Morals campaigner and Christian (wouldn’t dare call her a Baptist) cum feminist, Melinda Tankard Reist (‘The Tankard’) has threatened to sue the uber blogger, Jennifer Wilson, writing on her No Place for Sheep site. In her years as advisor and researcher to the wiley old fox and personal mentor, Senator Brian Harradine, you would have thought that The Tankard would have learnt a thing or two about political strategy. Clearly not.

In the recent past, she has slagged off others far more than she was slagged by Ms Wilson. In fact, the Sex Party and the Eros Association have often thought of suing her for defamation for the most unbelievable allegations she has levelled at us in the past. In 2009 and 2010 she alleged in a blog on her website that the Australian Sex Party had links to ‘pseudo child pornography’.  Amongst other things she alleged that a former Eros Committee member was importing adult sex magazines that glorify sex with young girls, rape and incest – all because the models had pigtails. She had absolutely no evidence that the company had imported these particular publications. She later went on to attest that these magazines were ‘ essentially child porn”. Later on still, she alleged that, “pseudo child pornography eroticizes incest, rape and sexual assault”. Of course none of this was true and there was not a shred of evidence anywhere that implicated these tawdry, trailer-park, blue-collar magazines to the Eros member and certainly no evidence that they led to anything except masturbation.

In the comments section of her blog, the writer of the first comment stated that the Sex Party is “a party that puts children in danger.” The second comment said, “They (The Sex Party) really need to be held accountable for distributing child pornography”. The third said, “Thank you, Melinda Tankard Reist, for exposing the hypocrisy of the Australian Sex Party”. The fourth said, “Fiona Patten, Eros and their Sex Party have this crazy idea that they have the monopoly on sex. You could say they do, if you mean that sex is about the invitation to get off to sex with pretend children and teenagers, sex without emotional connection or commitment, sex with symbolized gestures of violence and coercion.” The fifth alleged that the Sex Party had links to child porn and that, “Surely they (the Sex Party) are violating some rite for the protection of our children from sexual predators”.

Defamation actions largely rise or fall on the ‘imputations’ of what is being said rather than what is actually said. Blogs that host comments underneath them are a fabulous and simple way for lawyers to show how an imputation can arise from something someone has said. In this case, the undeniable  imputations that arise from The Tankard’s statements are there for all to see. People of differing backgrounds, ethnicity and religions have written them but all come to the same two or three conclusions (imputations) after having read The Tankard’s blog.  Of course nothing could be further from the truth and the idea of defending such unintelligent and hysterical pronouncements is vaguely akin to defending the theory of evolution against Creation Theory or the science of cell division against the Virgin Birth. You just think…”Nah….why would I even bother”?

What also makes it difficult for the Sex Party and the Eros Association now is that The Tankard has even stolen our defamation lawyer! Yes folks…that’s right we hired her current lawyer, Ric Lucas, in a defamation action against the Canberra Times for calling Canberra X rated video traders filthy pornographers. We settled out of court over a fine Italian pasta and a couple of bottles of Frascati and both of us got what we wanted. Lucas managed to get Judge John Gallop in the Supreme Court to agree to three of the six imputations that had arisen from the paper’s article on the porn industry. This quietly rocked the papers editors. Lucas is a defo lawyer who knows his stuff, so The Tankard should feel rightly pleased about her little coup here. But we still reserve the right to approach Lucas to represent us again against The Tankard although there may be just a slight conflict of interest – ours!

Defamation actions are funny things. They can go badly wrong for litigants who are wanting revenge or who are too thin-skinned for their own liking. My belief is that The Tankard is of the latter persuasion. She can dish it out better than most but when it comes to copping it, she’s got a glass jaw. She’s in the business of politics as much as any politician, she has got to expect a little rough and tumble. I find it extraordinary that she is ducking and weaving over her religious affiliations. If there’s any hint of this in the imputations that Lucas says can be inferred from the No Place for Sheep blog, she needs to revisit every Sunday school picnic and every evangelical rally she’s ever addressed or attended because her religion, like sexuality, is not something easily erased.

And why would she want to do that anyway? Surely if her religion and her religious beliefs are important to her political work – get ‘em out there honey! People aren’t scared of religion anymore. They’re just scared when it dominates political thinking.

In a previous life, the Sex Party’s public officer, Robbie Swan, was the editor of the ‘80s political humour and satire magazine, Matilda. It was broadly based on the British magazine Private Eye. Matilda defended nearly 15 defamation writs in its short lifetime. These came from such luminaries as the Prime Minister, The Queensland Premier, the Queensland Governor, a Supreme Court judge, a doctor and many more. In every case Matilda published the pompous letters that defo lawyers had sent them together with a critique of how they should run their case and any supporting evidence they had to help. Only two cases ended up going to court and both litigants wished they’d never started it. The judge ended up being the first Supreme Court judge to be sacked by the Qld parliament for perjuring himself in the trial and the doctor who sued ended up going to jail and not getting a cent for his efforts.

In the UK, Private Eye magazine called this curious syndrome ‘The Curse of the Gnome’ and indeed many litigants in that country suffered the same fate as the Matilda sue-ers (no pun intended!). No Place for Sheep may not be Matilda or Private Eye but I reckon the principle still stands and The Tankard can expect no relief when the defense lawyers expose her religious beliefs to the blowtorch of modern political life.

Inspiration. It's a wonderful thing. It can come from anywhere and anyone and when it hits, you can become a machine. Many things inspire me. Many people too. Even certain smells can inspire me! For example, if I'm outside on a warm Spring day and I smell cut grass, for the next few hours I'm on my knees in the dirt pretending my black thumb has turned green, pulling out weeds (at least I think that was a weed?) and making promises to myself about watering and planting and mulching that I know I won't keep.

In my former life, the one where I was a child care worker and didn't spend my days surrounded by sex, I used to get a lot of inspiration from the kids I looked after. Their way of seeing the world was so fresh and innocent and would constantly surprise and enlighten me and, in the last few weeks, it's begun to happen again. Children from around the world are inspiring me. Showing up the adults that stick them in the “you're just a child” basket and giving insight into not only how they see the world, but also how we as adults can get it horribly and sometimes tragically wrong.

The first of these children was an twelve year old girl called Adora Svitak (she's fourteen now), a child prodigy from America who is already a published author and internationally renowned speaker. The piece I'm talking about is a video of  her speaking at a TED conference. TED stands for Technology Entertainment and Design and is an amazing forum where big thinkers and world changers can come together and express ideas and concepts on how to make the world a better place. It's truly awesome and if you haven't checked it out I suggest you do. The speech I am talking about is wonderful. Adora talks about the idea of “childish thinking” and how really, considering how open-minded and imaginative children are, that's not such a bad thing when it comes to changing the world. Of course, she says it way better than I so check out her fantastic talk here: http://www.ted.com/talks/adora_svitak.html .

The next one is another young girl. Way younger than Adora is and who has become an inspiration to many without even trying. She isn't a child prodigy or anything like that. She's just a little girl with a strong opinion. Her name is Riley, she is three years old and, in a world where gender specific toys are unfortunately the norm, she has something to say about it. For example, when Lego recently announced they were bringing out a “girls” range of blocks I couldn't believe it. Since I was a child I've played with the “girls range” of Lego, and my daughter does now too. Funnily enough, though, it's just called “Lego” and we've done pretty well so far without pink bricks. No-one has put this frustration into words better than Riley does. Sure, it's not actually about Lego, but it was posted on YouTube in perfect timing with the toy company's announcement and says everything that needs to be said about marketing towards gender. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viQph2vuHgs

The third child who has inspired me is a thirteen year old girl (who I only know by her YouTube name, Astrorice) who speaks about something very close to my heart. Slut shaming. She makes a point under her video about her realising it's odd that a thirteen year old virgin has such an opinion, but to be honest I don't think her age or her sexual activity matters one bit. She expresses herself so articulately and so well that, despite the braces and “like whatever” nuances, she speaks more maturely than most grown-ups on the subject. Have a look at what she has to say here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXH2K7OC37s&feature=related and then post it and send it to as many people as you can. It's a message we all need to hear and a lesson so many people need to learn.

The thing about us adults is we're so caught up in being adults we seem to forget we're not the only ones on the planet. We forget that we were once children and teenagers with radical ideas, open minds and imaginations. We seem forget those times we were so frustrated because the grown-ups wouldn't listen to us, and we forget that these children, the ones we push aside because they couldn't possibly be as smart or as experienced and knowledgeable as us, not only have a unique and interesting way of looking at the world and solving problems, but are are also going to be the ones making the laws and decisions about us when we get older.

So the next time you have a big choice to make, or there's a topic you want some insight on, ask a child what they think and what they would do. And then listen. I mean really listen. You never know, you might end up learning something!

A few days ago we had our Sex Party staff Christmas party in the Canberra office.  It was wonderful to be able to have the team around the table.

We each took turns to say how we felt about the work we had done this year.  It's funny that while there were less events on our calendar this year (only one state election, a by-election, three Sexpos, fetish expo, midsumma, mardi gras fair day, pride marches, slutwalks, conSensual  and numerous Sex Party meetings) it really does feel like 2011 was our busiest year yet.   I think that is because we we have been busy developing the Party which is very exciting.  I believe as a Party we have shifted our position from "Wow, I can't believe we are actually doing this" to "Right, How do we improve and make this Party even better".  Now the hard work really begins.

And on that note, I would like to send a huge thank you to every member, supporter and wonderful volunteer who has donated their time and energy to the Sex Party this year.  Without your contributions the Sex Party simply would not exist.

As a team we also had a chat about what 2012 held in store for us - elections, registrations, a website upgrade, more Sexpos.....!  It's going to be an amazing year for the Sex Party, and I am really excited to be sharing it with all of you.

Finally, we stopped talking about work (well, for a couple of minutes at least) and turned our attentions to the sparkling wine, prawns and salad - What better way to celebrate the year.  Here's wishing you all a happy and safe holiday season.

Cheers,

Fiona Patten and the Sex Party Team.

P.S. Psst - want to know what really goes on at a Sex Party Christmas party?  We all wore paper hats and told the corny jokes from our crackers.  After a bit more wine and amidst many giggles we all attempted to download 'blendr' onto our phones and see if we could locate each other (I don't exactly remember why).  Eventually the afternoon digressed into a shameless paper airplane throwing competition, which was won by our youngest guest.   Yep, we're hard core!  :-)

We started off quite businesslike, without a drink in sight.

Later in the afternoon it was all giggles and Blendr.

As I have said previously, I don't have much experience with the law. I did legal studies in high school but all I really remember about that class was an excursion to the High Court in Canberra and one of the guys in our group falling in the water feature that runs along the side of the path. I do, however, know a little about right and wrong. I know what is fair and I know what is unfair and I know, when it comes to these things, very often our courts let us down because of either legal loopholes or extenuating circumstances.

This has happened again this week in the awful and tragic story of the 12 year old girl who was pimped out by her mother and had to sleep with over 100 men. Let me repeat what I just said; This girl is 12 and her mother (yes, her mother!!!) pimped her out to complete strangers.     Thankfully this revolting woman and her partner have been sent to jail (however there is debate over whether or not the ten year sentence was too light) but what about the men who paid them to have sex with the child? What about their punishments?

Now to me, and many others I have spoken to, this should be a fairly straightforward case. A child is used as a prostitute, anyone and everyone involved should be held accountable and punished with the full force of the law.

Sadly, however, because of certain circumstances, the Director of Public Prosecutions made the decision not to go ahead with the charges. One of his reasons was because the men involved answered a newspaper ad that stated that her age was 18 and that he was also advised that the improbability that someone would advertise a twelve year old for prostitution, should be taken into account.

Another reason he decided against it was because the girl herself was unwilling to testify in court and to be honest, there is a very good reason for this.

She has been absolutely traumatised by the whole situation. She has already had to sit through and testify in the trials of her mother and her mother's partner and I can fully understand why she wouldn't want to go through it any more. Considering each man who faces charges would have to be tried separately, the trials could go on for years, leaving this poor child with nothing but court dates and constant reminders of her ordeal for the rest of her youth.

Also, considering the sheer number of men she was subjected to over a short period of time, it is very unlikely she would be able to absolutely identify each one properly, leading to the defence most likely calling her an unreliable witness and having the case thrown out which would, in my opinion, just add to the trauma.

I have to say though, one of the things that has really bothered me about this case (and believe me there are many things that bother me about this case) is the defence used by former Labor MP Terry Martin, the only man (apart from, of course, Gary Devine, the mother's partner) to be charged with any offences related to this situation.

Yes, he was found guilty of having sex with a young person and of producing child exploitation material, for which he was given a measly 10 month suspended sentence, however the judge, Justice Porter, decided not to charge him with indecent assault or to place his name on the sex offender register because he agreed with Martin's claim that it wasn't really his fault because the medicine he was on made him do it.

Um what? Back up a little bit here, I am confused. Your medicine?

According to his defence team Mr Martin suffers from Parkinson's Disease and the medication he was on causes a side-effect known as “hypersexuality” which basically means he was super-horny all the time and needed to release it.

Fine. I have no problem with that. However, as previously mentioned, the girl he chose to have sex with was 12 years old. Twelve! So what if she was advertised as being 18? Anyone who has ever been around, well, people, can tell the difference between a child of 12 and an adult of 18 and the minute he saw her, he should have known.

In a maybe believable defence, all the men who were found to have had sex with her claimed it was in a darkened room and they truly believed her to be 18, however Terry Martin also had the girl visit his home, where he not only had sex with her but took photos and videos as well and I really do have a hard time believing that in that situation he couldn't tell she was under-age. Even with make-up and grown-up clothes on, I'll concede she may have looked 16, but that's still illegal and it's still a stretch. Especially once she was naked.

I don't give a crap if he was suffering from the bluest balls in history, the girl was 12! It's not like sex workers are hard to come by and even if they were, the minute this obviously under-age girl stepped into his home he should have asked her to leave and then got over his “hypersexuality” with a wank.

One thing this whole case brings to the fore is the very important need for a safe, legal, regulated sex industry in Tasmania. You see, although prostitution in itself is not illegal there (if you're a single worker in a private residence or hotel), there are no legal brothels and no licensed agencies and so punters are quite often forced to break the law by answering illegal advertisements in the paper like they did in the case of this young girl. If sexual services were legal and regulated there, this whole sorry situation could well have been avoided.

I will defend to the death the right of Kevin Rudd to go to a strip club, and NSW Labor MP David Campbell's right to go to a gay bar and I fully believe the backlash they received from those indiscretions was ridiculous and overblown but they are adults, performing adult activities with other adults in a consensual manner. This is different. This girl was 12!

If Terry Martin had gone and had a scat-filled orgy with midgets and Thai lady-boys then I would also defend his right to do so, but I will never, no matter how “hypersexual” he was, believe he could not control himself around this child nor do I believe he is any kind of victim in this whole  mess.

I really do wonder what sort of precedent this is setting and what sort of message are we sending to not only sex offenders, but to the children who are their victims? “Oh, sure it's wrong... But this man was on medicine, and you're too traumatised to testify so we're going to let him off. Sorry, kid!”

It really isn't good enough. It is sad, it is tragic and it is disgusting and I just hope that this young girl, after all she has been through, will find some peace and comfort in her world and will grow up to be a strong, smart independent woman with the world at her feet. But something tells me that not only her mother but the entire legal system has let her down in a way that she may never fully recover.

Last Saturday members and supporters of the Australian Sex Party attended the Pro-choice rally which was organised in opposition to the March for the Babies (an anti-choice rally) outside the Victorian Parliament.

Our presence at this rally certainly stirred up some debate on our facebook page, with comments from both sides of the argument.  All points made were passionate and well thought through.  Please feel free to add to them.

I would like to thank everyone who came along and showed their support, particularly the wonderful and eloquent Merinda who addressed the rally.  Her speech is below, and you can read her thoughts on the day at her blog: Quietly Questioning.

I am here today as a woman, and as a student. Let me start by emphasizing that education is centrally important to achieving equality, addressing poverty, preventing unemployment, homelessness and a host of other issues which impact individuals and the whole of society. Access to education is therefore pivotal. In my primary and high school days, I sat in classrooms with boys, being told that I was the same as them, being told that I could do anything. That as a girl and as a woman, there was nothing that was impossible. As I grew older, what a surprise it was to find that equality is still being fought for.  How amazed I was that it wasn’t until 2008 that Victoria removed abortion from it’s criminal statutes – after I had graduated from high school and had begun my tertiary education. All this while some women of my generation question the need for feminism and believe that full equality was achieved some time ago.

Reproductive rights are about more than just abortion. They include access to all forms of contraception, adoption, IVF, excellent pre- and post-natal care for those who give birth, as well as sterilisation.  Abortion is part of reproductive rights as a whole and I would like to emphasise that each of these are important for men, women and trans identified people – all people should have access to reproductive justice. Later this afternoon, the March for the Babies protesters will try to separate abortion from all of these things. Abortion must stay within a reproductive rights context and every element of reproductive justice is as important as the next. Last year at this protest I was shocked to hear one anti-choice protester say that she would rather be raped than have an abortion. A strong feeling that I personally disagree with, however she illustrates my point perfectly – this is about choice and personal freedom – if you do not want an abortion, then please, do not have one.

Speaking of personal freedoms, I would also like to talk about sexual freedom. It all sounds very 1970s and free-love, but sexual freedoms are the ones which governments target first. They are hard to defend because the moralizing parts of our society attack them as being debaucherous, immoral or unwanted in the first place. They have been described as the ‘canary in the coal mine’ or the barometer which tells us when freedoms in our society are beginning to be eroded. Reproductive rights are inherently linked to sexual freedom, as we cannot achieve sexual freedom without proper access to reproductive rights.

This brings me to my next point. We must trust women, trust them to make decisions which are best and right for them. Women must be able to decide when, if and how they have children. Women, including women students, are more than incubators and we must treat them as such. Women deserve equality before the law and the respect which comes with trusting women to make reproductive decisions. We must say to women ‘you are responsible and have your own moral integrity’ and allow women to exercise that responsibility and integrity. In Victoria, we are lucky that the law largely allows women to do that. In other states, we must fight so that women are afforded the rights they are entitled to. The prosecution of a young woman and her partner in Cairns should serve as a wake up call to all of us – this issue is centrally important and although these laws very old, they are still being enforced, and we must not assume any differently. Victoria can never go back.

The Victorian government is banning the sale of bongs in the state from new years day next year. A tip if you want to buy one, they’ll only be in shops for 3 more months.

Obviously this isn’t going to stop people smoking cannabis, and the government knows this, but they say the ban will send a message to Victorians that drug use is not on.

Interestingly though, the government have decided not to ban hookah pipes.

Here at the Sex Party office, we’re wondering – is there really that much of a difference between a bong and a hookah pipe? (We have included the definition of each piece below.)  Really, wouldn’t you just add a piece of hose to a bong and voila! it’s a hookah pipe?

So in light of this observation, we’ve started this blog on the Vic bong bill. We are asking you to comment with your suggestions or send in your pictures or videos on how to turn a bong into a hookah pipe to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (anonymously if you like).  We'll put them up here. Let's show the government how ridiculous this legislation is.

Here’s what we think: seeing as this ban isn’t going to stop people smoking cannabis, and it’s not going to stop people selling objects that are almost exactly the same as bongs, we really can’t see how there could be any point to this ban. There's no justification for banning bongs and taking away yet another one of our personal freedoms.

Cannabis water pipe means a device—
(a) capable of being used or intended to be used for the purposes of introducing into the body of a person cannabis or other drugs of dependence by the drawing of smoke or fumes resulting from heating or burning the cannabis or other drug through water or another liquid in the device, commonly known as a "bong"; or

(b) that is intended to be used as a device referred to in paragraph (a) but is not capable of being so used because it needs adjustment, modification or addition— but does not include a hookah;

Hookah means a fully assembled device—
(a) used for smoking a substance consisting of tobacco, molasses, fruit, herbs or flavouring, whether the substance contains all or any combination of them, by the drawing of smoke or fumes resulting from heating or burning the substance in the device through water or another liquid in the device; and

(b) that has one or more openings and one or more flexible hoses, each with a mouthpiece through which the smoke or fumes are drawn.

We look forward to your submissions.