One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has moved a motion in the senate attempting to restore the definition of a man and a woman.
Hanson tried to reintroduce the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Acknowledging Biological Reality) Bill 2024 to the Senate.
“I think this is a debate that we need to have. It is concerning many Australians; what is happening in our country,” Hanson said (pdf) in the Senate on Sept. 2.
“You hear all the time, as to what is happening in our educational system, that people are actually being told they can choose whether they want to be a boy or a girl. Let’s be logical about it and let’s talk common sense for a change, instead of the load of rubbish that’s going around.”
The proposed legislation would amend the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 to remove references to gender identity and reinstate the biological definitions of man and woman.
“Biological reality is: male and female—the essential basis for procreation,” Hanson said.
“I’ve never known of a man to deliver a baby yet … People born male cannot bear children. It’s determined by the chromosomes and it’s determined by DNA. It doesn’t matter how much you might think you want to be a female, you cannot and never will be a female.”
Hanson has previously attempted to bring the bill to parliament, however, it was blocked at the first reading stage.
Usually, a bill being blocked at the first reading stage is an unusual step.
Greens Stands with ‘Transgender Children’
On Sep. 2, Australian Greens Whip Senator Nick McKim said the bill would remove protections on the basis of gender identity from the Sex Discrimination Act.
McKim labelled the legislation “transphobic.” He said it sought to use the lives and wellbeing of transgender people in this country as “political pawns.”
“Senator Hanson wants to fight the culture wars, doing so in the full knowledge that this will harm
some of the most vulnerable people in our country, including children,” he said.
McKim wanted to very clearly say that the Greens proudly stood with Australians who identify as transgender.
“We proudly stand with transgender children in this country,” he said.
“I want to say to trans people in this country, no matter how old they are, no matter where they come from, no matter their cultural backgrounds—and there are many—that we have their backs in here. They are loved.”
Coalition Argues for Bill to Be Debated in Senate
Meanwhile, Coalition Senator Paul Scarr expressed support for debate on the legislation going ahead.
“While the Senate has the opportunity to reject a bill at the first reading stage, in practice, the first reading is almost always passed without opposition and is regarded as a purely formal stage,” he said.
He argued the normal process enabled bills to be fairly considered and debated by the Senate before a substantive decision is taken.
Scarr said this should only be deviated from in the most extreme of circumstances.
“As in all cases, a vote on the first reading should not be taken as a position on the substantive legislation,” he said.
“Similarly, a vote supporting an inquiry into a bill should not be taken as endorsing or rejecting that bill.”
Labor Argues Against Debate on Legislation
Meanwhile, New South Wales Minister Tim Ayres rejected the motion from Hanson, labelling it “harmful” and “indecent.”
He warned the Senate should not be used as a “a vehicle for propagating hateful or harmful speech” that hurts decent young Australians and decent people.
“The indecency of the propositions that have just been put by Senator Hanson reaffirms my confidence in the judgement the government took in terms of the position that we are adopting here,” he said.
Acting Deputy President Varun Ghosh put the question that the motion be agreed to. However, since a division had been called, the matter was deferred until a future Senate sitting.
The Senate recently stopped debate on a similar bill from Liberal Senator Alex Antic.
“Man means a member of the male sex, irrespective of age. Woman means a member of the female sex irrespective of age,” the bill said.
However, the Labor and Greens majority voted against the bill moving forward in the Senate.






















