Yesterday former federal Liberal MP Lucy Wicks was exposed as the complainant relating to the abusive behaviour of NSW upper house MP Taylor Martin. The outing was entirely against her wishes. Wicks released a statement saying:
I am distressed today to learn that I have been named by Radio 2GB as the person who made a formal and confidential complaint regarding abuse by a NSW member of Parliament spanning more than five years …
I am beyond distressed that I have had to disclose even a small portion of these details. I sought to create a confidential process that would enable natural justice and provide me with safety as I navigate this process.
2GB right-wing shockjock Ben Fordham defended his outing of Wicks: “I’m not in the business of suppressing information.”
This isn’t the first time a female complainant against a Coalition MP has been outed by a media outlet. In 2018 Catherine Marriott, who alleged sexual harassment by Barnaby Joyce — allegations that remain unresolved and without a satisfactory investigation by the Nationals — was outed against her wishes by The Weekend Australian after lodging a complaint with the federal National Party and asking for a confidential investigation.
She described being outed as “one of the most frightening things that you will ever have to live through … The control that I had over my own identity was taken away, and that’s something that I will live now with for the rest of my life, and I think was … you know, I think it was really unfair, and it was really horrific.”
The case of Brittany Higgins is different, given she chose to reveal her alleged experience, but she too has had her privacy and control taken away by a long-running smear campaign by The Australian, using illegally leaked texts provided to the Australian Federal Police and lawyers for the man she alleges sexually assaulted her.
Three examples of women who have complained about sexual harassment or assault by male Coalition figures being outed and exposed by the media. In each case, right-wing media outlets. In two cases, their identities were leaked by the party involved.
We know from the statements of the women concerned that being outed against their wishes is at the very least distressing and likely much worse, and a violation of the confidentiality they sought. We know Higgins has repeatedly called for the media and politicians to stop using her personal material — which has no public interest or probative value — as part of their campaign against her.
And we know confidentiality is a vital part of complaints-handling processes for sexual harassment and for the appropriate handling of sexual violence allegations, not merely to protect the privacy of the victims concerned, but to protect them from potential retribution. Protecting them also helps to focus on the alleged perpetrator, not the actions of the victim. That’s why the media is urged to get full and informed consent before identifying victim-survivors of harassment and omit any identifying details in coverage of violence against women.
The outing of female complainants against their wishes, and their harassment by the media afterwards, strongly risks a chilling effect for victims of sexual violence, abuse or harassment holding perpetrators to account. Moreover, the higher the profile of the complainant, the greater the impact. If even a former Liberal MP won’t have her request for confidentiality honoured, with her name paraded in right-wing media, what hope for any other victim of abuse or harassment?
The treatment of Higgins by The Australian and Sky’s far-right grubs was clearly intended as exemplary punishment for a woman who so profoundly exposed a toxic culture within not merely Parliament but also the Coalition and Morrison government. Was the outing of Marriott and Wicks by right-wing media for making allegations about the behaviour of federal and state Coalition figures any different in intention to what has been done to Higgins?
It certainly won’t be any different in effect — to intimidate women from calling out high-profile conservative men.
‘…the media is urged to get full and informed consent before identifying victim/survivors.’ It’s ‘urged’? Urged? You can hear 2GB and News Corpse howling with laughter at the suggestion.
Where can I get a list of Ben Fordham’s 2GB advertisers?
I suspect MFW might be able to supply something.
Indeed the Witches have a list on their website, and the old faithful Hardly Normal tops the list..but some surprising entries like the NRMA.
If not clearly targeting above median age voters the sponsors suggest they maybe, and guess in regional NSW too?
Yes I’ll join any group who boycotts sponsors of Fordham’s programs. It worked with Jones. And I know a lot of people who would never again shop at Harvey Norman after the rorting of the job keeper program. There’s a lot of power in purchasers’ hands.
I concur. I have never stepped into that store since the job keeper rort was exposed even if it means I am paying slightly more for good in other similar stores such as the Good Guys (who are pretty good anyway). It’s a matter of principle for me.
Same. I’ve refused to buy from them since then. Sadly my list of companies to avoid grows ever longer, with Unilever joining it recently.
I’m howling with laughter, Frank. ‘Urged’? Really? Not legally compelled? Yet another missing law to add to my very long list of absent legislation.
We don’t do law here in Australia. The big boys are only requested (urged) to follow a voluntary code or perhaps a set of guidelines. Laws with penalties are for the peasantry.
Right-wingers only like laws that protect but don’t punish their inner circle, and punish but don’t protect everyone else.
Yep. Like the Liberals going on about the Robodebt RC being a political hit job on them by Labor which is a laughable claim. But the Pink Batts and Trade Union RCs were a legitimate exercise of their power. My ass!!!!
Right wing or left ir millenial or boomer all labels bit really its about ignorance, bias, wilful blindness and worst of all enabled corruption
Why do they do it? Because they’re misogenists. How dare a woman not be thankful for a man’s advances. See also various goings on in Canberra over the Morrison years.
Let’s just call it the Mudroch effect. Might not be the only ones doing it, but they sure perfected the practice. Why do they do it? Power, money, influence… you could say it’s in their DNA.
It seems they are particularly attentive to their “own women” at pains to keep them well policed. Often with help from the other women of the right. To be a female in the Liberals seems to acquire a form of Stockholm syndrome or at least living through episodes of the Stepford wives.
Imagine having a heart to heart supposedly confidential discussed with one of those hard right coalition women. Straight after they would be on the phone. As it happened.
Agree. Rather than try to attract the female vote the Libs, NP, ON etc. through grounded policies they demand loyalty, obedience and ‘following orders’; not just women but their own men, members, constituents and anyone who disagrees.
Another symptom of imported from the US/UK, a corrupted nativist Christian authoritarianism that does not tolerate dissent form the lower orders including women…. response from too many ‘conservatives’ is silence….
Remember the double standards visited on Holgate courtesy of the mad monk club and boofheads
“I’m not in the business of suppressing information.” – coool – so tell us who leaked the info to you
It seems like Lucy Wicks recruited this guy into the Liberal Party and then he worked for her. He was then rushed into a political job of his own created by a NSW Upper House vacancy. Why would the Liberal Party appoint a novice to a permanent political position rather than an experienced person who deserved recognition? Maybe there are just no experienced people who deserve recognition in the Party? Anyway, he’s ot the first one, I’ve always felt its just too easy for a dud to rise to the top in that Party.