- 11 minutes ago
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:00Hi, I'm Kumi Taguchi.
00:02On this episode of Insight, have we reached the end of debate?
00:07Debate in this country is either febrile or deceased.
00:10I think plenty of the debates that we're having are harmful.
00:13They simply rob me of my voice.
00:15I was regularly called a Burma.
00:17Things like your transphobic, homophobic, your Islamophobic shutdown debate.
00:23What if you and your husband are sitting at a table together and say, American politics
00:27comes up?
00:27Well, I rise to the occasion.
00:33Lila, you're 15, you're part of your school's debating team.
00:37I'm going to throw it right out there.
00:39Tell us, what is a trad wife?
00:42So a trad wife is short for a traditional wife.
00:44And it's a movement that fosters women to do traditional roles.
00:49So it stems from 1950s kind of ideologies.
00:52So often women are staying home doing housekeeping, while the men go out and make the primary
00:57income.
00:58You were asked to argue that the trad wife movement was good for women.
01:01How did you feel about that?
01:03I was very against it initially.
01:05But then when I go in and do research and kind of look at statistics, I was kind of like
01:09swaying between sides and kind of found middle ground between both of them.
01:14In debating, do you get to choose a side?
01:16No, so you're given a side in debating.
01:18You're here with your teammates, Ilsa Nevada and Amelia.
01:22Welcome to you all.
01:23Ilsa, how did you feel when you learned you had to argue in favour of trad wives?
01:28I didn't really understand the topic because it was quite different from what I'd initially
01:34heard.
01:35The topic was framed a bit differently.
01:36So it was that the trad wife movement was good for women.
01:39So we were primarily arguing about women's wellbeing and stuff.
01:42So it was a bit different from like just saying women have to stay home and they have to take
01:47on that role of looking after the house and the children.
01:50I'll put it out to all of the team.
01:53Was anyone excited about the topic?
01:56I wouldn't really say I was excited, but I was more like inspired to do lots of research
02:02and find out different points of view from the topic.
02:05Sonia, you're the chairperson for debating South Australia.
02:07You set the topics and you also adjudicate.
02:10Yes.
02:11Why did you choose trad wives?
02:14I'm on the internet all the time.
02:15I'm trawling looking for topics that I think are suitable at a little bit different
02:19or they're current.
02:20And I'd been seeing this trad wife, people have written about it and stuff like that.
02:25So then I thought, yes, that could be a very interesting topic, something's a little bit
02:29different.
02:30But the whole idea of a debate is that it's an intellectual exercise and it's good to
02:35be able to look at the affirmative and a negative case.
02:38So then some of the students, although they didn't say anything, I could tell from the later
02:43debates that I saw that they didn't have their heart in it.
02:46Did you get any feedback from parents about debating that issue?
02:51One of the emails that I received from a school had mentioned that some of the parents weren't
02:56too happy.
02:56After the debate with these girls, I saw a couple of parents who had said they had reservations
03:03about the topic.
03:05But generally in the debating community, everyone accepts the fact that there are topics that
03:10you may not like.
03:11Sometimes schools don't like the topic, not the topic, they don't like the side they're
03:16on.
03:17Girls, how did your families react to you debating that issue?
03:20Dad was quite surprised about the choice of topic because of the South Australia social
03:26media ban.
03:27I don't think many people knew like what a trad wife was, like younger people.
03:32So my mum, she thought that the topic was quite relevant, which really surprised me because
03:38I had no idea what a trad wife was.
03:41I had to ask my mum, I had to ask Lila, we had to talk about it and define it.
03:46Ilsa?
03:47My family didn't have much to say about it, like they always have their opinions on things
03:51and their main stance on it was that while they disagree with what we were arguing, they
03:57were interested in hearing like the complete opposite side of what they believed.
04:01Even the media caught on to your debate.
04:04Sonia, did you expect such a response?
04:08No, I didn't.
04:08I was really quite shocked.
04:11In fact, a friend of mine who was in London at the time rang me and said, goodness, you're
04:16in the Guardian in London.
04:18It started off with someone posting on a Facebook page and it kind of took traction after that,
04:24which I didn't take too much notice of.
04:26But when we started getting the newspaper and radio stations asking us about it, I must
04:32admit I was really, really surprised because these were people who are outside of our debating
04:39community but seem to have an interest in the topic.
04:42What do you think people tend to get offended by?
04:46I think part of it could have been a feminist lens looking at what women should or shouldn't
04:53do and then there is no discussion for an opposing argument.
04:58It's that as though it's settled and that we can't discuss it any further.
05:03That's the only thing I could think of.
05:05Lila, you and your team had to argue for a side you didn't necessarily feel aligned with at first.
05:10What did you learn from that experience?
05:14I think arguing a side you don't agree with, it helps you develop your critical thinking skills.
05:18It also opens up your mind because you're able to understand a side better,
05:21which kind of develops your sympathy as well.
05:23And I also think it allows you to analyse sources and kind of look over research.
05:28Bo So is a two-time world debating champion.
05:31We visited him in Washington DC.
05:37My name is Bo So, I am a two-time world champion debater
05:42and I'm currently an attorney here at one of the great law firms in Washington DC.
05:48I moved from South Korea to Australia when I was eight.
05:52The hardest part of crossing language lines was adjusting to real-life conversation
05:58and the hardest conversations to adjust to were disagreements.
06:02I was a very shy kid on the playground, smiling and nodding, but keeping a distance from the other kids.
06:11I discovered debating in year five and to someone who had been used to being interrupted,
06:18the promise of being heard sounded like a kind of life raft.
06:23Debating changed my life because it gave me a voice.
06:27It gave me a set of tools to try the difficult task of changing someone's mind.
06:34So I went from being a shy kid, afraid above anything else of disagreement,
06:41to representing Australia on the global stage, a dream that I've had for a long time.
06:48Disagreeing is always going to be a leap of faith.
06:51It's one that I took.
06:53And what I can say is that people will surprise you.
06:58That by raising our voice in disagreement, fighting through the discomfort to do that,
07:04that we'll be rewarded with a richer relationship with ourselves, with others and with the world around us.
07:11Can you relate to anything Bo said?
07:14Yeah, I think because debating has helped me to have a safe environment for debating.
07:18A lot of the times when I'm debating issues with my brother at the dinner table,
07:21he's interrupting me constantly and saying points that aren't even true, but debating is very evidence-based
07:27and it allows you to talk for five minutes without anyone else interrupting you.
07:30Where did you guys end up standing on the topic of trad wives after the debate?
07:35I believe that women should be able to do whatever they want to do, whether they want to be a
07:39trad wife
07:40or whether they want to work a nine-to-five, it's really up to them.
07:43And I think as a society, we shouldn't be telling them what they should be doing.
07:47Karen, you're a mother of two adult children.
07:49Is there anyone in your life you disagree with?
07:52Yes. Well, there's several, but the topic tonight, my husband, we agree on many, many things,
07:59but the current political situations in the US have come to, we can't talk about it point.
08:06Really?
08:06He's one way and I'm the other.
08:08Right. So how specifically does that unfold?
08:12He watches a lot of Fox and he obviously reads the paper and gets the other news from locally as
08:19well.
08:19I do some of that, although I can't watch Fox. I can't even be in the room.
08:22And sometimes when a topic comes up, I'll just say, that's just not true. That's just not true.
08:28And then we can't go any further because he doesn't want to argue about it.
08:33We have had, shall we say, things that had escalated from debate to argument,
08:37but we have to kind of just leave it alone sometimes.
08:41Jack, you're Karen's son. Where do you sit?
08:44Well, dad is, I guess, the right leaning family member. We've got a family group chat on Instagram
08:50where specifically mum and I are most often sending notes. We find updates on events,
08:57just whatever we can, I guess. Partially, we're informing each other. Partially,
09:02we're hoping he'll have a look at it and maybe have his mind changed.
09:06Does he engage in those group chats?
09:08Somewhat, yeah. He definitely reads it occasionally. He may not say that he's read it,
09:12but it pops up and he'll occasionally send something back too, although it's never the same amount.
09:18So is it kind of two against one? Like, how does this unfold, say, at the dinner table?
09:22No, I wouldn't say it's two against one. My sister Jamie, she agrees with mum and I for the most
09:28part,
09:28but she acts as kind of a peacekeeper intermediary. She doesn't really like to see things escalate,
09:33but I wouldn't say that it's two against one or that we're really against each other at all. I
09:39think for the most part, our views do align. It's just, I guess, how we go about who we believe
09:45in,
09:46what evidence we believe in and what we're convinced of and the reality around us.
09:51So, Karen, some topics it sounds like are sort of off limits. What if you and your husband are
09:56sitting at a table together with a group of people and say, American politics comes up?
10:00Mm-hmm.
10:01How do you feel in that situation?
10:03I rise to the occasion. I love to be able to have the banter and the conversation. He'll be sitting
10:11there going, oh God, here she goes again. But I love to be able to have that conversation with people
10:16and I'm happy for other people to have an alternate opinion, but I think both parties need to be heard
10:22and given the opportunity to give the evidence of whatever it is you're arguing.
10:26Jack, you work in politics. Are we losing the ability to have uncomfortable conversations?
10:33Yes, is the short answer. In my view, debate, certainly in this country, is either febrile or
10:39deceased. And I think the greatest indicator of that is understanding what free speech is. Within free
10:45speech, there are two elements and without those two elements, you cannot say we have it. First is,
10:51of course, the right to speak. But second is the right, or what I would say, the obligation to listen.
10:57And if one looks across the broad spectrum of debate in this country, many people are fulfilling
11:03their right to speak, but I don't know that we are fulfilling our obligation to listen. And without
11:09that element, then I think we're in a very difficult place. And this extends, of course, to politics.
11:14Politics is, of course, about winning at the end of the day, but one would hope that you're winning
11:19on the basis of a better policy outcome for the majority of people. And I think, unfortunately,
11:25we exist in a political environment where it's all about the politics. It's not about the policy.
11:32And so, if our politicians and people in public life aren't playing with ideas gracefully,
11:38aren't appreciating the fundamental principles of free speech, then we're in a dangerous place.
11:46You caught some backlash for an article you wrote last year. How were you labelled?
11:52It had a very sensationalist headline, but...
11:56That's it there.
11:57There it is. Many people who sought to label me obviously only read the headline.
12:04What I was arguing fundamentally is this term, the rainbow community,
12:12is chief among them. But we have to break from this idea that certain gatekeepers have total
12:20possession over a monolithic idea of a group of people. Yes, I'm gay. There are other gay people
12:27who exist in the society. But that does not mean that our sufferance and our personal identity,
12:33something which we can't change, is ballast for the momentary political cause of a particular group.
12:39And so, in essence, what I think is a more progressive point of view is that, yes,
12:45we come together in struggle, but we allow people to be liberated from the ideas such as their sexuality,
12:52their political ideologies, whatever it may be, which are personal to them. Because when we fail
12:57to do that, which we certainly fail to do in this country, I am prejudiced. So, when I enter into
13:02a
13:03conversation with someone and they find out I'm gay or they may know ahead of time, they will assume
13:08a set of values and beliefs that I may not have. And this is no way to ensure equality. The
13:15greatest way to ensure equality is to have people embedded in the society and connected to the
13:19people next to them. You mentioned at the top of the essay that it took time and courage to express
13:24those views. Why? I had to deal with two fundamental concerns. When you lose both your parents before
13:30the age of 18, you have complex relationships with abandonment and belonging. And what I was fundamentally
13:38doing in writing this article was vitiating any connection I had to this group, even though
13:44I don't believe the group exists. So, I had to contend with that fundamental sense of belonging.
13:50But also, I had to deal with the reality that if you're interested in public life, it doesn't matter
13:57what you say, how eloquently you say it, how thoughtfully you might say it. The political
14:03machinery attacks you on the basis that you have said it. And that weighed on me very heavily. But
14:08I believed I was tacking towards the truth. And on that basis, I thought it needed to be said.
14:13Free speech has been in the news quite a bit recently. How do you feel about legislating
14:19freedom of speech? I'm not a free speech absolutist. I think we do need guardrails.
14:24The incitement to violence is certainly one. Of course, the creation of free speech was with an
14:30intention that we would have a non-violent means of settling dispute. But when one moves to curtail free
14:37speech to such a point, or moves to curtail speech to the point of banning phrases and so on,
14:43such that we are not armed with the very thing that we use as a non-violent means of settling
14:48disputes, then I think we get ourselves into a very dangerous place. And we cut off the capacity
14:55to convince our opposite number, to identify the problems in society, and to have honest and
15:00authentic conversations about how we move forward collectively. Peter, you're a senior lecturer in
15:05philosophy and you specialise in collaborative decision making. Where is the line between free
15:12speech and hate? I'll take the easy one, sure. If we wanted to go back to some of those fundamental
15:22texts like John Stuart Mill, he used a rather nice example of the corn dealer. And you might believe
15:29that the corn dealers are responsible for inflating the price of corn and, you know,
15:36creating a lot of hungry people in the process. And Mill would say that you have a perfect right to
15:41say that that's what you think is the case. You could, you could say it in the backyard barbecue
15:46today. You could write it on your blog. You could put it in the newspapers that that was your view.
15:52But he did make the distinction about talking to an excitable mob outside the home of the corn dealer.
15:59And he said, in that context, you may say exactly the same thing, but something else might happen here.
16:05And it's that notion of your right to say what you wish, to indeed act as you wish,
16:12has to have a boundary when you're actually endangering other people. So to the extent that
16:18we understand this modern concept of hate speech, or framing it that way, is kind of associated with
16:24the inciting to violence and the possibility of doing harm to others. And that's a way of
16:31of contextualising the words that you say, rather than just saying those words can't be said.
16:38Nicole, you're an academic. In 2019, you were due to give a speech at the University of Melbourne.
16:44Your speech was about challenging the perception that being transgender is a mental illness.
16:50What happened on that day?
16:53Even a couple of days prior, I started getting messages from a couple of my friends saying,
16:59oh, Nicole, a lot of people are reacting, you know, very strongly to the talk for which
17:05you've written an abstract. And they seem to be organising a protest.
17:12So when I arrived, I'd been reading some of these tweets and some of the stuff that had been posted
17:18on Facebook. And I was quite shocked at some of the things that people were saying about me.
17:23What were some of the things?
17:25One of the first things that people said is, oh, this is a clueless cis TERF. How dare she
17:30come to our university and spread yet more trans hate?
17:36What do you mean by TERF?
17:38Okay, so TERF stands for Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists. So these are the feminists who
17:46view themselves as, you can only be a feminist if you were born female. And so somebody who transitions
17:53and becomes a woman, they view them as, no, not even a woman. And so stay out of our spaces,
18:01not allowed to enter various spaces because that's, you're just a man entering spaces, etc.
18:07Was this a student group?
18:08It was a student union group, I believe. As I understand it, somebody at Monash University
18:15noticed the announcement for my talk, and they decided to do a posting on Twitter saying they
18:21should think really seriously about who they invite into our community. And this then caught the attention
18:26of various people, some in America, others in Australia. And very quickly, what they did is on
18:33the basis of something that was effectively a 100 or 150 word abstract, they made up a whole narrative
18:38about what I was going to say. And this narrative had nothing to do with what I was going to
18:44say.
18:44Did any of the protesters try to engage and discuss your views?
18:51Short answer is no, but there's a bit of a story. So I arrived at the university and meet one
18:56of the
18:57people that had invited me. Out of the corner of, you know, one of the windows, I noticed there's
19:01all these people. I thought, okay, they appear to be there protesting against me. I'll go out and say hello
19:08and try and, you know, tell them what the talk is actually about. So I went out there shaking as
19:14anything.
19:15But the really surprising part was that, you know, when I explained what my talk was actually about,
19:21I said, look, you know, and then I said, so please, would you join us? Because I would love to
19:24have
19:24your input into this discussion afterwards. I said, no, we can't possibly come and listen to your talk.
19:32And I said, well, why not? It's all because we organised the protest.
19:36Oh, so they kind of understood what you were going to be talking about, but they couldn't switch.
19:40They couldn't switch. You work in academia. Are universities a robust forum for airing
19:47differences of opinion? You would think so. I certainly think of universities as the places
19:53where debate should happen, but you cannot say certain things. If I were to say that it is okay
19:59to be white, right, in this context, there would be a whole bunch of assumptions about what else I
20:06might be saying, even though I may simply be saying that it is actually okay to be white,
20:10just like it is okay to be brown, just like it is okay to be black and so on and
20:15so forth.
20:16But people do tend to make assumptions that if you say certain things like that, like what I just
20:23mentioned, that you will have an abhorrent set of views. And on account of having those abhorrent
20:28set of views, you need to be, you know, punished in some way and excommunicated.
20:34I think anytime we talk about a population that people maybe aren't engaging with in their own
20:39personal life and people are given platforms to discuss it without having any connection to that
20:44community, has potential to be hugely harmful to the human beings that are behind the debate.
20:52He couldn't control her anymore, so he killed her. You've admitted to being jealous in past
20:58relationships. I was always afraid that if they got a taste of life without me, that they would
21:05realise that they didn't really need me. You decided to open up your relationship. We were
21:09very drawn towards the excitement and the connection aspect of non-monogamy. Some are envious. Women in
21:16particular, they come up to me and they sort of whisper to me, I didn't think I'd like you.
21:24Liz, you're a former educator. Where do you stand on free speech?
21:28I think it's very important. I taught even very young children, five-year-olds, some of the skills
21:35of philosophical discussion. So skills around formulating your opinion and justifying it,
21:43some of the rules about listening as well as being able to speak, some of the responsibilities that you
21:50have when you're speaking and the fact that you respect the other people in the room even if they've got
21:56different views. Are there any topics that you won't discuss? Well, one in particular, and it's very,
22:03very current at the moment, and I'm finding that I am discussing it in safe spaces, is gun laws.
22:11It's been a very sensitive topic in our family. We had a double murder in the family, so an extended
22:19family member of mine perpetrated killing his parents. He was an unlicensed gun holder, which
22:27we were not aware of. He had seven guns, all unregistered. And we were also not aware of the extent
22:35of his
22:36mental health illness. So he had been having some mental health treatment, but clearly his
22:43treating teams were not aware of the seriousness of it. You were a member of the Queensland Greens.
22:52You're no longer registered with that party. Why not? Over the years, I felt that
23:00there were often groups that became so dominant. It came to a crisis last year over a gender issue,
23:09where one of the founders of the Greens had his membership revoked. And it was because he'd opened
23:17up a discussion on his Facebook page regarding gender issues. So he hadn't actually engaged in that
23:23discussion. But as a result of him not taking down that discussion, he had his membership cancelled.
23:30So that's since had to be reversed. But it's left quite a lot of bad taste. And certainly for me,
23:38I was not concerned. The gender issue was new to me. I hadn't really thought about it. So it was
23:44something very new. But I found that when I did try to learn, I was being called a TERF. I
23:53was being
23:53called transphobic. I was regularly called a boomer. And I was told to go and join the Liberal Party.
24:01Not by the hierarchy of the Greens, but more by some of the grassroots membership.
24:06And it wasn't necessarily controlled very well. In the end, I felt that the safest place for me was,
24:14I enjoy getting involved in community work and getting involved in some activism. But I thought
24:22there's many other ways to do it and safer places to do it.
24:26Clinton, you work in Indigenous mental health. Should everything be up for debate?
24:32I think there is a place to put everything up for debate. But the debate needs to be
24:36undertaken in a way that remains mindful of the social and emotional well-being
24:42impacts that discourse can have. And I think that's something that we forget at times. We forget
24:47the power of our words and the impact and the influences that those words can actually have
24:52on different groups of people who are the topics of debates.
24:56Can you give an example?
24:58I think the referendum was a prime example. The referendum quickly lost being about
25:04the debate of the topic and the context.
25:07This is the voice referendum?
25:08Yeah. It quickly lost sight of being about the topic and the context and very much became about
25:14winning and egos. And in that, lost sight of humanity. So there was a lot of discussion that
25:22was occurring that wasn't in any shape or form, considering the social emotional well-being toll,
25:29the mental load that was being put on all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
25:33So that's why at the Black Dog Institute, we were so focused on, during that period,
25:38promoting having a respectful referendum debate, rather than promoting one side or the other.
25:44Did you see those impacts in your own life?
25:48Yeah, I'd definitely seen those impacts in my own life, and not just in my life,
25:51but in that of my children as well. So since that period of time, there has definitely been
25:57people that I grew up with, that I was friends with, that I choose not to spend time with any
26:03more. Because during that time, their positions and their inability to listen to and engage with
26:10a different point of view became very apparent. And I think as Aboriginal peoples, what's happened
26:15over a long period of time, and continues to happen on a daily basis, I would argue,
26:19is we are constantly put in positions where we feel we have to not only voice, but then defend
26:25who we are as a position. We need to look at how do we undertake debates
26:30in a more respectful manner that doesn't outwardly go to hurt people.
26:35We're hearing the phrase cultural safety a lot these days. What does that mean?
26:41Cultural safety is a right. It's a right for everybody to experience. It's no different to,
26:47I guess, notions of physical safety, psychological safety. And so as individuals and organisations,
26:53we have a responsibility to consider that diversity that's present, in terms of how we choose to act,
27:03what we choose to do, in the hope that we can help create situations that others will experience cultural
27:10safety in.
27:11And Jack, you have First Nations ancestry. Did you feel culturally unsafe during that time?
27:17No, I didn't. Of course, I'm stuck between two worlds, in the sense that I appear as I do before
27:24you. But 25% of my heritage is Indigenous. It is part of who I am. The original conception of
27:30cultural
27:31safety in Maori nursing, I think, was an honest one. But I have a real problem with it as a
27:37concept
27:38being applied to all spaces, because you immediately set up competition. You immediately set up a space where
27:46one group is elevated in their rights and privileges above the other. And in a sense,
27:51you're trying to create a system so perfect that people aren't required to be good.
27:56And the final point I will make is what I think the referendum revealed is that as a society,
28:03and certainly at a governmental level, we have so deeply inculcated the idea of disadvantage
28:11and disease into the Indigenous identity of this country, that we've diminished the capacity
28:18to rise above those things and put out of our minds any caricatured arguments.
28:24So I think, you know, there was a lot of lessons out of it. But one should not be that
28:27we retreat,
28:28rather that we advance, but we advance in a way more honestly, and acknowledge that some of the
28:34current methods we are using are not correct and aren't convincing the majority of the society.
28:38Have you ever felt harmed by a discussion?
28:42Never. I have engaged in some pretty heated discussions about personal parts of my nature
28:48with people. And one great example is during COVID, a very dear friend of mine
28:54was totally off on a conspiracy tangent. I made a conscious decision, as painful as it was,
28:59to remain engaged. And we got through that. I learned some things about him,
29:05he learned some things about me. And as a result, our relationship is so much deeper.
29:09But had I not stated that I excised him from my life, I'd be poorer, he'd be poorer,
29:14and the opportunity to have not a debate, but a discussion and find a way towards the truth
29:20would have been lost. Nicole, you're a philosopher. What about you? Have you ever felt sort of harmed
29:25by a discussion? Yeah, look, it's interesting hearing what you were just saying before,
29:31because I have. Part of the reason why I went to the University of Melbourne is that I'd noticed that
29:37there were a whole range of discussions on the trans topics, which were being done in a very single
29:45sort of, you know, monotone voice, only certain things could be said. And for me, as a trans woman,
29:52it was actually really important to be able to say, look, I don't particularly feel that
29:56a lot of the ways that so many trans lobby groups, how they, you know, portray what being trans
30:05means, which things are important, which things can be said and can't be said. For me, it was very
30:09important to be able to actually say, look, may I please enter my own voice here? What actually happened
30:15was that because the, I think it was a queer collective that organized this protest against me,
30:22because they decided that they already knew that I was a cisgendered TERF, they simply robbed me of my
30:31voice to speak. And there was nothing that I could say to them. So was it harmful? It was harmful
30:38to find
30:38myself surrounded at a university, a place where you're meant to be able to talk, have really open
30:45conversations, and indeed to be invited to give a talk on an important topic, you know, which affects
30:53me privately. And then to have the very people who are apparently my people come out and shut me down
30:59so severely that I still, you know, find myself shaking inside of the moment with upset.
31:07Hannah, have there been any debates that you've felt were harmful?
31:11Yes, I think plenty of the debates that we're having online and in person are harmful. The
31:17referendum brought up so many conversations and comments. I think the trans discussion has the
31:23same aspect. The marriage plebiscite had the same experience. I think anytime we talk about a
31:28population that people maybe aren't engaging with in their own personal life and people are given
31:33platforms to discuss it without having any connection to that community has potential to be
31:39hugely harmful to the human beings that are behind the debate.
31:42I'm fascinated by this because all Australians were asked to vote in the voice referendum and the
31:48marriage equality plebiscite. So how can people without that lived experience come to an informed
31:55decision on a vote that they must participate in? I think the way that people are informed is actually
32:02by doing the research. And if the hardest part of your life as a privileged person in this country is
32:06to actually read and learn and listen, I don't think that's a big ask of people. During the voice there
32:13was a great
32:15debate online which was all First Nations people coming at it from many different angles and having conscious
32:21debate but coming at it from an educated point of view and a community that are actively involved
32:27in the outcome. Equally with the change the date, abolish the date discussion, there's equally been
32:33a conversation of multiple First Nations people who all have differing views and watching that play out
32:39as an ally and as a non-Indigenous person, that's a great way to learn and listen to the community
32:46rather than making an ill-informed view based on what you might see online. Jack, what if we only heard
32:55from people with lived experience? I think if we proceed on the logic that you must have a ticket
33:02to gain entry to discussion and that must be lived experience, then we assume that that person's
33:08perception of that experience is accurate and is attributable to all. I think this is a very dangerous road.
33:15We lose, when we exclude people from discussion, and it's the same principle as excluding people
33:21from the right to vote, we wouldn't tolerate that. But when you exclude people from the discussion,
33:26you cut yourself off from the opportunity to convince them. So I don't think the idea of having
33:35guardrails, barriers, whatever you want, gates to people entering the discussion is a good idea for any
33:40of us. Do people make assumptions about your identity, for example, based on your appearance?
33:46I have an Arabic surname, I have Indigenous heritage. You know, people make assumptions about me all the
33:51time. I now am in a privileged position, but you know, I grew up in very serious poverty. I grew
33:59up with
34:00very considerable violence. I lost both my parents before I was 18. All of these things are part of my
34:06identity, and they inform how I face the world today. But I don't think that it would be for
34:12others to go and prejudge. So if someone sees me walking down the street, the nice Scottish fellow,
34:17Irish fellow, they probably assume, they've cut off so much of my identity. We take one element,
34:22and we assume the rest of the individual, when in fact, there is a complicated person sitting behind
34:28any one of those elements. And we've got to take the time to understand it and learn about it,
34:33and thus build a connection from which we can grow. Nicole, did anyone involved in those protests
34:39change their views when they knew that you were trans?
34:44Almost nobody did. So what was interesting is that there was only one younger gentleman,
34:51I would have said about mid-20s, who, you know, approached me later on. And he said,
34:55look, Nicole, I'm so very sorry about the fact that I joined this protest. I took it on face value,
35:01that the way that your talk was portrayed was indeed that it was transphobic. You know,
35:07so he was one person that definitely did change his mind. The strange part was that nobody other
35:13than him gave any indication of the fact that, you know, they did change their views.
35:20In your experience, is identity a factor in debate?
35:23I think that if you're speaking from a position of lived experience, there's probably going to be
35:30something useful that you might be able to say. But this gets really, really murky very quickly.
35:36I used to think, I'm not going to say anything on the trans topic, partly because I enjoyed flying
35:41beneath the radar and people not knowing that I'm trans, but also partly because I genuinely thought
35:46that I didn't have anything novel to add. You know, that it's just a little old me. What would I
35:53know?
35:54But what I then noticed is that in the absence of me being prepared to go and say what I
36:00think and
36:01what my experience is, that other people were quite prepared to step in and say what it is to be
36:07trans,
36:07how people should, you know, treat you, which things are and aren't important. And those things,
36:15precisely because I was so intent on not pushing my own views, well, that's okay. Other people stepped
36:21in and spoke for me. So one of the problems there is that identity can play a really important role,
36:28as long as people have a certain amount of, you know, being humble and being prepared to say,
36:33I am just talking about my position. But this unfortunately is very often not the case. And
36:38people quite often are prepared to start speaking on everybody's part. So identity is important,
36:43because if you marry it up with being humble, then it's possible to hear a few novel things every
36:49now and again. Are you always welcome speaking on women's issues? I've been invited on a number of
36:58occasions to speak. And I've, yes, I've actually said no on all occasions. There was one occasion where I,
37:06where my partner had been invited to an intelligence squared talk, but she was unfortunately recovering
37:14from cancer. But there was the only occasion where the talk was on a feminist topic and where I was
37:20prepared to step in because she simply couldn't because she was lying in hospital, right. But I figure
37:25there are so many women and I do not need to be one of them that transplains what being a
37:34woman is,
37:34right, or what the important issues are. So I think there's a certain, you know, lack of
37:39humble pie. And that's after, you know, what, 35 years since transitioning. So when I see people
37:45being prepared to wake up one day, say they're trans, and then to start talking on women's behalf,
37:52I think, whoa, check yourself. Clarity, you're an author and TikTok content creator. One of your posts
38:00caused quite a bit of controversy. What happened? I'd made a post that was about my own lived
38:06experience with police brutality from back when I was a teenager. And somebody decided to comment
38:11on that post saying that I should not be speaking about this topic because I'm not Indigenous,
38:16because I can't relate to what Indigenous people suffer with police brutality. How did you feel about
38:23that? It's upsetting when people react to things like that when it's not what I'm getting at with
38:29the point of my post. This was your response to those responses. How come racism doesn't go both
38:35ways? How is it that somebody is able to jump in the comment section on one of my posts where
38:41I'm
38:41explicitly talking about my own first-hand lived experience with police brutality, and their comment
38:47suggests that I should not be speaking on a topic I know nothing about for the simple fact that I'm
38:52not
38:52Indigenous. How did that go down? It actually went pretty well. There was some people jumping into
39:00the other person's defence, but I even had a lot of Indigenous people jumping in the comments just
39:05saying, this person does not speak on our behalf. Like, we're 100% aligned with you in this point of
39:12view. Do you think you can have a constructive debate on social media? Not normally. Do you ever turn
39:18comments off? I don't know. I feel that everyone is entitled to have an opinion. It is on my page,
39:26so I do obviously get the major word in it all. It's my videos that I post. But I don't
39:33like to shut
39:34people out from having their opinions. I want to show some photos of you. This is after an altercation
39:40on differing views. They didn't like what I had on the car. Even with everything that we've been
39:45experiencing in the last two years, it's taken a while now to see the consequences occur by allowing
39:51certain things to continue without robust debate back. Sergio, you're an artist. You share your
40:01views publicly. Here's you on Insight in 2014 talking about free speech. You express yourself
40:07quite vociferously. You've got a truck. Do you understand that's offensive to some people? They can
40:12be as offended as they like, but they don't have the right to cross the line and threaten me, injure
40:19me,
40:19my family or my friends. And that's the difference. It's like, I really believe in who we are as
40:26Australians. And part of that is the conversation that we can and should be able to have any conversation,
40:33no matter how distasteful it is, to get to the other end of it. Have any of your views changed
40:39since then?
40:40No. Do you enjoy disagreement? I enjoy a conversation and I enjoy
40:50the putting together of opposite ideas if there's someone there that has the opposite idea and they
40:59want to discuss it without just shutting it down by the stereotype, you're a racist, you're white,
41:05you're this and that. And that's where I think we have lost that ability for communication.
41:14I want to show some photos of you. This is after an altercation on differing views. What happened?
41:21They didn't like what I had on the car and luckily they didn't break the quarter panel of the car
41:28because
41:28that was really hard to replace and they only hit me. But this is the outcome back in 2010-11
41:39when they don't like what you have an opinion of. Why do you think your views attracted such a violent
41:45response? Because I don't think there are any mechanisms to stop the negativity because our
41:57legal system hadn't caught up with internet verbal violence at that point. I mean all the death threats
42:05that I got at the beginning slipped through the net because the system hadn't caught up to make them
42:10illegal even with everything that we've been experiencing the last two years with protests
42:16in the street. It's taken a while now to see that consequences occur by allowing certain things to
42:23continue without robust debate back. Do you ever feel like you might go too far?
42:32No because I never went to the point of saying blah blah blah and that has to happen to them
42:39because I
42:40never even said ban the burqa I said say no to the burqa to open up a debate about why
42:47are people so
42:47touchy about it. Karen you and your husband have opposing political views have you figured out how
42:55to disagree well? No not really. No we agree on many things probably most things but because it's about
43:04American politics and it's become more and more and more volatile since the current president was sworn in
43:12it's got to the point now we just know know that unless I happen to walk through and throw in
43:17a
43:17that's just not true it's easier to just not go there just don't go there. In terms of both of
43:23you
43:23you and your son Jack living in the same house does your dad sort of respect your view over your
43:29mum more or?
43:30I wouldn't say he respects me more I think it's just a different conversation when he's talking to
43:37his kid compared to his wife I think he's more receptive to what I have to say because it doesn't
43:45come across as judgmental but more I guess he's open to learning from me but I wouldn't say it's a
43:51respect thing no he respects mum heaps. How does he feel about both of you coming on the show?
43:58I think he's a little nervous but I did say to him that um no we're not here to talk
44:03about him
44:03or even just us we're here to talk about the ability to have a conversation and it's been
44:08fascinating listening to everybody's opinions. For those of us inspired to disagree well here's Bo
44:14So with his top tips. So here are my top four tips for disagreeing well. Number one start every
44:22disagreement with some agreement that's agreement about how you're going to have the conversation
44:28we're not going to interrupt each other so we're going to take turns and agreement about what the
44:34conversation is about. Number two make actual arguments so an argument is not all the thoughts
44:41that you've had on a given subject it's not emoting it's a tool to help the other person understand
44:48your perspective and it needs to answer at least two questions why is the point that you're making
44:53true and why should it change the other person's mind. Number three imagine that you might be wrong
44:59think of the best points for the other side that little crack in your certainty allows something like
45:06empathy and understanding to shine through and number four avoid just saying no in the end a debate is
45:14a comparison and you have to be for something and not just against your opponent and if you have
45:20someone who's just saying no to every idea you put forward you should turn around and ask them well
45:25what do you propose instead? Karen do you think any of Bo's tips might be helpful? Yes they would be
45:31probably very helpful as long as you can remember them in the heat of a moment. A little cheat sheet.
45:37Exactly. Jack how do you approach discussions with your dad when you know you're not likely to agree?
45:43Dad and I I mean for the past couple of years we haven't agreed on a lot especially when it
45:48comes
45:48to the topic of America but there are little wins every once in a while. I remember the topic of
45:55socialism and communism and what those terms means came up. There was a bit where he described communism
46:02and socialism as the same thing and essentially defined it as having a bowl of rice for dinner
46:07which being a teenager I knew obviously wasn't what Oxford said. So I eventually kept prying him
46:15being you know dad have you looked up the definition do you actually know what that word means and it
46:20took
46:20me essentially coming to him and saying I'm not going to tell you what it says I think we should
46:25just
46:25sit down and look up the definition together and come to I guess an understanding of what it means
46:33and just talk about it. It wasn't really trying to convince him or anything it was more I guess like
46:39joint discovery on the topic and yeah we eventually he did his political compass and came out as like
46:45a full-blown socialist which was surprising to all of us. Yeah it was I don't I expected I mean
46:52I always knew
46:53he was um it was more an economic right thing he was never um socially conservative or anything like
46:59that but yeah I think it was it took everyone aback really how much he agreed with us but it
47:06was more on
47:06the policies I guess the path to take to achieving um those goals. Why is it important for you to
47:14still
47:14engage in debate with your dad? What do you get out of it? I guess there's the fact that he's
47:18obviously my
47:19dad and he's getting older um and having I guess a topic that even if it's not something you know
47:25I
47:25don't enjoy looking up politics but it's something we're interested in we have passion for and to
47:31I guess not have those conversations feels like a waste I mean even if it is divisive and creates
47:36friction he's my dad I love him and um even if you know we disagree on some really hated uh
47:43conversations
47:44I think having them is better than pretending like they're not worth having. Would you date someone
47:50who had really differing views? I think it's impossible to find someone that agrees with you
47:55politically on everything but that being said I definitely think there are topics where someone's
48:01politics may reflect something about them which may prevent me from being able to form a relationship
48:06with them I think topics that bring into question someone's empathy for different people different
48:12groups different cultures it can say a lot about them in regards to just their character and I
48:18think that is something that would I guess be revealed by the politics which would cause me to
48:24potentially not date someone. Lila you defended the trad wife movement in a debate what was the outcome?
48:31I think the outcome's really positive you know before I had even done this topic on TikTok I would see
48:36videos
48:36of trad wives and it was all very glamorous but then undergoing research I think it kind of shifted my
48:42position of the such glamorized lifestyle when I was able to see kind of the opposite side of it.
48:47Did you win the debate? Yes we did. Congratulations and I believe you were debater of the year last
48:52year how does that make you feel? I think I feel very proud you know in debating it's a lot
48:57of effort
48:57as an extracurricular when I have like assignments due and I'm doing debating as well and trying to get
49:02my script done it's hard but yeah I feel really proud. Amelia do you feel like the skills you learn
49:08in
49:08debating can transfer outside your life? Definitely yeah I've learned a lot of skills
49:14during debating like I've it's been such a confidence boost for me because I used to be
49:18really shy and I still learn a bit but it's really improved in that and also I'm so much better
49:23at
49:23researching and finding like credible sources so that can always help me in like investigations at
49:28school and yeah in general life. Sonia you were the adjudicator what did you think of the girl's
49:35argument? I was really impressed first of all they're excellent debaters so their presentation's
49:42really good the way that they organized their debate with it in each individual debate was very
49:48logical and rational it followed very nice flow on they're very eloquent but the thing that really
49:55nailed it for me was that every claim that they made every statement that they made was backed
50:01up with some enormous amount of research it was absolutely phenomenal so I was incredibly impressed
50:08with what they'd done. You've received criticism for some of the topics you choose have you ever
50:14considered changing your approach or changing topics knowing that they might potentially receive
50:20criticism? No there will always be topics that will offend someone you cannot have a topic that
50:26doesn't offend anybody so I think that they are all topics that need to be discussed sometimes a very
50:33current topics some of them are very controversial or very edgy and I try to find topics that they
50:42wouldn't find in everyday life. Has tonight given you any ideas for new topics? No but I tell you what's
50:49been
50:49very interesting is to see the and listen to the various views of how people accept other people's
50:57views and it seems to me with the exception of a few speakers there are a lot of caveats on
51:03what you
51:04can say or what you can't say I think that's important that we don't have those caveats the other thing
51:11problem that I see for debating as well is that there are intellectual lazy shorthand words that establish
51:18the value of another human being rather than being a point of discussion and they are things like
51:25you're transphobic homophobic you're islamophobic you're some other phobic thing and they are lazy
51:33shorthand intellectual short steps to shut down debate and I think that people get very frightened about being
51:41labelled like with that kind of term. Thank you so much and thank you to you all for being here
51:48thank you too for your time and company that's all we have time for happy debating I'll see you next
51:53time
51:53thank you
51:55thank you
51:56thank you
51:59thank you
51:59thank you
51:59thank you
Comments