This is part four of #MeTooWhere? Crikey’s examination of the past, present and future of the Me Too movement. Read the whole series here.
What do we want from the Me Too movement? Change, of course. A culture shift. Women to be believed. Men to be held accountable.
But the Me Too movement must be more than just a mood board. A specific plan of action — from what legislation we want to be changed, to which report recommendations we want to be implemented, and what policies must be introduced — needs to be put forward not just by violence prevention and gender equity groups but by all those participating in the wider movement.
In previous feminist movements, campaigners found sympathy with the government — easier said than done considering the current cabinet. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been eager to put the burden of addressing change on women, seen in his demand that Brittany Higgins contact him instead of the other way around, and the creation of new roles for female cabinet ministers to address men’s behaviour.
Naturally this is a two-way street, but women and allies must rise to Morrison’s insistence on haplessness and ignorance and meet the government with specific key demands.
Sympathy with the government
Aside from some tears in a press conference (which quickly turned into a spat in which Morrison weaponised cases of sexual violence against the media), women have yet to receive much sympathy from the government. In fact, apart from tokenistic gestures announced in this week’s cabinet reshuffle, women have been largely shunned. It’s been eye-opening for many — even Morrison, who seems surprised his popularity is plummeting.
Blunder after blunder by ill-informed male ministers has been excused as blokes not always getting it right. Thousands at the March4Justice rally were snubbed by our leaders belatedly feigning “security risks”. Demands for more funding for domestic violence organisations have gone ignored.
Government sympathy was key to the success of previous feminist movements. In 1972 Gough Whitlam introduced feminist reforms including equal pay for work of equal value, the removal of the sales tax on contraceptives, and access to preschool education for all Australian children under the age of five. Whitlam did this without any female politicians in his cabinet. More change came under the Hawke government which in 1984 implemented the Sex Discrimination Act.
Women today in some ways have more work to do than women in the ’70s thanks to the dismantling of government policy architecture, from the Howard government cutting the scope and relevance of the Office for Women, to then-minister for women Tony Abbott abandoning the women’s budget statement in 2014.
As Macquarie University historian Dr Michelle Arrow told Crikey, “we’re now seeing the long term impacts of what happens when you remove those kinds of gendered checks and balances on policy”.
Presenting solutions
Past movements featured not just protests and demonstrations, but also private meetings, policy proposals and submissions, says academic Eva Cox. “Some people were outside [protesting] and the rest of us would be inside wearing our high heels talking to the minister, saying ‘we’ve got a solution for you here’,” she said. (Cox believes March4Justice organiser Janine Hendry did the right thing by refusing Morrison’s invitation for a private meeting).
The recent success of the LetHerSpeak campaign, which overturned laws gagging survivors from speaking about their assaults, came down to its specificity and the measurability of its mission to amend section 194K of the Tasmanian Evidence Act. This change allowed Grace Tame, later named Australian of the Year, to share her story.
Campaign creator Nina Funnell told Crikey that the work “didn’t just involve ‘making noise’”, it included researching viable solutions, engaging relevant stakeholders, writing a best-practice paper, making policy submissions, meeting with the government, pre-empting and neutralising counter-attacks through risk and inoculation strategies, and providing legal support to survivors.
Australia’s Black Lives Matter movement has achieved more than its Me Too movement thanks to campaigners’ specific goals, says Yuin woman and postdoctoral research fellow at the University of Wollongong Dr Marlene Longbottom.
When Indigenous woman Tanya Day died in police custody after being found asleep on a train and arrested for public drunkenness her family didn’t just start a rally to raise awareness about her death, they sued the state government, campaigned for CCTV footage to be released during the coronial inquest, advocated for the offence for public drunkenness (which is disproportionately applied to First Nations peoples) to be revoked, and pushed for a criminal investigation into police handling.
Embers of change
None of this is to say the Me Too movement hasn’t been positive or achieved great things — it just has a lot more to do.
While being “empowering and emotional”, it must work harder, chair of anti-violence against women group Our Watch Natasha Stott Despoja told Crikey.
“The key to so many social justice movements is eternal vigilance. I feel a rage permeating the country and one that we have rarely seen,” she said. “I hope we can harness this mood for change, and channel the inspiration and bravery … We not only need changes in structures, politics and practices but also wide-ranging cultural change.”
Cox agrees. “I want to harness that energy… but we also need to connect it up with trying to recreate a sense that we are citizens and we’ll get back to the social contract,” she said.
“[Without focusing on policies] it’s going to sort of fade away again until the next angry crowd turns up so it might be a much nastier, vicious cycle.”
What must the Me Too movement do next to affect real change? Send us your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say section.
If you or someone you know is impacted by sexual assault or violence, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit 1800RESPECT.org.au.
Next: there are real solutions to Australia’s culture of sexual violence, but is there any hope the government will support them?
Real concrete outcomes, that would be good. Just have to steer them through a govt that thinks announceables is all you have to do.
Best wishes for real change.
?MeToo?
‘A specific plan of action — from what legislation we want to be changed, to which report recommendations we want to be implemented, and what policies must be introduced — needs to be put forward not just by violence prevention and gender equity groups but by all those participating in the wider movement.’
The National Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in Australian Workplaces report, led by Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins, was released over a year ago and the government has sat on it since then. It is fairly comprehensive and goes beyond the workplace, including, for example, the recommendation of implementing respectful relationships education in all primary and secondary schools in all states and territories (along the lines of Victoria’s).
There are 55 reccomendations. The PM’s new girl squad (which includes at least one nutter) will likely be looking at it, picking, choosing, diluting, distorting.
When Amber says all those participating in Me Too should contribute to a specific plan of action – not just the gender equity groups – this presents a problem. It’s as if affected women (all women?) must compare what they see as systemic deficiencies to the solutions offered in the report, and judge whether they are addressed at all, and whether they are good enough. That’s a demanding task.
However, I do agree that one shouldn’t always allow government commissions or not-for-profit advocacy groups speak for you. Often they are well-intentioned, but sometimes they can miss things or lack courage to propose bold reforms.
Let’s be honest here. Many nfp are not well intentioned but are a maze of subsidiary organisations that grow and decline with agendas that iare being pushed by the Gvt and lobbyists, advisors or advocates. Gvt funding is the priority of the forementioned to secure well paying jobs while their services are almost non existant while number crunching is the target for more Gvt funding. More power for lobbyists, advisors and advocates means more money
Try being a new advocate for something. It’s a rough road indeed. Heard advocates are chosen for a reason always. Otherwise how did they get there ? The opposition allows it, for a reason.
When Plan A doesn’t get results, go to Plan B, then C etc. Women got the vote after Plan X. It wasn’t easy or quick but it did succeed. Making the forces against you look and feel stupid (not too difficult in this case) will work. Men in authority hate to be laughed at.
I am surprised that Amber Schultz does make more of the same-sex marriage campaign. It was staggeringly successful by adopting the kind of strategy that she advocates here.
Staggeringly successful is correct! However, it took 14 years, from the founding of Australian Marriage Equality in response to Howard’s Marriage Act amendment in 2004. The campaign in the broader sense involved petitions and rallies in the early 2000s, state LGBTIQ lobby groups & AME meeting politicians, years of activism by eg GetUp, parliamentary bills introduced by the Greens during the Labor years, the campaign within Labor to change it’s federal platform at the 2011 party conference (with a rally outside the conference centre), similar pushes within unions, the months-long campaign to persuade Labor to block the plebiscite legislation which involved 50 LGBTIQ organisations, the High Court challenge against the government’s postal survey, and then of course the narrow campaign of rallies, street stalls, phone-banking, and door knocking (in which I participated). And no doubt more I haven’t mentioned.
Back to Amber’s article: one key point she makes is that the Me To movement lacks a unified perspective and specific demands (although many have been forcefully suggested, eg the Respect@Work report). By contrast, the marriage equality campaign had one key demand: the repeal of the 2004 Marriage Act amendment and a new amendment to explicitly legalise same sex marriage.
Amber, like some powerful women in Australia have taught me; power and movement ebbs and flows, pushes and pulls and circles one way then another. Largely movements are predictable to a point and unpredictable with variables unknown.
We as humans like assurance but unpredictability comes from a variety of unfavourable and somewhat unseen variables. There are good and awful people. Define good and define awful.
We can’t just listen, we must also read and observe and think critically using all senses available to us.
Discomfort and fear will tell you you are close to the bone another wants. Hunger disappears when in danger.
I wish we could just follow the scent and have humans make the world a more equal place. It’s not equal because of the size of the prizes. Some prizes last 5 minutes. Some only a lifetime or less and some are milti-generational. It appears human society changes every 100 years or so in some significant way. However, some things can remain somewhat the same somewhat, but in a different era.