The ugly culture war malice an All Black is now supporting

The NZ First gender definition bill isn’t about solving a real problem — it’s about manufacturing one. And with Taine Randell stepping into politics, the culture war in New Zealand just recruited a very high-profile face.

Former All Blacks captain Taine Randell standing as New Zealand First candidate

Former All Blacks captain Taine Randell will stand as a New Zealand First candidate at this year’s election.

– Advertisement –

RNZ

NZ First wants to define a man and a woman. Government and experts say it will achieve almost nothing

Lawyers who had reviewed the draft legislation said it was questionable whether it would achieve those goals.

Barrister Graeme Edgeler said that if the bill passed in its current form, it would have little practical effect.

“Laws you might expect to be affected, for example rules around sex discrimination under the Human Rights Act, just don’t use any of the words the bill actually proposes to define. Nor, for the last 20 years or so, do criminal laws around rape.”

He added: “If you wanted to really change how law treats gender identity, this wouldn’t be the change you’d propose, which is to define a few terms in statutes that really aren’t used all that often in statutes.”

Edgeler noted that the Human Rights Act already permitted sex-segregated facilities and sex-differentiated sports in New Zealand. “But none of these rules have anything do with the definition of man or woman or male or female.”

One exception, he said, could be within the Corrections Department.

At present, prisoners can apply to be placed in a prison which aligns with their gender identity (except for sexual offenders). Because the NZ First bill also covers secondary legislation, which includes rules and regulations, it could affect that policy.

In a legal analysis published last year, public and human rights lawyer Matt McKillop asked whether the bill was a “solution looking for a problem”.

He considered whether concerns about trans women having access to women’s refuges, bathrooms, prisons and sports teams required law changes which clarified language around sex and gender.

“I conclude not,” he wrote in Law News. “New Zealand law already permits services or facilities for women in most of these circumstances based on biological sex. The bill would therefore not affect the legal position in those commonly cited circumstances where women might have reasonable concerns about safety and privacy.”

Stuff

Spite dressed up as policy

…this petty, pointless demand to define a woman is a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t actually exist!