The AAWAA Women’s Advocate

In this episode of The Unmoved Feminist, Martine and Liv unpack a word used everywhere and explained almost nowhere: patriarchy. Drawing on Wollstonecraft, Gilman, Frye's birdcage image, Mitchell's four structures of oppression, and Pateman's sexual contract, they trace why the analysis has never been superseded — and why its latest adaptations, from neoliberal feminism to the displacement of sex‑class analysis by self‑declared identity, make the word more indispensable than ever.If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Sue walk through forty years of Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act, from its CEDAW roots and the creation of our sex‑based protections and rights, through to the AHRC’s growing role and the 2013 gender identity amendments, to Giggle v Tickle, the Lesbian Action Group case, and Julia Gillard’s comments on how those changes were made without women’s concerns ever being squarely put to Parliament.DonateIf you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Former prime minister Julia Gillard has finally broken her silence on the 2013 Sex Discrimination Act amendments, telling an audience at Manchester University that “it was a different time”. In this special edition of The Women's Advocate, Emma explains why that answer is not good enough – and why women are now living with the consequences.DonateIf you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode, Emma and Lucy discuss the AHRC's 'The Answer is Human Rights' seminar in Adelaide, where women affected by the Commission's decisions — including members of the Lesbian Action Group — put their questions directly to AHRC Chief Executive Leanne Smith and Age Discrimination Commissioner Robert Fitzgerald. The exchange laid bare a critical unresolved question: how does the AHRC understand the costs matter in relation to the successful Lesbian Action Group appeal? They also discuss the needs of older women and how their sex-based protections cannot be ignored.If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode of The Unmoved Feminist, Liv and Martine ask why female‑only spaces still matter for women’s safety, dignity and participation in public life, tracing how refuges, hospital wards, toilets and change rooms were won through decades of organising against male violence and how recent shifts to “all‑gender” facilities, sex self‑identification and vague equality laws are quietly eroding those protections in practice.If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

At the AHRC's Sydney 'The Answer Is Human Rights' seminar, women asked one governance question: the Federal Court has found your exemption guidelines deficient — when will you fix them? No officer offered a date, a commitment, or even an acknowledgement of the finding. Emma and Lucy unpack what was said, what wasn't, and what it means for women who depend on female-only spaces and services. If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

At the Perth stop of the Australian Human Rights Commission's national seminar series, AAWAA Director Amber Rossi asked President Hugh de Kretser a direct question: will the Commission use its section 11 inquiry powers to recommend that Parliament restore clear sex‑based protections and rights for women and girls following the Full Federal Court's judgment in Giggle v Tickle? The answer was no: no plans, no inquiry, no recommendation to Parliament. Instead, the Commission pointed women back to exemptions and special measures under the existing Sex Discrimination Act. Emma and Amber unpack what that answer means in practice, and what women attending the Commission's remaining seminars should expect.Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode of The Unmoved Feminist, Liv and Martine go back to basics on something that shapes what governments see and what they ignore: sex‑disaggregated data. They trace how second‑wave feminists fought to get women counted separately in crime figures, labour force surveys and time‑use data, so we could prove what women already knew from our lives: that men overwhelmingly commit the violence, and that women carry the costs in unpaid care, low pay and poverty in older age.If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode, Martine and Liv step back to map the bigger picture — tracing the feminist "waves" from Mary Wollstonecraft's demand for women's rational equality in 1792, through the suffrage campaigns, into the women's liberation movement of the 1960s and 1970s, and on to the third, fourth and liberal feminist strands that followed. The episode is particularly interested in the continuous thread that runs underneath all of it: the insistence, found first in early writers like Wollstonecraft and Astell, that women's subordination is a political arrangement, not a natural one. For listeners coming to feminist theory for the first time, or trying to locate where second-wave, materialist feminism sits in the wider story, this is the grounding episode.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Amber look at how the Australian Government has chosen to ‘manage the mandate’ of the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, rather than engage squarely with her warnings about Tickle v Giggle, CEDAW, sex‑based protections and rights, and female‑only spaces. Drawing on FOI documents and internal briefings, they trace the pattern from ‘courtesy letters’ that never get answered, to decisions not to submit evidence, to closed‑door efforts to neutralise a UN expert whose work does not ‘conform with our views’ – and ask what this means for women who rely on robust international mechanisms when domestic systems fail us.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

When governments design mental health strategies, they focus on systems: beds, referral pathways, integration models. But what about the structural conditions actually driving women's mental distress? In this episode, Emma and Amber discuss AAWAA's five submissions to Tasmania's 'Rethink and Beyond' mental health strategy, examining the evidence on male violence, perinatal mental health gaps, the mental health crisis facing girls and young women, the invisibility of women in prison and older women, and the erosion of female-only services. Mental health policy can't fix what it won't name — and the structural drivers of women's distress are policy failures with policy solutions.If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Tasmania's Department of Health is developing its next mental health strategy, 'Rethink and Beyond'. AAWAA and our state member organisations – WAAT, QWAA, NSWWAA and WAWAA – lodged five coordinated submissions arguing that women and girls must be named as a priority population, that male violence and the erosion of female-only services must be addressed, and that sex-based women's organisations must have seats at the decision-making table. Emma and Amber discuss the strategy behind our response.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

On 26 May 2026, at Senate Estimates, Senator Henderson asked the Australian Human Rights Commission whether it had sought costs against the Lesbian Action Group. This episode sets out the documentary record, from the LAG's exemption application in August 2023 to the Federal Court judgment of 15 April 2026, and the events that followed. Senate Estimates audio is used in accordance with the conditions of access of the Parliament of Australia. It is used for the purposes of a fair and accurate report of proceedings and is not used for political party advertising, election campaigns, or commercial sponsorship.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

No country in the world has a dedicated national plan on violence against older women. Not one. In this episode, Emma and Megan unpack why, covering the way older women get absorbed into sex-neutral policy categories, who is actually perpetrating violence against them (husbands, partners, and adult sons), the critical gaps in Australia's evidence base, and what a real national plan would need to contain. This conversation draws on AAWAA's written submission and participation in an expert consultation convened by UN Special Rapporteur Reem Alsalem, who is currently preparing a report on violence against older women to the UN General Assembly.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode, Emma talks with Lucy about what NSWWAA saw inside DCJ’s stakeholder roundtable on the sexual consent reforms review. They walk through the structural gap between the domestic‑abuse laws and the consent provisions, why the current ‘reasonable steps’ test lets men wear women down, and how the fraud provision is at risk of being narrowed in ways that ignore serious deception about who has access to women’s bodies.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

On 15 May 2026, the Full Federal Court handed down its decision in Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd v Tickle — and buried inside the legal reasoning is an acknowledgment that women's advocates have been waiting years to see in writing. The Court found that the Sex Discrimination Act no longer gives pre-eminence to the rights of women, and that its current form may actually limit the pursuit of women's rights. The judges made clear: that's not their problem to fix. It's Parliament's. In this episode, we unpack what the Court said, why it validates concerns AAWAA has been raising since at least 2023, and what it means for women-only spaces, single-sex services, and the future of sex-based protections in Australia. We also have a message for every woman who has ever been told her concerns were alarmist, misconceived, or not worth taking seriously. They were wrong. And now we have the receipts.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma is joined by Suzi and Luci to unpack CEDAW’s Draft General Recommendation 41 on ‘gender stereotypes’ and why AAWAA decided to intervene. They walk through how the draft quietly shifts from sex to gender identity, how this risks reinforcing the very stereotypes it claims to dismantle, and what that means for female‑only spaces, sex‑based data, and surrogacy. The episode also explains AAWAA’s key recommendations to the UN and why getting this language right now will matter for women’s protections in Australia for years to come.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode, Martine and Liv look at prostitution through a second-wave, materialist feminist lens — and at why the shift to "sex work" language matters more than it might first appear. Drawing on Kathleen Barry, Carole Pateman and Andrea Dworkin, they trace the argument that prostitution is not a marginal issue but part of the basic infrastructure of patriarchy: a system through which men, as a class, buy sexual access to women and girls, as a class. They also ask the question that gets lost when the debate narrows to working conditions: should there be a market in women's bodies at all?This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this bonus episode, we share some of the audio of our appearance before the NSW Legislative Council’s inquiry into fertility support and assisted reproductive treatment. Presented under public interest, this recording lets you hear directly how we argued that surrogacy cannot be treated as routine ‘fertility support’, why Parliament’s first duty is to protect women from exploitation, and how MLCs engaged with our call for prohibition rather than expansion of surrogacy in New South Wales. Audio taken from NSW Parliamentary webcast, 21 April 2026, Select Committee on Fertility Support and Assisted Reproductive Treatment, shared in the public interest.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Last week the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission addressed the National Press Club. We were there — and we asked him why Parliament should extend the Commission's enforcement powers over women's organisations in the contested space of sex and gender, given that a Federal Court judgment just found legal error in how the Commission exercised its existing powers against the Lesbian Action Group. We asked about costs. We asked about proportionality. In this episode, we go through what he said, what he didn't say, and what Parliament should be asking.Donate to womensadvocacy.net:Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy AlliancesAccount number: 04201471BSB: 325-185This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Before the NSW Legislative Council even asked its first question, we made a deliberate choice: to shift the entire frame of the hearing. In this short episode, Emma and Megan discuss the opening statement we delivered to the inquiry, and the political philosophy driving it.They explore what it means to say that parliamentarians hold power but not rights against the citizens they represent; why guardianship and paternalism are fundamentally different ideas, and why that distinction matters enormously in the surrogacy debate; and how accepting the framing of 'fertility support' stewardship quietly forecloses the most important question of all — whether this market should exist at all.If you have ever wondered why the opening move in an inquiry matters as much as the evidence that follows, this conversation explains it.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Megan unpack their recent evidence to the NSW Legislative Council inquiry on ‘fertility support’ and surrogacy. Drawing on AAWAA’s anchoring arguments, they explain why Parliament’s role is to guard women and children, not steward a fertility market; why surrogacy is structurally exploitative even when framed as ‘helping families’; and why lived experience alone cannot decide questions of law and policy. They explore the dangers of an arms race of competing stories, the state’s duties under international law, and what it really means to say that some markets – including surrogacy – should not exist at all.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

When a woman dies, her superannuation doesn't automatically go to her estate — it goes to whoever her super fund trustee decides, within rules that can force payment to a violent or controlling man. Emma and Lucy walk through AAWAA's submission to Treasury's consultation on stopping male perpetrators from inheriting women's super death benefits, and what reform actually needs to look likeThis podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Luci unpack AAWAA’s new submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, focusing on how violence against older women is made invisible in Australia. They explore economic and administrative violence in the age pension and homelessness systems, abuse and sexual assault in residential aged care, the erasure of male perpetrators in language and data, and why sex-based protections and rights for older women must be explicitly recognised in law and policy.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this first episode of The Unmoved Feminist, Martine and Liv dig into one of the most consequential shifts of the past two decades: the gradual displacement of sex by gender identity in law, policy and public debate. Drawing on the foundational work of Kate Millett, Shulamith Firestone and Christine Delphy, they trace the second-wave concept of women as a sex class — where it came from, what it explains, and why abandoning it doesn't advance equality for women but obscures the conditions that make struggle necessary. A grounding episode for listeners who can see something has gone wrong but haven't always had a framework to name it.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Repeat episode for the Easter holiday. Emma and Liv push back against the mischaracterisation of women's rights organisations advocating for sex-based protections as 'right-wing', 'reactionary', or 'extremist'. They trace the feminist lineage of our advocacy through second-wave traditions, materialist analysis, and campaigns against prostitution, surrogacy, pornography, and male violence. From 'forced alignment' tactics that delegitimise our positions, to the conflation of sex with gender identity in law and policy, Emma and Liv explain why defending female-only spaces, critiquing gender as hierarchy, and opposing exploitation of women's bodies remain core feminist concerns—and why reclaiming our political tradition is essential to protecting women's rights today.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Sue spotlight Local action with Dr Megan Blake, barrister for the Lesbian Action Group and president of the new YAEL Women’s Defence Guild. They discuss Megan’s commitment to material reality and accuracy over labels, her experience weathering public hostility while defending women’s sex-based protections and rights, and why YAEL was created to fund key legal cases so women are not bankrupted for defending female-only protections. Listeners hear how one woman’s principled legal work connects directly to local action and how we can support YAEL as it begins its work.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Amber discuss Victoria's Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act, which is currently under review by the Victorian Law Reform Commission. AAWAA supports the ban on gay conversion practices — but the evidence suggests the Act is producing serious unintended consequences in its application to gender identity. Clinicians are stepping back from treating gender-distressed young people. Parents face uncertainty about conversations with their own children. And same-sex attracted young people may be being steered away from the careful clinical exploration they need. Emma and Amber discuss what AAWAA submitted to the review, what the evidence shows, and what modest amendments could fix the problem without disturbing the law's core purpose.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Equality Australia has been ruled an advocacy body, knocked back for standard charity tax status, and then rescued with a bespoke DGR deal, vice‑regal patronage and a shield of secrecy. In this episode, Emma and Liv unpack how Equality Australia used Thorne Harbour Health’s DGR status, how the Albanese government is now moving to write Equality Australia into the tax law, how the Governor‑General’s patronage is being cited in the Giggle v Tickle appeal, and how Senate rules swiftly protected the vice‑regal office from criticism. They then walk through AAWAA’s FOI battle with the Governor‑General’s office and the FOI watchdog, showing how section 6A and the Kline decision are being stretched to keep women from seeing whether the Patronage Policy was ever properly applied.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode Emma and Suzi unpack the NCC 2025 preview’s new ‘all‑gender’ toilet option and what it really means for women’s access to safe, adequate facilities in public buildings. Drawing on AAWAA’s 2024 submission to the Australian Building Codes Board, we explain how the change allows a ‘constructive reduction’ in female‑only toilets, why all‑gender cubicles do not replace women’s toilets in practice, and how sanitary bin rules still quietly assume sex‑based needs. We also examine the consultation process itself – where women’s groups engaged in detail but industry‑backed proposals prevailed – and outline what ministers, regulators, and listeners can do now to keep female‑only toilets on the agenda.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Amber examine the CEDAW Committee’s advance observations on the Netherlands, asking what it means when a UN women’s rights body talks about “sex work”, “safe and legal workplaces, including home‑based sex work”, and even “minor sex workers”. They discuss how this language sits with CEDAW, CRC, Palermo and the 1949 Convention, why it signals institutional drift away from sex‑based protections and rights, and what an abolitionist, treaty‑consistent approach to prostitution and trafficking should look like—for the Netherlands and for Australia.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Suzi examine the Auditor-General's comprehensive performance audit of age pension administration in light of evidence AAWAA submitted to the Australian National Audit Office one year earlier. The audit validates systemic failures – $5 billion in incorrect payments, processing delays up to 4.2 years, only 48.55 per cent of phone calls answered – but contains no sex-disaggregated analysis despite women constituting 55.55 per cent of recipients. They discuss specific cases of older women dismissed, delayed, doubted, and subjected to greater scrutiny than male counterparts, and why gender-neutral reform recommendations will fail to address how women experience administrative failures differently. Without making women visible in data and analysis, pension system reform will continue to assume a recipient who does not exist.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma is joined by Megan to unpack a significant development for women's advocacy in Australia: a formal meeting between AAWAA, Feminist Legal Clinic, the Coalition of Activist Lesbians, and the Australian Human Rights Commission. They discuss why women's organisations pushed to meet with the President, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner and the Human Rights Commissioner; what they presented about Australia’s de facto sex and gender framework; and how concerns about female‑only spaces, lesbian‑only organising, and CEDAW‑compliant consultation were received. The episode explores ‘strategic patience’, section 11 inquiry powers, and what it means for womens groups to move from sending submissions to being recognised as stakeholders inside the national human rights body.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Luci examine violence and discrimination affecting lesbian and bisexual women in Australia. They unpack how governance failures themselves constitute discrimination: the systematic exclusion of lesbian women from policy processes on sex self-identification laws, exemptions under discrimination law, and school policies. They detail the Lesbian Action Group's failed exemption application to the AHRC, institutional capture by LGBTIQ+ organisations claiming to represent lesbian interests, and how lesbians are denied the right to organise publicly as women – while gay men and transgender groups operate without obstruction. This is about fundamental human rights violations through governance failure.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Lucy unpack violence against mothers – a form of sex-based harm that remains dangerously invisible in international policy. They examine three interconnected mechanisms: reproductive coercion, weaponisation of children against mothers, and systematic economic subordination through the motherhood penalty. They detail how institutional actors enable rather than prevent this violence, and outline comprehensive recommendations for legislative and policy reform to protect mothers' safety, autonomy, and economic security.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Megan unpack the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026 – a framework that criminalises organisational membership based on a vague "unacceptable risk" standard, without procedural fairness, and with a 72-hour consultation window. They examine the constitutional vulnerabilities: the absence of evidence that organisational criminalisation is necessary, the deliberate removal of procedural safeguards, the risk of retrospective criminalisation for lawful conduct, and the chilling effect on women's political advocacy. This is what happens when serious legislation meets broken process.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

AAWAA's Christmas Wrap for 2025: Emma hosts Martine, Luci, and Suzi as they look back on a transformative year for AAWAA. They discuss coordinated national campaigns on sex self-ID and surrogacy prohibition, groundbreaking UN submissions on women's human rights, the 2025 federal election push to restore sex-based protections, international momentum against surrogacy, how we've built genuine cross-state collaboration on policy and strategy, and what it means to organise as feminists across Australia. Serious, strategic and upbeat – this is how to build a real movement.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

On 18 December, feminist organisations attended an ALRC roundtable on surrogacy law reform – and witnessed an independent review apparently structurally compromised. Emma and Amber unpack the governance failures: how the ALRC deflected legal questions about abolition, moved process concerns into private emails, conflated having women with representing women's interests, curated 'lived experience' to exclude voices that oppose surrogacy, and set a submission deadline the day after the roundtable. We discuss what the ALRC must do to retain credibility – and why it matters.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Amber discuss the Australian Law Reform Commission's review of surrogacy laws, examining why the roundtable with feminist organisations is scheduled for 18 December—one day before the submission deadline for feedback on its discussion paper—and why this timing exposes deeper governance failures. They unpack the advisory committee's structural conflicts of interest, the lack of early consultation with abolitionist women's organisations, and how the review breaches CEDAW compliance obligations. Most critically, they explain why AAWAA is attending despite these failures: to place governance concerns formally on the record and refuse to negotiate away the principle that surrogacy must be abolished. Because the integrity of law reform processes matters as much as the policy content itself.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode, Emma is joined by Lucy and Liv to discuss their formal submission to the statutory review of sexual consent laws. In 2021, NSW introduced landmark "affirmative consent" reforms. But four years on, are they actually delivering justice for women? The team unpacks why the current legal definition of consent—"free and voluntary agreement"—is fundamentally flawed in a patriarchy. The discussion explores how the law fails to recognise the reality of coercive control, why the "reasonable steps" test still allows men to negotiate away a woman's "no," and why true affirmative consent requires flipping the presumption of male sexual access.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Liv expose why consultation alone cannot satisfy Australia's obligations under CEDAW. Governments across Australia are treating consultation as political cover for decisions already made—but CEDAW demands something far more rigorous: mandatory impact assessment. They break down what the Convention actually requires (Articles 2, 3, 5, and 7), explain how General Recommendation No. 28 shifts the focus from process to results, and document the systematic failures in NSW, Western Australia, and Queensland where women were excluded and impact assessment never occurred. Most critically, they outline a four-step legislative framework—from legislated impact statements to independent oversight—that would restore women to the centre of policy affecting our sex-based protections and rights. Because governments can no longer vote claiming ignorance once impact is published.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode of the Women's Advocate, Emma and Megan discuss the ABC’s relationship with ACON, the LGBTQ+ advocacy organisation behind the Australian Workplace Equality Index (AWEI). Following the National Press Club address, they explore ABC Managing Director Hugh Marks’s responses—both publicly and in follow-up questioning—on governance, editorial independence, transparency, and the influence of advocacy relationships on media coverage. The conversation covers recent public scrutiny, gaps in ABC reporting acknowledged by its own Media Watch program, and why advocates are calling for an independent parliamentary audit of the ABC–ACON connection. The discussion also examines the BBC’s experience with Stonewall, what it can teach Australian media, and the next steps for public accountability. For full documentation, the latest petition, and further analysis, visit womensadvocacy.net.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

We unpack revelations from a Freedom of Information release showing how the Australian Government works behind the scenes to push back against independent UN scrutiny of our nation's women's rights record. Emma and Megan discuss why the Government is actively countering the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, how Australia is now treating women's sex-based protections under CEDAW, and the troubling blurring of lines between government priorities and UN committee independence. From debate over surrogacy to the erasure of sex-based rights, this episode explores what is really at stake when governments try to control the international conversation on women and girls.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Liv push back against the mischaracterisation of women's rights organisations advocating for sex-based protections as 'right-wing', 'reactionary', or 'extremist'. They trace the feminist lineage of our advocacy through second-wave traditions, materialist analysis, and campaigns against prostitution, surrogacy, pornography, and male violence. From 'forced alignment' tactics that delegitimise our positions, to the conflation of sex with gender identity in law and policy, Emma and Liv explain why defending female-only spaces, critiquing gender as hierarchy, and opposing exploitation of women's bodies remain core feminist concerns—and why reclaiming our political tradition is essential to protecting women's rights today.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Megan unpack shocking FOI evidence showing systematic exclusion of women's groups from policies affecting our sex-based protections and rights. Whilst LGBTQIA+ organisations receive formal advisory positions, paid travel, and access to draft policies months before public consultation, women's groups scramble to respond to four-week consultation windows—if we discover them at all. From the 2013 SDA amendments that introduced 'gender identity' to the 2023 LGBTIQA+ Health Action Plan, the pattern is documented and damning. This is a clear breach of CEDAW Article 7—and it's producing bad policy with real harms for women and girls. Read the full FOI analysis and our demands at womensadvocacy.net.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

In this episode, Emma and Martine explore the Northern Territory’s landmark decision to ban all male prisoners from women’s jails—an “on my watch” promise from Chief Minister Lia Finocchiaro that has set a new national benchmark for protecting women in custody. We unpack two alarming incidents—a Victorian child sex offender housed at Dame Phyllis Frost Centre and Katie’s alleged assault at South Australia’s Port Augusta Prison—to show how sex self-identification laws have left female-only spaces dangerously exposed. We outline practical steps premiers and chief ministers can take—legislative amendments, ministerial directives, immediate placement audits and explicit sex-based placement rules—to ensure women’s safety and dignity are enshrined in law, not left to shifting policies.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Megan examine how forty years after the Sex Discrimination Act was passed to implement CEDAW, confusion over sex-based protections is leaving women's services, sporting bodies, and advocacy groups without clear guidance. They explore the AHRC's rejection of lesbian exemption applications and institutional drift that prioritises other considerations over women's sex-based rights. The episode sets out the Commission's unused section 11 powers to inquire, examine, and report on human rights inconsistencies—and why Parliament must act if the AHRC won't restore legal certainty for women's protections.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma and Sue unpack Janet Fraser’s journey from second‑wave roots and lesbian organising in the ’90s to founding Joyous Birth after a traumatic hospital transfer, being branded for saying ‘birthing women’, and finishing law to fight for female‑only spaces and legal clarity.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma hosts Amber and Martine to unpack Western Australia’s surrogacy ‘reform’: how an industry‑led process sidelined women’s voices, abolished ex‑ante safeguards, and bundled ART with surrogacy to fast‑track a market‑friendly law. Amber lays out the process failures and what the Bill changes; Martine maps the advocacy strategy in the Council—committee referral, reinstating pre‑conception approvals, raising surrogate protections, and splitting ART from surrogacy—so lawmakers can restore scrutiny and protect women and girls.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Emma hosts Amber and Lucy for a ground-level look at how exclusion of women from consultation is producing bad law across Australia. From WA’s industry‑driven ART and surrogacy bill and fast‑tracked sex self‑ID law, to NSW’s predetermined ‘equality’ process and bundling ART with surrogacy, to QLD’s token consultation windows, they unpack why this breaches CEDAW Article 7 and ICCPR participation rights, and how it leads to regulatory capture, legal uncertainty, and harm to women and girls. The episode sets out concrete fixes: separate surrogacy from ART, end curated stakeholder lists, restore independent reviews and full committee scrutiny, and centre women’s advocacy in every stage of law‑making.This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.