Facebook blogger Politicialpostingmumma Marijke Rancie who is Melbourne mother who campaigns against the Safe Schools program and fronted both television and print advertisements for the Coalition for Marriage during the postal survey has exposed the risqué activities of several high-profile members of the Melbourne based LGBT youth organisation Minus 18.
Minus 18 was an initial sponsor of the Safe Schools program and its website previously had links to explicit sexual content but following close scrutiny the website was cleaned up. However, its booklets which include gender transition advice to minors remain available by request and its provocative anti-homophobia posters are still displayed in many Victorian schools.
Yesterday on her Facebook page Rancie posted photos which showed two of Minus 18’s organisers engaged in what many would conclude is sexually suggestive conduct. Rancie questioned how the availability of such images are appropriate for a youth worker.
Minus 18 responded with a Facebook post which accused Rancie of violating revenge porn laws and claimed her conduct was the unauthorised release of intimate public images. However, this accusation can be repudiated by the fact that these were publicly available images on the Minus 18 members’ Facebook page. If an image is public how can it be a violation of privacy to post it?
Certainly, if images such as these were discovered to be on the public Facebook profile of certified teacher or social worker that would certainly land them in trouble. People in these professions are actually trained to make sure their Facebook accounts are private and cannot be easily accused by young people under their care. Accusing those critical of such conduct as being homophobic and of bullying vulnerable young people is shrill defence.
Rancie has defended her actions and said she won’t be intimated from her activism against Safe Schools or critiquing Minus 18 due to legal threats. Her Facebook page is regularly trolled and reported by LGBT activists.
Certainly, if LGBT groups want to avoid criticism such as this they should make sure that in regard to their social media accounts they keep them to a standard that would be expected of any working professional, especially if they work with children. It is not anti-LGBT to have this expectation.