Senior Coalition figures continue to double down on their commitment to radical LGBTIQA+ ideology.

The latest was Senator Dave Sharma, who on Sunday night told the Danica & James show on Sky news that the Coalition would not amend the Sex Discrimination Act to restore the biological reality of two genders in Australian Law.

In 2013 both Labor and the Coalition amended the SDA to allow biological males to identify was women and vice versa and for it to be illegal to discriminate against someone based on their new gender.

Last week Donald Trump signed an Executive Order to say the US federal government now only recognised two genders.

Sharma told Danica and James he believed in protecting girls and women’s sports but would not support amending the SDA, which means it would remain illegal to protect girls from the encroachment of males in their sport.

Sadly Peter Dutton also said last week the Coalition had no plans to restore the definition of biological gender to law, leaving mainstream Australians and women’s groups gobsmacked.

Here’s the transcript of the interview with Dave Sharma:

JAMES MACPHERSON: I've got a very tricky question for you that politicians right around our country have been struggling with all week. I want to see how you go. The official policy of the US government is now that there are only two genders, male and female. So, I wanted to ask you, as a high-profile Liberal Party Senator three questions. How many genders are there? What are they? And will that be reflected in government policy should you win the election?

SENATOR SHARMA: Well, in my view, there are two genders, male and female. And in my view, the policy on this is settled. I mean, we've got our guidelines on this in the Australian government go back to 2013 when the Sex Discrimination Act was amended. My view is if it's not broke, don't try and fix it. I think, uh, you know, I'm watching what they're doing in the US with interest, but I don't have any proposals to change how we go about this in Australia.

JAMES MACPHERSON: So the coalition won't embrace the pro women's rights movement and push back against trans ideology?

SENATOR SHARMA: I think our priorities are addressing, you know, people's cost of living, uh, you know, power bills, grocery prices, electricity prices. I mean, fundamentally we think the most important duty of our government is to keep people safe, give them an opportunity to get ahead and that's what we'll be focused on.

JAMES MACPHERSON: Just before I let you go, I've got to push back slightly because there'd be a lot of ladies watching saying, well, our priority is the safety of our daughters, fairness in girls sport. Is that not a priority for at least half the population?

SENATOR SHARMA: Oh, I think, I think those are important issues. Uh, I think, you know, making sure that, you know, women are safe, whether they're playing sport or they're in correctional facilities or, uh, anywhere else is an important consideration. And I think we always need to make sure we keep that first and foremost, that people's freedom to identify how they want to in terms of their gender does not impinge upon the rights and safety of others. Now, that's always going to be a live issue, but I don't think we need to be headlining a policy area on this when I think Australia's under so many other pressures.

Sadly Labor, the Greens and the Coalition are on a unity ticket when it comes to defending the lie about gender that is baked into the Sex Discrimination Act.

Family First’s Senate team of Katie Lush (Qld), Lyle Shelton (NSW), Bernie Finn (Vic) and Christopher Brohier (SA) is fighting for a return to commonsense on gender.

The legal battle between Sall Grover, founder of the female-only networking app Giggle, and transgender activist Roxanne Tickle escalated last week.

Despite winning the initial case last year — where a Federal Court judge ruled that a male could become a female under former Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s absurd amendment to the Sex Discrimination Act — Tickle is now counter-suing.

This is in the face of Grover’s appeal to the High Court against the Federal Court’s bizarre ruling in the biological male’s favour.

It’s confusing. Feel free to read the above sentences again – slowly.

If Family First Senate candidates are elected, they will fight not only for the law to be changed in favour of girls and women, but they will fight for the federal government to pay Grover’s legal fees.

Tickle, a man who appropriates a woman’s identity, is now seeking to upgrade his original ruling from indirect to direct discrimination, demanding additional damages and aggravated damages.

This latest development underscores the absurdity and injustice Grover continues to face.

Giggle was created as a safe space for biological women, yet defending this principle has cost Sall Grover more than three years of stress and legal battles.

She has now filed an appeal, but the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is once again intervening to support Tickle’s case.

As Sall noted, “If you don’t believe in gender ideology, they can do this to you.”

The implications of this case go far beyond Giggle.

It’s about the right to defend biological truth, protect women-only spaces, and uphold freedom of speech, belief, and association.

Grover’s courageous stand is a reminder of the importance of fighting back against radical gender ideology and its infiltration into Australia’s legal system.

Australian politicians stand condemned for doing nothing to remedy the law, sitting passively by while Grover fights in the courts.

Family First stands in solidarity with Sall Grover and is running candidates at the up-coming federal election committed to amending the Sex Discrimination Act to restore the biological definition of "woman" in Australian law.

This is essential to ensure that private companies and organisations can provide spaces exclusively for women and girls without fear of legal retribution.

Grover’s fight is a costly one, with legal fees expected to run into the millions.

Supporters are encouraged to contribute to her legal fund at www.gigglecrowdfund.com.

Family First shares the outrage of child safety and women’s rights advocates at recent decisions of Australia’s Classification Review Board reported in the Weekend Australian.

If elected, Family First will fight for an overhaul of the board including inclusion of child safety and trauma experts on the board to ensure decisions reflect community standards.

The board’s clearance of a novel and a comic containing graphic depictions of child sexual abuse and violent sexual acts against women under the guise of "literary, artistic and educational merits” is a stark example of how this government body is failing to protect families.

Family First calls for urgent reform of the Classification Review Board to prevent such anti-family decisions from continuing to harm our society.

The board’s decision to give the novel Ostend an unrestricted classification is a shocking dereliction of its duty to uphold community standards.

Ostend, written by Maxsense Maximus, includes graphic descriptions of the violent gang rape of a nine-year-old girl and the torture of an 11-year-old girl by paedophiles.

While the novel does not promote paedophilia - its descriptions are in the context of a character dismantling a fictional child sex gang – the novel’s depictions of child gang rape are of such a graphic nature that they do not belong in literature.

Family First has chosen not to print even the Australian newspaper’s description, which was itself heavily redacted.

Despite this horrifying content, the board deemed the material “not high in impact” and concluded it had “literary, artistic and educational merits.”

It is incomprehensible that such content could be deemed suitable for audiences as young as 15.

Equally appalling is the board’s approval of The Boys: Omnibus Volume Two, a comic depicting violent sexual acts, including a scene where a man threatens to kill a woman’s family while forcing her into submission.

The board dismissed this as "dark humour" and “consensual” despite the clear terror and aggression depicted. This decision trivialises the horror of sexual violence and ignores the dangerous influence such media can have on young minds.

Family First firmly believes there is no place for literature or media that normalises or glorifies child sexual abuse, rape, or violence against women and girls.

These decisions by the Classification Review Board undermine efforts to combat domestic violence, protect children, and uphold the dignity of women.

It is deeply concerning that, while the Albanese government touts its new laws banning under-16s from social media to reduce social harm, it allows material of this nature to circulate freely.

Family First commends family activist Bernard Gaynor for his tireless efforts in exposing the dangerous failings of the Classification Review Board.

Gaynor has highlighted how these decisions are not only morally wrong but legally flawed, given that the National Classification Code explicitly prohibits material containing descriptions of child sexual abuse or exploitative depictions of sexual violence.

Family First has long supported Gaynor’s work, with National Director Lyle Shelton featuring him on ADH TV.

Readers can view these insightful discussions on Family First’s YouTube channel.

Advocates such as Hetty Johnston of Bravehearts and Melinda Tankard Reist of Collective Shout have rightly also condemned the board for failing to prioritise community wellbeing and child safety.

Johnston described the material as "violent porn" and expressed disbelief that such content could be given the green light.

Tankard Reist called for the inclusion of child safety and trauma experts on the board to ensure decisions reflect community standards.

Family First, if elected at the federal election, will fight for these inclusions.

The inclusion of experts in child safety and trauma is essential, as is a mandate to reject material that trivialises or exploits sexual violence.

Without such reforms, the board will continue to betray its responsibility to the Australian people.

As a nation, we must draw a firm line against the distribution of material that degrades women and endangers children.

Family First will continue to advocate for a safer, family-friendly Australia where the rights of the vulnerable are defended, and harmful media is kept out of circulation.

(Image: A page from the comic strip "The Boys").

In a significant move, the U.S. House of Representatives this week passed the "Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act," aiming to restrict biological males who identify as female from participating in female sports categories.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Greg Steube, argued for its necessity, saying, “There are young girls across this country who have worked their entire lives to achieve their dream of competing in women’s sports, only to find that dream being crushed by biological males competing against them.”

This sentiment resonates with countless Australians concerned about the fairness and safety of our own women’s sports.

In contrast, Australian sports authorities have adopted guidelines promoting the inclusion of transgender and gender-diverse athletes in elite sports, despite the obvious unfairness to girls and women.

The Family First Party firmly believes that women's sports should remain a fair arena where female athletes can compete on an equal footing.

We advocate for policies that protect the integrity of women's sports by ensuring that only biological females participate in female categories.

This stance is not about exclusion but about preserving the opportunities and rights of women and girls in sports.

As Australia approaches the upcoming elections, it's imperative to question why our politicians are not taking decisive action to safeguard women's sports.

If American lawmakers can implement measures to protect female athletes, why can't Australian leaders do the same?

Family First's candidates are committed to championing the sex-based rights of women and girls.

We pledge to advocate for policies that ensure fair competition, protect the safety of female athletes, and uphold the integrity of women's sports.

The Victorian Liberal parliamentary party’s treatment of Moira Deeming exposes a glaring hypocrisy in the so-called progressive left and the #MeToo movement.

Despite last week’s Federal Court ruling that found Victorian Liberal leader John Pesutto’s conduct towards Deeming was “untruthful” and “evasive,” there has been a deafening silence from those who claim to champion women’s rights and integrity. Where is the outrage?

Imagine the scenario reversed: if a conservative man had lied about a progressive woman, the fallout would have been swift and unforgiving.

As Peta Credlin astutely observes, “The uproar from the #MeToo movement would be nuclear.” Yet when it’s a “moderate” like Pesutto targeting a conservative woman, the double standards are stark.

(“Moderate” is the wrong term to describe someone who thinks a woman can have a penis and should be allowed in girls’ and women’s spaces – the Liberals need new nomenclature for their factions).

The injustice doesn’t end there. Deeming’s “crime” was standing up for women’s rights—particularly their right to safe spaces.

For this, she has been vilified, excluded, and left to bear the brunt of a leader who, as Credlin highlights, is too “delusional” to apologise.

Pesutto’s refusal to accept accountability, even after a Federal Court verdict, speaks volumes about his character and judgment.

It also speaks volumes about the character of some of the Christians in the party room who, according to media reports which have not been repudiated publicly by them, voted with Pesutto to expel Deeming.

A party room meeting is scheduled for tomorrow to discuss her re-admission. If these Christians do not change their vote and apologise, preferably publicly, Christian voters will need to be far more discerning when it comes to the Liberal party’s Christian candidates at the next election.

What’s truly at stake here is not just one woman’s reputation but the integrity of a political party and its ability to offer a credible alternative to an incompetent Labor government. Credlin rightly points out,

“If the Victorian Liberal Party won’t stand up for women’s rights, then frankly it has no right to call itself Liberal.”

This case should serve as a wake-up call to all Australians. Hypocrisy and cowardice must not replace principle and justice. It’s time to demand better from those who claim to represent us, starting with leaders who are brave enough to admit when they’ve failed.

The failure of the Liberal Party to uphold basic integrity, women’s rights, the best interests of the mum and dad family, the human rights of unborn babies and economic and energy policies that help families get ahead is why Family First is in the political fight.

MEDIA RELEASE