Before we begin, the
queer portfolio of the Melbourne University
Law Students Society, and the Indigenous
Law and Justice Hub, acknowledge that the
Law School sits on stolen Wurundjeri land
of the Kulin nation. I would like to
pay my respects to the elders both past
and present and extend that respect to other Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islanders who are present
here this evening. We celebrate the outstanding
contributions of local providers of
the Queer community like Koorie Pride Victoria OutBlack and Strong Brother Strong Sister alongside the work of nationwide organizations, Black Rainbow, and
First Nations Rainbow. Together, these
groups work tirelessly to
support, elevate, and advocate for
the rights of the local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Queer community. Together, we hope
to learn from these leading
organizations and continue building a
safer space for all. Hello everyone. Welcome to the annual Queer lecture, presented by the
Queer portfolio of the Law Students
Society in collaboration with the Indigenous Law
and Justice Hub. My name is Maatharan, and I'm the Queer
director of the Melbourne University
Law Students Society. Alongside my
Queer officers, Veena and Emily, I'll be one of your hosts
for this evening. Before I introduce our esteemed guest and speaker, who I'm sure you're all
eager to hear from. I'd just like to extend my thanks to a
few key people. Firstly, I'd like to thank Associate Dean of
Diversity and Inclusion, Ann Genovese, Interim Dean Professor
Allison Duxbury, and the team
at the Hub for your support in bringing this lecture to life. Tonight, we are joined by Dr Todd Fernando. Todd is a key figure in advancing social justice and policy in Australia. He's a descendant of the Kalarie Peoples of the Wiradjuri Nation who is a senior
research fellow at the University
of Melbourne School of Population
and Global Health. Holding a PhD in medical
anthropology, his research examines
the experiences of LGBTQIA plus individuals within Australian
healthcare settings, with a special focus on the unique
contributions of queer Indigenous
perspectives to healing practices and
research methodologies. As the former
Commissioner of Victoria's LGBTIQ
plus Communities, Tod provided
crucial advice to the Victorian
government on the development
of policies, services, and
programs that are inclusive and
meet the needs of our diverse
communities. Without further ado,
I'd like to welcome Todd Fernando to
present his lecture, Culture, colonies,
and camp, Indigenous rights
across the Pacific. Can I start by acknowledging
acknowledging that no matter where we
are in Australia, we walk an
Aboriginal land, and I pay my respects to ancestors past,
present and emerging. Can I also start by thanking the organisers
of this event, Maatharan and others who
have tirelessly put on, I think what has been a very important
conversation at the Melbourne
Law School. Conversations that
are too often I think happened on
the margins in the peripherals of
elevator conversations or around the quiet corners of the Melbourne
Law School library, trying to hide from
others trying to come in. And I think that
in of itself, the exclusion of
others who are outside the law school and their identities
in and around how they interact. I think forms an
interesting lens to view and understand the way in which
the conversations happen inside this place. And so I want to
congratulate them on quite a stark journey
from Justice Kirby to Todd Fernando
in just one year. We couldn't be two
different people. I am not Justice Kirby, though it must be nice to be a white man
of his calibre. I've been exploring
interested in understanding Queerness across
the Pacific and across the world for a
very, very long time. I'm also obviously
interested in understanding that from an Indigenous
perspective, from a First Nations
perspective. And understand kind of
what that looks like. In addressing I guess the complexity of this
intersection, Indigeneity, colonialism
and queerness, I think we're
going to overlook, we're going to look at the often overlooked nexus of those identities and the historical
legacies that have marked the way in which these communities
have emerged. For Indigenous people
across the Pacific, the impacts of colonialism has been far reaching. Not only in terms of land, dispossession,
cultural disruption, and political
marginalisation, but also in ways that colonial powers sought
to regulate and suppress expressions of gender and of sexuality. The imposition
of Western norms around heteronormativity and binary gender systems disrupted Indigenous understandings
of identity, where many
communities held more fluid non binary
or inclusive ways of viewing gender
and sexuality prior to colonization. The importance
of understanding this intersection lies in recognizing that for many queer
Indigenous people, our experience of
marginalization is often shaped by multiple interlocking forms
of oppression. Colonialism
obviously is not just a historical
backdrop. It continues to inform the legal and social
and cultural realities faced by many queer
Indigenous people today and of course, many communities across Australia
and the world. By exploring this
intersection, we, I think tonight
will attempt to gain a deeper
understanding of how colonial era laws continue to perpetuate
discrimination and how queer indigenous
people are claiming their cultural
identities and resisting these
oppressive legacies. This intersectional lense, I think is crucial
because it illuminates how
decolonization must involve not just the
reclamation of land, but sovereignty and the recovery and
validation of indigenous ways of knowing being and loving,
rather than doing. As we trace these
intricate connections, I'm going to ask
that we reimagine a future where
queer indigenous rights are not seen as add on to legislative frameworks
or conversations within broader
struggles for justice, but are understood as
the integral part of decolonization of both
land and identity. The Pacific region is a expansive and
culturally rich area, home to a vast array of communities spread across thousands
of islands. It encompasses
diverse nations from Polynesia,
to Melanesia, to Micronesia, each with its own unique languages, traditions, and
social structures. The region's rich
diversity also extends to its legal systems, its
colonial histories. As many of Pacific nations across this region, were colonized
European powers, including the British, French, Dutch,
and Spanish, who imposed their
governance, their religion, and
their legal frameworks. Now, while New Zealand
and Australia have shared histories of
British colonisation, and have made
notable progress in terms of LGBT rights. Many communities
across the Pacific, including Fiji,
Papa New Guinea, Samoa, for example, continue
to grapple with the legacies of
their colonial past. Colonial power imposed
law and legal systems that criminalize
homosexuality, restricted gender
identities, and expression,
and undermined Indigenous social orders, leaving enduring
impacts that continue to shape laws and attitudes in society. So the Pacific is a region of contrasts
in my mind. It's a place of deep cultural richness
and resilience, but one where its
colonial legacies and its conservative past, particularly on in
relation to LGBTQIA+ people, continues to be a feature of current day politics. Understanding the Pacific requires an
appreciation of its of its diversity and the ongoing struggles
for decolonization, legal reform and its
cultural reclamation. At the heart of
this discussion tonight is the legacies
of colonialism, and inheritance that many Pacific nations
never asked for, but were left
with nonetheless. I want to remind us
here, colonial legacies, they don't just
claim the land, that's often a
lie sold to us. It's about the bodies
on those lands and how those bodies operate
whether within love, within hunting,
within ritual. And These laws, however, don't disappear when the colonizers pack
their bags and go. They remain
deeply embedded. That's going to get
to the heart of what it is that we're here to talk about tonight. I know many in the room kind of looking
at me being like, we can get this
we're sold. We're on that
part of the choir But there's a deeper part of
the conversation, I think that might make you think
a little bit differently in regards to resistance and in regards
to decolonisation. Places like Fiji and
Papa New Guinea and Samoa continue to uphold
restrictive laws, even when they make no sense in modern worlds. They serve as legal
ghosts of a violent past, imposing a straight
jacket, if you will, on societies that
were, in fact, much more fluid and open than these laws
ever acknowledged. Yet the narrative
of the Pacific isn't one of
passive endurance. It's one of
active defiance. Across the region,
we're seeing a shift in the landscape around
LGBTQIA plus rights. And look, it's not
perfect to somebody who's just finished a tenure with
Victorian government. It will never be perfect. But nonetheless, it's critically
important to do so. Countries like Australia
and New Zealand, which I'll largely leave out of this conversation, partly because
we're in it. We kind of get it. There will be moments where
I'll touch on it, but for the most
part, it will be around countries
in the Pacific. What emerges so
powerfully for me. When I look at
these communities across the Pacific is its richness in understanding their
cultural histories. But it's marked by this really complex
juxtaposition between upholding
colonial legacy. That's what I
really want to get into tonight because it's these colonials legacies, these
oppressive laws that slow and even march towards the rights and powerful surgence of
Indigenous resistance. So I want to also do this in regards to
an assemblage theory. Do people understand what assemblage theory is? Anyone want to have to
go at attempting John, do you
want to have to go? So, assemblage theory posits that we can build the kind of fabric of social life and order by placing things on
top of each other. So I as a gay, Aboriginal man, forget it. Got you. This is how we're going to imagine
this conversation in this lecture tonight. By understanding the place in which these people
that I'm talking about, which aren't foreign from us, they are our neighbours and have been for a very, very long time have different imaginations around the legal systems that are being imposed, or that are being
transformed in order to give greater rights to those
in the region. Assemblage theory forces us, I think to see
colonization, culture, and queerness as
constantly in motion, shifting and
influencing each other. For me, it's not
just a picture of domination versus resistance. There
has to be both. That's a really
interesting site in a place to sit that domination
requires resistance. Resistance requires
a domination. It's this that I
think we we'll also tassle with through
this lecture. Through this
lens, I want to understand a better kind of framework for
understanding what queer
indigenous means in the context of
queer indigenous. Queer indigenous queer or indigenous or queer
indigenous Words. They are also
words that are imposed upon groups of people across the world. Many of us consider these to be a Western
framework for understanding queerness or a
Western framework for understanding
indigenous people. It becomes a
bit complicated when we talk about
queer indigenous, even though those
words don't really hold mean for many of
those communities. So people will know what indigenous
queer words are or identities
across the Pacific. Does anybody want
to shout someone? Have a go? Takatāpui from
New Zealand. Faʻafafine from Samoa. We've got two. Two out of the
many thousands of communities that
exist across the region, that is so vast. Colonialism is working.
It's still here. We as people who are
largely educated, Melbourne Prestigious
Melbourne Law School have slightly become uneducated on those in the
region in which we. How do we think about
legal frameworks and justice about people who have been marginalized,
where we can't even name them. I think the European colonial powers
that arrived in the Pacific
brought with them obviously their guns and their missionaries
and trade, but a legal framework that fundamentally opposes
Indigenous norms. Not people, but laws. And that's a good distinction to make between that. The British, French,
Dutch, Spanish imposed the legal system
that regulated the life and the aspect of life in the colonies, including gender
sexuality in the body. So, these legal systems were not only an extension of European sovereignty
over indigenous lands, but as a tool
to control and suppress and suppress
indigenous identity, particularly through
criminalization of their practices, whether that be just being or just
trying to love. We criminalized it. So the most
prominent example of the British Empire's
reliance on this form of regulation was
the offenses against the persons
act of 1861, which introduced the
criminalization of unnatural offenses
across its colonies. But we know Justice
Blackstone's work earlier proceeds in and around buggery and the use
of such terms, in order to control
and regulate people that the
European powers, particularly in British,
were trying to do. So when they planted
the flag in Australia, for example, in 1788, It became illegal for anybody
in Australia, for any Aboriginal person
at 1788 to be gay. Despite 60,000 years
of things that were happening on day one
of planting a flag. Not only was
the land taken, but the right to love someone in the way
they wanted to express that love was
imposed upon you. Obviously,
this imposition isn't walking
around being like, you're gay, you're out, doesn't
happen like that. We know that laws often influence
the way that societies and cultures and Morales will interact
with each other. This law was
meant to provide a justification in which the perversity of nature, the savagery became illuminated within public. So, the legal systems, the law along with
earlier statutes, criminalized consensual same sex relations under broad terms like buggery,
or gross indecency. Gross indecency is such a good term A friend of mine says I'm profesionally
offended. and I'm like, I'm so using that I'm professionally
offended by this term. This imposition was not just about
regulating behavior. It was about a colonial strategy for domination, rooted often in Victorian era Christian values that conflated
sexuality with morality and public order. In French colonies,
the Napoleonic Code or the Code Cal initially criminalized same
sex relations between consenting adults, but imposed strict
public morality laws, and enforced heteronormative
behavior, and gender conformity. This would have gotten killed a long time ago. But in practice, colonial
administration in French Pacific
territories often imposed severe
social controls, further criminalizing
public expressions of non heteronormative behavior through local ordinances, and here's the kicker,
religious policies. In both legal traditions, indigenous norms
around gender and sexuality were
systematically dismantled with European authorities
seeking to reshape local laws to reflect their own
societal values. Indigenous Pacific
societies, which often recognize fluidity in their gender, found that the systems of customary laws were
slowly being eroded. At the same time,
Western customary laws on sexuality were exploding and
being evolving. This dichotomy strange
in my mind, that over the
last 200 years, particularly in the Australian
context, queer indigenous
almost is erased Well, queerness in Australia, particularly in
Melbourne, sexy. This is about
the way in which society functions and
your place in society. If your place in
society is at the center, of course, your sexuality is going to be bold and audacious, and you go girl. But if you're indigenous, first nations,
migrant, refugee, religious, becomes a
little bit more complex. A little bit more
misunderstood. I think what we will find in exploring legal
codes across the Pacific will represent a kind of radical shift in
the relationship between state power
and the individual, particularly in
the Pacific. Now, I want to couch
that again because this term
individual really has no place within
indigenous communities. We know that communities
are families, and kinship structures and are structured as so. The idea of the
individual and their relationship to the state power is
really complex. Examples like sodomy law, impose British
legal codes, criminalize these acts as state sanctioned
systems of surveillance
and punishment. Can someone tell me what
that means, what do you think
that means? It's gonna be an interactive lecture. Who imposed punishment in regards to sexuality. Arthur Cook once said that anybody found in
using buggery should be sent on a boat
to New Zealand where he shall be eaten
by the Natives. You guys get a free trip to New Zealand. Whoo! why is removing the objects from purview important in terms of criminality
and punishment? So, Sickness
doesn't spread. You're doing... in the 80's. hiding it and making it invisible so you don't see it. Can't be real.
That's such a phase. I don't know any gay people says Bob Kat What else? Why
might removing it be the option
of punishment? You're not normal. There's nobody like you around here is essentially
what these laws and punishment is
trying to create. Is social and
cultural order, sanctioned by the state. This becomes
really perplexed for people who have never positioned themselves
in a relationship with what that means if the state is not
attacking you. It's hard for people to conflate the notion of empathy when it comes to the notion that the state is trying to
get rid of you. They're trying to erase me. I often hear in marches
on the streets of Melbourne But people don't
understand what that context means in relationship
to history, in relationship to current state political powers, and the suppression
of identities when it comes to
legislative frameworks, where if you're not named as such, you're erased. and That's a really
interesting and complex approach to legislative justice. Right now, tomorrow,
we're about to submit the
national ... rapid review of domestic family sexual violence
approaches in Australia and mean that the five other co panelists are frantically texting
each other being like What about the monks or the vegans
we're trying to get trying to make sure
everyone is included. But in doing so,
we're forgetting the primal position of this is to understand the complexity of the nature. And I think that's two extreme example around how ... and
responses happen. But nonetheless, it gives, I think an interesting
exploration into the heart of what
it is that we're trying to get
at in terms of conversations on
legal precedent and sexuality. So Religion takes a really interesting
place here as well. Colonial powers
rationalize that these laws as part of their broader
"civilizing" missions, were framed as a way for European
legal norms to correct what
they viewed as moral failings of
indigenous societies. You didn't disappear.
Your ugly people. That's a moral
failing on you. You didn't
disappear. You're gay. You didn't disappear.
You're lesbians. That's a moral failing
on you as a society, therefore barbaric.
Therefore, savage. The act of disappearing becomes so interesting within this topic because it's literally the punishment
and the control. Right now we're seeing
an incredible rise in missing indigenous
women and children from
around the world. We have been watching for a very long time queer and trans people particularly trans women become missing
and murdered. It's the disappearing...
often says that hurts the most Because when we disappear,
and no states up. Where never to be found. If we're disappeared
in legal frameworks, as a way to make sure that everybody
feels included. I think we often miss
the point around what public morality and order are opposed to justifying, which is giving
little regard for the social and cultural consequences of
indigenous people who just want love and live on the lands
that they've lived on. It's a very simple motion. But the persistence of colonial laws, I think, well into the
modern era speaks to its power to
be sustainable. Despite the formal
end of colonial rule where many Pacific
nations can continue to maintain colonial era laws that criminalize same
same sex relationships, and reinforce these
rigid gender roles. These laws have to be put into context in
which they've been embedded both
as past, colonial Legal sorry, post colonial
legal frameworks, but have created
direct legacy of colonialism in the culture and the society today. So let's go through
a few examples. So we've got
the section 377 of the Fiji Penal Code, which has similar laws in Papua Guinea and Samoa, which criminalize the same sex sexual behavior
or activity, which draws
direct influence from the British
colonial statutes. While some Pacific nations have made moves toward decriminalization and legal frameworks
and reform, others have remained
deeply resistant to it. That's an interesting
idea that people have resisted
the resistance, and we'll get
into that later. The legal
frameworks imposed by colonial powers are up held by contemporary
political and religious elites who continue to use
these laws to control social
behavior and to often suppress LGBTQ plus rights or the appearance
of LGBTQI+ people. Flags everywhere.
Everywhere I turn is a pride flap.
Thank me for it. These laws have been I think the entrenchment of conservative
religious values, which were
introduced a long time ago through the
missionary activity, which I think now act
as obstacles to reform. I'm not suggesting
that we get rid of religion
completely. But the way in which somebody is allowed or not allowed to love
somebody else, I think goes against most general
frameworks about what religion
is meant to do, love thy neighbor, care for community, et cetera. But seeing these as obstacles is
really interesting because when we trace
the legal history, we see that
colonial powers did this to
maintain an order that reshaped indigenous
legal systems and imposed the new norms. After formal independence, Pacific nations have
often struggled to extricate
themselves from the deeply embedded
colonial legacy and legal system that
were imposed upon them. And so the far more
reaching relics, I think of the past is that these laws
have involved to function as agents of moral and
legal control, aligning with
often nationalist and religious
narratives that many nations in
the Pacific have adopted in their post colonial state
building processes. So in countries like Fiji, New Guinea or Samoa, colonial era laws are not just the remnants
of the past, but living and
breathing elements of contemporary
legal frameworks. So Fiji, for example, initially inherited
its anti-sodomy laws from the British Empire. And though Fiji repealed
that law in 2010, the longstanding
legal culture that pathologized homosexuality remains very difficult
to dismantle. In Papa New Guinea, despite achieving
independence in 1975, Colonial sodomy era laws still perpetuate
social cultural norms. But here in New
Guinea, though, criminalization serves as a mechanism of control, especially in rural areas where local customs often defy or defers
to colonial era legal codes as sources
of order and morality. Go away. We don't
want to see you. We don't
want to hear you. You don't exist. The law says you don't exist, therefore, you
don't exist. It's written there on this document.
Do I see it? Samoa? Despite shift from German and Latest
New Zealand rule to independence from 62. The Modern Crimes Act in 2013 enshrines
colonial ideas by criminalizing
male sex sexual acts with penalties up to seven years
imprisonment. Here, the colonial
rules have not been swept away by
post colonial reform, but have been
reconstituted with a localized framework
that blends colonial legal control with Samoan Christian values. What does resistance look like in this setting? Here in these countries,
you have deeply, deeply entwined
religious cultures. Will who by the way, not even getting to
the fact that they have had longstanding sexual
and gender expressions prior to the invasion of these cultures
and these ideas. Yet somehow we're still upholding them in
these countries. Why is that do you think? beyond the social order
and the control? Read my mind.
Theory, of course, but I think we're on to something that the
notion that we have to go back to
something that we've not fully understood
because of the histories of
generations being told, no, no, no, no I think the
challenge for many of us in societies, whether we be in
indigenous ones or not is to understand
what it means to renegotiate an
understanding of culture where there's
been a disruption. I think what we're
seeing play out across the specific is
communities who are resisting
through disruption, who are saying, Hang
on, how do we uphold these Christian
values when they've only been around for the last couple
of hundred years. Remember
Anthony Mundine's twit. young people. old one who are... BBC And In Season two
episode three, It was a episode that focused on gay
love relationships with Aboriginal Australia. In this episode, a gay
Aboriginal man comes home and brings
a partner home, but his child is
asleep upstairs. Nothing untoward happen. Very consensual,
very loving. It was a great kind
of film of it. Anthony Mundine, for those who probably have no idea. ex- NRL football player
in Aboriginal in Australia turned
Boxer. Play Boxer. But said, I think it was a Facebook comment
or whatever it was. Adam and Eve were
part of our stories. Adam and Eve was
in the dreamtime What tribe Adam
and Eve from? Because that story is only 1788 in Australia. Yet somehow has
undone his notion of it anyways
is that religion has undone the last
60,000 years. We know that there
was a relationship between religious
entities and the state despite many claiming
their separation. Here, I think
Mundine explores this notion of
punishment and control. How dare we watch
something so perverse on TV on the
ABC of all places? A gay aboriginal man
wanting to find love. That didn't
exist across the last 60,000 years
of course it didn't Because when men
go out hunting with no women for
a long time, nothing happens.
Let me tell you. Nothing. Women
like, whoo, they're gone. These Things are so interesting
when it comes to the application of law and the idea then of justice. Because if we're
not reconciling both the application and the notion of justice, in the complexity, as
I've just explained. Then where do we go
with this information? So these colonial laws obviously embedded into
the fabric of post colonial
legal systems. But I think are part of a deeper
entanglement between identity formation
and legacy. The retention of
colonial laws criminalizing homosexuality
in places like Papua New Guinea,
Samoa, and Fiji, demonstrate how these laws have become tools
for asserting a national identity in post colonial
countries. Rather than
being discarded as colonial impositions, these laws have
been reframed as protectors of morality and
cultural integrity. That's lovely, isn't it? So nice. Your cultural
integrity. But they are reinforced, and this is the important
part reinforced by powerful influences
of religious bodies, which were introduced by employing missionaries. That relationship
between missionary, sexuality and identity, particularly our
native status, becomes even a bigger
intersection in which to explore all of the things that
are happening there. In this sense, the legal frameworks
inherited from these colonial
rulers have been reconstituted with
pacific nationalism. They serve as a means of asserting independence, cultural
sovereignty, even as they perpetuate the
colonial ideologies. This paradox, I think, is, or the use of colonial laws to defend post colonial identity, reveals a complex way in which legal systems can be both instruments
of colonial control, but symbols of national Self determination. Now,
that's interesting. Eddie, How many gay you
got up in your self determined
community in Larrakia? How many gays in Hong Kong, China ,Taiwan So we're here I think at this intersection where
we're starting to understand the
legacies of building nations across the Pacific and across regions
throughout the world. Not based on but influenced
by religious values. I think when we start to unpack this a
little bit more, we see that
these symbols of national self determination
become really fixated on the idea of the lie being
sold to them. Clean up the streets, get rid of the gays. Get rid of anybody
who's not willing to participate in what we have determined as normal. We have shunned them
and shamed them. In Samoa, for instance, the Crimes Act retention of criminal penalties for same sex relation is often justified by appeals
to Christian morality, which is seen as synonymous with
Samoan identity. However, this conflation
obscures the fact that these legal frameworks
are not indigenous, but the products
of colonial rule. Similarly in Papua new Guinea, colonial era sodomy laws have been integrated into legal cultures that view these provisions
as central to maintaining
social order, even as they
marginalize and criminalize lgbtqia+
people. The endurance of
colonial laws in the Pacific is a
reflection of how these structures have
been internalized within all of us in post colonial
identity formation. Laws that criminalize
homosexuality enforce these rigid
roles and they have remained deeply
embedded in the legal and
cultural landscapes of many communities
across the world, but most certainly
in the Pacific. And they even assert them, even with their
independence. Efforts to reform
these laws, whether through legal
decriminalization or broader
societal shifts, face significant
challenges due to the intersection
of colonial legacy, nationalist identity,
and religious morality. By conforming to
colonial origins, these laws have these laws and entangling
them from post nationalist narratives. Pacific nations must
begin to move toward, I think a legal
system that genuinely reflects
indigenous ways of being, doing and knowing. I think for too long
Pacific nations have clambered to this
notion that only the colonial
era will save us. Despite thousands of
years of existing. We've been sold the lie. You're savage
without these laws. Clean up your street,
get rid of the gays. I keep repeating this because that's
what's happening. Efforts to reform in recent years in New
Zealand and Australia, I think we've made
significant strides. I think one of the greater ones across the Pacific, but we could be
doing better. There is still
only exist one Commissioner for LGBTQIS+ Communities in
Australia that happens to be
here in Victoria. We didn't get what
we were promised in terms of
legal reforms at a national level with this new
government despite many of us forgetting
the deal that was done. We gave up
marriage equality. Well, sorry we got marriage
equality and gave up rights to children
and teachers in religious schools.
That was the deal. And we forgot
about that deal. When we pushed and we won the marriage equality in Australia and
across New Zealand. And now we're on to the
other one. Hang on. You're back tracking
on the deal. It's become a really interesting
conversation, I think within communities around what that
means to have a deal where it's
okay for teachers and students to be discriminated within
religious schools. But we've got
marriage equality. Meanwhile, every migrant and
community member, every first nations member is like I don't care about marriage. Here we see an interesting site
of resistance. Where for me, I
couldn't care less. Is not high on my radar as an Indigenous person to become married it's important. Of course. But resisting
coloial power has to be overcomed by the cultural values of those people or communities
of which it serves. So for LGBTQ+ people or queer Indigenous people, where marriage equality, where Amnesty International came running in and said,
marriage equality. We don't care. So
the conversation moves from reform around decriminalization of practices to a
conversation around accepting cultural norms
as the framework in which legal resistance becomes the norm. What do I mean by that? Where do we see
that in practice? We're on stream in
terms of colonial legacy, and we've marched
full on ahead towards understanding
the cultural norms that have happened
in societies. Great, I'm not the only one.
There are some examples. We'll get to
that in a bit, I want to couch this
part of the into this part of the lecture I guess, the legislative
achievements that reflect the societal
shifts from recognizing LGBTQIA+ people with both countries
positioning themselves as
religious leaders and promoting legal
equality for LGBTQIA+ people. So we've got New Zealand, which Maori
concepts of gender and sexualities often differs significantly
from Western norms. So traditional
Maori recognizes the fluidity of
gender roles and same sex
relationships. We're not necessarily
stigmatized before the imposition
of colonial law. And the challenge
in New Zealand today is to how to reconcile with
both of that. Challenge in
Australia, of course, how to reconcile sexual sorry, sistergirls or
brotherboys To reconcile our first
nations understandings of queerness within frameworks like
marriage equality. That's I think a really
interesting site. In marriage
equality debates that happened in
Australia where First Nations people were overwhelmingly
coming out in force of it to support it. We see an interesting
rejection of what it is that they do as community to what it is that was good for good for the
greater community. We see this also happening in civil rights
movements in America, where Black women took a step back and were asked
by Black men, hold off from your
feminist stuff, just for now. Just park, just carry that baggage a
little bit more. We've got a whole
thing happening. Don't muck it up for us. Clean the streets, hide
the gays, hide women. We see this pattern
emerging around control and order,
punishment and society. It's not new.
People often think that colonialism
as an event, not a structure is a
It's not strategic, but it is very strategic. You can't colonize
entire regions of the world without knowing exactly what it
is that you're doing. In Australia, obviously, we were colonized
since 1788. In America, for example, they have an
extra 200 years of colonialism
on top of us. People forget this that England had 200 years of practice before
they got here. They knew everything that they were about to do. They don't get here
and be like, that. They know exactly
the technique because they're
perfected it for hundreds and
hundreds of years. Colonial forces happen. So We get really upset, I think in Western
countries, particularly from
the left where we're trying to change the laws. But we ourselves,
I think need to do a disservice to ourselves for
not recognizing that we're trying to do this within a generation. Where they've had
hundreds of years to perfect the techniques that we're trying
to dismantle. It will be almost
impossible to do it and change the legal frameworks
that need to be changed within a single
generation. Why? It's not the legal frameworks
we're trying to change. That can be done
with the pans. It's the social order. It's the rejection of
cleaning the streets, hiding the guys,
hiding the women. That is community
power that will take a very,
very long time. In the Pacific region, it has manifested in quite an interesting way. There have been criticisms to decolonization,
which should, I think feature maybe a future entire
lecture on its own because I think it's an interesting
legal concept. That has been taken
over in the same way that defund the police has.
it's a scary term. We don't really
understand it, but really it's exercising equity
in a different way. But I think what the
Pacific does for us is it gives us an
understanding of the limitations of
Western frameworks, where movements
in New Zealand or Australia while
they're grounded in Western legal and
political traditions, is at odds with the indigenous people that they're
trying to serve. We know that? We
know that there's not going to be a
large swathe of indigenous
specific laws or customary practices
that's going to be imbued upon the
entire population. It's just not we know that's not how
happen for pride, despite there being
a rainbow flag on every corner sometimes. I think this is
the example for us to understand around how recognition of
laws happens in the customs and control the cultures of social people, us
be social people. The persistence
in this way, I think, I'm just jumping ahead here So the resistance
in this way, particularly in the
in the Pacific, becomes a really interesting
site for inquiry. The Methodist
Church in Fiji, which has historically
been aligned with British
colonial covenants, has played a crucial
role in betting those values into Fijian
society today. Over time, the
church became one of the most influential
religious institutions in
Fiji, obviously, I acted as the moral
arbiter and compass in political and
social matters. Even after the formal
end of colonial rule, the Methodist Church maintained
significant power, reinforcing colonial era legal frameworks
that criminalize same sex relationships
as part of a broader narrative of purity and cultural
preservation. What are we trying
to preserve? What's the moral
imperative here? When we say as
queer people or as trans people or gender diverse people or
indigenous people, you aren't allowed to have your own law that is imposed on
everybody else. Even in the act
of resistance, we are recognizing that
we don't want to give up what has been
afforded to us. So gays might dress less gay. Women might less women. I know you know
what that means. In order for
purity, social cohesion. Free the nipple campaign was wild. Wild. Blackfellas in Australia have
been doing that for thousands of years. I get it. There's a complexity here between what it is
that we understand between history and modernity when it comes to resistance. Because when white
women freed the nipple, it went wild. But for Blak women,
savagery and barbaric, cleaning the streets,
hiding the gays, hiding women
will always show up when you go
looking for it. How long do I have left? I'm
on a roll here. Somebody will give me a time at some
point, I'm sure. I think there also
is at a state level, the reclamation of queer
Indigenous identities. It often faces significant political and
legal resistance in countries like
Papua New Guinea, Samoa, and Fiji, where criminalizing
homosexuality is still on the books. In New Guinea,
for example, the continued
criminalization of Same sex relationship
is justified by the state as a defense of national sovereignty
and cultural values, even though the
laws themselves were imposed by
colonial authorities. Packed up and born. But the culture
still remains. I was just recently
in the Torre Strait, where they firmly
believe that the practice being called coming of the light, which is when the
missionaries arrived. They believe in their
heart and hearts that it's what saved the Torres Strait Island culture from being eroded. They will never, I think, remove that
cultural custom from that
community because it's ingrained deeply
in their societies. I wonder why we see such
a high suicide rate in those communities that come to queer or trans. Why they're not frequently around or disappeared.
Clean the streets, hide the gays. Where cultures submit to colonial authorities, Customs, love expression, often
the first to go. My grandfather
who grew up on the Cotton farms of
Northern new South Wales, wasn't allowed to
grandparent or parent his kids. It's not what men did back then. He parented in hiding. Gave us little lollies and treats on the side and showed his love
in ways that were not public out of fear of persecution of being called pedophile
or whatever. My dad and his dad don't really get along
because of that. But the history in the moment,
isn't rational. I'm looking at this from the grandchild's
perspective, that the relationship
between those two could have never worked
out because of the timing in
which it was. Incredibly sad. Maybe a great understanding
and a tool for healing. But we see this relationship
between custom, time period and expression happen
throughout history. How many times have
we read in a book? They were friends. We know what that means.
They were just friends The wall's blue, the curtain's blue the same analogy
that we often use to hide people. There's a shame,
I think that's attached to an expression
of the past that has hurt so many
people. I was very fortunate
to work with the Coroners court
here in Victoria on understanding
LGBTQI+ suicides in Victoria where 208 lives
were lost. Preventable. Often,
what was really interesting when we delve into those 208 lives. Many were from
Asian countries who were here in Australia expressing themselves in ways that they
never thought possible. The notion of going back. This is how colonial laws Impact us all We'd like to think that
we're not in it. We like to think that we're
detached from it. But we're not. It
affects us deeply. So, I was really loving going through some case studies across
the Pacific in and around where
resistance has occurred. In the Tongan
society, leitis, which I'm probably
butchering has a really complex and interesting
understanding of what cultural
authenticity means. For this society, it's a prime example of how resistance
movements in the Pacific must contend with the
complexities of cultural authenticity and the legacies
of colonialism. So TLA advocates for
the rights of leitis, which are gender diverse
individuals who have historically
held respected roles in Tongan society. However, the movement
also grapples with internal tensions
regarding what it means to be
authentically Tongan. Because being
authentically Tongan isn't to be gay. Being authentically
Asian isn't to be gay. Clean the streets.
Hide the gays. You get the point. In what TLA has done in
Tonga has been negotiating between reclaiming pre
colonial identities and also aligning
them with this notion of global LGBTQIA+ activism. Some activists in the
TLA have argued for a focus on traditional Tongan cultural
practices that affirms the role of leitis drawing on pre colonial
understandings of gender and sexuality and assert that they are
an active part of what it means
to be Tongan. However, there
are some within the movement who push
for this alignment to be part of a
broader queer right rather than
Tongan rights. Why? Black women, just take. We've got a
thing happening. Just shut up for a moment. Is Essentially
what's happening. There are places in which resistance within the resistance
is occurring. In, at a state level in
Papua New Guinea and in Fiji, There are Christian
doctrines that have become deeply
embedded within within identities
since colonisation. For example, the TLA,
another example, seeks to challenge
the colonial legacy of legal
repression. Well, upholding
this notion that in order
for us to exist as part of a
global majority, we can't be Tongan. In order to have
our global rights, we can't be Tongan. In order to get married. So Again, punishment,
control, it all shows up. The movement in Tonga is finding a
way to reclaim these identities
where contexts within both colonial
and religious legacies are married. What an interesting re-negotiation of marriage quality. That you can be
non white and cultured and
from a long line of lineage of Queer ancestry. And still be part of the modern
global movement. In Samoa, the
Fa'afafine Association understands the politics of visibility very well. They examine
resistance within resistance around issues of visibility
and representation. Does anybody
understand what fa'afafine means? Is the word new for you? Anyone want to have an attempt to explain what it is? Is there any Samoan people
in the room present? Fa'afafine are individuals who embody both male
and female traits? Often it's the
last male member of a family being born will often
be raised as female. They're socialized
fully as female in the community. Understanding both their spirits of maleness and femaleness. Yet transphobia exists in Samoa. How how does that happen? Where you have such deep cultural recognition of identity within
kinship and family. Inside the household We recognize you as a
fa'afafine, as a society, never. Colonial laws have
a way of showing up in a legacy
that is enduring. That even in
the family unit where we have raised
you in that way, we can't protect you once you walk
outside the door. You know, Josh, I
know Eddie's son, Josh. And when I was doing
my PhD thesis, I was talking
to Josh about how he's raising
his son and whether that was
different from the way that
Eddie raised him. And he said Dad
knew that he had to protect me
in ways that I didn't have to
do with my son. That was an interesting
idea that for their resistance
generationally, protection look
differently. I hope that in
places like Samoa, where we've relaxed
in the region, I think our
understandings of queerness and transness
a little bit, might impact a
generation in a positive way in
a generational or two. That's decolonization,
by the way, just as a little side note, but we must confront Christian or
religious hegemonies, that have often redefined cultural authenticity
in our communities. Mundine said that Adam and Eve were traditionally
aboriginal. Well, you know what I mean. This notion that
the movement of decolonization
or in this case, global Queer politics, because global queer politics by the way is also
decolonization. We just don't think of
it in that way because it's a Western movement.
How can we resist ourselves
in that sense. So in navigating global
queer frameworks, the fa'afafine movement in Samoa faces some really
interesting tensions as they advocate for
increased participation in international
platforms. So arguing that
visibility on the global set stage is essential for advancing
queer rights in Samoa. Others are concerned that this alignment with
Western frameworks, particularly queer
frameworks, risk erasing unique cultural context
of which fa'afafine exists. Their argument is that you can't be for fa'afafine and a global queer person because the two don't
recognize each other. Recognition within the
law and then therefore within justice, so complex. It's not just simple for me to say
in that sense. We have to go deeper and understand why
the recognition is not available for us to look at or through. Colonialism, I think, will always be present forever. Bold statement
to make. Considering we won't be here for the next couple of
hundred years anyways, but If we manage to fit past this global
earth shattering event that is
climate change, perhaps the next
big frontier, will be really repealing
the ways in which colonial legacies have formed and
reformed societies, not only in the specific, but across the world. When it comes to simple
things like loving, thy neighbour whether thy neighbour be your friend What's fascinating about
the fa'afafine experience also is the way that it's become a
digital movement. I think apps like TikTok and other social media
platforms have really brought to light what
it means to exist as an individual
in a family unit, in a community or in a state in and around the
global presence of other individuals. We see that
happening right now with Palestinian
resistance, we see that happening
with post resistance, we see it happening
on a grander scale, and we simplifying it down to to symbolic gestures
of recognition. I'm recognizing
that you're looking and feeling
the same way that others might be
looking and feeling in a way that expresses
that visually. A through iconography. But how do you can't drill down
further than that. Because otherwise, we're
going to be walking around with Wiradjuri flags and Wurndjeri
flags and Boonwurrung flags and it's just
not possible. So we simplify it.
But there's a danger, I think when law becomes simplified
in that way, clean the streets,
erase the gays. When people aren't reflected in the laws or in society, they feel like they
don't have voice. Every suicide, almost every suicide
is preventable. Often people don't see themselves being
reflected. It has to come back to the way which we've set up our frameworks that
apply punishment, control or order. When we look at
this from a drug and alcohol policy
perspective, we have shamed an entire group of people. In Australia or
in countries across the Pacific,
we don't heal. Because that means
that we've got to look at why it is
that we're healing. Understand that that
shame attached to that healing is a direct relationship
to colonialism. That's just a
bigger conversation that I think many
in this region or perhaps
across the world are just too
afraid to have. So if I've learned anything
really from camps, I've changed it now to
churches and colonies. Because it just makes sense is that we have
to start to recognize that there are deeply entwined resistance within
the resistance, and that's an important
focus for us to have when it comes
to the what do we do? What's the call to action? I think for me, what I've learned are a
number of things, but amplifying Indigenous voices,
particularly within the region is
so important. We have communities who are digitizing their land because it's about to be lost. They are moving
into a new way of thinking about
land ownership and education for their
generations to come, knowing that their land
is going to be gone. If only we'd had
that technology before 1788. I think there's a really
interesting moment for us to ponder now that we have some understanding
of what it means to resist
resistance, to be a legacy
within a legacy and to be a part
of a global thing. This is me trying
to be gay and queer and modern
at the same time. You get it now,
It's fully there. But I shouldn't have to explain that that's
what I'm doing. We should be operating by now at a level in which we have some recognition that people walk through
society differently, and that we all play
the social game of dressing nicely or doing things that just might make us fit
in a little bit more. But that is
at the direct assault to the soul who knows that just wants to flare a little flare or do
a little better. From many white women
years ago, it was the red lipstick. Look at me being
dangerous. Acting out. It's what it was. We hid the women. Not anymore. Little acts of resistance
like that in which change people's
perception of their value and
worth in society. Is so important
because at some point when we convince
the rest of people that come to
Melbourne Law school, that we're
okay that we are allowed to participate
in society, even in legal definitions
and frameworks, we might see that
be applicable in social cohesion
order and control. But until we
reach that point, we're going to
have to have great conversations
like this where I have to point
out the differences between Justice
Kirby and I. One generation. You get the point. And when Justice
Kirby was my age, there was no way to
have this conversation. And that's not his fault. Just like it wasn't my
grandfather's fault for not being
able to parent. But it's the moments
we do now that impact, the decisions we'll make about people's lives, seven generations to come. That's what I think
is really important. That I think is
what I found throughout looking
at the challenges in the legal code across Pacific cultures
that are so deeply ingrained and their religious
relationships that have formed, I think the intersection
between both. That it's not good enough for
us to attack god or to attack the law or to attack
the racist uncle. We're going to put
it all into context. The context here matters when it comes to
those in the Pacific. That queer indigenous
people aren't just fighting
for themselves, but for the broader group. It sucks when the
broader group doesn't fight
back with us. That somehow my
recognition as a queer indigenous
person wanting to be included is at the expense
of your inclusion. We've tried, I think the way of straight white men for a
very long time. America will see a
very different shift. I think if VP Harris gets up, what does that
mean for white women. we've jumped a group. Sorry. You'll get there one day. I'm sure you're excellent. It's language I've often heard in my life. It's good to see equity play out even now. I guess the takeaway
point for me is that Despite history being so gay, because it is. We walk through any colonial
painting wall and there's always two
men off squandering somewhere or two women
plowing a field or whatever it
might be playing and it's present. It's there if we
look hard enough. But maybe I'm suggesting we don't actually need
to look that hard. We just need
to accept that for some people,
their queerness, their transness, and
their relationship to both has always been, don't hide me. I'm here. Two figures up
in the back of a painting is literally
saying to you. I'm here. I'm around. I've always been here. And so I think
it's our duty to reject the notion
of disappearing, to reject the notion
that we can't put people into a mirror
to be reflected. I think all of us
in this room in some way somehow have felt what it means
to not be reflected. And we can't ever wish that upon a next
generation. So the Pacific is
gay and very trans, lots of trans people and lots of gender diversity
across the Pacific, go us. But I suspect we'll
find that across the world if we go looking hard
enough. Thank you.