A much more likely approach to receiving such accolades is to pursue services to ‘business’ to ‘law’ and even to the “Anglican Church”.

For the second year in a row, a slightly higher number of women than men have been recognised in the general division of the Australia Day honours list, at 50.5 per cent. This continued progress is welcome. But at this rate, we still have decades ahead before the overall gender gap in who has been recognised since 1975 closes altogether.

Analysing words used in describing the services offered by the 739 Australians to be recognised this year, the word ‘care’ rarely comes up.

According to this analysis of the description fields, just one Australian has been celebrated for their work in childcare, with Louise Maiden receiving an award for her services to primary and early childhood education. 

Just two have ‘aged care” in their award description, including Deborah Parker, a registered nurse specialising in aged care now pursuing vital research work on palliative care for older people Not one recipient has the term ‘disability care’ in their award description, although there are others who have received recognition for their disability advocacy work, including Ellie Cole.

To put these figures in perspective, it helps to consider some of the more prominent areas highlighted. 

There are 36 individuals with ‘business’ in their award description. Another 25 have the word ‘law’ in their description, while 13 mention ‘media’. Science is also highly represented, with 26 mentions. 

There are twelve mentions of ‘church’, with ‘Anglican Church’ dominating this list with five mentions. 

While there are 76 recipients with the word ‘education’ in their award description, with most of their work being in academia or in offering education services to key industries – rather than in primary or second education, or in early childhood education.

One mention of childcare was the same as one mention of ‘for service to lawn bowls’.

The word ‘care’ is only mentioned eight times across the list of 700 plust Australians recognised, mostly this is related to healthcare. 

Overall, and as with previous years, the majority of the awards have been given for services to the Community, at 310, followed by medicine at 77, and then sport and leisure, at 58.

It should be noted that some recognition in this year’s list for supporting and advocating for key communities — such as multicultural communities, Indigenous communities and migrant communities — may not carry the word ‘care’ in the description of services but would incorporate care, including Dr Sabrin Farooqui, who we spoke to on her own a Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for her services to community and multicultural affairs. There is also great work recognised in areas like reproductive rights and human rights.

None of the above is shared to suggest that those receiving awards for services to areas like business and law shouldn’t be recognised. Far from it.

Rather, sharing these figures highlights the opportunity for more diversity — among both the individuals nominated and ultimately recognised, as well as in recognising and celebrating the different types of work people do.

There is clearly a great opportunity to celebrate better and acknowledge the work of those in care-related fields: disability care, childcare, aged care, as well as primary and secondary school teaching.

Better recognising individuals for their work in care will not only grant them the recognition they deserve, but it will also go a long way in building up how we generally value anyone who works in these fields.

Plus, getting care work better recognised will have the inevitable affect also of seeing the overall proportion of women recognised going up too, given women still make up the overwhelming majority of those working in these fields.

Governor General David Hurley says there is a priority in ensuring the Order reflects the diversity of our community.

He said that “work continues to increase nominations for outstanding individuals from parts of our community that have been historically underrepresented, including women, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

An approach to doing the above could and should include looking areas of ‘service’ that are underrepresented in these awards.

The post Those working in the care sector remain largely ignored in Australia Day honours appeared first on Women's Agenda.

It was a perplexing moment. Not least because of Court’s hugely outdated and damaging public views about homosexuality and the transgender community, but also because the former athlete has already been recognised (several times over) for her contribution to sport.

What rationale then was there to go an additional step further? Why did the Australia Day council — selected by the Governor General and the Prime Minister– feel compelled to stamp this stake in the ground?

The answer’s simple: political agenda fuelled by a shared ideology.

Court’s homophobic views spurred by her Pentecostal faith aren’t ones that are shared by the majority of Australians but they are shared by certain members of the government.

Indeed, in former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s recently released memoir he recalls Scott Morrison‘s visceral dismay when the ‘yes vote’ passed for marriage equality.

“Scott was utterly deflated. He couldn’t believe his own electorate had voted ‘yes,’” Turnbull wrote.

“‘I don’t feel this is the country that I grew up in anymore’, [Morrison] allegedly complained.

While political memoirs undoubtedly present a single perspective and should thus be read and taken with a grain of salt, this recollection is hardly surprising. Morrison who, like Court, is of Pentecostal Christian faith, has never shied from sharing this as the centre of his politics.

He has previously invited camera crews to film him worshipping at his church Horizon in Southern Sydney, and in his maiden speech to Parliament in 2008 he described Hillsong Church leader Brian Houston as a “mentor” in his pursuit to share “the immutable truths and principles of the Christian faith”.

Morrison tried to suggest he had no insight into the selection process of the honours last week.

“I can’t comment on an award that’s done through an independent process that hasn’t been announced,” Morrison told reporters in Brisbane.

“This is a completely independent set of processes. It is an announcement that will be announced on that day. It is a system that recognises the full spectrum of individuals across this country.”

But this assertion is patently false.

While Morrison may not have had direct word that Court would be recognised, he did know and approve the council who puts forth the recommendations to the Governor General. The council has 19 members, who are appointed by the governor general on the recommendation of the prime minister. The current chair is Shane Stone; a former Country Liberal Minister.

Ultimately Margaret Court’s latest honour proves a broken system. One in which rich, white, Christian privilege prevails at the decision making table.

But while Labor leader Anthony Albanese was right in identifying that this decision had zero to do with the sporting prowess of Court and everything to do with ideological agenda, the move was ultimately politically dense.

Australians are, on the whole, united when it comes to inclusivity. As our population grows, religion becomes more and more obsolete. We have been a secular country since federation, but this is becoming truer by the second.

Divisive views like Margaret Court’s and certain members of our largely white, Christian and male government hold little sway in today’s society.

Canberra doctor Clara Tuck Meng Soo was also recognised in the honours’ list but chose to hand back her OAM in protest against Court’s award. 

“I do not want to be seen as supporting the values that the Council for the Order of Australia seem to be supporting with this promotion of Mrs Margaret Court,” she said.

Dr Soo, who received her honour in 2016 for her work as a medical practitioner with LGBT people and those with HIV and drug dependencies became one of the first GPs in Australia to undergo gender transition.

“I have both professional experience as well as lived experience of the communities that Mrs Margaret Court makes these derogatory and hurtful remarks about,” she told the ABC.

“She says that she has a right to free speech, and I’m not saying she can’t say what she believes in, but she’s using her position as a public figure to promote her views and I think that such behaviour should not be encouraged.

“By elevating her, the Council for the Order of Australia is actually sending a message that they condone and support such behaviour.”

She’s absolutely right. The message is loud and clear… but it’s falling on deaf and defiant ears. Australians aren’t riding with the carefully curated religious agenda that is so desperately being pedalled by some of our leaders.

And Scott Morrison might want to take note of that or face the consequences of being perceived as a leader out of touch and out of depth.

The post Morrison’s ideological agenda fuelled Margaret Court’s recent honour… but the decision was politically stupid appeared first on Women's Agenda.

Two of the three highest honours went to women, with Belinda Hutchinson and Naomi Milgrom both named a Companion of the Order of Australia (AC). The third went to Tony Abbott, noting his contribution as a prime minister, including for “Indigenous service” and “border control”.

But while women dominated in this group receiving the highest orders, just 13 women compared with 37 men were named in the next levels of honours. That means just 28 per cent of the gongs in the two highest categories went to women.

And the proportion of women celebrated overall was down compared to the Australia Day honours announced earlier this year.

Professor Marcia Langton (pictured above) was named an officer of the Order of Australia, for distinguished service to tertiary education, and as an advocate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

She was joined on the list by CSIRO Chief Physicist Dr Catherine Foley, who was also named the 2019 Women’s Agenda Agenda Setter of the Year.

Other women named in the officers’ division included politician Bronwyn Bishop, businesswoman Christine Christian, biomedical researcher Suzanne Crowe, business leaders Denise Goldsworthy and Diane Grady, dance leader Lucy Guerin, medical researcher Georgina Long, medical researcher Isabella McMillen, arts advocate Greta Moran, actor Robyn Nevin, screenwriter and director Jan Sardi and cancer researcher Ingrid Winship.

Ming Long was named in the AM division, and told the ABC she “hopes it’s a reminder for all women of colour coming through that they are capable of great things, for all people of colour.”

She was joined by Annette Kimmitt, CEO of Mintor Ellison, who was recognised ’for significant service to business and to gender equality and inclusion’.

They were two of the 15 women honoured in the “business and commerce” category, compared with 23 men.

All up women received 290 of the awards handed out.

Belinda Hutchinson was named for her “eminent service to business, to tertiary education and scientific research, and through philanthropic endeavours to address social disadvantage”

Naomi Milgrom was named “For eminent service to the community through philanthropic leadership and support for the promotion of the arts, architecture, design excellence and cultural exchange, and to business”.

Honour A Woman has used the gender imbalance to again push for women to be nominated

They noted that there were ZERO women recognised in the “public service (federal) category, despite women making up 59 per cent of the Australian Public Service.

And there were zero women recognised again in the category of “local government”.

Honour A Woman has urged premiers and chief ministers to “embed processes in the public service, to nominate outstanding women in their states and territories. Deliberate action is needed to find and nominate women who are making a significant contribution to their profession and communities.”

The group founded in 2017 is pushing for gender equality in the Australian honours system, and to even up the imbalance that has seen men take 70 per cent of Australian honours awards since they were introduced in 1975. “Australian honours are predominantly conferred on older men from Anglo-Saxon backgrounds at the higher levels, while women are clustered in the lowest, Medal of the Order (OAM), category,” the group says. “For example, between 2012 and 2016 men received 56 Companion (AC) awards while women were awarded only 12 or 17 per cent of the awards.”

The post Marcia Langton, Ming Long, Naomi Milgrom celebrated as 41% of gongs go to women appeared first on Women's Agenda.

The office of Governor-General, David Hurley, confirmed it had received correspondence calling for Arndt’s honour to be rescinded, which will be considered by the board.

Governor General’s office confirms Bettina Arndt’s Order of Australia under review after formal complaints regarding her support for police keeping an open mind on whether a killer dad who burned wife and children to death in Brisbane was ‘driven’ to it https://t.co/5TwpG5iBLq

— 𝕤𝕒𝕞𝕒𝕟𝕥𝕙𝕒 𝕞𝕒𝕚𝕕𝕖𝕟 (@samanthamaiden) February 23, 2020

Arndt was controversially recognised in the 2020 Australia Day honours “for significant service to the community as a social commentator, and to gender equity through advocacy for men”.

Remarks she has made previously either excusing or minimising sexual abuse, even of minors, have been raised as being inconsistent with the honours.

Comments Arndt made about the abhorrent murder of Hannah Clarke and her three children have sparked renewed criticisms over her suitability as an awarded-citizen.

Arndt took to Twitter on Friday to congratulate the Queensland police for “keeping an open mind and awaiting proper evidence, including the possibility that Rowan Baxter might have been ‘driven too far’.”

…and explanations when women stab their partners to death, or drive their children into dams but immediately judging a man in these circumstances as simply representing the evil violence that is in all men. https://t.co/gCMCn1kma1

— Bettina Arndt (@thebettinaarndt) February 20, 2020

The tweet has been almost universally condemned. The Queensland police detective Mark Thompson who used those words “driven too far” was removed from investigating the case as a result.

The Queensland Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll said it was the only appropriate response.

“I apologise for what was said and how it was said. Phraseology was completely wrong and the words and way it was said should not have been used,” she told ABC Radio.  “I sincerely apologise to the community and to victims about the way it was put.”

Arndt however has not apologised and instead dug in and took issue with the detective being stood down.

Today I wrote to the Chair of the Council for the Order of Australia to formally ask the Council to advise the Governor-General that Bettina Arndt’s AM be cancelled because of her comments that sought to excuse extreme violence. Her comments will “bring disrepute on the Order.” pic.twitter.com/fizGF1fP7o

— Tim Smith MP (@TimSmithMP) February 22, 2020

Liberal MP, Tim Smith, told The New Daily, “This is not a left-versus-right issue, this is not a Labor-versus-Liberal issue. This is a right-versus-wrong issue. Anyone who seeks to justify, explain or rationalise why a man would commit mass murder by incinerating his three little kids and their mum in a car is wrong.”

Tried to think of a response worthy of the arsehattery of this tweet. Can't think of anything.
He burned his ex-partner and little children to death. Set them on fire.
What on earth is wrong with you. https://t.co/Hh9P7LDZ6c

— Hugh Riminton (@hughriminton) February 21, 2020

On Bettina Arndt's Order of Australia honours, QLD's Minister for Child Safety, Youth and Women @difarmerMP says it absolutely should be revoked. "We do not need public figures calling domestic violence anything than what it is" she told @frankelly08 on @RNBreakfast #auspol

— Julia Holman (@JulesHolman) February 23, 2020

I think Bettina Arndt will and should return her Order of Australia medal . Controversy around the awards is destructive . And she well deserves the criticism .

— Neil Mitchell (@3AWNeilMitchell) February 22, 2020

These comments about a man who doused his wife and children with petrol and burnt them to death are abhorrent. I don’t believe the values which underpin @thebettinaarndt’s views on this horrific family violence incident are consistent with her retaining her Order of Australia. https://t.co/gyTLUIjEQm

— Senator Sarah Henderson (@SenSHenderson) February 22, 2020

The awarding of an OAM to Arn*t was a shocking lapse in judgement that requires correction. She may be a favourite of the aggrieved extreme fringes but she is unworthy of an honour that is bestowed on behalf of us all as a nation. https://t.co/FJ9xfUATx1 via @theage

— Brian Mitchell MP (@BrianMitchellMP) February 22, 2020

The post Bettina Arndt’s Order of Australia is formally under review appeared first on Women's Agenda.

On Tuesday evening New Matilda published a report following an 18-month long investigation by Nina Funnell and Chris Graham, in which Arndt acknowledges she is not a doctor, has never obtained a PhD and nor is she a psychologist or clinical psychologist.

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: Psychologist, Clinical Psychologist, Doctor Or None Of The Above? Will The Real Bettina Arndt AM Please Stand Up! https://t.co/FOKQkz8wJv#BettinaArndt #newmatilda #auspol #AustraliaDayHonours pic.twitter.com/hpWYsnPWjF

— newmatilda (@newmatilda) January 28, 2020

But Arndt, who has been credited as “Dr Arndt” – in The Australian newspaper and federal parliament – strongly denied that she sought to intentionally mislead people about her profession.

New Matilda’s report, however, comprehensively details instances where she has actively participated in the promotion of material that portrays her as either a doctor, a psychologist or clinical psychologist.

The back cover of the 2009 edition of her best-selling book The Sex Diaries reads: “Bettina Arndt is a clinical psychologist, sex therapist and social commentator,” and, “she draws on her thirty-five years of experience as a sex therapist and psychologist to provide a provocative analysis that challenges our basic assumptions about sex”.

When New Matilda put this to Arndt she initially responded that she didn’t believe what they were saying was right. The jacket of the book however indicates that it was.

Hoo boy. Turns out Bettina Arndt has never been a clinical psychologist. Her own book says she was one for 35 years. https://t.co/fiPiS3OqTY pic.twitter.com/JGigVncYr8

— Gina Rushton (@ginarush) January 28, 2020

A two-minute video produced by New Matilda contains ten examples where Bettina Arndt is described on TV, radio or in promotional material as being either a psychologist, clinical psychologist or even a doctor. Arndt fails to intervene or correct the record in any of these interviews.

Look at this incredible video of Bettina Arndt being introduced as a clinical psychologist and even doctor without correcting the error. When someone misrepresents their qualifications, it isn’t just an issue of accreditation, it’s an issue of character https://t.co/NlCkH1l7Xm

— Lisa Pryor (@pryorlisa) January 28, 2020

Arndt herself has shared many of these clips, dating back several years, on her website and social media accounts, without ever acknowledging that her designated titles were false.

As New Matilda reports, “it is an offence for an unregistered person to knowingly or recklessly claim to be a psychologist. This can include “using a title, name, initial, symbol, word or description” which may lead a “reasonable person” to believe they hold the title of ‘psychologist’, ‘clinical psychologist’ or ‘doctor’. Individuals found guilty of misusing a title can face up to three years jail, or a fine of up to $60,000 per offence.”

Earlier on Tuesday before New Matilda published its investigation Arndt had used her own social media to variously question the ethics and practices of Rosie Batty, Jenna Price and even Women’s Agenda.

Wow, this is so endlessly entertaining. My work is "ideologically-driven not evidence-based," says Women's Agenda. That's a real hoot from this feminist rag which endlessly distorts and misrepresents data and plays fast and loose with the truth. https://t.co/BWBS0SQmgR pic.twitter.com/hEhCYRPzsS

— Bettina Arndt (@thebettinaarndt) January 28, 2020

As far as ‘playing fast and loose with the truth’ goes, failing to correct the record about one’s professional qualifications, particularly when one is a protected title that is an offence to misuse, is rather bold.

Beyond Arndt’s interview with New Matilda she is yet to publicly comment on this story.

https://www.change.org/p/revoke-bettina-arndt-s-australia-day-honours

The report has bolstered calls for her Australia Day honours to be revoked. At the time of publishing this Change.org petition calling for a revocation had gathered 26,800 signatures.

The post Bettina Arndt acknowledges she is not a psychologist or clinical psychologist appeared first on Women's Agenda.

This shock reverberated around the country, hitting particularly hard those women who are survivors of men’s violence, and researchers and practitioners in the prevention of violence against women field who are well aware of the lack of substantiation behind Arndt’s work, which is ideologically driven rather than evidence-based.

Brilliant reporting here from @ninafunnell on Arndt Bettina. “Australia Day” Honours are nonsense and her OAM sits well within that wheelhouse, but it’s also good to remember just how far her hatred of women and children extends. https://t.co/iKnMImjxb5

— Clementine Ford (@clementine_ford) January 26, 2020

Bettina Arndt’s website, which has the hashtag #MenToo, for example, is all rhetoric and no evidence in its assertion that women are the aggressors and abusers of men.

She claims that she is really “ashamed of women at the moment” with “false accusations of violence used to destroy men’s lives.”Arndt invites the community for a discussion around these issues, however does not provide any evidence on which her claims are based. She also ignores a multitude of studies discounting the idea that women commonly make false accusations – a damning myth being repeated by the likes of Pauline Hanson in her calls for a review of the family law system.

Bettina Arndt given Australia Day honour for ’services to gender equity’. Wonder which lurking cabal of grim-faced rorty grifters, Young Liberals, and misogyny’s henchfolk came up with that bit of snickering troll work? https://t.co/BfX8dY0Cvq

— Kaz Cooke (@reallykazcooke) January 25, 2020

Arndt has also spoken widely about the need for proper support for the purported “one in three” male victims of domestic violence who have been abused by women. This number has been roundly dismissed by experts as in accurate and a misrepresentation, and is based on ABS data which has long been identified by researchers as lacking adequate detail and rigour to support this claim.

So just to be clear, we have awarded an Australia Day honour to a woman for ‘gender equity’ who herself pushed the smear campaign against an Australian of the Year and anti-violence campaigner who watched her own son be murdered by his father.

— Rick Morton (@SquigglyRick) January 26, 2020

Feminists have fiercely advocated for action to address men’s violence against women, however in this case the statistics speak for themselves. These are that on average one woman a week is killed by her current or former partner; one in three women experiences physical violence; one in four emotional abuse, while one in five experiences sexual violence.

Statistics also show that violence perpetrated against women is more severe than that perpetrated against men, with women are almost four times more likely than men to be hospitalised after being assaulted by their spouse or partner. It is this evidence base that led the federal government – in partnership with COAG – to develop the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their children 2010-2022.

How can a woman who supported a convicted male paedophile be rewarded? https://t.co/tAlN1Kb2I9

— Jenna Price (@JennaPrice) January 27, 2020

Prevention of family violence and all forms of violence against women work in Australia is also informed by the national framework developed by Our Watch called Change the Story. The framework, underpinned by rigorous research, outlines the drivers of violence against women, including: the broader condoning of violence such as those who hold beliefs that justify, excuse, downplay, shift blame and trivialise men’s violence against women.

Sadly, the work of Arndt – particularly her efforts to downplay men’s violence against women by perpetuating myths about the rates at which men experience violence – can be seen to uphold rather than challenge this key driver.

Her work is antithetical to the gender equity cause not just because it misrepresents the facts about violence against women in Australia. It also perpetuates another dangerous myth that work to address gender inequality is anti-men.

After receiving her award, for example, Arndt went on to claim that “quiet Australians aren’t happy about the constant male-bashing in our society and I’m working to try to change that”.

Rosie Batty claims my work "pits men and women" when sadly that's exactly the problem with her take on DV which denies women's role in family violence. Playing the feminist puppet is further damaging the reputation of this once admirable woman. https://t.co/XLFYrnQ3tQ pic.twitter.com/7w7U7HyuWb

— Bettina Arndt (@thebettinaarndt) January 27, 2020

She also expressed her hope that her award “will encourage others to join me in campaigning for true gender equity – fair treatment of men and women.” These statements presume that addressing men’s violence is somehow anti-men and not in their interest. This couldn’t be more wrong.

Other drivers mentioned in Change the Story include stereotyped notions of masculinity, men’s control over decision making, and disrespect towards women and male peer relationships that emphasise aggression. Addressing these drivers of violence against women is to acknowledge that gender stereotypes are as harmful to men as women, and that it is as much in their interest to be liberated from toxic norms of masculinity as it is women’s.

Having been one of 60,000 children so gravely abused that my perpetrator is serving a 9 year sentence, Clem is exactly right.

I was 13. I had just learned to braid my hair.
I was no match for a 35 year old priest who had been raping kids since 1969.

Bettina is hugely damaging.

— Georgie Burg (@Georgie_Burg_45) January 27, 2020

It is unfortunate that the lack of evidence and biases in Arndt’s work were not more carefully considered in the Order of Australia nomination process.

The end result is that more power has been given to those wishing to subvert the progress that many family violence and violence against women advocates and practitioners are making in Australia.

This work, steeped in evidence and reliable statistics, seeks to end violence against women and violence by addressing toxic masculine norms and should be embraced as of benefit to all women and men.

The post No. There is no evidence of Bettina Arndt’s ‘contributions to gender equity’ appeared first on Women's Agenda.