Gender Queer: A Memoir (2019) & Library Censorship

The GENDER QUEER controversy began in the United States in 2020.

It was targeted in Australian libraries in early 2023, with the protest soon expanding to include manga and comic books.

The following books, manga and graphic novels are covered on this page or have been mentioned in media reports or by activists.

• 7TH GARDEN (2014-17) by Mitsu Izumi
• A.I. LOVE YOU (1994-99) by Ken Akamatsu
• AUSTRALIAN PENTHOUSE (1979-Present)
• BOOF GOES TO BEAUTY SCHOOL (2018) by Caroline Tuohey
• BOOK OF HUMAN INSECTS, THE (1970-71) by Osamu Tezuka
• BOYS, THE (2006-12) by Garth Ennis
• CROSSED: BADLANDS (2012-13) by Avatar Press
• EMBRACING LOVE (1997-09) by Youka Nitta
• FIFTY SHADES OF GREY (2011) by E. L. James
• HIPS ON THE DRAG QUEEN GO SWISH, SWISH, SWISH, THE (2020) by Lil Miss Hot Mess
• LET’S TALK ABOUT IT (2021) by Matthew Nolan, Erika Moen
• LOVE HINA (1998-01) by Ken Akamatsu
• NEGIMA! MAGISTER NEGI MAGI (2003-12) by Ken Akamatsu
• NICK AND CHARLIE (2020) by Alice Oseman
• Ostend (2024) by Maxsense Maximus
• PREACHER (1995-00) by Garth Ennis
• RENT-A-GIRLFRIEND (2017-Present) by Reiji Miyajima
• SAME-SEX PARENTS (2018) by Holly Duhig
• SEX: A BOOK FOR TEENS (2010) by Nikol Hasler
• SEX CRIMINALS (2013-20) by Image Comics
• SHANGRI-LA FRONTIER (2017-Present) by Katarina
• TENJHO TENGE (1997-10) by Oh! great
• UQ HOLDER! (2013-22) by Ken Akamatsu
• WARRIOR NUN AREALA: RITUALS (1995-96) by Antarctic Press
• WELCOME TO SEX (2023) by Yumi Stynes, Dr Melissa Kang

Gender Queer: A Memoir

Author Maia Kobabe / Publisher Oni-Lion Forge Publishing Group / 2019 / USA

On 27 February 2023, an article drew attention to the availability of GENDER QUEER and Alice Osman’s NICK AND CHARLIE (2020) in libraries in Sydney’s Sutherlandshire.

The second title, NICK AND CHARLIE (2015), was in the news after the father of an 11-year-old complained after his son borrowed it from his school library in the US state of Maine.

Both were described as graphic and repulsive and questioned why ratepayers were funding Australian libraries to stock them.

March 5, 2023
In an email to councillors on Friday, a Sylvania resident called on the council to remove the book from the library, declaring it did not represent “the vast majority of reasonable people in the Shire”.

“GENDER QUEER should be removed from Sutherland Shire Council libraries completely. This should happen today.”

Councillor Jen Armstrong wrote back to defend the “memoir”…As for objections to references to sexual behaviour, [she] said the library may as well also remove Prince Harry’s book given he detailed how he had lost his virginity “to an older woman” and nearly lost his penis.

– Fury over ‘obscene’ library book
– dailytelegraph.com.au

At the same time, a protest at Queensland’s Logan City Council library saw it removed from the shelves but remaining available on request.

A complaint was then made to the police on March 4 about it and four other titles, which included manga and graphic novels.

March 16, 2023
[GENDER QUEER] referred to the Australian Classification Board (ACB) after a complaint made by a conservative activist saw the book removed from the shelves of a Queensland library.

Following a four-day investigation, Queensland Police confirmed to 9news.com.au that on March 9 they flagged GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR to the federal government’s Department of Communications and Arts, which runs the ACB.

9news.com.au has seen correspondence from Logan council stating the council was not breaking any laws by stocking GENDER QUEER, because there had been no ruling or review from ACB dictating otherwise.

– Gender identity memoir removed from Queensland library shelf, referred to classification board
– article @ 9news.com.au

March 17, 2023
A federal arts department spokesperson confirmed the department was contacted by Queensland Police on March 9 regarding GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR. The department told police the book had not been classified, nor had an application for classification been received.

The department then advised the board’s director, Fiona Jolly, of “concerns raised regarding this book”. Jolly determined to call in publication on March 15. Classification may take five weeks.

– Censor to assess ‘Gender Queer’ graphic memoir after activist’s complaint
– article @ smh.com.au

March 17, 2023
It is unknown whether all [GENDER QUEER] copies have been removed while the council investigation is under way.

Since the initial complaint on March 4, four others books have been targeted.

Logan City councillor Karen Murphy said the council review had already started.

“This review will be undertaken with reference to council’s Library Collection Development Policy,” Ms Murphy said online.

“This policy is consistent with national public library standards and guidelines.

“Council will make no further comment until the review is completed.”

– ‘Porn’ comic book taken off SEQ library’s shelves
– couriermail.com.au

March 20, 2023
[Queensland] Police investigated the complaint for several days, and then contacted the federal government’s Department of Communications, which runs the ACB, on March 9.

The department told police the book had not been classified at that time and nobody had, so far, lodged an application for classification.

It is not unusual for a book to not be classified.

The department then flagged the situation to the ACB.

After assessing developments, on March 15 Fiona Jolly, director of the ACB, officially “called in” the book from publisher Oni Press.

The publishers were given the standard three days to comply.

At Jolly’s discretion, a single board member or a group panel will read the publication in order to reach a decision.

– Clock ticking on ‘Gender Queer’ censorship decision
– article @ 9news.com.au

Policing your comics

On 15 March 2023, the NSW Police received ratings for four American comic books they had sent to the Classification Board. The background to these seemingly random submissions is unknown. However, it is interesting they came at the same time as library censorship began to take hold in Australia. Please e-mail us if you have any information about this case.

Benn Dunn’s WARRIOR NUN AREALA: RITUALS ran for six issues between August 1995 and June 1996. Three issues were submitted.

No. 3 (Dec. 1995) received an ‘Unrestricted’ rating.

No. 1 (Aug. 1995) and No. 5 received ‘Unrestricted’ ratings but with added consumer advice of ‘M – not recommended for readers under 15 years’. The National Classification Database lists No. 1 (Aug.1995) as BOOK II.

The fourth submission, CROSSED: BADLANDS No. 41 (2013), received a Category 2 rating. It restricts it to people 18 years and over and sale in certain places in opaque packaging. Queensland prohibits the sale of all Category 1 and 2 publications.

This decision has been mentioned on social media by the activist behind the GENDER QUEER complaint so may prove a link between the cases.

Surry Hills, NSW – Policing your library

In late March, Sydney’s Daily Telegraph visited Surry Hills Library in search of titles to complain about.

March 29, 2023
Comic books with graphic sex scenes and violent pornographic imagery have been pulled from the shelves of the “Teenage Fiction” section of a major Sydney library, as questions are raised about the classification of explicit material in Australia.

And the City of Sydney library late Tuesday began removing some of the books from the shelves of their Surry Hills branch after the Daily Telegraph uncovered explicit material in the teenage fiction section, including a copy of THE BOYS VOL 1 by Garth Ennis, which includes bestiality and rape scenes.

… a different book [CROSSED: BADLANDS No. 41] by the same author was declared Category 2 pornography on March 15 by the classification board after the NSW Police brought it to their attention.

A council spokeswoman said the novels were catalogued as adult graphic novels but “unfortunately they were located very close to the young adult graphic novels at the Surry Hills library”.

The same Sydney library shelves also contain Japanese manga books depicting sex, including a series about two Japanese porn stars “engaging in a 10 day sexual romp” called EMBRACING LOVE by Youka Nitta.

– ‘Extreme, degrading, violent’: Graphic teen library books under fire
– dailytelegraph.com.au

The full article quotes the anti-GENDER QUEER atavist, which explains why the journalist singled out THE BOYS.

It is another title at the centre of attention in the censorship push.

Unrestricted in Australia

On April 3, the 240-page GENDER QUEER was rated Unrestricted M (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years).

April 3, 2023
On 3 April 2023, the Classification Board (the Board) classified the publication, GENDER QUEER A MEMOIR, Unrestricted, with consumer advice of ‘M (Mature)—Not Recommended for Readers under 15 Years’.

When classifying a publication, the Board is required to consider the impact of classifiable elements within the publication in the context of the publication’s narrative and artistic merits. The Board applies the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Publications 2005 (the Guidelines) when classifying publications.

The Director of the Classification Board, Fiona Jolly, stated: ‘In the Board’s view, this publication can be accommodated in the Unrestricted classification as, within the context of the publication, the treatment of themes is not high in impact or offensive, and the treatment of sex and nudity is also not high in impact and is not exploitative, offensive, gratuitous or very detailed. Given the context of the publication’s narrative and its literary, artistic and educational merits, the Board does not consider that the publication contains material that offends a reasonable adult to the extent that it should be restricted.’

‘While considering that the publication should not be restricted, the Board noted that some content within this autobiographical text may offend some sections of the adult community and may not be suitable for younger readers. For this reason the Board has classified GENDER QUEER A MEMOIR ‘Unrestricted’ with consumer advice of “M—not recommended for readers under 15 years of age”.’

Ms Jolly reiterated: ‘This consumer advice does not constitute a legal restriction on its sale or availability.’

– Classification of the publication Gender Queer A Memoir
– Fiona Jolly, Director. Classification Board

Full Classification Board report

April 3, 2023
Title: GENDER QUEER
Alternate Titles:
Publisher: Oni-Lion Forge Publishing Group
Author: Maia Kobabe
Year of Production: 2020
Number of pages: 240 pages
ISSN/ISBN: 9781549304002, 9781637150726
Version: Original
Format: Paperback
Country of origin: USA
Language: English
Application Type: New Publication
Applicant: Kinokuniya Bookstores of Australia

Dates:
Date application received by the Classification Board: 22/03/2023
Date of decision: 3/04/2023

Decision:
Classification: Unrestricted
Consumer Advice: M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years
Conditions:

Synopsis:
GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR is an autobiographical non-fiction graphic memoir, written by Maia Kobabe, that explores the author’s path to identifying as nonbinary and asexual. This 240-page edition was published in 2020 by Oni-Lion Forge Publishing Group.

Reasons for Decision:

In making this decision, the Classification Board has applied the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Classification Act), the National Classification Code (the Code) and the Guidelines for the Classification of Publications 2005 (the Guidelines).

In the Board’s view this publication warrants an Unrestricted classification, in accordance with item 4 of the Publications table of the Code.

Pursuant to the Guidelines, this content is classified Unrestricted as it does not include material that is likely to offend a reasonable adult to the extent that it should be restricted. A ‘reasonable adult’ is defined in the Guidelines as, “possessing common sense and an open mind, and able to balance personal opinion with generally accepted community standards”.

Publications classified Unrestricted may include material that is not recommended for some readers, including those aged under 15 years. Publications classified Unrestricted that contain material that is not recommended

for readers under 15 may be required to carry consumer advice of M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years.

The Unrestricted classification encompasses a wide range of material. Generally, descriptions and depictions of classifiable elements in publications classified Unrestricted may contain some detail. However, the impact will not be so strong as to require legal restriction.

The impact of covers of Unrestricted publications will be low.

In the Board’s view, this publication can be accommodated in the Unrestricted classification as, within the context of the publication, the treatment of themes is not high in impact or offensive, and the treatment of sex and nudity is also not high in impact and is not exploitative, offensive, gratuitous or very detailed. Given the context of the publication’s narrative and its literary, artistic and educational merits, the Board does not consider that the publication contains material that offends a reasonable adult to the extent that it should be restricted.

The examples described below do not represent an exhaustive list of the content that caused the publication to be classified Unrestricted.

ADULT THEMES, SEX and NUDITY

Descriptions and depictions of adult themes should not have a high impact or be offensive. The treatment of themes with a high degree of intensity should be discreet, low in impact and not exploitative. Generally, the stronger the theme, the more discreet the treatment. Descriptions and depictions of sexual products and services that are restricted to adults should be discreet and have a low impact.

Descriptions and depictions of, and references to, sexual activity involving consenting adults should not be exploitative or offensive. Realistic descriptions of sexual activity involving adults should not be gratuitous or very detailed. Sexual activity involving consenting adults may be discreetly implied in realistic depictions. It should not be high in impact. Descriptions and stylised depictions of sexual activity involving consenting adults may be more detailed than realistic depictions if this does not increase the impact.

Descriptions and depictions of, and references to, nudity should not be exploitative or offensive. Realistic depictions of sexualised nudity should not be high in impact. Realistic depictions may contain discreet genital detail but there should be no genital emphasis. Prominent and/or frequent realistic depictions of sexualised nudity containing genitalia will not be permitted. Realistic depictions in which sexual excitement is apparent are not permitted. Stylised depictions of nudity may contain more detail than realistic depictions if this does not increase the impact. Descriptions of nudity may contain more detail than depictions if this does not increase the impact.

The classifiable elements of themes, sex and nudity are inextricably linked in the publication, which is an autobiographical non-fiction graphic memoir that explores the author’s path to identifying as nonbinary and asexual. The content is depicted through stylised illustrations, which are presented sequentially, and accompanying text. The Board notes that the Guidelines define ‘stylised’ depictions to ‘include cartoons and other unrealistic illustrations and images.’

The publication details on page 2 contain the statement, “This is a work of non-fiction.” The memoir begins with an introductory section, which notes that the author began work on the text while enrolled in a subject covering autobiography as part of a master’s degree in comics at the age of 24 years. The text then recounts anecdotes from the author’s childhood, adolescent and young adult experiences with ideas of gender.

On page 60, the author recounts a memory, explaining, “I was 11 or 12 years old the first time I can remember fantasizing about having a penis. I was lying, fully clothed, on a hillside under an open sky. I held a folded handful of grass between my legs. Safe in the knowledge that, if discovered, I could release my imaginary member and it would disintegrate back into scattered stalks.” The text continues on the following page: “For years my standard method of masturbation was stuffing a sock into the front of my pants and manipulating The Bulge. This would evolve into hip-thrusting while thinking of my latest gay ship.” (In this context ‘ship’ denotes a fantasy in which people, typically fictional characters or famous people, are believed to be involved in a relationship whether or not the romance actually exists.) The comment about a fantasy relationship is accompanied by a drawing that depicts two people in an embrace and kissing. The image includes partial buttock nudity of a dark-haired character who is lying between the legs of a blond character but does not include any genital detail or depict any explicit sexual activity. The lower third of page 61 features a cropped image of a person depicted from chest down with a hand resting between their legs as they drive a car. The image is accompanied by the text, “Memorably, I got off once while driving just by rubbing the front of my jeans and imagining getting a blow job.”

On page 62, the author’s sister asks, “It really never occurred to you to put something into your vagina, not even a finger? … So you’ve never tasted yourself? … You should try.” A drawing then depicts the author holding up a finger with a white substance on the fingertip and a caption identifying the substance as ‘vagina slime’. The author contemplates the substance before commenting, “I have an extremely low sex drive compared to pretty much all my friends. As a teen I got bored of masturbation.”

On page 63, the author comments, “The main trait I’ve always been attracted to is androgyny.” On page 64, the author continues, commenting, “My deepest emotional relationships have always been with women. Did that mean I was a lesbian? But my fantasies involved two male partners. Was I a gay boy trapped in a girl’s body? The knowledge of a third option slept like a seed under the soil.” On page 71, the author quotes from a diary entry written as a 15-year old: “I don’t want to be a girl. I don’t want to be a boy either. I just want to be myself.”

The narrative then covers the author’s adolescent interest in queer literature, discomfort with ‘girly’ activities and attributes, and embarrassment related to romantic ‘crushes’. On page 123, the author commences an anecdote about a pap smear. On page 124, a small drawing in the lower left-hand corner depicts the author standing nude in an image that includes breast nudity and pubic hair covering genitalia. On page 127, the pap smear is described as “45 seconds of the most excruciating pain of my life”. On the following page, a drawing depicts the author crouched over with a large metallic blade protruding through the abdomen. This image is accompanied by the text, “I felt as if I had been stabbed through my entire body and with this came a wave of psychological horror at the realization [sic] that things can go inside my body.”

On page 134, the author at age 14 is depicted telling a friend, “I think I’m asexual.” On the following page, the author writes about masturbation, commenting, “I discovered it at around the same age, followed by the further realization that my ability to become aroused was governed by a strict law of diminishing returns. The more I had to interact with my genitals the less likely I was to reach a point of any satisfaction. The best fantasy was one that didn’t require any physical touch at all.” These comments are accompanied by a highly-stylised drawing that depicts two nude male figures in the style of ancient Greek red-figure pottery. In this pottery illustration, a bearded male with an erection kneels before a smaller male figure, cupping his hand beneath the smaller figure’s penis. The highly stylised illustration of the pottery is identified as ‘An elaborate fantasy based on Plato’s SYMPOSIUM’.

On page 138, the author discusses the purchase of a ‘$10 bullet vibrator’. The vibrator is depicted in a drawing as an egg-shaped object attached by a cable to a control with a heart-shaped switch. On page 140, a series of drawn panels depict the author’s face as the vibrator is implicitly used. The author does not enjoy the sensation, turns off the vibrator and comments, “That was not for me!”

On page 157, after asking for help setting up a Tinder profile for research, three illustrated panels outline some of the other avenues of research that were undertaken by the author. These include, “Watched 10 hours of modern college dance performances,” “Spent several days driving around San Francisco scouting locations” and “Toured the SF Armory, which at the time housed the filming studios of Kink.com”. The picture accompanying the reference to ‘Kink.com’ is a stylised drawing of a building. No further references are made to the website or the content it hosts.

In the two panels at the bottom of page 157, the word ‘autoandrophilia’ is defined as ‘refers to a person assigned female at birth who is sexually aroused at the thought or image of having male genitalia or being a man’. The author comments, “Wow. I never knew there was a word for that. For me.”

On page 160, a section of the narrative commences that features the author’s relationship with a woman known as ‘Candidate Z’. On page 166, the author writes, “Fast-forward: We’ve been dating for two months, we’ve made out, we’ve had sex, we’ve moved on to sexting at work.” Drawings then depict a series of messages from Candidate Z to the author, featuring the text, “I got a new strap-on harness today. I can’t wait to put it on you it will fit my favourite dildo perfectly. You are going to look so hot. I can’t wait to have your cock in my mouth – I’m going to give you the blow job of your life. Then I want you inside me.” The author is depicted blushing and thinking, “This is the most turned on I’ve ever been in my life. I am dying.” On page 167, Candidate Z is depicted from the author’s perspective as she kneels and performs oral sex on a phallus that protrudes from the author’s unzipped pants. This image is accompanied by the text, “This is the visual I’d been picturing.” Below this, another drawing depicts the author wearing a strap-on dildo as Candidate Z kneels and sucks on the sex toy. This image is accompanied by the text, “But I can’t feel anything. This was much hotter when it was only in my imagination.” The author tells Candidate Z, “Let’s try something else.”

On pages 169 and 170, the author is depicted thinking about the sexual experience depicted on page 167. A series of thought bubbles feature the text: “I think the fact that I don’t see myself as, or understand myself as, a female person but that most of the people I interact with do is actually damaging all my relationships, even ones with friends and family. Sex just throws this into high relief because it involves contact with genitals. This whole dating thing is making me more and more confused and less and less happy. I don’t think I want to do it anymore.”

On page 189, the author speaks with Jaina Bee, explaining, “I’ve been thinking about switching to they/them pronouns but for some reason that doesn’t feel quite right. What pronouns do you use?” Jaina answers, “I use the Spivak pronouns e, em, eir, as in, ‘Ask em what e wants in eir tea.'” The author replies, “I love those pronouns! I just got the biggest tingle down my spine.” On page 191, the author writes, “As I pondered a pronoun change, I began to think of gender less as a scale and more as a landscape. Some people are born in the mountains, while others are born by the sea. Some people are happy to live in the place they were born, while others must make a journey to reach the climate in which they can flourish and grow. Between the ocean and the mountains is a wild forest. That is where I want to make my home.”

The Board notes that the examples above outline descriptions and stylised depictions of themes of gender identity, sexuality and other themes which are inextricably linked with the elements of sex and nudity. In the Board’s view, the depictions of nudity are stylised and do not increase the impact to high. The descriptions and depictions of sexual activity are also stylised and are not high in impact. The Board notes that there are references to sexual activity, such as masturbation, by a minor, however the Board considers that these references do not deal with matters of sex in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults. The Board also considered that the depiction of an erect penis is stylised and can be accommodated within the Unrestricted classification.

The Board notes that on page 134 there is a highly-stylised drawing of a work of ancient Greek art depicting a sexual encounter between an ancient Greek scholar and his student. However, given the historical context of the artwork, the narrative context of the publication and the stylisation of the imagery, the Board is of the opinion that this image does not depict a child under 18 years in a way that offends against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that it should not be classified.

[On July 5, the Classification Review Board report determined the Classification Board was referring to the panel image at the bottom of page 135 and not to an image on page 134. The Review Board determined that this was a typo made in error. They also found that poor wording in the above paragraph had led misinterpretation by the Applicant.]

The Board recognises that some content within this autobiographical text may offend some sections of the adult community. The Guidelines state that, “in considering each element, the Board makes classification decisions based on the impact of individual elements and their cumulative effect. Both the content and treatment of elements contribute to the impact. The Board takes into account the concepts underlying individual descriptions and depictions, and assesses factors such as emphasis, tone, frequency, context and the amount of visual or written detail in those descriptions and depictions.” Thus, specific content that may be accommodated within a certain classification within one context, may fall into a different classification within another context.

The Code (Clause 1) states that adults should be able to see, hear, play and read what they want, while minors should be protected from material that is likely to harm or disturb them. The Board is of the opinion that, in this publication, the treatment of themes, sex and nudity does not impart an impact so strong as to warrant legal restriction to adults. However, some of the events and recollections by the author may not be suitable for younger readers. Therefore, the publication is classified ‘Unrestricted’ with consumer advice of “M – not recommended for readers under 15 years of age”. This consumer advice does not constitute a legal restriction.

FRONT AND REAR COVERS

Covers must be suitable for display in public. The impact of any descriptions, depictions and references on covers should be low. Publications with covers which are not suitable for public display will not be permitted in the Unrestricted category.

The front cover is low in impact, therefore it is suitable for public display. The cover features the title GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR and mirrored images of figures standing in water. The upper figure has short hair and is wearing a t-shirt and shorts while the lower figure has shoulder-length hair and is only wearing shorts. A circular marker notes that the publication has been recognised as a ‘Stonewall Honor Book’ by the American Library Association.

The rear cover is low in impact, therefore it is suitable for public display. The cover features a blurb, which reads in full: “In GENDER QUEER, MAIA KOBABE has crafted an intensely cathartic autobiography about eir path to identifying as nonbinary and asexual, and coming out to eir family and society. By addressing questions about gender identity – what it means and how to think about it – the story also doubles as a much-needed, useful and touching guide.”

Decision:

This publication is classified Unrestricted with a consumer advice of M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years.

– Classification Board report

Background to a classification

Despite the involvement of the Queensland Police and Fiona Jolly’s promise to ‘call in’ the book from Oni Press, neither was named. Instead, Kinokuniya Bookstores of Australia were the applicant.

Following the decision, they wrote a blog post explaining how this became the case.

April 5, 2023
On 17th March Kinokuniya received an email from The Classification Board of Australia “calling-in” GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR for classification within three business days.

It is one of the most challenged and banned books in the U.S. right now, and the conservative challenge to it here in Australia should ring alarm bells and make us all more vigilant.

Once a title as been called-in we essentially have three options. The first is to approach the local publisher/distributor of the title and ask them to submit it to the board. In the case of GENDER QUEER there isn’t a local supplier. We have recognised the importance of this title and we import it ourselves, which makes us (and anyone else who sells it in Australia) the ‘publisher’, in the Classification Board’s terms.

Our second option is to remove it from sale and write-off the stock. Why would we do that, you might ask? We would consider doing that, as we have done before, because the cost to have a single book classified for a single store is prohibitive – in this case, based on the number of pages, it is $560. The process could take several weeks, and there is no guarantee of The Board’s decision.

So, there you have our third option – to pay to have it classified ourselves. And we feel so incredibly passionate about being able to represent and champion this title in Australia that we paid the fee, and then waited.

– Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe allowed to be sold “Unrestricted” in Australia
– article @ kinokuniya.com.au

Logan, Qld – Queensland crackdown

Following the Unrestricted rating, Logan City Council moved the book to the biography section of the adult collection.

Meanwhile, Queensland’s Office of Fair Trading (OFT) continued investigating Logan’s libraries to see if they had breached the state’s Classification of Publications Act 1991.

May 7, 2023
…formal complaints [had been made to] with the council and OFT about GENDER QUEER – one of America’s most banned books – and comic book THE BOYS (VOLUME I).

…police told him [the complainant] they were powerless to act as the book had not been classified.

…OFT confirmed it was investigating his complaint about whether books being loaned by the library were prohibited publications.

– Office of Fair Trading investigates pornographic books and comics at public libraries
– dailytelegraph.com.au

Rating review

An appeal was announced seven weeks after the GENDER QUEER classification.

The applicant was the conservative Catholic activist responsible for initiating the campaign. Having been denied a fee waiver, he reportedly paid the $10,000 application fee himself.

May 22, 2023
The Classification Review Board has received an application to review the classification of the publication GENDER QUEER by Maia Kobabe.

GENDER QUEER was classified Unrestricted with consumer advice ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’ by the Classification Board on 3 April 2023.

The Classification Review Board will meet on 29 May 2023 to consider the application. The decision and reasons will later be published on www.classification.gov.au.

If an individual or organisation wishes to apply for standing as an interested party to this review, please write to the Convenor of the Review Board. The names of interested parties will be disclosed in the Review Board’s final decision report, unless requested otherwise.

Submissions should be emailed to crb@classification.gov.au

The closing date to lodge your application for standing as an interested party and any submissions is 26 May 2023. Please note that the Review Board can only consider submissions about GENDER QUEER itself and not any other matters relating to publication classification policy or issues generally.

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. It makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. The Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

– Classification review announced for the publication Gender Queer
– Classification Review Board

May 25, 2023
In March, The Classification Board called-in GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR by Maia Kobabe for classification from Kinokuniya. This was due to a complaint that was made by a very vocal proponent of book-banning. We were very pleased when The Board determined that GENDER QUEER should be available Unrestricted, with a recommendation for Mature readers, over 15 years. However, The Classification Board’s decision has been appealed (it appears by the same complainant) and they are now reviewing the decision.

If you believe that it is important for people to be able to access GENDER QUEER, unrestricted, then please see [Classification Review Board Media Release] for information about how to make your own submission to the Classification Review Board.

– The Classification Board’s decision to allow “Gender Queer: A Memoir” to be sold “Unrestricted” has been APPEALED
– kinokuniya.com.au

How are library books classified in Australia?

The controversy reached Canberra in time for the Classification Board’s appearance before senate estimates.

Alex Antic (Liberal) was keen to discover why library books were not rated. He used the example of the graphic novel LET’S TALK ABOUT IT (2021) by Erika Moen and Matthew Nolan.

In 2020, the hard-right Christian senator had questioned the board about CUTIES (2020).

May 25, 2023
Senator ANTIC: I want to ask a few questions about how publications, books in particular, are classified in Australia. I have a few concerns about books that are showing up in public libraries. It is my understanding that under the classification act, or a truncated version of that title, publishers of books don’t need to seek classification for them unless they met the definition under the act of a submittable publication. That is broadly—

Ms Jolly: That is correct.

Senator ANTIC: It is a bit complicated. The onus, therefore, is on the publisher to seek classification for the material if they think it is potentially fitting into that submittable publication category?

Ms Jolly: Or otherwise if they would like to have the publication classified.

Senator ANTIC: Or if they would like to have the classification. That would by definition include publications that appear in public libraries. There is scope, I think, for unclassified material to hit public libraries. What happens if a publisher doesn’t seek classification for material which arguably and objectively might fit that submittable publication categorisation?

Ms Jolly: The classification scheme is enforced by state and territory governments. If there is material that would be considered, or likely to be considered, a submittable publication, it is up to state and territory enforcement agencies to put in an application to give the publication to the Classification Board.

Senator ANTIC: So the onus has been on a local authority or a minister or a public official of that nature? They have to hear about it, find it and put it through?

Ms Jolly: Under the Classification Act, I have the power to call in a publication.

Senator ANTIC: Or yourself, of course. I say this because I am getting an increasing number of concerns and complaints about books that are showing up in public libraries. This is one. It’s a book called LET’S TALK ABOUT IT: THE TEEN’S GUIDE TO SEX, RELATIONSHIPS, AND BEING A HUMAN, which all sounds a bit innocuous. The index contains chapters on sexting, kinks, fantasy and porn. I won’t actually hold any of this up because it’s pretty graphic in many senses. It is rated for 14-year-olds and thereabouts. That may be an American classification—I don’t know—or wherever the book is from. There are sections here telling kids basically how to go about sexting. It states:

‘Before you start sending your naughty masterpieces around the world, take some time to get friendly with photo editing software or apps. Digital photos are permanent and are impossible to retract once they are out there.’

This is the broad splash of it. It’s currently unclassified, as I understand it. It has a target audience of 14 years plus and is available in libraries in South Australia. My view is that it would meet the category of a submittable publication as it particularly unsuitable for minors. With that in mind, are you aware of any applications that have been made to classify that book?

Ms Jolly: No, not that book.

Senator ANTIC: Having heard that, would there be any scope for that to be done? Is there a process for that?

Ms Jolly: There is a process for that. If in my opinion a publication is likely to meet the definition of being a submittable publication, I can ask the department to assist me in calling in that publication. But I would only do that if it met the definition of a submittable publication. The threshold for that in the context of publications is: whether the publication is likely to be classified RC, refused classification, which is a very high standard or low standard, depending on your point of view, to meet; whether it is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult to the extent that the publication should not be sold or displayed as an unrestricted publication; or if it is unsuitable for a minor to see or read. A minor is a person under 18 years old. We also have to look at the context of a submittable publication under the criteria set out in the code. The first one is that adults should be free to read, hear and see what they want. We balance that with the requirement that minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them.

Senator ANTIC: You are stuck with the legislative framework you have. It does strike me that there is a serious gap in the powers afforded whereby this and others can just slip through. This is just one example of what I would say is inappropriate material going through public libraries on public display around the country and around my state. There are surely gaps in your legislative powers, then, if the process is for someone to find it, potentially take it out of their child’s bedroom if they had borrowed this book from the library and have it referred. I understand that process is onerous. Maybe there are costs associated with it as well. They could have it referred to a power. Would you say that there is need for reform in this area if that is the only mechanism? These things are showing up in libraries. It is almost like you have to let a crime happen before it gets stopped. That is a bad example.

Ms Jolly: I won’t comment on that book. I won’t make any personal comment on what I think about the content you have described. It is interesting to note, though, that the publications guidelines haven’t been reviewed since, I think, 2015. They were developed in the context where really the largest bit of the board’s workload for publications was classifying adult content. They are really focused on what is okay and giving information about protecting minors from explicit adult sexual content.

Senator ANTIC: Could it be that perhaps this is more prevalent now, this sort of material, these how-to guides coming out of the US, and, therefore, this is a new material problem—I say problem; others might disagree—which perhaps the legislative framework hasn’t yet catered for? If that is the process and these books are going out into public libraries, do we need a bit more of a look at the powers that are afforded?

Ms Jolly: It’s possible that the guidelines were created in a different context, yes.

Senator ANTIC: Thank you. That’s all from me.

– Fiona Jolly, Director, Classification Board
– Alex Antic (Liberal)
– Environment and Communications Legislation Committee
– Senate estimates, Parliament of Australia

Next up was One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts, who focused on the recent classification of GENDER QUEER.

May 25, 2023
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for being here today. I think these questions will probably go to Mr Sharp. I will leave that to you, Ms Jolly. My questions reference the book entitled GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR. Are you familiar with it?

Ms Jolly: Yes, indeed.

Senator ROBERTS: Amazon lists this book as suitable for people only 18 years of age and over. The Classification Board has reviewed the book and given it a rating of M, which is a recommendation only. It is not legally binding. According to your website, ‘M’ is, and I quote:

‘Unrestricted classification, meaning any child of any age can access the book with a recommendation that it not be made available to under-15s.’

Is that correct?

Ms Jolly: That’s correct.

Senator ROBERTS: The material in GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR is what we would have called a cartoon book; it has a fancy name these days.

Ms Jolly: Graphic novel.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. This is very graphic. It has full oral sex depiction between two people. Is my accurate representation of the classification of GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR correct?

Ms Jolly: It’s what the classification board gave, yes. It is an unrestricted publication with a rating of M and consumer advice that it is not suitable for readers under 15 years of age. Yes, that’s correct.

Senator ROBERTS: Queensland commonly has a child’s library card for under-12s. It is probable a child under 12 years could view this in a public library but not borrow it. New South Wales has no such children’s card, so a child of any age could borrow this book. If a child even under 10 years, for the sake of argument, were to borrow this book and check it out using the automated checkout, with no adult supervision required, would the library have broken an actual law?

Ms Jolly: I’m not in a position to answer that.

Senator ROBERTS: This book is commonly read to children as part of a Drag Queen Story Hour event. If a drag queen chose to read this book to an audience of children, would that person have broken any law?

Ms Jolly: I can’t answer that question.

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, this is a matter of policy. The next step up from ‘M’ in your classification system for written works is ‘R’, which is restricted to sale in a sealed wrapper. I note that you have more options for video material but only limited options for classifications in written work. Is there nothing in between that for kids having exposure to this book and books only able to be sold in a sealed wrapper? Are you coming up with another classification, or will you, to protect children?

Senator Carol Brown: The classifications are as you outlined, Senator Roberts.

Senator ROBERTS: It allows graphic material through that is not suitable for young children. Will you protect those children?

Senator Carol Brown: The book that you referenced, GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR has consumer advice for children. It is not recommended for children under 15 years.

Senator ROBERTS: But children under 15 years old can still access it.

Senator Carol Brown: I’m not sure what you are saying to me about access in Queensland.

Senator ROBERTS: I will make it clear, Senator Brown. My intention is not to get this book banned. Adults can have a look at it. Will you introduce a new classification for graphic novels, as for videos, of 15-plus?

Senator Carol Brown: Well, I can say to you that I think the classification system that we have is robust. The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review board. I don’t see any need to introduce another step or another level.

Senator ROBERTS: How can you say that when I have said that this is a graphic book? It is a well and truly graphic novel. It is available to children under 15. They can get hold of it in libraries just like the previous book.

Senator Carol Brown: The advice is that it’s not recommended for readers under 15 years old.

Senator ROBERTS: That is probably an enticement for a 10-year-old or a 12-year-old. Can’t something be done about this?

Senator Carol Brown: I have responded, Senator Roberts.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

Ms Jolly: I will go back to your question, Senator, about breaking any laws. The ‘M’ unrestricted classification, as I think you are trying to allude to, is not a legally enforceable classification.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for that follow-up. I appreciate that, Ms Jolly.

– Fiona Jolly, Director, Classification Board
– Tristan Sharp, Deputy Director, Classification Board
– Malcolm Roberts (One Nation), Carol Brown (Labor)
– Environment and Communications Legislation Committee
– Senate estimates, Parliament of Australia

Banned in Queensland

In early March, complaints were made about THE BOYS: OMNIBUS VOLUME 1 after it was found on the shelves of Logan City Council libraries. An investigation was launched by Queensland’s Office of Fair Trading to see if it broke the state’s classification law. By the end of the month, The Daily Telegraph was discovering a copy, containing ‘bestiality and rape scenes’ at Sydney’s Surry Hills library.

In May, it was reported a complaint had led to the Brisbane City Council removing all six of Dynamite Entertainment’s omnibus volumes from their library shelves.

On June 6, they were rated by the Classification Board. The applicant was Queensland’s Department of Justice and Attorney General.

Volumes 2, 4 and 6 received Unrestricted ratings.

Volumes 1, 3 and 5 received Category 1 ratings.

Unlike the rest of Australia, Queensland prohibits Category 1 and 2 publications.

On the same day, a protest was held outside Beaudesert Council Chambers. A borrowed copy of THE BOYS: OMNIBUS VOLUME 1 was displayed and described as the property of the Scenic Rim Regional Council that was now illegal to own in Queensland.

The activist displayed a Japanese manga [title unknown], a genre previously described as ‘…a particularly large problem’.

Delayed review

The Classification Review Board convened on May 29 to examine GENDER QUEER.

On June 22, the Board announced that a final decision would not be made until later in the year.

June 22, 2023
… GENDER QUEER will remain on bookshelves as a review of its age restriction is postponed indefinitely.

‘Due to the volume of submissions received, the convenor of the Classifications Review Board has determined that the review is sufficiently complex that it cannot be concluded by 22 June,’ a spokesman for the board told AAP.

– There were calls for this queer book to be banned, but supporters may have saved it
– article @ sbs.com.au

Scenic Rim Council capitulates

June 15, 2023
Scenic Rim Council has reissued a zero tolerance warning relating to abuse of council employees, this time adding that targeting sections of the community is also unacceptable.

The first announcement was made after a man was asked to leave Tamborine Mountain library for filming a video about what he said were pornographic books in the children’s section. It triggered an angry response from some members of the community.

A protest attended by a dozen people including political blogger Bernard Gaynor was staged outside council chambers in Beaudesert at the same time as the fortnightly council meeting. It was followed by a barrage of arguments on social media.

– Council warns against abusive exchanges
– article @ beaudeserttimes.com.au

June 29, 2023
A council spokesperson this week confirmed a “range of books” had been taken off the shelves of Scenic Rim libraries.

“Council is aware of the concerns raised by some members of the community regarding some of the material held in its libraries,” the spokesperson said.

“In response, Council is currently conducting a review process, so in the meantime some of these titles have been removed while that is underway.

“Council will continue to assess its library collection and is working with the relevant governing bodies to ensure the provision of high quality and diverse library services to our community.”

Council did not say how many books had been removed but said an update would be provided after the review process.

– Scenic Rim council removes books from library
– article @ beaudeserttimes.com.au

Another Unrestricted rating

On July 11, LET’S TALK ABOUT IT (2021) by Erika Moen and Matthew Nolan was passed as Unrestricted by the Classification Board. Penguin Random House published the 240-page edition.

September 27, 2024
LET’S TALK ABOUT IT…explores the common questions and issues facing teens in relation to sex, sexuality and relationships. In making its decision the Board acknowledged that the content includes some frank descriptions and highly stylised cartoon illustrations relating to sexuality, gender identity and other themes that are inextricably linked with the elements of sex and nudity, and further noted that the publication is aimed at a specific teenage readership, as is clearly signalled by the subtitle on the front cover, which reads THE TEEN’S GUIDE TO SEX, RELATIONSHIPS AND BEING A HUMAN.

It was classified Unrestricted due to the information presented being in a factual and plain-speaking manner, with the aim to share factual information and encourage informed decision-making in line with each person’s individual circumstances and preferences. On the book’s copyright page, text clearly outlines the intent of the authors, stating, ‘The material in this book is for informational purposes only’.

It is the Board’s view that this work has clear educational merit and is unlikely to cause offence or harm to the person or class of persons to whom it is intended. Furthermore, the Board is of the opinion that, in this publication, the treatment of themes, sex and nudity does not impart an impact so strong as to warrant legal restriction to adults.

– Classification Board, Annual Report, 2023-2024

The Director of the Classification Board had been asked on May 25, in Senate estimates, if it would meet the criteria of a submittable publication.

It was later revealed the applicant to be an Adelaide-based activist. She paid $790 to have the book rated after being denied a fee waiver by the Classification Board.

Gold Coast campaign

On July 12, a petition circulated in Southport calling on Gold Coast libraries to restrict access to certain books.

It included images of BOOF GOES TO BEAUTY SCHOOL (2018) by Caroline Tuohey and THE HIPS ON THE DRAG QUEEN GO SWISH, SWISH, SWISH (2020) by Lil Miss Hot Mess.

July 13, 2023
Gold Coast City Council spokeswoman.
“We are not a censoring body and as such we continually work to assist customers in their awareness of what is in our collection, and we encourage all parents and carers who visit our libraries to actively engage with their children when choosing any of our resources.”

– A homophobic petition is targeting Gold Coast library books
– article @ qnews.com.au

The Classification Review Board usually announces their decisions in less than a week of meeting. In the case of GENDER QUEER, it took over seven weeks.

A 52 day wait

Their full report was dated July 5. However, it took until July 20 to announce the outcome.

July 20, 2023
The Classification Review Board (Review Board) has classified the publication GENDER QUEER Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’.

In the Review Board’s opinion, GENDER QUEER warrants an Unrestricted classification because the content of the publication is justified in context, is appropriate for its intended audience of people who are interested in the author or interested in the subjects of gender identity and asexuality, and has a positive tone and character as well as many layers of positive messaging. The Review Board found that the publication’s depictions of sex and nudity were justified in the context of a non-fiction memoir describing the author’s lived experience.

Also, in the Review Board’s opinion, consumer advice of ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’ is warranted as some content within the publication may offend some sections of the adult community, and may not be suitable for younger readers; therefore, the publication is not recommended for readers under fifteen years of age.

The Review Board convened on 29 May 2023 in response to an application from Mr Bernard Gaynor to review the decision made by the Classification Board on 3 April 2023 to classify GENDER QUEER Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’. This Review Board’s decision replaces the decision made by the Classification Board.

The Review Board is an independent merits review body. In reviewing a classification decision, the Review Board applies the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Publications 2005. This is the same framework used by the Classification Board.

– Gender Queer classified Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years)
– Classification Review Board

Full report

Unlike previous reports, this does not name the panel members.

July 5, 2023
Applicant: Bernard Gaynor
Business: To review the Classification Board’s decision to classify the publication GENDER QUEER, Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years).

Decision and reasons for decision

1. Decision

The Classification Review Board (the Review Board) classified the publication GENDER QUEER Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘(M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years).

The decision was made by a majority of the Review Board members. These reasons reflect the reasons of the majority, which is the decision that prevails pursuant to s 79(1) of the ‘Classification (Publications, Computer game and Computer Games) Act 1995’ (Cth) (the Classification Act).

2. Legislative provisions

The Classification Act governs the classification of publications and the review of classification decisions.

The Review Board

Part 5 of the Classification Act outlines the provisions relevant to the Review Board and its procedures.

Section 42 of the Classification Act sets out the persons who may apply for review of a decision:

a) the Minister
b) the applicant for classification of the publication, or the likely classification of the publication under section 33
c) the publisher of the publication, or
d) a person aggrieved by the decision.

Section 43 sets out the conditions regarding the manner and form of applications for review, including time limits. Under section 44, the Review Board must deal with an application for review in the same way that the Classification Board deals with an application for classification of a publication.

Classification of publications under the Classification Act

Section 9, subject to section 9A, provides that publications are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the classification guidelines. Section 9A states that a publication that advocates the doing of a terrorist act must be classified RC.

Section 11 of the Classification Act requires that the matters to be taken into account in making a decision on the classification of a publication include the:

a) standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, and
b) literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the publication, and
c) general character of the publication, including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character, and
d) persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published.

The National Classification Code

Relevantly, the Publications Table of the National Classification Code (the Code) provides that:

Publications (except RC publications, Category 2 restricted publications, and Category 1 restricted publications) are to be classified Unrestricted, and the Code also sets out various principles to which classification decisions should give effect, as far as possible:

a) adults should be able to read, hear, see and play what they want
b) minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them
c) everyone should be protected from exposure to unsolicited material that they find offensive
d) the need to take account of community concerns about:

(i) depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexual violence and,
(ii) the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner.

The Guidelines

Three essential principles underlie the use of the Guidelines for the ‘Classification of Publications 2005’ (the Guidelines), determined under section 12 of the Classification Act, the:

importance of context
assessment of impact, and
the six classifiable elements—themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity.

3. Procedure

Three members of the Review Board met on 29 May 2023, in response to the receipt of an application from Mr Bernard Gaynor on 5 May 2023, to conduct the classification review of the publication, GENDER QUEER, which had previously been classified Unrestricted with consumer advice of ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’ by the Classification Board. The Review Board determined that the application was a valid application.

The Review Board was provided a written submission from the Applicant.

The Review Board read the publication.

The Review Board was provided written submissions from interested parties.

The Review Board heard an oral submission from the Applicant.

The Review Board heard an oral submission from a representative of the Australian Library and Information Association.

The Review Board then considered the matter.

4. Evidence and other material taken into account

In reaching its decision, the Review Board considered the following:

(i) Mr Bernard Gaynor’s application for review
(ii) Mr Bernard Gaynor’s written and oral submissions
(iii) The written and oral submissions from The Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA)
(iv) The written submissions from members of the public
(v) The publication, GENDER QUEER by Maia Kobabe
(vi) The relevant provisions in the Classification Act, the Code and the Guidelines, and
(vii) The Classification Board’s report.

5. Synopsis

GENDER QUEER is an autobiographical non-fiction graphic memoir, written by Maia Kobabe, that explores the author’s path to identifying as nonbinary and asexual. This 240-page edition was published in 2020 by Oni-Lion Forge Publishing Group.

6. Findings on material questions of fact

The Review Board found that the cover of the publication was suitable for public display for the following reasons:

The front cover is low in impact; therefore, it is suitable for public display. The cover features the title, GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR, the author’s name, and a mirrored image of figures standing in water. The upper figure has short hair and is wearing a t-shirt and pants or shorts that have been rolled up above the knees. The lower figure has long hair reaching below the shoulders and is wearing shorts. A circular marker notes that the publication has been recognised as a ‘Stonewall Honor Book’ by the American Library Association.

The rear cover is low in impact; therefore, is suitable for public display. The cover features a blurb that describes the focus of the publication with the following statement: “In GENDER QUEER, Maia Kobabe has crafted an intensely cathartic autobiography about eir path to identifying as nonbinary and asexual, and coming out to eir family and society. By addressing questions about gender identity – what it means and how to think about it – the story also doubles as a much-needed, useful and touching guide.”

The Review Board found that the publication contains aspects or depictions of importance under various classifiable elements:

(a) Themes—the publication details the author’s journey toward identifying as nonbinary and asexual. The exploration of these themes is clearly signalled to a prospective reader by the use of the words ‘gender’ and ‘queer’ on the front cover, rear cover, and spine; the illustration on the front cover; and the blurb on the rear cover.

The impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(b) Violence—not present in the publication.

(c) Sex—there is a pervasive narrative element of sex throughout the publication that is consistently mitigated by multiple contributing factors:

Descriptions and depictions of sex are justifiably interlinked with the publication’s central premise of a memoir recounting how the author struggled to make sense of gender identity and sexuality.

Descriptions and depictions of sex are highly stylised and contain little or no realistic detail.

Descriptions and depictions of, and references to, sexual activity involving consenting adults is not exploitative, or gratuitous.

The presence of sex and nudity in the publication is justified in context, specifically that of being a non-fiction memoir describing the author’s lived experience.

Sex and nudity are justifiably interlinked with the publication’s core themes of gender identity and asexuality. These themes are clearly signalled to a prospective reader by the use of the words ‘gender’ and ‘queer’ on the front cover, the illustration on the front cover, and the blurb on the rear cover.

The impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(d) Language—the publication contains infrequent strong coarse language, some of which is used with sexual connotations that are justified by context.

The impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(e) Drug Use—not present in the publication.

(f) Nudity—the publication contains infrequent, highly stylised depictions of male and female nudity, including full-frontal nudity. These depictions are lacking in detail and justified in context.

The impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

7. Reasons for the decision

Summary

The publication is an autobiographical memoir, as indicated by the front and rear covers, and the statement on the title page that reads, ‘This is a work of non-fiction’. The publication contains recollections of the author’s lived experiences presented using the visual style of a graphic novel.

The Review Board found that the publication contains highly stylised depictions of classifiable elements that are consistently justified by context and appropriate for its intended audience. The Review Board recognises that the intended audience for this publication are readers interested in the author, and/or interested in the publication’s central themes of gender identity and asexuality.

The Review Board found that the publication contains highly stylised depictions of nudity and sex that, when considered within the broader context of the publication, are no higher than moderate in impact, and are not exploitative, offensive, gratuitous, or very detailed.

Given the context of the publication, the character of the publication, its recognised literary and educational merit, and the likely intended audience of the publication, a majority of the Review Board considers the treatment of the classifiable elements to be no higher than moderate in impact, and not depicted in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency, and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that this publication should be legally restricted.

The application by Mr Gaynor

Mr Gaynor summarised his submissions in his application as follows (at [4]):

a) The Board wrongly applied the Act, Code and Guidelines to the findings that it did make about the contents and effects of GENDER QUEER and that the correct test required the Board to refuse classification to this publication;

b) the Board further made errors in relation to its findings about the content and effects of GENDER QUEER that were not open to it based on the evidence before it and/or failed to consider necessary elements of GENDER QUEER under the under the Act, Code and Guidelines which provided additional reasons for this publication to be refused classification or to warrant restricted classification;

At the outset, the Review Board notes that its role is not to determine whether the Classification Board made an error or applied the wrong test. As noted above, under section 44 of the Act, the Review Board must deal with an application for review in the same way that the Classification Board deals with an application for classification of a publication.

The submission by ALIA

A representative from ALIA provided written and oral submissions in favour of an Unrestricted classification for GENDER QUEER. ALIA’s submission detailed the well-established artistic, literary, and educational merit of the publication, and the praise and recognition it has earned from authorities within Australia and overseas. ALIA listed the myriad nominations and awards attributed to the publication, as well as the high acclaim and praise it has received from well-respected literary organisations, journals, schools, and educators. ALIA referred to the positive character and tone of the publication and how it sensitively treats complex themes and subjects, such as menstruation anxiety and masturbation. ALIA submitted that the publication contains infrequent sexual references that are not presented in a way that is exploitative, offensive, gratuitous, nor detailed, rather are used to explore themes such as gender identity and self-expression. The Review Board acknowledges ALIA’s submission that GENDER QUEER has an important role in our community as an LGBTQIA+ text, especially for people who may have experienced, or are experiencing a similar journey to the author.

The Review Board notes ALIA’s submission that a growing backlash exists against the LGBTQIA+ community, and that attempts to restrict or remove GENDER QUEER and other LGBTQIA+ materials forms part of that agenda. The Review Board also acknowledges ALIA’s concerns that removing or restricting GENDER QUEER and other LGBTQIA+ from library shelves denies access to affirming materials for vulnerable members of our community who are non-binary, transgender, and/or asexual, many of whom are subject to prejudice and are at risk of self-harm and suicide.

Written submissions from interested members of the public

The Review Board received a large number of emails in response to this review. Overwhelmingly, those in favour of restricting or refusing classification for GENDER QUEER contained statements that the Review Board considered to be broadly anti-LGBTQIA+. The Review Board gave little weight to these submissions as they contained little or no evidence that the writers had read GENDER QUEER, or that they understood the content within the context of the publication. The submissions did not demonstrate engagement with the publication.

Most of the written submissions in favour of an Unrestricted classification contained clear and detailed evidence that the writers had read the book and understood the impact of the classifiable elements. The Review Board gave more weight to these submissions as they appeared to have been written by members of the intended audience of GENDER QUEER who had read and considered the content within the context of the publication.

The Classification Board’s Decision Report

The Classification Board provided a comprehensive summary of reasons for classifying GENDER QUEER Unrestricted, paying particular attention to the treatment of themes, sex, and nudity, which the Review Board also determined to be the most classifiable elements of GENDER QUEER. The Review Board notes the Classification Board’s reasoning and findings that some content within GENDER QUEER may offend some sections of the adult community, but that the treatment of themes, sex, and nudity does not impart an impact so strong as to warrant legal restriction to adults.

The Review Board considered Mr Gaynor’s application and his submissions as to the appropriate classification of the publication. The Review Board also considered the submissions from ALIA, the members of the public, and the Classification Board’s decision report. The Review Board concluded that the publication is to be classified as Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘(M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years)’.

Nudity

The Applicant submitted that nudity is depicted frequently within the publication and some of these depictions are high in impact because of their emphasis, tone, and context. Mr Gaynor submitted that the publication contained frequent depictions of nudity that are likely to be offensive to most people, and the intensity and impact of these depictions are aggravated by, among other things, accompanying text and other imagery.

In particular, Mr Gaynor referred to various depictions of nudity at pages 13, 20-22, 29, 31, 35, 36, 124, 127-128, 212 and 213. Mr Gaynor made submissions regarding the impact of depictions involving adult themes, including depictions involving menstrual blood, bathrooms, and a pap smear.

The Review Board notes Mr Gaynor’s submission that the depictions of nudity are likely to be offensive to most people and are unsuitable for a minor to see or read. The Review Board read the publication and considered the depictions of nudity throughout the publication. As outlined above, the Review Board found that the impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the M level, as depictions of nudity are highly stylised and justified in context. The Review Board found that the depictions of nudity are not likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult. Consistent with the Guidelines, the Review Board considered that the publication does not warrant restriction to adults and should be classified ‘Unrestricted’ with relevant consumer advice.

Consistent with the Guidelines, the depictions referred to by Mr Gaynor on pages 13, 20-22, 29, 31, 35, 36, 127-128, 212, and 213 should not be classified as nudity because they do not contain any breast or genital detail. The full-frontal female nudity on page 124 is in the context of undressing for a medical examination and the feelings of discomfort associated with that experience. It is the Review Board’s opinion that the impact of this image is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the M level.

Sexual activity

The Applicant submitted that sexual activity is depicted frequently and the depictions and descriptions of sexual activity are likely to be offensive to reasonable adults.

As outlined above, the Review Board found that there is a pervasive narrative element of sex, but that it is consistently mitigated by various factors discussed under Part 6 above. Descriptions and depictions of sexual activity are not exploitative, gratuitous, or very detailed. As per the impact section of the Guidelines, depictions are highly stylised and are less impactful than realistic depictions (such as photographs).

The Applicant made submissions about particular instances of sexual activity in the publication, including relating to the author’s account of masturbation, sexting, and sexual activity with ‘Candidate Z’.

In relation to the aspects of the publication relating to masturbation, Mr Gaynor submitted that these depictions and accompanying descriptions are high in impact and intensity and are likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult. Mr Gaynor submitted that, in context, certain depictions of masturbation and fantasising on page 61 of the publication depict the author under the age of 18. The depictions on page 61 are alleged to “involve depictions of a minor engaged in sexual activity and are high in impact, detailed and not discrete, and should not be classified as Unrestricted and instead warrant a refusal of classification under the Act, Code and Guidelines”.

Pages 62-63 contain references to “vagina slime” and masturbation. Mr Gaynor submits that the implied references to sexual activity are “high in impact and are likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult and be considered an abhorrent or revolting phenomena.” The Review Board considered that the references to masturbation, including but not limited to the aspects of pages 61-63 complained of, are lacking in detail and are justified in context. The Review Board took into account Mr Gaynor’s submissions, but determined that the impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the M level.

Pages 166 and 167 contain references to sexting and sexual activity using a strap-on. Mr Gaynor submitted that the depictions and description on pages 166 and 167 are “intense and high in impact and likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult”. For the same reasons outlined above and in Part 6 of these reasons, the Review Board found that the impact of this element is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the M level.

Mr Gaynor submits that the publication contains references to paedophilia and to violent pornography. The Review Board did not identify any depictions of or references to paedophilia or violent pornography in GENDER QUEER. The publication does contain discrete references to pornography that are justified in context and are no higher than moderate in impact.

Mr Gaynor submits that depictions and descriptions of sex are “likely to be offensive to reasonable adults, especially because the intended audience of this publication is persons under the age of 18”. The Review Board is of the opinion that the intended audience of this publication is adults, but that the book has a special crossover appeal to people aged 15 and above who are either members of the LGBTQIA+ community, are allies of the LGBTQIA+ community, or are interested in LGBTQIA+ stories. This supports the Review Board’s decision to classify the publication as Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘(M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years)’.

The Review Board disagrees with the Applicant’s submission that the publication is aimed at children by virtue of it being written in the style of a graphic novel, or that sexual content within a graphic novel constitutes either child pornography or pornography that is targeted at children. The Review Board further disagrees with the Applicant’s submission that the Classification Board’s decision implies that “depictions of sexual activity involving minors, including sexual abuse of minors by adults, is not only acceptable but a normal and expected element of the behaviour and experiences of persons who are not heterosexual” or that “sexual activity involving minors, including with adults, is now considered to meet the general standards or [sic] morality, decency and propriety when such behaviour involves persons who are not heterosexual”.

The Review Board determined that the author’s treatment of sex and sexuality throughout GENDER QUEER is consistently positive and framed by a pervasive sense of self-awareness, self-respect, self-love and self-acceptance. The author does not advocate sex or masturbation, rather the author demonstrates how they found sex to be something unpleasant and dissatisfying, and one of the key factors that helped them to understand they were asexual and non-binary.

The depiction of the fantasy based on Plato’s SYMPOSIUM

Mr Gaynor submitted that the Classification Board did not classify GENDER QUEER in accordance with the Code and Guidelines in relation to an image on page 135 of the publication, thereby breaching s 9 of the Act. Mr Gaynor submitted that Item 1(b) of section 2 of the Code required the Classification Board to find that the publication should be refused classification.

The panel at the bottom of page 135 depicts the author lying on a couch at approximately age 14, fully clothed, eyes closed, arms resting across eir mid-chest area. Above the author is a piece of text that reads, ‘An elaborate fantasy based on Plato’s SYMPOSIUM with an arrow pointing to a framed artwork inside a thought bubble. Inside the thought bubble, we see an image of two nude male figures framed by square symbols. The males could be described as a bearded, older-looking male, and a cleanshaven, younger-looking male. The bearded male is kneeling before the cleanshaven male with one hand resting just beneath the cleanshaven male’s genitals. The image of the males is not titled but the Classification Board, the Review Board, ALIA, and the Applicant have all identified it as a highly stylised depiction of a work of pottery art attributed to the Brygos painter, dated around 4th BC Athens.

Mr Gaynor submitted that the Classification Board had found that the depiction was of a child under the age of 18 years engaged in sexual activity with a man, in the context of the author’s discovery of masturbation and “fetish habits and fantasies about paedophilia”. Mr Gaynor included a letter from Dr Lesley-anne Ey, a lecturer in Educational Psychology and Child Protection at the University of South Australia. Dr Ey stated her opinion that the image depicts sexual activity between a full-grown man and a child aged approximately 12 years.

The Review Board considered Mr Gaynor’s submission and noted that the paragraph at the top of page 5 of the Classification Board’s decision report contains an error and poor wording that has led to a misinterpretation by the Applicant. Specifically, the Classification Board states that the image on “page 134” of GENDER QUEER “does not depict a child under 18 years in a way that offends against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults…” The Review Board understands that the Classification Board is referring to the panel image at the bottom of page 135 of GENDER QUEER, and not to an image on page 134. The Review Board determined that this is a typo made in error.

The Review Board notes Mr Gaynor’s submission that the Classification Board’s findings in the paragraph at the top of page 5 of the decision report serve as an admission that the Classification Board has identified ‘a child under 18 years’ in the Greek artwork, and that the Classification Board, therefore, should have classified GENDER QUEER as ‘refused classification’. The Review Board considered the Classification Board’s statement and determined it not to be an admission that the Greek artwork contains a depiction of a minor, but that the Classification Board is referencing the section of the Classification Guidelines for Publications that sets out the criteria for classifying a publication ‘refused classification’. The Review Board’s understanding of the Classification Board’s statement is that the Classification Board determined that the image on page 135 of GENDER QUEER does not depict a child under 18 years, nor does it depict a child, nor anyone, in a way that offends against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults. In any event, as set out below, the Review Board determined that the image does not depict a child under 18 years, nor does it depict a child, nor anyone, in a way that offends against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults.

As noted by the Classification Board, the Greek artwork is “a highly stylised drawing of a work of ancient Greek art”. The image is depicted within the same square symbols that surround the original work. The inclusion by the illustrator of the square symbols around the males is a strong indicator that the image is a stylised depiction of the flat, inanimate pottery art, and sets the artwork within its historical context. The Review Board considers that the artwork is an artist’s impression of the bona fide artwork that contains less detail and realism than the original work, and is less realistic, sexual, intimate, and evocative than the original work. The image is tertiary to the primary image of the author on the couch and the secondary reference to Plato’s SYMPOSIUM, so is less active than the original artwork, which serves as the primary image on the ceramic.

The Review Board notes that the Applicant has speculated in his submission the ages of the males within the panel image; however, the Review Board is of the opinion that while the precise ages of the males in both the original artwork and the panel image are unclear, the Review Board is satisfied that the males are not children. The Review Board could not find any indicators in the publication that conclusively or definitely suggest whether either of the males in the panel image are minors. The Review Board also notes that the publication contains many examples of adults who appear to be depicted as minors, including numerous depictions of the author’s mother.

The Applicant submits that the panel image on page 135 depicts the author fantasising about paedophilia. The Review Board determined that the Greek artwork inside the panel image on page 135 is a depiction of an older-looking male and a younger-looking male, and not a depiction of paedophilia, child exploitation, child pornography, or any other interaction between an adult and a minor. The Review Board notes the Classification Board’s findings that the image likely depicts a sexual encounter between an ancient Greek scholar and his student. The Review Board rejects the Applicant’s submission that ‘student’ means ‘child’.

The Review Board disagrees with the Applicant’s submission that the image is entirely gratuitous and has no contextual relevance to the publication because GENDER QUEER does not deal with any aspect of ancient Greek culture or art. The Review Board considered the context of the Greek artwork as a visual reference to help the reader understand the author’s reference to Plato’s SYMPOSIUM, which is the subject of the author’s fantasy in the panel image. The author does not describe the nature or the context of the fantasy or the roles that the Greek artwork and Plato’s text serve within that fantasy. The Review Board determined that, for the reader to understand the panel image at the bottom of page 135, the reader is not expected to have read Plato’s SYMPOSIUM (an ancient Greek work of fiction containing a series of monologues about love) or know that the Greek artwork is attributed to the Brygos painter. The Review Board determined that the use of the panel, and the depictions and descriptions within the panel, is artistic for the purposes of information and expression, and is consistent with the positive tone and character of the publication. The Review Board has considered the Applicant’s submission that the Greek artwork is sexualised because it appears in the context of masturbation. The Review Board determined that this element is mitigated by the surrounding panels and text that, along with the panel image at the bottom of page 135, describe how the author came to identify as asexual. As noted by the Classification Board, and by Mr Gaynor, the text surrounding the subject panel image reads, “I discovered it [masturbation] at around the same age, followed by the further realization that my ability to become aroused was governed by a strict law of diminishing returns. The more I had to interact with my genitals the less likely I was to reach a point of satisfaction. The best fantasy was one that didn’t require any physical touch at all”. The Review Board determined that the panel image and surrounding pages describe the author’s anathema to masturbation and sex, which is consistent with the author’s autobiographical realisation that e is asexual and non-binary.

The Review Board agrees with the Applicant’s submission that the image would be likely considered criminal if the males were real people depicted contemporaneously, and the males were an adult and a minor, and the males were found to be involved in a sexual activity. The Review Board shares the Applicant’s view that depictions of children engaged in sexual activity are beyond the norms of morality or decency accepted by society, as well as the Applicant’s concern for victims of child abuse. The Review Board agrees with submissions by the Applicant, ALIA, members of the public, and the Classification Board that state that minors should be protected from material that is likely to harm or disturb them.

The Review Board found that the depiction on page 135 would not cause offence to a reasonable adult because the panel does not contain a detailed or realistic description or depiction of sexual activity, and it is not offensive, gratuitous, exploitative, or explicit. As the Classification Board notes in their Decision Report, the Greek artwork is highly stylised and justified in its historical context and the narrative context of the publication.

Themes

The Review Board agrees with the Applicant’s submission that “GENDER QUEER deals with adult themes relating to sex, sexuality, sexual orientation, gender, and gender confusion from the perspective of a person who strongly believes that the traditional approaches to sex, gender and morality are flawed” and that “these are clearly themes and a perspective which can, should be and are widely canvassed in all manner of publications”. The Review Board has considered the elements of sexuality, sexual orientation, gender, and gender dysphoria against the classifiable elements of sex, nudity, and themes in GENDER QUEER, and considered how the content and treatment of this element contributes to the impact. The Review Board agrees with the Classification Board’s finding that the treatment of themes, sex, and nudity does not impart an impact so strong as to warrant legal restriction to adults. However, some of the events and recollections by the author may not be suitable for younger readers.

As outlined above, the Review Board found that the element of themes is inextricably interlinked with the elements of sex and nudity, all of which are consistently mitigated by various factors discussed under Part 6 above.

Promotion, incitement, or instruction in matters of crime

The Applicant submitted that the publication should be refused classification because it promotes, incites or instructs in matters of crime or violence. In particular, Mr Gaynor contended that two depictions promote crime in the publication:

a) ‘The depiction on page 135 shows a naked man with an erection engaged in sexual activity with a boy, cupping the boy’s penis with his hand.’

b) ‘The depiction on page 61 shows the author masturbating while driving.’

The Review Board notes Mr Gaynor’s submission that GENDER QUEER promotes, incites, or instructs in matters of crime, and depicts revolting and abhorrent phenomena. The Review Board disagrees that the depiction on page 135 shows a naked man with an erection engaged in sexual activity with a boy, and the Review Board also disagrees that the author’s reference to masturbation while driving promotes, incites, or instructs others to drive dangerously. The Review Board determined that GENDER QUEER does not contain any content that is high impact, gratuitous, or exploitative, or likely to cause outrage or extreme disgust in a reasonable adult. The content does not promote or incite illegal activity, and is not abusive, violent, sadistic, abhorrent, or cruel. All content in the book is justified in context and appropriate to its intended audience.

Finally, the Review Board notes the widespread recognition, critical reception, and acclaim that GENDER QUEER has received worldwide, including from ALIA, the peak body for libraries in Australia. In addition to being a Stonewall Honour Book and Alex Award recipient, GENDER QUEER is listed as the ALA YALSA Best Books of 2020: Great Graphic Novels for Teens (2020), ALA YALSA Outstanding Books for the College Bound (2020), Chicago Public Schools Great Graphic Novels (2021), Denver Public Schools Top 100 High School Books (2020-21), Howard County Public Schools (MD) Best of the Year – High School (2019), Iowa High School Battle of the Books (2021), Jefferson County (KY) Public Schools Recommended Reading Grades 9-12 (2021), New York Public Library’s 50 Best Books for Teens (2019), School Library Journal 17 Immersive Graphic Novels for Teens, Summer Reading 2021, Texas Library Association: Maverick Graphic Novel Reading List, 2020, and was a nominee for the Garden State Teen Book Awards (2021). The American Library Association recommends GENDER QUEER as appropriate reading for ages 14+. Amazon’s recommended reading age for is 16+ (USA, Australia, and UK), Common Sense Media recommends the book for ages 16+, Barnes and Noble (USA) recommends the book for ages 15+, and Maia Kobabe recommends the book for ages 16+. In July 2019, the School Library Journal (USA) listed GENDER QUEER as recommended reading for grades 11 and up, before amending its recommendation in December 2019 to grades 9 and up. ALIA has not placed any restriction on GENDER QUEER within Australian public libraries. The Classification Branch has not received any complaints about GENDER QUEER from other peak Australian authorities such as the Australian Border Force.

The Review Board notes that GENDER QUEER is not banned or restricted in any other jurisdiction. The Review Board acknowledges ALIA’s submission that the publication has been translated into Spanish, Polish, Czech, French, and Italian with Norwegian, Portuguese, German, Dutch, Japanese, and Korean forthcoming.

8. Summary

Pursuant to the Guidelines, the impact of the classifiable elements in the publication is no higher than moderate. All of the content in the publication is entirely justified in context and appropriate to its intended audience. The publication has a positive, lighthearted tone; positive character; and many layers of positive messaging. However, the Review Board recognises that some content with this publication may offend some sections of the adult community and may not be suitable for younger readers. It is therefore the Review Board’s view that the publication warrants a classification of: Unrestricted with the consumer advice of ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’. This consumer advice does not constitute a legal restriction.

– Classification Review Board report No. 1

Freedom of Information (FOI) – Submissions released

On July 5, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications released a 63-page PDF of the submissions made to the GENDER QUEER review.

FOI No. 23-286 contains 19 documents and 38 individual submissions. 28 of which were negative and 10 positive. The Board noted overwhelming support for a higher classification or an RC. They were also broadly anti-LGBTQIA+’ and showed ‘little or no evidence’ that they had read the book. Submissions from supporters had more detail, while those against were often little more than short emails.

Guardian Australia filed the FOI request. They reported the Classification Review Board received over 500 submissions, causing a reporting delay. The smaller number in the FOI reflects the broad public response.

Another sex education book attacked

On July 16, WELCOME TO SEX (2023) by Dr Melissa Kang and Yumi Stynes became the latest target. The controversy began when a Sydney podcaster posted an Instagram video of himself flipping through the book in Big W.

The media picked up the story, and by July 18, Big W had dropped the book from stores due to the public abusing their staff. It remained available in their online store.

Senator Ralph Babet (United Australia Party) and Malcolm Roberts (One Nation) continued the campaign against the book.

Buy your copy now

July 21, 2023
Kinokuniya is pleased to hear that the Classification Review Board has released its finding on GENDER QUEER, upholding the original decision of the Classification Board.

GENDER QUEER will remain on our shelves – and library shelves throughout the country – classified as Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years).

Our sincerest thanks go to all those who shared our posts about GENDER QUEER’s journey through the Classification system, and to all those who supported it with submissions to the Review Board. It’s a small win in the culture war with those who seek to restrict what others are allowed to read, but it feels like an important one for all of us, and especially the LGBTQIA+ community.

– Update
– kinokuniya.com.au

July 21, 2023
ALIA welcomes the decision announced yesterday that the Australian Classification Review Board (ACRB) has classified Maia Kobabe’s graphic novel GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR (2019) as Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years). This means that GENDER QUEER can continue to be available on library shelves around the country.

GENDER QUEER represents a voice that is not often heard and recounts the author’s journey from adolescence to adulthood, exploring gender identity, sexuality, and being outside of the gender binary along the way. The ACRB decision means that this important voice and perspective will not be silenced or erased.

Yesterday’s announcement is one step in a longer process to ensure that people are free to choose what books they want to read, and to ensure that library staff are safe and supported when making texts available to the public. ALIA will continue to support libraries and library staff as they work to develop diverse collections responsive to the needs of everyone in their communities.

– Gender Queer: A Memoir classified Unrestricted by Australian Classification Review Board
– alia.org.au

Background to a classification

Sky News revealed the campaign against LET’S TALK ABOUT IT (2021) had been running since the start of the year.

July 31, 2023
A graphic book about sex that encourages minors to look up porn and tells them how to send naked pictures of themselves to their peers has sparked outrage, and prompted calls for it to be removed from display in Australian libraries.

…the book is available in 36 public libraries across Australia, some holding multiple copies, as well as major booksellers including Dymocks, Angus & Roberts and QBD Books.

– Sky News Australia investigation
– article @ skynews.com.au

Motion defeated

On August 1, Malcolm Roberts (One Nation) called for a parliamentary inquiry into the Classification system. It proposed to look at the ‘…adequacy of the current classification system for publications to protect children from age-inappropriate material’.

His speech to the Senate references THE BOYS, WELCOME TO SEX and something called NAGANO.

August 1, 2023
A publication called THE BOYS has been available in Australia since the first issue in 1996. This is the same THE BOYS that Netflix turned into a hit streaming show. Children, having seen the sanitised Netflix version and then seeing the book version on the shelf of their local library, will, of course, pick the book up and borrow it, unaware of the depictions of extreme violence, rape, public sex and bestiality found in the publication. Even more troubling, all of these things are portrayed in a positive light. For 25 years, this material has been perfectly legal to sell, display and lend to minors of any age.

A week after the Classification Board appeared before Senate estimates to answer questions from me and Senator Antic, the board reviewed all six volumes of THE BOYS as a result of a referral from campaigner, family protector and child protector Bernard Gaynor. A citizen fulfilling his responsibility to the community, to the nation, got it referred to the board. Three volumes were restricted and three were allowed to remain on sale unrestricted, meaning available in libraries to children. One of the banned works, episode 5 in volume 1, was titled ‘Herogasm’ and chronicled the sexual exploits of our superheroes. Graphic depictions included orgies and bestiality. This behaviour was presented in a positive light, with smiles, high fives, raised fists and whoops all around.

Dynamite publishing did not refer their publication to the Classification Board as the law requires. I’ll say that again. Dynamite publishing did not refer their publication to the Classification Board as the law requires. The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 does not prescribe a penalty on a publisher who does not refer a work that may be subject to sanction.

That’s an incentive to not submit a work. This is one of the terms of reference of this motion. Penalties may be appropriate for a publisher who failed to submit a work that was subsequently restricted.

One of the volumes that was not banned depicted the male lead character, Homelander, raping the lead female character, Starlight, complete with protestations, using language that should not be suitable for children. The board declined to restrict the volume because the nudity in the rape scene was not overly graphic. What about the rape? All senators and members of parliament are required to take a course on sensitivity to women. The Classification Board clearly needs to attend the same training. The second justification for not restricting the volume is even worse. It was, ‘The two characters both climaxed, suggesting the sex was not rape but consensual.’ The Classification Board is apparently bringing back, ‘But she came’—the old rape defence. Where are the women’s activists? Where are the Greens talking about women now? They’re nowhere to be seen.

– Malcolm Roberts (One Nation)
– Senate, Parliament of Australia

Robert’s criticism of WELCOME TO SEX was echoed by Pauline Hanson (One Nation) and Ralph Babet (United Australia Party).

August 1, 2023
On 19 July I wrote to the Labor Party communications minister, Michelle Rowland, expressing my immediate concern about this [WELCOME TO SEX] book. ‘Why is it unclassified, Minister Rowland?’ Minister Rowland hasn’t replied to my letter. I’m not surprised. Does Minister Rowland care about children? I certainly hope so. Minister Rowland, reply to my letter. Show that you care. The title itself, let alone the harmful content, should have prompted the publishers to submit the book for classification. There is the loophole right there. It’s up to them to determine whether they should submit their own book for classification, and that needs to change.

On 21 July I wrote a similar letter to the deputy secretary of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, who oversees the operation of Australian classifications. They are the entity responsible for the classification of children’s books. I questioned if they would exercise their authority to call in this book and other books, and I have yet to receive a reply from them also.

– Ralph Babet (United Australia Party)
– Senate, Parliament of Australia

Also speaking in support of the motion was Alex Antic (Liberal). He had mentioned LET’S TALK ABOUT IT during Senate estimates in May and now provided background to its submission to the Classification Board.

August 1, 2023
I rise to speak in support of the motion this evening, and I want to illustrate the importance of this motion by way of a recent interaction I had with a local constituent in the northern suburbs of South Australia, where I am the paired senator. My first opportunity to come into contact with this single mother with three children was through a deputation she made to the local council. She bravely approached the local council, which is a very brave thing to do, bringing to their attention the presence of a particular book called LET’S TALK ABOUT IT. This is not the book that Senator Babet referred to but is a book containing graphic depictions of sexual practices, adult concepts and in one instance a detailed manifesto, if you like, as to how to send naked selfies across the internet. The book was marketed at children, and she was alarmed by the fact that it was available to children in the library and was completely unclassified.

This brave mother took her fight to the council. She then took it to the ombudsman. She took it to a number of politicians, and finally she took it to the Classification Board, which cost her the princely sum of around $800 in order to have this book considered for classification. She put together a submission, outlined her concerns and sought a waiver of the fee, I might say, which was rejected. Bearing her own costs and using her own time, this brave mother sought to have this book classified so it could at least be removed from public libraries, where children like her own were likely to see the book in circulation. Ultimately, she went round and round the mulberry bush, so to speak. The Classification Board rejected the application, and the book remains unclassified. She’s now been told that she can send it off to the Classification Review Board for the princely sum of $10,000, which she of course does not have.

– Alex Antic (Liberal)
– Senate, Parliament of Australia

The following day, the Malcolm Robert’s motion was defeated. 25 voted in favour on an inquiry, but 30 were against.

Do we need a new classification?

In May’s Senate estimates, Malcolm Roberts (One Nation) had questioned Fiona Jolly regarding the classification of GENDER QUEER.

He returned in November for a second round with THE BOYS and WELCOME TO SEX added to the agenda.

November 8, 2023
Senator ROBERTS: I’ve asked the Classification Board before about publications that must be considered obscene material for children. Last time it was the books THE BOYS and GENDER QUEER. Since then, the publisher, Hardie Grant, has released WELCOME TO SEX, which is targeted at 10-year-olds, and the author said actually eight and up. The distinction between eight and 10 is academic. This book was on the shelves of retailers like Target, where a child of any age could purchase it.

My question now is the same as it was last Senate estimates. Does the Classification Board have a rating system available to it for graphic novels that allows the board to make an accurate rating, or do you need something between anyone being able to access a publication and R—restricted for sale to adults, in plastic wrapping? Do you need an intermediate classification?

Ms Jolly: As you’ve outlined, the options available for the Classification Board are restricted publications of different types, but they’re restricting publications for over 18-year-olds or freely available. The other option we have is to produce consumer advice, which is not legally restrictive, which advises that the material is not suitable for people under 15.

Senator ROBERTS: Do you need an intermediate classification, then?

Ms Jolly: I think the board’s submission to the Stevens review back in 2020 was that we felt that there would be benefit in having some greater—

Senator ROBERTS: Another category.

Ms Jolly: gradations in classifications.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much. Your answer’s really clear. Minister, in my meeting with Minister Rowland, I was advised that a review of the classification system would be commenced shortly. Has that review commenced?

Senator Carol Brown: The review is being taken in two stages. Stage 1, of course, you would understand, included the piece of legislation that was passed recently in the parliament and received royal assent on 14 September, and that will commence next year, in March 2024. The stage 2 reforms aim to bring the scheme into alignment with the modern media environment, particularly the treatment of online content. Do you want me to tell you what those reforms go to?

Senator ROBERTS: I really just want to know: is it looking into options available for written publications?

Senator Carol Brown: This is a result of the 2020 review of Australian classification regulation, the Stevens review, which was handed to government in 2020 and released in 2023, and one of the things that it is looking at is to ensure that the classification criteria are evidence based and responsive to evolving community standards and expectations.

Senator ROBERTS: Is it looking into the options available for written publications—another classification, for example?

Senator Carol Brown: The review is quite broad, and it will refine the purpose and scope of the National Classification Scheme, so it will establish—

Senator ROBERTS: The review has commenced?

Senator Carol Brown: Informal consultation with government stakeholders has commenced. Public consultation will occur early in 2024.

Senator ROBERTS: So it is looking into options available for written publications. The public will get the opportunity to comment early in 2024. What is the time frame for recommendations?

Senator Carol Brown: I might hand to the deputy secretary to give you some time lines—if that’s what you’re after?

Senator ROBERTS: Yes, please.

Mr Windeyer: I don’t think I can give you a date for conclusion at this point. I’m happy to take on notice to see if we’ve got some more precise time lines developed at this point, but the key point is: we’ve started preliminary consultations with internal-to-government stakeholders. Public consultation will commence early next year. But I don’t have a set date for the conclusion of the review.

Senator ROBERTS: Could you take that on notice.

Mr Windeyer: I’m happy to take that on notice.

Senator ROBERTS: WELCOME TO SEX is an instruction manual for a wide range of adult sexual activity—literally a how-to, with illustrations. This is targeted at 10-year-olds but currently unclassified and available to children of any age. In our opinion, the tutoring of children aged eight and up in adult sexual practices is in breach of community standards. Will the Classification Board use its power to initiate a review of this publication?

Ms Jolly: Our understanding is that the book clearly states that it’s targeted to teenagers from 13 up.

Senator ROBERTS: But it says 10 and up.

Ms Jolly: In making a decision about whether to call in a publication, we have to look at whether we think the publication is likely to be refused classification—so not available at all—or whether it’s likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult to the extent that the publication should not be sold or displayed as an unrestricted publication, or that it’s unsuitable for a person under 18 to see or read. Our view is that it’s unlikely that that book would meet any of these criteria.

Senator ROBERTS: Yes, I think it’s suitable for teens, but not for 10-year-olds.

Ms Jolly: I’ve just—

Senator ROBERTS: And your media classification would take care of that?

Ms Jolly: Yes. My power to call in is: if I have reasonable grounds to believe that the publication is submittable, and a submittable publication meets one of those three criteria that I just gave to you.

Senator ROBERTS: So what were the three again, please?

Ms Jolly: If we think that the publication contains depictions or descriptions that are likely to cause the publication to be classified ‘refused’—so not available to anyone—or that it’s likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult to the extent that the publication should not be sold or displayed as an unrestricted publication, or that it’s unsuitable for a minor to see or read, and ‘minor’ is defined as being a person under 18. So, unless it meets one of those criteria, it’s not a submittable publication.

Senator ROBERTS: So the new legislation doesn’t give you the power to review something that doesn’t meet those criteria?

Ms Jolly: Correct, unless there’s an application for board classification put in.

Senator ROBERTS: This book tutors children aged eight and up in how to take nude selfies and send them safely—as if you can do that! Minister, can you explain to me how a child can send a nude selfie, and is that a safe practice?

Senator Carol Brown: I didn’t really catch the first part of your question.

Senator ROBERTS: This book tutors children aged eight and up in how they—

Senator Carol Brown: I haven’t seen the book, Senator Roberts.

CHAIR: I’m going to pull you up there, Senator Roberts. Nobody else has the book in front of them.

Senator ROBERTS: Well, basically, we don’t even need the book. If the book’s—

CHAIR: No. We’re working off your interpretation, not a factual piece of material. As you know, with the situation we’re in, you can’t table that.

Senator ROBERTS: No, that’s fine. I don’t need to table it. But I call for—

CHAIR: Then I think it’s very difficult for the minister, who hasn’t seen this publication, to provide you with any answers.

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, perhaps I could ask the question differently. Do you think the community would think it’s safe and acceptable for an eight-year-old, or older, to take a nude selfie and then send it?

Senator Carol Brown: No, I do not.

Senator ROBERTS: I don’t think it’s a safe practice either. Legally, the sending of the selfie is producing and disseminating child porn for the sender and the receiver. That’s both a state and federal criminal offence, I understand. How can you not review a book that incites serious illegal behaviour?

CHAIR: I’m going to say to you, again, Senator Roberts, that nobody else has the book in front of them.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay.

CHAIR: And I don’t know if anyone else here has read it or engaged in—you’re telling us a whole bunch of things that are in that book, but none of us has seen it.

Senator ROBERTS: I’m just telling you one thing, Chair. I understand the situation you’re in, and I thank you for continuing the hearing. Ms Jolly, how can we not review a book that incites serious illegal behaviour: an eight-year-old sending, basically, child porn? This is not to trap you.

Ms Jolly: The criteria for calling in a publication are as I’ve said. Going to the chair’s point: when we’re looking at a publication, we have to look at things in the context; we have to look at whether it has descriptions or depictions; we have to look at the intended audience; and I think we also have to look at, for example, the length of the publication, and what that might amount to in the context. So I can’t make a blanket yes or no response to that sort of statement.

Senator ROBERTS: I understand the position you’re in. To me—and the minister’s said it very bluntly and clearly—that’s not safe for an eight-year-old to do. It would seem to me, Chair—

CHAIR: No, I’m sorry, Senator Roberts; I am going to pull you up because you are making a whole range of statements, and we have no evidence in front of us, and, if you make me say it out loud, we have to stop.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay. I’m just giving you my opinion, then.

– Fiona Jolly, Director, Classification Board
– Richard Windeyer, Deputy Secretary, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
– Malcolm Roberts (One Nation), Carol Brown (Labor)
– Environment and Communications Legislation Committee
– Senate estimates, Parliament of Australia

Southern Downs, Qld – Ken Akamatsu targeted

In March 2024, it was reported that UQ HOLDER! by Ken Akamatsu and PREACHER by Garth Ennis had been targeted at the Southern Downs Regional Council Library in Queensland.

March 14, 2024
…claims contain nudity and sensitive content, including depictions of underage characters and homosexual themes.

‘The library item in question can be found in several other local government library collections across the state, and council has referred the matter to the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) for their review and feedback,’ a council spokesperson said.

…a scrutiny of the comic section at the SDRC Library revealed that the books are no longer on the shelves. Whether they will return following discussions with ALIA remains uncertain.

– Comic content ban call
– article @ warwicktoday.com.au

Central Highlands Council removed Ken Akamatsu’s NEGIMA! MAGISTER NEGI MAGI and A.I. LOVE YOU in March.

April 4, 2024
In a letter to the Central Highlands council’s acting chief executive Ross Higgins in late February, Mr Gaynor said a scan of the library catalogue showed it held copies of Ken Akamatsu’s volumes one, two, four and seven of NEGIMA! MAGISTER NEGI MAGI and volume one of A.I. LOVE YOU.

Mr Gaynor said he since learnt that two of the volumes were now missing from unnamed Central Highlands library outlets.

“I found in other councils there seemed to be a lot of these books go missing as well, so I don’t know why that is… it could be because people are destroying them, it could be that people are stealing them,” he said.

“I’ve been told the other three volumes actually belong to the State Library of Queensland, and are in the Central Highlands as part of some inter-library loan… so they have been taken off the shelf but are on the catalogue but are now unable to be borrowed.”

The Central Highlands council informed Mr Gaynor on Wednesday 27 March it had removed the offending works.

– Library child porn on campaigner’s radar
– article @ gladstonetoday.com.au

In Queensland, Ken Akamatsu’s manga were removed from libraries in Logan, Scenic Rim, Banana Shire, Western Downs. Banana Shire and Burdekin Shire councils.

Mackay, Qld – Gender corrupt material

At their 24 April meeting, a tabled petition requested ‘…all pornographic and gender corrupt materials targeting children, be removed from Mackay Regional Council libraries immediately’.

It resolved to refer the petition to the Chief Executive Officer and for a report to be prepared for consideration by the Council.

May 10, 2024
The North Mackay grandparent [Rhonda Marriage] said she and the 80-plus others who signed the petition have a “big problem” with the books which included the likes of WELCOME TO SEX…

The language on the Mackay petition is identical to a website found by the Daily Mercury called ‘Stop Corrupting Our Kids’, which has an overwhelming obsession with kids’ gender identity, including trans kids, and an insistence that sex education for children is inappropriate.

Previously, Ms Marriage pushed Mackay council to take action on ‘chemtrails’ — a conspiracy theory that the government is modifying the weather/atmosphere/mind controlling citizens (depending on your beliefs) through airborne-released chemicals in planes.

At the time, Mrs Marriage said, “You can scoff all you like, but the World Economic Forum have no hesitation in bragging about their master plan to reduce the world population”.

– ‘Gender corrupt pornography’: Sex-ed book banning
– article @ couriermail.com.au

Cumberland NSW – Book ban

In May, Cumberland City Council in NSW voted to ban same-sex parenting books in their libraries.

On their list was SAME-SEX PARENTS (2018) by Holly Duhig.

May 1, 2024
Motion (Colman/Hamed)
That Council adopt the ‘Library Strategy 2024 – 2027’ as outlined in Attachment 1 of this report.

Amendment (Christou/Garrard)

Add the below words:
subject to the following being undertaken:
That Council take immediate action to rid same sex parents books/materials in Council’s library service.

The Amendment on being Put was declared CARRIED.

Motion (Christou/Garrard)
That Council adopt the ‘Library Strategy 2024 – 2027’ as outlined in Attachment 1 of this report subject to the following being undertaken:

That Council take immediate action to rid same sex parents books/materials in Council’s library service.

The Motion on being Put was declared CARRIED.

– Minutes of the Council Meeting
– Cumberland City Council

The amendment was proposed by Councillor Steve Christou and Paul Garrard, both members the Our Local Community (OLC) party. It was supported by Councillor Greg Cummings (Independent), Helen Hughes (Our Local Community), Mohamad Hussein (Labor), and Michael Zaiter (Independent).

Opposition came from Councillor Diane Colman, Glenn Elmore, Kun Huang, Suman Saha, and Mayor Lisa Lake, all of whom are members of Labor. Ola Hamed (Labor), the Deputy Mayor, chose to abstain from the vote.

Two weeks later, the decision was overturned after an intervention from John Graham (Labor), the NSW Arts Minister. The final motion passed with a vote of 12-2, with only Steve Christou (OLC) and Eddy Sarkis (Independent) voting against it.

May 15, 2024
Motion (Huang/Farooqui)
That as a result of Minister representations concerning funding and a request to reconsider Council’s 1 May 2024 resolution with haste along with intense public interest.

1.That Council adopt the Library Strategy 2024-27 as outlined in attachment
2. That Council ensure that all books in the library are catalogued and placed within the library according to the records of Libraries Australia (National Library of Australia),
3. In the rare event that a book is received by Council that requires a subjective decision by Council staff to give it a classification, the General Manager is to implement guidelines to assist our library staff to ensure that all books are placed in the appropriate sections of the library.

Amendment (Christou/Sarkis)
Replace points 2 and 3 of the original motion with the following:

2. That the book titled SAME SEX PARENTS be moved to the Adult Collection Non Fiction Section,
3. The General Manager implement procedures to ensure that children under the age of 18 can only access books which are age appropriate,
4. Upon implementation of the procedures the General Manager is to conduct a review to ensure Council is compliant with the new procedures.

The Amendment on being Put was declared LOST.

Amendment (Garrard/Hughes)
Replace points 2 and 3 of the original motion with the following:

2. That the book titled SAME SEX PARENTS be moved to the Adult Collection Non Fiction Section.

The Amendment on being Put was declared LOST.

The Motion on being Put was declared CARRIED.

– Minutes of the Council Meeting
– Cumberland City Council

Albany, WA – First protest

In May, Michelle Kinsella, a former One Nation candidate, addressed the Albany Council in WA.

May 28, 2024
Ms Kinsella addressed Council regarding books in the Albany Library which she considers are inappropriate for children. Ms Kinsella requested that the City of Albany join the Keeping Children Safe Albany Committee to evaluate books which are available at the Library. The reference number for Ms Kinsella’s tabled document is ICR24536118.

– City of Albany minutes

WELCOME TO SEX (2023) and SEX: A BOOK FOR TEENS (2010) were among the books that were targeted and described as being in ‘gross violation’ of community standards and ‘not appropriate for our children.’

Cairns & Townsville, Qld – Manga audit

Ken Akamatsu’s work was removed from Cairns libraries in June.

June 12, 2024
…[the] library catalogue showed half a dozen books by Ken Akamatsu, a Japanese manga artist turned politician, listed as young adult fiction but contain “highly confronting” images of nudity and violent sex involving childlike characters.

A Cairns Regional Council spokeswoman said on Thursday the books would be removed from the library catalogue.

“Individuals with concerns around classification can make independent complaints through the Federal Government’s Australian Classification board,” she said. “Council remains dedicated to providing a welcoming and inclusive environment for all members of our community.”

– Kid books banned
– article @ cairnspost.com.au

A few days later, Townsville declared themselves clear of Ken Akamatsu’s NEGIMA! MAGISTER NEGI MAGI (2003-12).

June 15, 2024
Up until Thursday. the Townsville City libraries online catalog showed that volumes 2 and 26 of Ken Akamatsu’s NEGIMA! the series were in the collections of Flinders St Library

However, a Townsville City Council spokeswoman has since clarified that none of the city’s libraries currently have any Ken Akamatsu titles available for loan, and that the books on display at the Flinders St library were incorrectly recorded.

“These entries will be removed from the catalog because the books have not been in the collection since the last loan in 2019” – said the spokeswoman.

– The Controversial Manga Is No Longer On The Shelves Of City Libraries
– article @ townsvillebulletin.com.au

Mackay, Qld – Petition outcome

In June, Mackay Regional Council voted against removing so-called ‘gender corrupt’ books.

June 26, 2024
Purpose
To provide a response report to Council related to a Petition received by Council regarding Mackay Regional Council Library material.

Related Parties
Principal petitioner Rhonda Marriage
Listed petitioners per the petition.
Stop Corrupting our Children.

Background/Discussion
The petition was received by council at its Ordinary meeting of 24 April 2024, specifically – “It is our will that all pornographic and gender corrupt materials targeting children, be removed from the Mackay Regional Council (MRC) libraries immediately.” Council resolved to receive the Petition, and that it be referred to the Chief Executive Officer for a report to be prepared for consideration by Council which investigates the issues identified within the Petition. This report and content as a result of that resolution.

Council Resolution ORD-2024-93
THAT Council confirms that no material within its libraries are banned by the Australian Classification Board, nor is there any category targeted at children that fits the definitions of “pornographic” or “gender corrupt”

AND THAT material within Councils libraries are in line with Queensland State Library Guidelines, and that should any material be banned by the Australian Classification Board that they will be removed.

FURTHER THAT the Chief Executive Officer contact the Principal Petitioner to advise of the Council decision, and also that any further correspondence related to queries regarding materials contained within Council’s libraries be addressed by the Chief Executive Officer

CARRIED 6/5
For: Cr Bella, Cr Hassan, Cr Johnson, Cr Jones, Cr May and Cr Williamson
Against: Cr Christensen, Cr Corowa, Cr MacRae, Cr Paton and Cr Sheedy

– Mackay Regional Council minutes

Cumberland NSW – A voice of reason

July 1, 2024
The Nazis’ infamously instigated the burning of books at universities all over Germany in May 1933. It was part of the drive to merge German cultural life with Nazi aims and beliefs. It was extreme, although not in comparison to the atrocities that were to come, and an example of the exercise of control over free thought and ideas. However, as Ray Bradbury said:

You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.

That’s precisely what Cumberland City Council in Sydney tried to do in May when they banned the book SAME SEX PARENTS by Holly Duhig from eight of its libraries. Such actions are unacceptable in Australia in 2024.

[snip]

The most banned book in the United States is the graphic novel, GENDER QUEER by Maia Kobabe. It’s shameful that this same book is the subject of a forthcoming decision in the Federal Court of Australia after an attempt to ban it from libraries in Logan.

Banning books is another aspect of the culture wars, and its battlefields are often our local libraries. Libraries are open to everyone and offer access to ideas, learning and imagination. And, as far as I understand it, it’s not compulsory to take a book from a library. In our society, and in 2024, these should not be considered as dangerous concepts. The actions of those people seeking to ban books is also extremely concerning. The CEO of the Australian Library and Information Association describes people going into libraries, grabbing books off the shelves, reading them out loud and saying, ‘These shouldn’t be here!’ They call librarians horrible names and threaten doxxing and physical violence. In many cases these instances are part of coordinated campaigns—small battles in larger culture wars. They maybe small battles but they’re dangerous attacks on social cohesion. They aim to isolate groups of people and divide communities.

Returning to Sydney: it was heartening that two weeks after Cumberland’s official announcement of the ban, they reversed the decision to ban Holly Duhig’s book. The public outcry and the 42,000 people who signed a petition against the ban no doubt clarified the council’s thinking. At our best, society is kind, cohesive and inclusive—as we heard from the Governor-General today. More kindness in our society should always be something we strive towards. We should value and respect each other’s experiences. This is what we should all be striving for. After all, there is something we can learn from each other, and picking up a book is a good way to start.

As the Minister for the Arts said, banning books takes things in the opposite direction and serves no-one. If we know of children who are having some challenges at school and if they can find that voice that speaks to them, whether it be in something as radical as TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD or THE CATCHER IN THE RYE or books like that— books that have been banned in the US—why not have that helping hand offered from a book shelf or from a librarian selecting something for a kid? Banning books should not be a part of Australia in 2024.

– Graham Perrett (Labor)
– House of Representatives, Parliament of Australia

Albany, WA – Protests rumble on

July 23, 2024
Mr [Phillip] Douglas addressed Council regarding his concerns over what he considered to be unsuitable books for children currently available in the Albany Library.

– City of Albany minutes

On 1 August, following a petition signed by 352 people, the council announced a Special Electors’ Meeting. To be held on 26 August, it would ‘…discuss the promotion of sexualizing of children in the City of Albany through unrestricted books in the Town Library and events held during the month of February 2024’.

August 4, 2024
The push for the special electors meeting has come from recently formed group Keeping Children Safe Albany and has been backed by local councilor Dr Thomas Brough and state parliamentarian Sophie Moermond.

At a community meeting held at the Beryl Grant Community Centre on 29th July the group outlined their demands for the local council with Brough and Moermond giving presentations on their concerns.

Over the course of two hours [Michelle] Kinsella outlined they held grave concerns about a wide range of issues including books in the town’s library, mental health organisations, young people twerking, Dungeons and Dragons games, and events run as part of the local community’s Pride celebrations. Kinsella said there should be concern that a Game Night would include the fantasy pen-and-paper game Dungeons and Dragons, because it involves role playing.

– article @ outinperth.com

Maia Kobabe question in Queensland

August 20, 2024
Mr KATTER: My question is to the Minister for Education and Minister for Youth Justice. The book GENDER QUEER shows its author fantasising about paedophilia with an image of a man touching a boy’s genitalia. Can the minister please confirm that this book is not on the shelf at any Queensland school and, if it is, commit to having it urgently removed?

[snip]

Ms FARMER: Thank you for your guidance, Speaker. I am not aware of the book that the member speaks of, but I absolutely commit that in any action I take as education minister I will be absolutely transparent. I think it is what we would expect of any leader: to be absolutely transparent about what their plans are, about what their past is, about what their future is—

Mr SPEAKER: Member, I have given you some guidance. The question was not about transparency. The question was not related to that. I will ask you to resume your seat.

– State Schools, Reading Resources
– Robbie Katter (Katter’s Australian), Di Farmer (Labor)
– QLD Legislative Assembly

Albany, WA – The outcome

A majority of the 400 people who attended the 1 August meeting voted in favour of restricting WELCOME TO SEX (2023), SEX: A BOOK FOR TEENS (2010) and Image Comics’ SEX CRIMINALS (2013-20).

City of Albany councillors would now have to vote on the proposals.

August 26, 2024
MOTION 1:
This Meeting requests that Council affirm the collections policy of Albany Public Library as outlined in the Collection Development Policy 2022, Point 8, noting that:

Public Library collections reflect a balance of views and perspectives without seeking to promote or discourage particular viewpoints. The Albany Public Library’s collections reflect the diversity of the community and aim to be as inclusive as possible. Providing materials do not breach federal and state government laws, the library will not censor material.

Further, that Council reiterates its recognition of and reliance on the expertise of Library staff in serving their community through their event programming, selection, curation and display of all materials within the library collections.
LOST 180-224

MOTION 2:
This Special Meeting of Electors calls for WELCOME TO SEX to be limited for borrowing to persons over the age of 16 and that this publication should be kept behind the counter until library facilities are provided to adequately store this publication in a section of the library that cannot be accessed by persons under the age of 16.
CARRIED 236-172

MOTION 3:
This special meeting of electors calls on the City of Albany to remove the publication SEX A BOOK FOR TEENS: AN UNCENSORED GUIDE from its Library catalogue until it is assessed for classification by the Australian Classification Board.
CARRIED 231-169

MOTION 5:
This Special Meeting of Electors notes that the series SEX CRIMINALS is available for loan via eBook from the City of Albany library network and calls on the City of Albany to submit the six volumes of this series to be assessed for classification by the Australian Classification Board or to remove it from its library network.
CARRIED 236-145

– City of Albany minutes

August 27, 2024
“I support my library, but when I see this smut … it disgusts me to my core,” great-grandfather Barry Leslie said at the meeting.

“No child … [should be] exposed to this type of filth.”

Father of five Gareth Ballast spoke to say the debate was part of a larger “battle” between “a secular world view and a biblical world view”. “Sexuality is a creative gift from God and he as the creator gets to determine its boundaries,” he said.

– Albany council to assess proposal to restrict children’s access to sex education books
– article @ abc.net.au

During the Ordinary Meeting of Council the following night, several members of the public referenced a letter from Peter Abetz, the WA State Director of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL).

August 27, 2024
6:24pm Susane Ashton, Mt Clarence
Ms Ashton advised that she had two questions for the Mayor and Councillors, the first was in relation to Albany Pride which the Mayor noted. The second was seeking confirmation that the Mayor and Councillors had received an email from the Australian Christian Lobby Group on 12 March 2024.

6:44pm Tony Evers, Cuthbert
Mr Evers thanked councillors and staff for facilitating the Special Electors Meeting. Pleased that the meeting ran calmly and thanked the Mayor for the handling of the meeting.

Mr Evers stated that he believes that the council is not responsible to remove books from the library and that this should go to the Australian Classification Review Board, would also encourage parents to be responsible for their children, not various organisations. Mr Evers spoke further in relation to entitlement.

– City of Albany minutes

Bundaberg, Qld – Book removal

On 28 August, it was reported that Bundaberg Regional Council became the first to remove GENDER QUEER.

They refused to discuss the issue and responded ‘…the book is presently not on our shelves’.

Albany, WA – The conclusion

On 24 September the City of Albany council voted to not adopt the decisions of the Special Meeting of Electors.

Three councillors, Mario Lionetti, Craig McKinley and Thomas Brough, voted against it.

September 24, 2024
THAT Council:
1. RESOLVE that, having considered the matters raised by electors at the Special Meeting of Electors held on August 26 2024, the following decisions are not adopted:
a. Decision 1: Restrict WELCOME TO SEX;
b. Decision 2: Removing SEX: A BOOK FOR TEENS;
d. Decision 4: Classifying SEX CRIMINALS eBook Series.

2. NOTE that the following administrative actions have been implemented by the library:

a. Relocate the WELCOME TO SEX book to the young adult section; and
b. Will not replace SEX: A BOOK FOR TEENS due to its age and the availability of more current resources;

CARRIED 8-3
Record of vote:
Against the Motion: Councillors Lionetti, Brough and McKinley

Decision 1: Restricting WELCOME TO SEX
Officer Comment:

14. Due to the specific nature of this decision of the Special Meeting of Electors there are concerns about whether a Council decision of this nature would fit into Council’s function as set out under the Local Government Act 1995.

15. If Council wishes to proceed with the intent of this motion, then it would be better to go through a policy development process resulting in the adoption of a formal Council Policy.

16. It should be noted that there is already an administrative policy, Albany Public Library Collection Development Policy, that provides guidance on the City of Albany’s Albany Public Library collection development.

17. The policy has been developed with guidance from standards, guidelines and institutions that have expertise in this area such as the APLA-ALIA Standards and Guidelines for Australian Public Libraries and the State Library of Western Australia, as well as the staff at the City of Albany’s Albany Public Library.

18. There would be some practical concerns with whether the development of such a policy would achieve the intended aim of the decision. As local government is not the appropriate or responsible authority to determine what books should or should not be age restricted, a policy that covers the classification of books would likely defer to the Australian Classification Board as the responsible authority on what publications should be age restricted.

19. The book WELCOME TO SEX is an award-winning and unrestricted title that is considered an educational resource on the issue of sexuality, relationships and sex, and is held in 161 libraries across the country.

20. Among the book’s 17 chapters it covers what sex is, having awkward conversations with parents and carers, sexual identities, myths, reasons to not have sex, feelings and falling in love, relationships, and keeping safe.

21. With the book being widespread throughout Australia, and anyone in the public being able to submit a copy to the Australian Classification Board for review, it has not been restricted.

22. Further to the above point, in New Zealand, the book has been referred to the New Zealand Classification Office which has published a report on its decision that the book would remain unrestricted.

23. Additionally, this book has not been available within the Albany Public Library catalogue for several months now due to an extended unreturned loan that resulted in the book being flagged in our system as lost.

24. When a loanable copy of the book is available in the library again, an administrative decision has already been taken that the book will be relocated to the library’s young adult section.

25. Albany Public Library’s Standards of Behaviour also clearly place responsibility for supervision of children on parents and guardians and it is the role of the responsible adult to guide their child’s book choices.

Decision 2: Removing SEX: A BOOK FOR TEENS
[As above 14-17]
30. From a practical point of view, the development of a policy would take a level of resourcing that would be a duplication of staff resourcing, considering that policies have already been developed by qualified information professionals.

31. With anyone in the public able to submit a book to the Australian Classification Board for review, this title has not previously been restricted.

32. The book has been in the young adult section of Albany Public Library’s collection for more than eight (8) years and has been borrowed six (6) times. It has not been available within the library’s catalogue for several months now due to an extended unreturned loan that resulted in the book being flagged in our system as lost.

33. The book cannot be replaced as it is no longer available through the State Government’s approved book suppliers for public libraries. However, even if a replacement book was available, an administrative decision has been taken that the book will not be replaced due to its age (originally published in 2010) and the availability of more current resources. This decision is consistent with the library’s Collection Development Policy for ‘weeding’ the collection.

Decision 4: Classifying SEX CRIMINALS eBook Series
[As above 14-17]
45. From a practical point of view, all eBook platforms available to Albany Public Library members are statewide services coordinated by the State Library of WA. Albany Public Library staff do not curate these collections.

46. Further, staff cannot extract e-books from vendor platforms for submission for classification, and making such a submission would set a precedent for future objections to library content.

47. Submissions of print editions to the Australian Classification Board can be made by anyone.

– City of Albany minutes

Social media ban

In the Senate, Ralph Babet (United Australia Party) again targeted WELCOME TO SEX.

September 11, 2024
This Prime Minister says he is all about protecting children [with social media ban]. Really, Prime Minister? Riddle me this: how is it that your own literary awards just shortlisted a children’s book titled WELCOME TO SEX, which describes in graphic detail the most wicked of sex acts?

The author of this book said that she would ‘be happy with a mature eight-year- old having a flick through the book’. So eight-year-olds can learn about sex acts that I don’t feel comfortable repeating here in this chamber with parliamentary privilege? So this book is acceptable—okay, great—but God forbid your child scrolls through Instagram or TikTok. Are you serious, Prime Minister?

– Ralph Babet (United Australia Party)
– Senate, Parliament of Australia

Review Board challenge

Bernard Gaynor applied to the Federal Court to overturn the Classification Review Board’s decision to award GENDER QUEER an ‘Unrestricted’ rating. The hearing commenced in late September.

September 30, 2024
Bret Walker SC, acting for Gaynor, said the overwhelming majority of submissions to the board on the review of the decision had called for the publication to be restricted or refused classification. He argued the classification board had erred by not taking these submissions into account, by broadly labelling them as “anti-LGBTQIA+”.

Walker said there was a “deliberately broadbrush dismissal” of those submissions, many of which he said objected to what they saw as depicting a man having sex with a minor – referring to an image portraying Plato’s Symposium. Walker said many of those objections did not refer to the gender of the image’s subjects, just that it appeared to depict paedophilia.

Justice Ian Jackman said that while by his count, about 600 submissions from among 9,000 people had been considered to be anti-LGBTQ+ by the board, on closer examination Jackman said just 52 of these expressed anti-LGBTQ+ views – less than 1% of submissions received.

Walker said the board gave little weight to the submissions, and had failed to engage with them in its review decision.

In response, the barrister for the minister for communications and the classification board, Houda Younan SC, said the law did not require the board to accept submissions as part of the review of its classification decision and that the invitation of submissions did not require the decision-maker to then consider them.

However, Younan said the board did consider the public submissions and did not dismiss them on the basis of being anti-LGBTQ+ but because they did not assist the board in its statutory task of a classifications decision.

“We say that in this case, every submission was received and considered,” Younan said.

Submissions in the decision were labelled to give their tenor, she said. Submissions were given weight based on whether they contained evidence the writer had read Gender Queer and understood its content within the context of the publication.

Those that did not demonstrate an engagement with the publication were given little weight, she said.

Younan indicated the board had considered whether a submission noted the context of the image being of Plato’s Symposium, or was a criticism of the image on its own, removed of context. She later identified 14 additional examples of explicitly anti-LGBTQ+ submissions beyond those initially identified by Jackman.

– Concerns over Gender Queer book dismissed by Australian classifications board as anti-LGBTQ+, court hears
– article @ theguardian.com

Port Macquarie Hastings, NSW

Various book restrictions were put on the agenda of Port Macquarie Hastings Council. The motion was put forward by Councillor Mark Hornshaw, a member of the Libertarian Party.

Two books were originally named but later dropped from the redrafted motion.

17 October, 2024
The options available to Council to remove books that may be considered inappropriate for young readers from general access areas of the library, including titles such as GENDER QUEER and WELCOME TO SEX.

– Agenda of the Council Meeting
– Port Macquarie Hastings

It carried by a vote of five to four.

17 October, 2024
1.Request that the Chief Executive Officer provide Councillors by end December 2024, a written brief detailing the following information about Council’s policies and obligations in relation to publications and videos held in Council’s library collections that contain sexually explicit content:

a. Accessibility of materials to people of different age groups, and any potential options for ensuring access is age appropriate

b. Consideration of complaints or concerns raised by community members

c. Child safety, including NSW Child Safe Standards

d. Wellbeing of general patrons

e. Wellbeing of Council staff

f. Prevention of peoples from using materials for criminal purposes, including but not limited to grooming, domestic and gendered violence.

g. The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 and whether Council libraries meet the definition of ‘publish’ under the act, and whether Council has any obligation to obtain a classification of any ‘submittable publications’ prior to displaying or distributing such a publication via its library network.

h. Any other matter staff identify as relevant

i. Whether Council is meeting any required obligations.

2. Request that the Chief Executive Officer provide Councillors written information by the same date, in relation to implications of the judgement Gaynor v Minister for Communications [2024] FCA 1186] in relation to Council’s library facilities.

– Minutes of the Council Meeting
– Port Macquarie Hastings

Review Board challenge outcome

On 14 October, Justice Ian Jackman quashed the ‘Unrestricted’ rating and ordered the Classification Review Board ‘…to determine the matter according to law’.

The decision rested on the Board finding 576 submissions to their 23 July 2023 review to be ‘overwhelmingly anti-LGBTQIA+’. Justice Jackman found only 66 of the submissions to be ‘broadly anti-LGBTQIA+’, which was not an ‘overwhelming’ number.

October 14, 2024
The Court Orders That:

1. The name of the second respondent be amended to read: “Convenor of the Classification Review Board, as representative of the Members of the Classification Review Board as identified in s 73 of the ‘Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Cth)'”.

2. An order in the nature of certiorari be made quashing the decision of the second respondent dated 5 July 2023 and 20 July 2023 in relation to the Classification Certificate for a Publication, Classification No CLAS-108096.

3. An order in the nature of mandamus be made compelling the second respondent to conduct its review function of the Classification Board’s decision dated 3 April 2023 according to law.

4. The first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings.

– Gaynor v Minister for Communications [2024] FCA 1186
– Federal Court of Australia
– full judgement @ judgments.fedcourt.gov.au

Slow news month

In January 2025, THE AUSTRALIAN revisited two previous decisions of the Classification Board.

The first was the Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years) awarded to the book OSTEND by Maxsense Maximus. Euraus Developments, the applicant, received the rating in December 2024.

January 17, 2025
Australia’s censor has cited the “literary, artistic and educational merits” of a novel depicting the violent gang rapes of young girls, and dismissed a comic book rape scene as “dark humour”.

“Within the context of this publication, the treatment of … sex is not high in impact and is not exploitative, offensive, gratuitous or very detailed,” the board states in its decision.

“Given the context of the publication’s narrative and its literary, artistic and educational merits, the board does not consider that the publication contains material that offends a reasonable adult to the extent that it should be restricted.”

A spokeswoman for the Australian Classification Board said that the novel OSTEND had been classified as unrestricted on December 17, with consumer advice of “M – not recommended for readers under 15 years of age”.

“The Board considered the context of the work, including its fictional nature, target audience, and literary merit, in assessing themes of sexual violence and child sex trafficking,” she said.

– Censor OKs ‘artistic merit’ of violent gang rape
– theaustralian.com.au

The second was the Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years) for THE BOYS : OMNIBUS VOLUME TWO by Garth Ennis.

January 17, 2025
The board’s June 2023 decision report describes the comic book as “satirical” and depicting “an animosity between two characters which is often expressed through aggressive sexual interactions”.

The board’s report describes the scene in the comic book where a female character, Rayner, is “being forcefully pushed by the back of her head into the rear seat of the couch, face-first, by Butcher’s (the male character’s) hand” while the woman repeats, “I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!”

“There appears to be fear on Rayner’s face, yet Butcher is portrayed with an amused and selfsatisfied smile,” the Classification Board states in its decision report.

“In the view of the board, these sex scenes between Butcher and Rayner depict sexual activity that appears to role-play hostility and aggression, but at no point is there any indication that the activity is non-consensual.

“The scenes are further mitigated by the darkly humorous tone and the implication throughout the narrative that while their relationship is presented as antagonistic and competitive, these sexual interactions are entirely consenting and seemingly inevitable whenever they meet.

“In the Board’s opinion, the presentation of themes and sex in this way is not exploitative, offensive or gratuitous.”

– Censor OKs ‘artistic merit’ of violent gang rape
– theaustralian.com.au

More Garth Ennis targeted

In January, the e-Safety Commissioner found the online version of PREACHER VOLUME 2 by Garth Ennis to be ‘Class 2’ material, meaning it would likely be R18+ or X18+ under the National Classification Scheme.

The e-Safety submission was made by Bernard Gaynor after the Director of the Classification Board did not issue call-notice to the publisher. Rockhampton Council and the publisher also declined to submit a physical copy of the book for a rating.

January 21, 2025
In a ruling that exposes inconsistencies in the censorship of sexually explicit publications, the federal government’s Office of the e-Safety Commissioner has slapped a “Class 2” rating of adult pornography on the online version of the graphic novel PREACHER VOLUME 2, by Garth Ennis.

However, the official censor, the Australian Classification Board, has not evaluated the print version of the publication.

– ‘Porn’ comic banned but kids can borrow
– theaustralian.com.au

Estimates answers

The classification of OSTEND (2024) was brought up by Ross Cadell (National) during Senate estimates. The basis of his information was the aforementioned article published in THE AUSTRALIAN on 17 January 2025.

February 25, 2025
Senator CADELL: I’ve got some concerns. I’m not going to pretend—OSTEND. Let’s go straight there. I don’t ever think a book should be banned. I’m not in that. But the classification of being able to sell it to anyone, even with the 15-year-old guide—I’ve read your reasons, but there are gang rape scenes of young girls and women in a book that is available in libraries and sales. We’ve had the eSafety Commissioner here. We’re hearing that one in four girls are facing sexual harassment if not online. It promotes the wrong message. We’ve had a cry out from Bravehearts. The co-chair of the National Office for Child Safety, who is a member of Bravehearts, said no. I find it hard to rationalise in a world that objectifies women so badly, even having read your reasons. I get it’s part of a criminal dismantling of a sexual predator ring; I get that. I get the context of it. But to make it available for all people—how do you get to that level? How do we respect women enough at a board that says—I mean, it is gang rape. It is that. You don’t even pretend it’s not in these books. It’s a sexual predator ring. How is that approved for general sale?

Mr Thomson: I appreciate the seriousness of the topic. In assessing all publications, the board follow the classification of publication guidelines from 2005. That’s what the board did in this instance. As you pointed out, they classified the publication as M—not recommended for readers under 15.

Senator CADELL: Not recommended but available.

Mr Thomson: Yes. The board aren’t in control of the guidelines or enforcement of the guidelines. That’s something that’s agreed by the Commonwealth and the states and territories. So, when dealing with this sort of publication, the board’s only recourse is to follow the guidelines, which they did in this case and in all cases. Hence the classification of M—not recommended for readers under 15.

Senator CADELL: It says in your ruling, ‘Sex is not high in impact and is not exploitative, offensive, gratuitous or very detailed.’ It is gang rape.

Mr Thomson: Literary—yes, I understand. When looking through the publications, the publication guidelines talk about context, terms like artistic merit and the fact that we’re dealing with a fictional, written account of fictional activities.

Senator CADELL: If I put a video on the internet of the acts carried out, if it was a video and not a book, it wouldn’t even get shown at all. I would be charged for the acts that are on that video, let alone not able to distribute it.

Senator DAVEY: Even if it was a fictionalised draft.

Senator CADELL: Yes. If it were adults pretending to play this role, I would be charged. How is there the differential between print and depiction? I just have trouble grasping this?

Mr Thomson: I understand, Senator. The classification guidelines for films and the classification for publications are different.

Senator CADELL: This isn’t an anti-government thing for me. I’m having trouble understanding it. What would we need to do so this book wouldn’t fit into those guidelines of that government, our government, any government?

Senator DAVEY: Eighteen-plus?

Senator CADELL: As eighteen-plus, I might not love the book but I would understand that. What do we need to do to do that?

Mr Thomson: A review of the publication guidelines is what we would need to do. In our submission to the stage 2 reform consultation, last year, the board outlined some recommendations around looking at the publication guidelines and considering a more informative set of guidelines to deal with publications.

Senator CADELL: So you were hamstrung by the guidelines, as they were. I have trouble, when it says, ‘Sex is not high in impact and is not exploitative, offensive or gratuitous,’—I don’t know what is more that than a gang rape scene of young women, young girls. So I find that for that classification potentially, if it is that, because it is exploitative, it doesn’t fit under that category. Wouldn’t you agree?

– Steven Thomson, Director, Classification Board
– Ross Cadell (National), Perin Davey (National)
– Environment and Communications Legislation Committee
– Senate estimates, Parliament of Australia

Senator Cadell moved on to the classification of THE BOYS : OMNIBUS VOLUME TWO. Again, his information came from the article in THE AUSTRALIAN.

February 25, 2025
Senator CADELL: There’s another one: a comic book that’s been similarly hated by young women and stuff like that. I won’t name it so everyone goes googling it at home, but there is a sex scene where a man is, while he’s having sex with a woman in a comic book, pulling her hair, burying the woman’s head in the pillow and saying—I will say these words and bleep out the ‘f’s: ‘You stupid slapper. I’ll come to your house and I’ll kill your husband and I’ll kill your two little kids I’ll—expletive deleted—kill you.’ It’s doing this same thing again.

Isn’t that exploitative, offensive and gratuitous, and isn’t that fear of non-consensual—when someone is saying that? I know you are saying in that magazine, reading the ruling again, that these two antagonists come together and they do this a lot. In a world that is meant to be respecting women more, valuing them and protecting them when we’re trying to protect our youth from such violence—this is a comic book where this exists. Is this exactly the same problem?

Senator McAllister: You’re pointing to the issue that’s actually the subject of the reform process that’s under way, which is that since these guidelines were established, the world has changed a great deal and there are a range of different medium through which content is provided to users and consumers. The way that they are treated from a classification perspective is not consistent and this is a source of quite significant frustration for people who voice very similar views as you do.

They might differ in terms of where the line ought to be drawn, but this lack of consistency between the different media is one of the things that is the subject of a present piece of reform that’s under way. We’ve got a number of reviews that have already been undertaken that indicate that this is not fit for purpose and that, to a point, technology has moved on.

Essentially, the department has initiated consultation about reform. The submissions, as I’ve indicated, have highlighted the fragmented nature of governance and regulation and supported consolidation of the classification function into a clearer governance framework and a more clearly defined scope of content that would require classification. The government is now working with the states and territories to update classification guidelines for publications, films and computer games to try and bring some of this consistency and address some of those community concerns around gender based violence, mental health themes and sexually explicit content.

– Steven Thomson, Director, Classification Board
– Ross Cadell (National), Jenny McAllister (Labor)
– Environment and Communications Legislation Committee
– Senate estimates, Parliament of Australia

Confirmed Unrestricted again

On 5 July 2023, the Classification Review Board awarded GENDER QUEER an Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years). The Federal Court of Australia quashed that decision on 14 October 2024.

It took six months for the Classification Review Board to release its second judgement. On 19 April 2025, the fresh panel upheld the original rating.

April 19, 2025
Applicant: Bernard Gaynor

Business: To review the Classification Board’s decision to classify the publication GENDER QUEER, Unrestricted (M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years).

Decision and reasons for decision

1. Decision

The Classification Review Board classified the publication GENDER QUEER Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘(M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years)’.

2. Legislative provisions

The Classification Act governs the classification of publications and the review of classification decisions.

The Review Board

Part 5 of the Classification Act outlines the provisions relevant to the Review Board and its procedures.

Section 42 of the Classification Act sets out the persons who may apply for review of a decision:

a) the Minister

b) the applicant for classification of the publication, or the likely classification of the publication under section 33

c) the publisher of the publication, or

d) a person aggrieved by the decision.

Section 43 sets out the conditions regarding the manner and form of applications for review, including time limits. Under section 44, the Review Board must deal with an application for review in the same way that the Classification Board deals with an application for classification of a publication.

Classification of publications under the Classification Act

Section 9, subject to section 9A, provides that publications are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the classification guidelines. Section 9A states that a publication that advocates the doing of a terrorist act must be classified RC. Section 11 of the Classification Act requires that the matters to be taken into account in making a decision on the classification of a publication include the:

a) standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, and

b) literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the publication, and

c) general character of the publication, including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character, and

d) persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published.

The National Classification Code

Relevantly, the Publications Table of the National Classification Code (the Code) provides that:

Publications (except RC publications, Category 2 restricted publications, and Category 1 restricted publications) are to be classified Unrestricted, and the Code also sets out various principles to which classification decisions should give effect, as far as possible:

a) adults should be able to read, hear, see and play what they want

b) minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them

c) everyone should be protected from exposure to unsolicited material that they find offensive

d) the need to take account of community concerns about:

(i) depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexual violence and,

(ii) the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner.

The Guidelines

Three essential principles underlie the use of the ‘Guidelines for the Classification of Publications 2005’ (the Guidelines), determined under section 12 of the Classification Act, the:

importance of context

assessment of impact, and

the six classifiable elements—themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity.

3. Procedure

The publication, GENDER QUEER was classified by the Classification Board on 3 April 2023 Unrestricted with consumer advice of ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’.

An application for a review was lodged by the Applicant, Mr Bernard Gaynor, on 5 May 2023. The Classification Review Board (CRB1) met on 29 May 2023 and finalised their decision on 5 July 2023. The CRB1 upheld the original Unrestricted classification of the Classification Board, with the same consumer advice, ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’.

The Applicant applied for judicial review of the decision to the Federal Court of Australia and a decision was made on 14 October 2024 by Justice Jackman to quash the CRB’s original decision, and an order of mandamus was made returning the publication to the Classification Review Board to conduct a fresh review.

A newly convened panel of three members of the Classification Review Board (CRB2) met on 23 January 2025 to review the publication. There are no conflicts of interest noted by the members of the CRB2 panel. None of the members of CRB2 were part of the CRB1 panel.

The CRB2 was provided with a written submission from the Applicant dated 17 January 2025, with annexures A-J. In the Applicant’s written submission he sought the opportunity to provide oral submissions in relation to the fresh review decision, noting that CRB1 had received oral submissions from both the Applicant and other interested parties. The Applicant stated that the failure to accept oral submissions would deny the CRB2 the benefit of asking the Applicant questions about the content of the publication and without the benefit of his previous oral submissions made in May 2023.

The CRB2 considered whether it is necessary or appropriate for oral submissions to be provided, noting that there is no statutory requirement for oral submissions to be invited. In circumstances where the CRB2 has detailed written submissions from the Applicant and other interested parties, the CRB2 decided that the issues were well understood and oral submissions would not be of further assistance. The CRB2 further considered that the Applicant has had a sufficient opportunity to be heard in relation to his application. The Applicant was informed that oral submissions would not be invited, and was invited to provide any information in writing, which he has done.

The CRB2 was provided with a copy of the Federal Court decision, ‘Gaynor v Minister for Communications’ [2024] FCA 1186.

The CRB2 was provided with written submissions from interested parties who had made submissions to CRB1. The Applicant also noted in his submission that he relied on these public submissions in full. The CRB2 considered whether it is necessary or appropriate to invite further public submissions, given the time that has passed since the CRB1 decision. In circumstances where the CRB2 has a large number of public submissions already provided, and there is no statutory requirement to invite public submissions for this review, the CRB2 decided that the issues were well understood and further public submissions would not be of further assistance.

The CRB2 read the publication.

The CRB2 then considered the matter.

4. Evidence and other material taken into account

In reaching its decision, the Review Board considered the following:

(i) The publication, GENDER QUEER by Maia Kobabe

(ii) The relevant provisions in the Classification Act, the Code and the Guidelines

(iii) Mr Bernard Gaynor’s application for review

(iv) Mr Bernard Gaynor’s two written submissions including 9 attachments (including the submission by Associate Professor Lesley-anne Ey)

(v) The written submissions from The Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA)

(vi) The written submissions from members of the public

(vii) The Classification Board’s report dated 3 April 2023

(viii) The Classification Review Board’s report dated 5 July 2023

(ix) The Federal Court decision, ‘Gaynor v Minister for Communications’ [2024] FCA 1168.

5. Synopsis

GENDER QUEER is an autobiographical graphic novel by Maia Kobabe, published in 2020 by Oni-Lion Forge Publishing Group. This 240-page memoir chronicles the author’s journey of self-discovery, focusing on their exploration of gender identity and sexuality. Throughout the novel, Kobabe reflects on their experiences growing up, particularly during adolescence, and the challenges they faced in understanding their identity within the context of their relationships with family, friends, and society.

The graphic novel delves into the author’s evolving sense of self as a non-binary and asexual individual. Kobabe navigates the complexities of societal expectations surrounding gender, offering a candid and often humorous portrayal of their discomfort with traditional gender roles. The memoir is not just a recounting of experiences, but also an insightful exploration of how these personal revelations intersect with the broader cultural and social understandings of gender and sexuality.

The graphic novel further examines the author’s relationship with their family, particularly the challenges and misunderstandings that arise as they attempt to explain their non-binary identity. These familial interactions provide a key emotional backdrop for the narrative, highlighting the difficulties of reconciling one’s internal sense of self with external expectations. Through these reflections, GENDER QUEER offers a profound meditation on identity, acceptance, and the complex nature of self-expression.

This additional context is important to understanding the publication’s broader themes, helping to establish the narrative and intellectual framework within which the more sensitive topics, such as gender and sexuality, are explored. The CRB2 considered this context in making its findings on material questions of fact as set out below.

6. Findings on material questions of fact

The front and rear covers

The CRB2 found that the front and rear covers of the publication were suitable for public display.

The publication

The CRB2 found that the publication contains the following classifiable elements (listed in order of impact):

(a) Sex —The publication contains descriptions and depictions (in the form of illustrations) of sexual activity. These descriptions and depictions are justified by context. The impact of these descriptions and depictions is not so strong as to require legal restriction. The impact is mitigated by factors including:

• Descriptions and depictions of sexual activity are an integral part of the author’s story of the struggle to understand the author’s gender identity and sexuality.

• Descriptions and depictions of sex are highly stylised and contain little or no realistic detail.

• Descriptions and depictions of sex are not exploitative or gratuitous.

• Descriptions and depictions of sex are infrequent in the context of the publication as a whole.

(b) Nudity — the publication contains infrequent, highly stylised depictions of male and female nudity, including full-frontal nudity. These illustrations are lacking in detail and are justified in context. The impact of the nudity is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(c) Themes — the publication is a first-person narrative about the experience of a non-binary and asexual person growing up, and explores complex themes including gender, sexuality, identity, puberty, and relationships. The impact of these themes is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(d) Language — the publication contains very infrequent coarse language which is justified by context. The impact of this language is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(e) Drug Use — the publication contains a depiction showing a person injecting what is identified as testosterone, and some stylised images of syringes, as well as references to prescription medications accompanied by stylised images of medication containers. The impact of the depiction of drug use and the drug references is no higher than moderate, and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

(b) Violence — The publication contains no violence.

7. The applications and submissions by Mr Gaynor

The Applicant provided a submission to the CRB2 on 20 January 2025, which annexed:

A. The Applicant’s original application for review of GENDER QUEER lodged 5 May 203

B. Public submissions lodged in relation to GENDER QUEER

C. CRB biography

D. ‘There were calls for this queer book to be banned, but supporters may have saved it’ published by the SBS on 22 June 2023

E. ‘Qld police ‘reluctant to get involved’ in campaign to ban book’ published by the BRISBANE TIMES on 18 June 20223

F. Letter from Dr Lesley-anne Ey dated 3 May 2023

G. Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss, filed by Maia Kobabe on 26 July 2022

H. Maia Kobabe’s Reply Brief, filed on 17 August 2022

I. Screenshot of home page of kink.com captured on 20 February 2023

J. ‘What to Do When Your Kid Is Reading a Book That Makes You Uncomfortable’ published by Slate.com on 22 March 2022

In his submission to the CRB2 on 20 January 2025, the Applicant stated that, the decisions by the ACB and CRB1 to give GENDER QUEER an ‘Unrestricted’ rating failed to apply the Act, Code or Guidelines given ‘this publication indisputably contains a depiction of a minor engaged in a sex act with an adult.’ The Applicant focused in particular on page 135 of GENDER QUEER, submitting that this involved a depiction of a ‘paedophilia fantasy’.

He argued that the publication should be Refused Classification because it ‘breaches the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, not just because it depicts a minor engaged in a sex act with an adult but, more importantly, does so in a manner which clearly suggests that it is positive and acceptable to fantasise about such content…’. The Applicant submitted that, contrary to the CRB1 decision conclusion that the autobiography indicated the author’s ‘anathema to sex and masturbation’, the Applicant submitted that the novel demonstrates the author’s ‘complete obsession with these matters, as well as bodily secretions’.

In addition, the Applicant stated, ‘Putting aside the sexualised content of GENDER QUEER, the remainder of this publication is likely to cause significant harm and confusion particularly to girls going through puberty who may be anxious or nervous about the bodily changes they face.’

The Applicant also stated that the publication ‘has a link to a website that focuses on public degradation and humiliation is alarming and an additional and separate reason that his publication is not suitable for minors. Under the Act, Code and Guidelines, this should see the publication given a Restricted rating.’ The Applicant stated that the reference was a ‘clear invitation’ to readers to access the website.

The Applicant cited the public submissions received by the CRB which ‘highlight the enormous public concern specifically about this publication.’

In the Applicant’s first application to the CRB1 (date not included), in addition to some of the points made above, he submitted that the publication contains: nudity which is high in impact ‘because of… emphasis, tone and context’ including because of depictions involving the author’s menstrual blood; high impact violence (‘the author being stabbed through by a giant metal pole while naked on pages 128 and 129’); depictions and descriptions of sexual activity that are high in impact and intensity and ‘likely to be offensive to reasonable adults’ and includes ‘depictions which constitute a fetish or a depiction and description of a revolting or abhorrent phenomena’ warranting a Category 2 Restricted classification.’

The Applicant also stated that the publication contains two depictions which promote crime: the depiction on page 135; and the depiction on page 61 showing ‘the author masturbating while driving’.

8. Public submissions

The Classification Review Board is not required by the Classification Act to invite public submissions, or take public submissions into consideration; however, CRB1 invited and considered public submissions. The Applicant also requested that the CRB2 consider those submissions, and the CRB2 has done so.

The CRB2 panel considered all of the approximately 526 public submissions made by email (including approximately 82 identical petition submissions each with 100 names, sent by email from ‘CitizenGo’ as 1 submission by email). The public submissions are approximately 837 pages in length, and the CRB2 has read all of the submissions.

The significant majority of submissions wanted the publication to be Refused Classification or restricted from minors, citing concerns about paedophilia, homosexuality, pornography, masturbation, oral sex and other sexually explicit content, and LGBTQIA+ issues. Many of these submissions expressed concern about the book being available in the children’s section of public libraries. The CRB2 noted that the Federal Court described the ‘dominant theme’ of the submissions as being that ‘the book tolerates or promotes paedophilia, and that such a stance is against the criminal law in Australia and is morally repugnant’. Some of the submissions raised the following three main concerns (either in exact wording, or variations):

‘This book disturbingly depicts its author fantasising about paedophilia while masturbating.’

-This book contains highly offensive images of the author engaged in oral sex.’

‘This book is offensive to reasonable adults and completely inappropriate for minors.’

The CRB2 noted that the above dot points appeared to have been proposed by the Applicant to his email subscribers. One of the public submissions included a forwarded copy of an email from Mr Gaynor to his subscribers which said:

‘Last week I wrote to let you know that I had challenged the approval of the disgusting, pro-paedophilia children’s book, GENDER QUEER.

The Classification Review Board is now considering that challenge and taking public submissions. They can be lodged up until midnight this Friday.

This means we only have a few days to act. So we must act now!

Lodging a submission is easy. Simply email the Classification Review Board at crb@classification.gov.au and outline your views about GENDER QUEER.

Some points that you may wish to make to the Classification Review Board about this book (in your own words) are:

‘This book disturbingly depicts its author fantasising about paedophilia while masturbating.’

‘This book contains highly offensive images of the author engaged in oral sex.’

‘This book is offensive to reasonable adults and completely inappropriate for minors.’

You can see some of the redacted imagery from GENDER QUEER here.’

The 82 ‘petition’ submissions organised by CitizenGo appear to have been arranged by a petition commenced on the CitizenGo platform that remains available online at:
https://citizengo.org/en-au/fm/210974-ban-paedophile-comic-book.
The petition invites persons to enter their email address to ‘sign’ a petition and send the following email to the CRB:

‘Dear Australian Classification Review Board, I am writing to express my concern about the book GENDER QUEER and its potential impact on children. The book contains an image of an adult man engaging in a sexual act with a child, which is essentially child pornography. This type of material should not only be restricted from children, but should be illegal. I strongly urge you to restrict this book from children and take the necessary steps to protect them from such disturbing material. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,’

The petition webpage included an excerpt of page 135 of the novel, and invited signatures with the following description:

‘GENDER QUEER, a comic book that promotes explicit sexual content and gender confusion, has been classified as suitable for children as young as 15. What’s worse is that it’s available in public libraries, and quite possibly in schools for children of all ages to get their hands on. This book contains a graphic depiction of a sexual act between an adult male and a boy or, in other words, child pornography. This is unacceptable. You must take URGENT action right now as there is a very short window in which we can get this book banned. The Classification Review Board has opened a very short submission period, closing this Friday, 26 May 2023, to reconsider the classification of this book. We urge you to sign our petition to the Classification Review Board and demand that GENDER QUEER be reclassified as unsuitable for children. Children are vulnerable and should not be exposed to harmful content that can negatively impact their mental and emotional well-being. Help us protect them by signing the petition today. Time is running out. The submission period closes this Friday, 26 May 2023. Don’t wait until it’s too late. Sign the petition now and make your voice heard.’

An ‘update’ posted to the webpage after the closing date for public submissions states ‘Together, we sent a powerful message to the Australian Classification Review Board (ACRB) that Australians won’t tolerate materials that confuse our youth about their gender identity and expose them to graphic content involving an adult male and a boy’.

Submissions advocating for the book to remain Unrestricted cited its value as an educational resource, reducing prejudice and increasing empathy and understanding. Some of these submissions also noted the book’s literary and artistic merit, noting a lack of representation of stories of intersectional identities.

The Applicant cites the public submissions as evidence of the public’s concern with the content of the publication. However the CRB2 notes that approximately 50 of the submissions appeared to have cut-and-pasted their concerns from an email soliciting submissions sent by the Applicant (which was contained in one of the submissions as described above). Many other submissions appear to have been written in response to the Applicant’s prompt which referred to ‘some of the redacted imagery’ from the novel, some stating that they had not seen the text, or not seen all of the text. Similarly,

while the CitizenGo petition was ‘signed’ by thousands of people, this does not demonstrate that each of those persons has seen the text, or all of the text, other than the image at p135. Any person visiting that webpage would have been provided with the description of the novel provided by CitizenGo and the depiction on page 135 of the novel, and they may not have appreciated the full context of the publication. The CRB2 acknowledges that these submissions reflect the views of these members of the public. It cannot however be assumed that this cohort is representative of the broader community’s views.

9. Other submissions

In addition to written submissions from members of the public, the CRB2 also considered submissions to the first review from the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and Associate Professor Lesley-anne Ey (provided by the Applicant).

The CRB2 noted that the CRB1 received written and oral submissions from ALIA in favour of an Unrestricted classification. The CRB2 considered only the written submission, as discussed earlier in these reasons. The CRB2 notes ALIA’s submission that restricting the publication denies access to affirming materials for vulnerable members of the community who are non-binary, transgender, and/or asexual, many of whom are subject to prejudice and at risk of self-harm and suicide.

The submission by Associate Professor Lesley-anne Ey, a lecturer in Educational Psychology and Child Protection in Education Futures at the University of South Australia, concerns the age of figures in a depiction on page 135 of the publication, and a ‘moral dilemma’ of a sexual relationship between a teacher and a student. This depiction is discussed in more detail in the reasons below.

10. Reasons for the decision

Sex

The depiction of a fantasy based on Plato’s Symposium

The Applicant’s second submission to the Classification Review Board states that GENDER QUEER depicts a paedophilia fantasy and that the publication ‘breaches the standards of morality, decency and propriety general accepted by reasonable adults, not just because it depicts a minor engaged in a sex act with an adult but, more importantly, does so in a manner which clearly suggests that it is positive and acceptable to fantasise about such conduct and that GENDER QUEER should be Refused Classification’. The Applicant’s first submission also focused significantly on this depiction, submitting that a reasonable adult would form the view that the image depicts the author sexually aroused by a fantasy of a man engaged in sexual activity with a boy and that the author is sexually aroused and masturbates to the thought of paedophilia.

The depiction and its context in the publication

The applicant refers to a depiction on page 135 of the publication.

The panel, the lower of two panels on the page, is a colour illustration which depicts the author lying down, fully clothed, eyes closed, with arms resting across the belly. The face is slightly flushed, represented by red lines on the cheek. A thought bubble appears alongside. The bubble contains a depiction of two nude males, one is bearded and significantly larger than the other. The larger male kneels in front of the smaller male, his right hand cupped below the smaller male’s penis. The larger male has an erection. The image in the thought bubble is stylised to look like ancient Greek red-figure pottery – the males are drawn as pale figures against a dark background, inside a circle surrounded by a geometric pattern. The Classification Board, CRB1 and the Applicant have identified this illustration as a reference to a work of pottery art attributed to the Brygos painter, dated around 4th BC Athens. A caption inside the panel identifies the thought bubble with an arrow as ‘An elaborate fantasy based on Plato’s Symposium.’ A caption above the panel says, ‘I discovered it (masturbation) at around the same age, followed by the further realization that my ability to become aroused was governed by a strict law of diminishing returns.’ A caption below the panel says, ‘The more I had to interact with my genitals the less likely I was to reach a point of any satisfaction. The best fantasy was one that didn’t require any physical touch at all.’

The panel above this depicts the author seated at a writing desk, implicitly writing. A caption above the panel says ‘Alison Bechdel writes in Fun Home about discovering masturbation soon after her first period (page 170).’ A caption box inside the panel says ‘I didn’t know then that there was a word for the oddly gratifying motion of rocking back and forth in my chair as I drew at my desk.’

This page is part of a sequence, from page 134 to page 141, that deals with the author’s growing realisation that they are asexual, charting their confusion by, and ultimate dissatisfaction with, masturbation.

The style of the author’s illustrations throughout the publication are simple and direct, closer to a cartoon than reality. The depiction on page 135 is further stylised by its presentation as an image from ancient Greek pottery.

The age of the figures in the panel

The Applicant states that the panel depicts the author ‘fantasising about an adult male fondling the genitalia of a minor’ and says the evidence for this can be found in: the detail of the imagery; the assessment of the imagery by Dr Lesley-anne Ey; the reference to Plato’s Symposium in the text associated with the image; the style of the image which mimics ancient Greek artworks depicting sexual activity between adult males and minors; and Maia Kobabe’s admissions that the image depicts a minor engaged in a sex act.

The Applicant also states that, ‘There are actually two minors depicted engaged in sexual acts in the image above… The first is the image of Maia Kobabe herself and the second is the male figure depicted at the right of her masturbatory fantasy’.

The image of the ancient Greeks depicts two figures. One larger and bearded, the other is smaller and lacks facial hair, though appears to have some pubic hair. The submission by Dr Lesley-Anne Ey asserts that the smaller figure is ‘a child aged approximately 12 years’ based on the figure’s size and indicators of development.’ Dr Ey’s assessment has been taken into account by the CRB2, however, the CRB2 considers it is not possible to conclusively determine the age of the larger or smaller figures because of the highly stylised nature of the illustration which lacks significant detail.

The context of the image – the visual reference to pottery art attributed to the Brygos painter, and the textual reference to Plato’s Symposium – suggests that the image references the ancient Greek practice of pederasty, or sexual activity between adult males and teenage boys. It is noted that these references require some cultural knowledge to decode or fully understand this context,.

The Applicant cites a line contained in a legal brief for an American court proceeding from 2022 (Virginia: In The Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach in re: GENDER QUEER, A MEMOIR – Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss. Supplied by the Applicant) ‘The only image of the book of nudity or a sexual act indisputably involving a minor depicts a scene from Plato’s Symposium on an ancient Greek vase.’ The Applicant states that this is a ‘factual admission’ and suggests this is decisive. The CRB2 notes that the full paragraph reads, ‘Altman erroneously asserts that Kobabe’s work depicts ‘felonious sexual acts between minors.’ The only image in the book of nudity or a sexual act indisputably involving a minor depicts a scene from Plato’s Symposium (p.135 of the book) on an ancient Greek vase. This classical theme is common in works of philosophy, history, and art of that era.’

In the CRB2’s view, it is not possible to conclusively determine the age of either of the figures because of the highly stylised nature of the illustration. While the CRB2 acknowledges the opinion of Dr Ey, the CRB2 considers that analysis of size and ‘indicators of development’ of the figures is unhelpful taking into account the highly stylised nature of the illustration. Further, the text contains no description of the two figures to identify the figures or their ages. The most that can accurately be said is that the panel contains a depiction of an older-looking male and a younger-looking male. For these reasons, on balance, the CRB2 does not accept that the image depicts, or appears to depict, an adult and a minor.

The CRB2 also considered the age of the author figure in the panel. The figure is highly stylised with minimal detail, and the figure is clothed, making it difficult to ascertain the age. However, the CRB2 notes that the figure is depicted with long hair, and that the author’s hair was cut short at age 16, as described on pages 78-81 of the publication. The age of the author figure may only be inferred from context.

The Applicant also described this panel as containing depictions of the author’s ‘fetish… avoiding sexual touch of her genitalia’. The CRB2 disagrees with the characterisation of this as a fetish.

A teacher and student?

The submission by Dr Ey states that the image depicts ‘a sexual encounter between an ancient Greek scholar and his student’. She observes the moral dilemma of a sexual relationship between teacher and student, the codes of practice which apply and the power differential involved in such a relationship. The Classification Board also made an observation that the image likely depicts a sexual encounter between a Greek Scholar and his student. The CRB1 did not address this issue.

The submission by Dr Ey stated that the image depicts ‘a sexual encounter between an ancient Greek scholar and his student’. The Classification Board agreed with this view. The CRB1 did not address this issue. The CRB2 acknowledges that, in Australia, relationships between teachers and students are prohibited if the student is a minor. As Dr Ey notes, even if the participants are adults, such relationships pose a moral dilemma because of the power differential between a teacher and a student, and the inherent conflict of interest. However, the CRB2 does not agree that the image depicts ‘a sexual encounter between an ancient Greek scholar and his student’ and considers this assertion to be conjecture not supported by the image.

Should the depiction require the publication to be Refused Classification?

The National Classification Code (the Code) provides that publications that ‘describe, depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex… in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified’ should be given an RC classification. The Code also states that publications that ‘describe, depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not)’ should be given an RC classification.

For the reasons explained above, the CRB2 is not satisfied that the panel of p 135 depicts a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18.

Even if one accepts the context provided by the reference to Plato’s Symposium and the statement contained in US court proceedings, to conclude that the depiction appears to depict a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18, the impact of the stylised illustration remains moderate. As outlined above, the CRB2 finds that the panel on page 135 does not depict sexual activity in a detailed or realistic manner. The illustration is highly stylised and not explicit. The ages of the characters cannot be definitively determined from the depiction alone, and could only be inferred from the broader context. These factors significantly reduce the impact of the image.

The impact of the image is further reduced by the fact it mimics an ancient Greek vase.

The context in which this image appears – in a broader narrative exploring the author’s personal journey of self-discovery, further mitigates its impact. GENDER QUEER explores Maia Kobabe’s personal journey of self-discovery, focusing on themes of gender identity and asexuality. One of the significant elements of this narrative is the author’s exploration of the nuances of sexual identity, which includes reflections on masturbation and an eventual realisation about being asexual. These themes are a central aspect of the memoir’s coming-of-age narrative, as a reflection of Kobabe’s experiences in a positive, introspective light, exploring the complex feelings of confusion, discomfort, and eventually acceptance.

The CRB2 disagrees with the Applicant’s statement that the image is ‘a very modern and paedophilic fantasy of the author which simply mimics this style (of ancient Greek pottery) without any historical or other contextual justification’. The reference to the ancient Greeks is one of a number of cultural images the author uses in the search for representations of gender and sexuality to help them make sense of their own experience, for example: on page 30 the author writes, ‘My favourite fictional character at this time was Alanna the Lioness – a short, stubborn girl who disguised herself as a boy to train as a knight’; the music of David Bowie ‘was the first time I could ever remember hearing queer references in song lyrics.’ (page 58); at the library they discover queer books including the FAKE SERIES books by Sanami Matoh and THE LAST HERALD MAGE TRILOGY by Mercedes Lackey (page 75); and on page 87 they discover Oscar Wilde on a theatre trip. As the author’s story makes clear, they struggle to find representations of intersectional identities and sexuality.

While the Symposium reference serves as a cultural touchstone in the author’s search for representations of gender and sexuality, it is not presented as an endorsement or promotion of the historical practices depicted in such artworks. The CRB2 finds that the image is appropriately contextualised within the author’s narrative and cultural references.

The Applicant raised concerns about the age of Maia Kobabe in the illustration. As noted above, the age of the author figure is difficult to ascertain from the illustration itself and may only be inferred from context. Even accepting that the character may be 16, in the CRB2’s view, the depiction is justified in the context of the broader narrative, which conveys the complexity of the author’s

thoughts and feelings about sexuality in a non-exploitative way. The CRB2 also notes that the author is drawn fully clothed, in a non-sexualised pose, further mitigating the impact.

In response to the Applicant’s assertion that the depiction might promote criminal behaviour, it is essential to clarify that the narrative does not glorify or endorse illegal activities. The CRB2 concurs with the Classification Board’s findings that the content of the publication, including the depiction in question, is not intended to incite or promote criminal actions. Rather than promoting or glamourising paedophilia or inappropriate sexual conduct, the panel on page 135 is part of a broader narrative about the author’s growing understanding of their asexuality.

The CRB2 notes that the Guidelines define a reasonable adult as ‘possessing common sense and an open mind, and able to balance personal opinion with generally accepted community standards.’ This definition emphasises that a reasonable adult is expected to assess content thoughtfully, with an open mind, and in a way that reflects a balanced understanding of the material.

While the CRB2 acknowledges that the publication may create some discomfort for some readers, we find that the illustration does not describe, depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that the publication should not be classified. Nor does it describe or depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be, a child under 18.

The CRB2 finds that the narrative surrounding the illustration on page 135, and its placement within the broader themes of the publication, justifies the GENDER QUEER graphic novel’s classification as Unrestricted with the consumer advice of “M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years.”

Other descriptions and depictions of sexual activity

The Applicant submitted that the publication contains descriptions and depictions of sexual activity that offend against the standards of morality, decency or propriety such that the publication should be Refused Classification or Restricted. Some of the examples cited by the Applicant include:

Also on page 60 the author describes fantasising about having a penis. On page 60 the author describes across three panels experiences of masturbating. In the first panel an illustration shows a hand on the crotch of a pair of jeans. Text says, ‘For years my standard method of masturbation was stuffing a sock into the front of my pants and manipulating the bulge.’ The second panel contains an illustration of two males kissing. The males are implicitly naked, one lying atop the other, the top of his bare buttocks visible. Text says, ‘This would evolve into hip thrusting while thinking of my latest gay ship…’ The Applicant states that these characters appear to be minors but the illustrations do not contain enough detail to conclusively state their age. The CRB2 is satisfied that the illustrations do not involve minors. The third and final panel shows the author sitting in the driver’s seat, one hand in their crotch, the other on the steering wheel. Text says, ‘Memorably, I got off once while driving just by rubbing the front of my jeans and imagining getting a blow job. I promise I’m a really safe driver.’ The author is fully clothed in this panel. The CRB2 rejects the Applicant’s assertion that this behaviour constitutes a fetish.

Pages 62 and 63 depict a conversation with the author’s sister about masturbation in which the author’s sister says, ‘It really never occurred to you to put something into your vagina, not even a finger?’ and ‘So you’ve never tasted yourself?’ The author responds, ‘What? No! Ew!’ But after the sister says, ‘You should try.’ The author is depicted with white substance on one finger. A text arrow

describes it as ‘vagina slime’. The author refers to not being able to taste it. The CRB2 rejects the Applicant’s description of this experimentation as a ‘fetish or revolting or abhorrent phenomena. The CRB2 considered that these passages are justified by their context and include an honest account of the author’s personal experience.

On page 93 the author recounts several masculine dreams including a dream ‘about having a massive painful boner that lasted all day’. This is depicted as a bulge in the author’s boxer shorts.

On page 117 the author is surprised when a friend says she likes lesbian porn. The friend says, ‘I think it’s because – I just don’t know how to assign a sensation to a body part that I don’t have.’ In the next panel the author says, ‘I assign sensation to a body part I don’t have all the time. Sometimes I can almost feel where it would be resting against my thigh.’ The illustration shows the author sleeping in a T-shirt and underpants. The image contains no depictions of genitals. The Applicant again describes this as a ‘fetish’ of fantasising about having male genitalia. The CRB2 does not accept the Applicant’s description as a ‘fetish’.

Pages 134 to page 141 deals with the author’s growing realisation that they are asexual, charting their confusion by and ultimate dissatisfaction with masturbation. It includes the Plato’s Symposium panel considered above, as well as references to a calendar of abstinence/masturbation, and speculation that the author’s body operated on ‘a seasonal sexual cycle like a bird’. On page 138 the author describes discovering reference to a ‘$10 bullet vibrator’ in a comic. The page includes an illustration of the vibrator which resembles an egg on a cord. The author says they purchased a vibrator and, on page 140, attempts to use it before deciding that they don’t enjoy it. This is illustrated by a series of panels of the author’s head and shoulders, while implicitly using the vibrator. The sequence concludes with the author giving the vibrator to their sister.

From page 154 to 156 the author searches for someone to kiss, in order to write more accurately about kissing and refers to One Direction fan fiction. In a thought bubble on page 154 the author says ‘In my story all of the 1D boys are lusting after each other and it is destroying their friendships.’ This ‘research’ sequence also includes a panel on page 157 with an illustration of a building and text that says, ‘Toured the SF Armory, which at the time housed the filming studios of kink.com.’

The Applicant submits that this is ‘a link to a website that focuses on public degradation and humiliation’ and is ‘an additional and separate reason that this publication is not suitable for minors.’ The CRB2 notes the reference to the website is not a ‘link’ as characterised by the Applicant – the website cannot be accessed from the graphic novel. Nor is it, as the Applicant states, ‘a clear invitation to readers to access this website’. The panel contains no description or depiction of the contents of the website.

The Guidelines provide that Unrestricted publications may contain descriptions and depictions of sexual products and services that are restricted to adults but these should be discreet and have a low impact. In the CRB2’s view this passing reference to an adult website in a non-sexual context is discreet and has a low impact, and can therefore be accommodated in the Unrestricted category.

The impact of these pages concerning the author’s ‘research’ is mitigated by the lack of detail to the sexual references.

Pages 160 to 168 recount the author’s experience with Z, who they meet through Tinder. On pages 167 and 168 the author describes sexting and depicts an encounter in which Z fellates a strap-on, worn by the author. A panel on page 167 depicts Z fellating what appears to be a penis – from the standing author’s point of view. Text says, ‘This is the visual I’d been picturing.’ In the second panel a wider view shows Z fellating a strap-on worn by the author. Text says, ‘But I can’t feel anything. This was much hotter when it was only in my imagination.’ The two characters are clearly established as consenting adults.

The descriptions and depictions of sexual activity are relatively visually discreet. The impact is significantly mitigated by the simple, stylised illustrations and lack of detail. They are justified in the context of the narrative, concerning the author’s exploration of their sexuality. As the submission by a Senior Lecturer in Writing at the University of Technology Sydney notes, ‘Unlike pornography where sex is often depicted as occurring in a vacuum and without consequences, GENDER QUEER sensitively depicts intimate relationships and sexual desire (between consenting adults) as complex and entangled in questions of gender, identity, and our responsibilities to ourselves and other people.’

The CRB2 has read the novel in full and considered all of the descriptions and depictions of sexual activity and considering them individually and as a whole, the impact is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

Nudity

In Mr Gaynor’s first application to CRB1 (date not included) he submitted that the publication contains: nudity which is high in impact ‘because of… emphasis, tone and context’. He submitted that the publication contained frequent depictions of nudity, citing depictions of nudity on pages 13, 20-22, 29, 31, 35, 36, 124, 128-129, 212 and 213.

The CRB2 read the publication and considered depictions of nudity.

Page 13 depicts two young children implicitly urinating in the yard with bare buttocks visible.

Pages 20-22 depict a scene in which the pre-pubescent author is teased by fellow students for swimming topless at a beach. The author has not developed breasts and appears flat chested. The scene illustrates their confusion at being told to put a top on.

Page 124 includes a small panel depicting full frontal female nudity as the author undresses for a medical examination. The image includes breast nudity and pubic hair but does not contain any genital detail.

Page 128 and 129 depict the naked author stabbed through the belly with a giant pin, representing the excruciating pain they felt undergoing an internal examination. The full page panel on page 128 includes a glimpse of pubic hair. The image contains no breast nudity or genital detail. A second, smaller image on page 129 shows buttocks nudity. These panels are discussed in more detail in the consideration of themes below.

A panel on page 213 depicts the author bare chested after imagined top surgery, without breasts. Arguably this doesn’t depict any nudity beyond a bare male chest.

Some of the depictions cited by the complainant contain no nudity, for example: the panel cited on page 29 depicts the author’s thighs and knees, looking at a blood spot on what appears to be the author’s underwear.; the panel cited on page 31 depicts a side view of the author sitting on the toilet with no nudity; pages 35 and 36 depict the author’s nightmares about menstruation, showing bloody legs and a bloody crotch but no nudity; page 212 depicts the author’s struggle to wear a binder, with one panel showing the author with an itchy back and scratching, with the chest completely covered by the arms.

The nudity is not frequent in the context of a 240 page graphic novel. The nudity is not detailed. The highly stylised illustration significantly mitigates its impact. Excepting the panel of Plato’s Symposium on page 135 discussed above, the nudity does not occur in a sexual context. The depictions are justified in the context within which they are presented.

The CRB2 finds that the impact of the nudity is not, as the Applicant submits, ‘aggravated by accompanying text and other imagery’. The impact of the nudity is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level. Depictions of nudity are not likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult.

Themes

GENDER QUEER is an autobiographical narrative which recounts Maia Kobabe’s experience growing up, and the author’s exploration of gender identity and sexuality.

The publication explores a number of complex issues including gender, sexuality, identity, puberty, and relationships – elements commonly addressed in coming-of-age books. Examples include:

In a sequence from page 29 – 37 the publication depicts the author experiencing a period and the associated distress and the ongoing anxiety caused by menstruation for the author. Page 35 describes nightmares involving menstrual blood on the author’s underwear and thighs. On the following page the author elaborates on their nightmare, finding themselves in a bathroom with no door or ‘the only available toilet is overflowing with a soup of blood and shit’. The panel depicts a toilet bowl covered in blood and faeces. Though the image is not detailed, the depiction conveys the author’s horror of their bodily functions.

The submission by ALIA notes that ‘sensitive issues such as menstruation anxiety or masturbation are common experiences that many readers will relate to. It is refreshing to see them presented factually in the context of a character’s growth and development’. The CRB2 agrees with this statement.

Another sequence dealing with anxiety the author’s feminine body causes, occurs from page 123 to 131, depicting the author’s first pap smear. The procedure is contextualised by a female doctor who tells the author that they are screening for cervical cancer and talks them through the process. Nonetheless, the author describes the procedure (which is not depicted) as ’45 seconds of the most excruciating pain in my life’. This is represented on pages 128 and 129 as the author being run through with a giant pin. Text on page 128 says ‘I felt as if I had been stabbed through my entire body and with this came a wave of psychological horror at the realization that things can go inside my body.’ The depiction is surreal, with the exaggerated size of the pin suggesting the size of the author’s pain. This is the strongest depiction of the author’s distress.

The Applicant submitted, ‘Putting aside the sexualised content of GENDER QUEER, the remainder of this publication is likely to cause significant harm and confusion particularly to girls going through puberty who may be anxious or nervous about the bodily changes they face.’ The CRB2 disagrees with this assertion, finding that the author explores issues of gender and sexuality in a candid manner, modelling self-compassion, and ultimately finds peace with ambiguity.

The CRB2 considered the treatment and impact of these elements and finds that they are justified in the context of the narrative, and moderate in impact. The treatment of these complex themes can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

Coarse language

The publication contains coarse language: two uses of ‘shit’, two uses of ‘asshole’ and one use of ‘fuck’. On page 215 the author shows a thought bubble containing the word ‘fuck’, when a call is received about a papsmear exam. The coarse language is very infrequent. It is justified in the context of the narrative. The impact of this language is no higher than moderate and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

Drug Use

The publication contains a depiction showing a person injecting testosterone, and some stylised images of syringes on page 174, as well as a reference to the prescription medications Oxycodone and Lorazepam and a stylised drawing of the tablet containers on pages 222 and 223. In the context of the narrative, the impact of the depiction of drug use and the drug references is no higher than moderate, and can be accommodated at the Unrestricted level.

Violence

As noted above, the CRB2 considers the images of the author stabbed through the belly with a giant pin on pages 128 and 129 are most appropriately considered to be thematic content. The publication contains no depictions of violence.

Consumer advice warning

Unrestricted publications may include material that is not recommended for some readers. The CRB2 recognises that some of the elements may offend some sections of the adult community and may not be suitable for readers under 15. Therefore, it is appropriate to give the publication a consumer advice of ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’.

Promotion, incitement, or instruction in matters of crime

The Applicant submitted that the publication should be refused classification because it promotes matters of crime, citing the depiction of Plato’s Symposium on page 135, and a depiction on page 61 that ‘shows the author masturbating while driving’.

The CRB2 has reviewed both depictions above (under The depiction of a fantasy based on Plato’s Symposium and Other Depictions and Description of Sexual Activity).

The CRB2 notes that merely describing or depicting something does not equate to promoting it. The depiction of the author’s fantasy involving an ancient Greek scene does not promote paedophilia, as the Applicant asserts. The CRB2 does not accept that the image includes a depiction of paedophilia, or that it promotes paedophilia. Additionally, the scene depicting the author masturbating while

driving clearly states that it occurred “one time” and includes the author’s comment that they are a “really safe driver,” acknowledging the potential danger of such behaviour.

The CRB2 finds that the publication does not encourage or promote criminal activity, and disagrees with the Applicant’s claim that these behaviours are “likely to be emulated” by readers.

Section 11 considerations

Section 11 of the Classification Act requires that the matters to be taken into account in making a decision on the classification of a publication include the:

a) standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, and

b) literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the publication, and

c) general character of the publication, including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character, and

d) persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published.

The Act requires the CRB2 to consider all these matters together, and that this may require weighing one consideration against another in the context of the publication as a whole – for example, Section 11 includes the ‘general character of the publication’ which cannot be gleaned from a single panel taken out of context.

The CRB2 has considered these matters together in the context of the publication as a whole.

a) standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, and

As the Applicant notes in his submission, the standards of morality, decency and propriety are ‘based on a plurality of standards held by reasonable adults and necessarily entails the ACB or CRB give consideration to these differing standards…’

The CRB2 again notes that the Guidelines describe a reasonable adult ‘possessing common sense and an open mind, and able to balance personal opinion with generally accepted community standards’.

The reasonable adult test requires a balanced, open-minded assessment, and the CRB2 has carefully considered the content within this framework, ensuring that the decision reflects a fair evaluation of the material, consistent with generally accepted community standards.

While the CRB2 acknowledges that the publication may create discomfort for some readers, we find that the publication does not offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults. The CRB disagrees with the complainant’s assertion that the CRB2 need only find that the publication is likely to cause offence to a (singular) reasonable adult.

The CRB2 further notes that the Classification Branch has not received any complaints about GENDER QUEER from other peak Australian authorities such as the Australian Border Force.

CRB2 acknowledges ALIA’s submission that the publication has been translated into Spanish, Polish, Czech, French, and Italian with Norwegian, Portuguese, German, Dutch, Japanese, and Korean forthcoming.

b) literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the publication, and

CRB2 notes the widespread recognition, critical reception, and acclaim that GENDER QUEER has received worldwide, including from ALIA, the peak body for libraries in Australia, who stated in their submission, ‘Books such as GENDER QUEER which have a first-person narrative from a non-binary person play a particularly important role in reducing prejudice and increasing understanding… It is important to also acknowledge the support the novelGENDER QUEER can give to people who are non-binary, transgender and/or asexual. Theirs is a story that is not often told which can delay self-awareness and coming out to friends and family. Many of us take for granted that we will be able to see people like ourselves reflected in the pages of a book, and that representation is powerful. LGBTQIA+ people, and specifically in this case non-binary and asexual people, should similarly be able to find people with similar stories and experiences to their own…’

In addition to being a Stonewall Honour Book and Alex Award recipient, GENDER QUEER is listed as the ALA YALSA Best Books of 2020: Great Graphic Novels for Teens (2020), ALA YALSA Outstanding Books for the College Bound (2020), Chicago Public Schools Great Graphic Novels (2021), Denver Public Schools Top 100 High School Books (2020-21), Howard County Public Schools (MD) Best of the Year – High School (2019), Iowa High School Battle of the Books (2021), Jefferson County (KY) Public Schools Recommended Reading Grades 9-12 (2021), New York Public Library’s 50 Best Books for Teens (2019), School Library Journal 17 Immersive Graphic Novels for Teens, Summer Reading 2021, Texas Library Association: Maverick Graphic Novel Reading List, 2020, and was a nominee for the Garden State Teen Book Awards (2021).

c) general character of the publication, including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character, and

The publication is an autobiographical graphic novel. While the publication touches on themes related to human development, sexuality, and gender, it is not of a medical, legal or scientific character. Instead, the work is best understood as a narrative that provides insight into the lived experience of a non-binary and asexual individual, offering both personal reflection and broader social commentary.

d) persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published.

The CRB2 notes that the likely audience includes teen readers who may be negotiating similar issues. The graphic novel format is popular with young adult readers. GENDER QUEER is just one of many contemporary graphic memoirs to tackle complex topics of interest to young adult readers including for example, PITY PARY by Tyler Feder (cancer and grief); EL DEAFO by Cece Bell (deafness); GUTS by Raina Telgemeier (anxiety and illness). Generally speaking, the graphic novel format makes the heaviest topics more accessible to readers of all ages.

The American Library Association recommends GENDER QUEER as appropriate reading for ages 14+. Amazon’s recommended reading age for is 16+ (USA, Australia, and UK), Common Sense Media recommends the book for ages 16+, Barnes and Noble (USA) recommends the book for ages 15+, and Maia Kobabe recommends the book for ages 16+. In July 2019, the School Library Journal (USA) listed GENDER QUEER as recommended reading for grades 11 and up, before amending its recommendation in December 2019 to grades 9 and up. ALIA has not placed any restriction on GENDER QUEER within Australian public libraries.

The front and rear covers

The CRB2 found that the cover of the publication was suitable for public display for the following reasons:

The front cover is low in impact; therefore, it is suitable for public display. The cover features the title, GENDER QUEER: A MEMOIR, the author’s name, and a mirrored image of figures standing in water. The upper figure has short hair and is wearing a t-shirt and pants or shorts that have been rolled up above the knees. The lower figure has long hair reaching below the shoulders and is only wearing shorts. A circular marker notes that the publication has been recognised as a ‘Stonewall Honor Book’ by the American Library Association.

The rear cover is low in impact; therefore, is suitable for public display. The cover features a blurb that reads in full: “In GENDER QUEER, Maia Kobabe has crafted an intensely cathartic autobiography about eir path to identifying as nonbinary and asexual, and coming out to eir family and society. By addressing questions about gender identity – what it means and how to think about it – the story also doubles as a much-needed, useful and touching guide.”

11. Summary

After a thorough review, the Classification Review Board (CRB2) has upheld the Classification Board’s original classification of GENDER QUEER as Unrestricted, with the consumer advice ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’. The decision follows a detailed examination of the publication in accordance with the Classification Act, the National Classification Code, and the Classification Guidelines, considering the submission from the Applicant, public submissions, and the Federal Court’s judgment.

GENDER QUEER is an autobiographical graphic memoir that explores themes of gender identity, asexuality, and self-discovery. The publication includes depictions of sexual activity, nudity, and discussions on sensitive topics like puberty and sexual orientation. While some material may be discomforting to certain readers, the CRB2 found that the publication’s content does not meet the threshold for Refused Classification or Restricted status. The depictions are artistic, highly stylised, and serve the narrative context of the author’s exploration of their identity.

The Unrestricted classification reflects the publication’s literary, artistic, and educational value. The consumer advice of “M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years” is appropriate to protect younger readers while ensuring that older teens and adults retain access to diverse and important narratives.

– Classification Review Board report No. 2

Their decsion was announced three days later.

April 22, 2025
A three-member panel of the Classification Review Board has unanimously determined that the publication, GENDER QUEER by Maia Kobabe, is classified Unrestricted with the consumer advice ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’.

The review of the Classifications Board’s original classification of the publication was remitted to the Review Board following the Federal Court of Australia’s judgment in ‘Gaynor v Minister for Communications & Anor’, handed down in October 2024.

In reviewing a classification decision, the Review Board applies the ‘Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Publications 2005’.

In the Review Board’s opinion, the Unrestricted classification reflects the publication’s literary, artistic, and educational value, with the consumer advice of ‘M – Not recommended for readers under 15 years’ appropriate to protect younger readers, while ensuring that older teens and adults retain access to diverse and important narratives.

The Review Board is an independent merits review body. This Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

– Classification Review Board decision: Gender Queer