This is a post about something which I suspect the media are about to do, rather than something they already have.
Credulously believing, and then repeating, cynical astroturfing efforts to help the ALP diffuse pressure on it to finally remove discrimination against gay Australians in the Marriage Act, as supported by a clear majority of voters, ahead of its national conference in December.
Because it looks like the ALP has set up its own faux “Marriage Alliance”, pretending to be working with the actual advocates for equality, in order to push acceptance of its “separate but equal” civil unions non-solution.

Real equality advocates are inconveniently critical of the ALP’s let’s-keep-discriminating-a-bit-longer plan
Here’s Brian Greig in Crikey back on 16 June:
If anyone thinks Gillard’s office will put up with this any longer they’re dreaming. Her office will inevitably set about creating a new gay marriage group. A nicer one. A tame one. One that will be quiet. One that won’t annoy her. One that can spin a poor conference outcome Labor’s way. One that can be corralled into impotency.
It will urge recruits to work with the ALP’s strategy. It will have maps, polling and arguments designed to show well meaning but naive campaigners that the best chance of success lies in making the campaign go quiet. No more activism. No more embarrassing Gillard. Just lots of fruitless, time-consuming meetings away from media and public attention.
The uninitiated will be told that conservative voters in outer urban seats don’t like the issue being raised, but will begrudgingly support it if it goes through quietly. If you keep banging on about it, they’ll say, you’ll lose support. So, everybody, shush!
The Star Observer, this week:
Concerns have been raised about who is behind a new Australian marriage equality alliance before the group has been formally announced.
The Marriage Alliance was founded six months ago and lists the Australian Coalition for Equality, Queensland Association for Healthy Communities, Gay & Lesbian Equality WA, NSW Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby, Victorian Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby, Tasmanian Gay & Lesbian Rights Group (TGLRG), PFLAG Australia and Australian Marriage Equality (AME) as members.
However, the Star Observer has spoken to leadership individuals from Alliance member organisations, some of whom requested anonymity, who are concerned that focus group research and polling was commissioned on their behalf but without their knowledge.
The research, seen by this newspaper, urges taking a non-confrontational approach in the lead-up to the ALP National Conference in December and, although supportive of marriage equality, notes “for those conflicted by the issue or sitting on the fence, the idea of civil unions seem like the easiest and less disruptive path, and a reasonable compromise for both sides … some also think it might be a good first step before same-sex marriage becomes law”.
Groups who organise rallies for marriage equality have not been invited to join the Alliance.
No surprise why.
Now, obviously the point of setting up such an organisation is to get your misleading line out there by having it uncritically reported by media outlets as if it were coming from the actual marriage equality lobby. Hence this post – let’s hope enough journalists see through the ruse by asking the obvious question: wait, who are you again? And why are you separate from the Australians for Marriage Equality mob who’ve been running all these equality rallies for the last few years? Who’s behind you?
But if they don’t – let us know in the comments.












9 Comments
What do we want? – Equality for all!
When do we want it? – When it no longer poses potential political risks in certain marginal seats!
Hang on.
So the research showed that “FOR THOSE CONFLICTED” civil unions will be appealing. Well, yes. And?
I don’t see ANYTHING on the group’s website (http://mymarriagestory.com.au/) that promotes civil unions.
As far as I can tell, more voices calling for marriage equality can only be a good thing, and if this lot are savvy enough to commission polling and research to help make their point, then all the more power to them.
Storm? Teacup?
“I don’t see ANYTHING on the group’s website (http://mymarriagestory.com.au/) that promotes civil unions.”
Wait – are you sure that’s their website and not one of the genuine advocates for equality?
The point is that they are using this as a false compromise that can be sold as Labor “doing the right thing” when it is primarily a PR end-run around the issue. It was also predicted, based on previous behaviour, that this is the path that would be chosen by Labor.
When an organisation claiming to represent groups that do not know or approve of the research or lobbying it has done “on their behalf”, the storm has escaped the teacup.
That website is not for the “Marriage Alliance” (in name) but for an actual alliance of pro- marriage-equality groups (except there is no official name for it, AFAIK).
This reminds me of going to the polls at an election and being forced to choose who to put higher: the Liberal Democratic Party, or the Democratic Labor Party when doling out preferences. The uninitiated would probably choose one thinking they represent their views but they’ve actually chosen the one actively working against them.
{/teacher}
oops {seems like} {subject-verb agreemment: idea (sing) + 3rd person singular, to seem]
mmm Skitts Law violation: {agreement}
It’s the same kind of ruse as the one which has seen Queensland’s abortion laws remain unreformed despite huge Labor majorities in State Parliament for most of the past 22 years.