Ribbon plays a very important role in encouraging men to take responsibility and to combat these attitudes in our community. However, as a male-led group attempting to address gender inequality and to change men's attitudes towards women, White Ribbon has always occupied a delicate space.

There have always been some who understandably questioned whether the answer to a problem created by men is more men. There have also been some who have been worried about the risk of such a campaign giving credibility, and even more power, to men with views that perpetuate the kind of gender inequality at the heart of this matter. I feel this delicacy myself when speak on these issues. However, I am firmly of the view that, given the primary challenge in preventing this violence is to change the attitudes of men in our community, men need to be a major part of the response to this problem. It is frustrating, but many of the men who harbour the kinds of sexist views that underpin gender inequality, simply will not take in this message if it is being delivered by a woman.

This kind of prejudice is the very nub of the issue and is something that White Ribbon has played a very valuable leadership role in addressing. However, given that men can be both part of the problem and part of the solution, they carry special obligations when engaging in this debate. The first is to listen to the women around them about their experiences of gender inequality—experiences that by definition we cannot understand firsthand. The second is to take responsibility for attitudes and actions that perpetuate gender inequality and, as a result, men's violence against women.

It is in these respects that a recent opinion piece published by Tanveer Ahmed, currently a White Ribbon Australia ambassador, was both wrong and repugnant. Instead of asking men to take responsibility for their attitudes and actions, the piece claims that men's social and cultural 'disempowerment' is an increasing driver of family violence. There is no evidence for this view. The drivers of men's violence against women have not changed over time. Violence against women is a crime of control. It is a crime committed by men who feel entitled to exercise power over the women in their life through violence and intimidation. Worrying about 'male disempowerment' in this context perpetuates this power problem. Perhaps most concerning about Mr Tanveer's piece is his nonsense raving about men being under attack from 'radical feminists' preaching 'male villainy, denial of biologically based sex differences and a cult of victimhood'.

We need to do better than to allow men's violence against women to become another cheap front in the culture wars. One woman a week is killed in this country by a partner or former partner, and surely we can avoid turning this into an undergraduate debating point. I encourage Mr Ahmed to do the decent thing and stand down as a White Ribbon ambassador as soon as possible. His views are utterly contrary to those of both White Ribbon and the broader sector that is trying to end this violence. If Mr Ahmed does not resign I firmly believe that the White Ribbon board should remove him from his position to avoid further damage being caused to the ambassador program.

In this respect, I am pleased to inform the House that late last year White Ribbon introduced a new ambassador education and screening process to avoid situations of this kind. I was one of the first people to complete this program and can report that it required the completion of an interactive online education program that took me more than two hours to complete and a thirty minute interview in which I was again tested on the content of the program and questioned about my personal background. I also understand that White Ribbon now undertakes background checks of applicants to be ambassadors.

This education program is delivered by Andrew O'Keefe, a past chairman of White Ribbon and current ambassador, and explains the causes of men's violence against women and teaches men how to take personal responsibility for their attitudes and behaviours. As Mr O'Keefe put it recently, no man is perfect, but they ought to keep asking themselves questions about the impact of their attitudes and behaviour on the women and the world around them. He says that they should be asking questions like:

How do I manage conflict in my relationship?

Do I show my sons and daughters what respect and equality really mean by trying to live a respectful life myself?

Do I do my fair share of the housework? Do I take an active role in nurturing my kids instead of just being a good-time dad?    Do I treat my partner with kindness and respect by valuing her contributions and making space for her interests? Do I show my kids that a man doesn't have to be the tough-guy in control of every situation? And do I celebrate the achievements of my boys and girls equally—

These are the valuable messages that White Ribbon ambassadors can deliver to other men. The men asking these difficult questions of themselves and others deserve better than to be tarred with the same brush as Mr Ahmed.

See this speech in context