<p>AAWAA is a national peak advocacy body and independent media outlet. The AAWAA Women&#39;s Advocate works for the protection and advancement of Australian women and girls in areas where we are vulnerable on the basis of our sex.</p><p>This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p>

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/28/5/d9db4da9-c459-45f5-bacd-a750c1033d4e__on_naming_sex__the_question_now_before_the_un.mp3

<p>In this episode, Emma and Lucy discuss AAWAA&#39;s submission to the UN Human Rights Committee on its draft General Comment on freedom of association. They cover why women&#39;s associations depend on organising around biological sex rather than a generic identity category, the gap in the draft&#39;s membership test that leaves sex-based criteria exposed to being labelled discriminatory, and the risk that ordinary advocacy for sex-based protections gets read as hostile discourse. They close with the Lesbian Action Group and Giggle v Tickle cases, two Australian rulings that show what happens when the law has no settled basis for recognising this right, and the narrow, specific fixes AAWAA has asked the Committee to make.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Female association depends on naming sex: The question now before the UN

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/27/7/ed7b540d-0385-4286-92ab-f82f5bf2e204_-neutral_language_fails_family_violence_policy.mp3

<p>In this episode, Emma and Lucy discuss two recent submissions on family violence, one to the Tasmanian Government, one to the federal Second Action Plan consultation, both built on the same argument: sex-neutral language like &#34;people who use violence&#34; obscures who is harmed and who does the harm. They cover misidentification of women as perpetrators, the case for female-only refuges and crisis services, and why official communications avoid naming men as responsible, before looking at the one place the submissions take different approaches, and why that reflects two levers of government rather than a real disagreement.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Why sex-neutral language fails family violence policy

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/24/5/42aef585-b664-4ba2-a030-1a409bf975c1_struction__not_a_virtue__the_unmoved_feminist_.mp3

<p>In this episode of The Unmoved Feminist, Martine and Liv take apart the idea that &#39;be kind&#39; is a harmless, universal instruction. Drawing on Robin Lakoff, Dale Spender and Sandra Lee Bartky, they trace how women and girls are trained from childhood into a softened, hedging register, and how &#39;be kind&#39; is used to police tone rather than engage with substance whenever women raise male violence, discrimination or the erosion of sex-based protections. This is part one of two: a second episode will look at how the same instruction escalates from policing how women speak to compelling what we&#39;re required to say.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

TUF. Be kind, part I: An instruction, not a virtue (The Unmoved Feminist)

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/17/3/7db0fde6-0121-4540-b6df-000e1cd14351_nd_where_a_digital_duty_of_care_needs_to_begin.mp3

<p>Emma and Lucy unpack a gap in the Digital Duty of Care Bill: harms from pornography and misogynist material are fixed directly into law for children, but for adult women, the same harms are left to a minister&#39;s discretion, with no requirement they&#39;re ever addressed. They discuss what that gap reveals about how Parliament treats women as a class, and why structural harm can&#39;t be judged by individual lived experience alone.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Women, structural harm, and where a digital duty of care needs to begin

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/16/1/a70b70f7-e167-42f4-a3e2-e80757d8e5e9_e_reveals_about_the_alrc_surrogacy_laws_review.mp3

<p>Emma and Amber unpack a newly released Freedom of Information document showing how the Attorney-General&#39;s Department and the Australian Law Reform Commission negotiated the terms of reference for the ALRC&#39;s surrogacy law review, before those terms were ever made public. They cover what the correspondence confirms, what&#39;s been withheld under the FOI Act&#39;s deliberative process exemption, the ALRC&#39;s undisclosed request for a reporting extension, and the case for why a recommendation to prohibit surrogacy sits squarely within the ALRC&#39;s own terms of reference.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

What a new FOI release reveals about the ALRC surrogacy laws review

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/10/6/17fa5d61-426d-457d-8c5b-3a8c6fe27589_the_melbourne_declaration_to_abolish_surrogacy.mp3

<p>As the Australian Law Reform Commission prepares to provide its report on surrogacy laws, Megan and Amber read the Melbourne Declaration to Abolish Surrogacy in full. The Declaration emerged from the National Conference on Surrogacy, <em>‘In the Name of the Child’</em>, held in Melbourne in August 2026. It calls on Australian governments to abolish all forms of surrogacy and to protect the rights of those already affected without using those protections to justify future arrangements.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Women are not for use and children are not for transfer: The Melbourne Declaration to Abolish Surrogacy

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/6/20/52089306-6e2a-4b9e-8e43-037281a1abcb_rchy__an_interview_with_reem_alsalem__unsrvawg.mp3

<p>Amber speaks with Ms Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, about her mandate, CEDAW and sex in international law, women’s sex-based protections and rights, pornography, surrogacy, violence against girls, and the changing forms of violence against women and girls.</p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

The convoluted ways of patriarchy: An interview with Reem Alsalem, UNSRVAWG

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/2/7/110a5f56-d8c2-462b-9965-6ec87cad5af7_tions_and_the_erosion_of_female-only_provision.mp3

<p>Emma is joined by Suzi to examine how the exemption process under the <em>Sex Discrimination Act 1984</em> is coming to function as the default pathway for female-only services, rather than the narrow, temporary safeguard it was designed to be.</p><p>They discuss the Lesbian Action Group&#39;s three-year dispute with the Australian Human Rights Commission, the practical cost of an exemption-dependent framework for refuges, sporting bodies and small volunteer-run women&#39;s groups, and the options available to Parliament for restoring clear, workable protection for female-only provision.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

The exemption problem: How a practical default is becoming a developing expectation

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/8/31/2/823ab5de-e953-47c2-be16-35af8832789b_orteur_addresses_national_surrogacy_conference.mp3

<p>In this episode of The Women&#39;s Advocate, Emma and Meg discuss the keynote address delivered by Reem Alsalem, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, at the ARMS national conference on surrogacy in Melbourne. They walk through the claims she examined, from consent and payment to bodily autonomy and the best interests of the child, and the international developments she referred to, including a push for a global moratorium on surrogacy.</p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

UN Special Rapporteur sets out concerns at national surrogacy conference

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/8/26/21/2473b459-fbf8-44cb-bd1a-e771cf4c954c_mb_interview_v_2_mp3.mp3

<p>Dr Megan Blake is co-counsel for the Lesbian Action Group in its case against the Australian Human Rights Commission, and a member of Sall Grover&#39;s legal team in the High Court application in Giggle v Tickle. In this interview with The Women&#39;s Advocate, she sets out what each case says about the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 and what, in her assessment, Parliament would need to consider in any reform. </p><p>Dr Blake explains why the Act has never defined &#39;sex&#39;, how that gap underlies both the Giggle case and the Lesbian Action Group&#39;s application for an exemption, and why she considers the exemption process an insufficient basis for female-only provision such as refuges and women&#39;s sport. She also addresses the interaction between federal and state law on identity documents, and discusses the extent to which courts will continue to interpret the Act regardless of what Parliament does.</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Dr Megan Blake on reforming the Sex Discrimination Act: An interview

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/8/5/10/af6de0fb-3d0c-4c0c-b51e-d9119c7d52ab_ry_says_about_female_alignment_with_male_power.mp3

<p>In this episode of The Unmoved Feminist, Martine and Liv tackle the uncomfortable question of why some women side with male power, police other women, and direct hostility sideways instead of at the structures that harm us. Drawing on second‑wave, materialist feminist analysis, they unpack calculated safety strategies, male identification, reform complicity, and horizontal hostility as part of a wider survival economy under patriarchy. The discussion holds survival and responsibility together, asking how women’s choices are shaped by male violence and control of resources without erasing the real costs to other women.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

TUF. Female alignment with male power: What feminist theory says

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/8/7/6/e2dc655b-5ef2-4e06-b756-2e89b97d6245_g__then_left_wondering__our_time_with_the_alrc.mp3

<p>The Australian Law Reform Commission told stakeholders its surrogacy review was nearly complete. Days earlier, it had quietly been given six more weeks — and nobody will say why. In this episode, Amber and Emma trace two episodes eight months apart: a roundtable where governance concerns were redirected to private correspondence, and a deadline extension the ALRC&#39;s own newsletter never mentioned. They discuss what the Advisory Committee&#39;s composition tells us about access and influence, why &#34;workload&#34; isn&#39;t an explanation, and why AAWAA keeps asking questions institutions would rather answer privately, or not at all. Full correspondence discussed in this episode is published at womensadvocacy.net.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><p><br></p><p><br></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Redirected to writing, then left wondering about the surrogacy review: Our time with the ALRC

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/7/31/5/ac6672d0-b868-4cf6-84e7-3e0f11348b1a_conversion_practices_and_sex_based_realities.mp3

<p>Emma and Megan discuss the Tasmanian Greens’ draft conversion bill and AAWAA’s submission, using it as a springboard into the “guilt trade” and “forced teaming” of LGB with TQI+. They explore how collective cultural guilt about gay conversion therapy is being leveraged to silence scrutiny of gender‑identity law, what this means for lesbian and gay young people, and why sex and gender must be disentangled in conversion‑practice legislation.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Weaponising guilt: Tasmania’s Greens, forced teaming and conversion practices

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/8/4/22/aeaf6060-50dc-4295-807c-ec2d8a0f4e64_hy_women_s_advocacy_must_be_considered_first.mp3

<p>Emma and Megan look at what is really at stake when Parliament considers surrogacy law reform. Instead of starting with “access” and “barriers”, they focus on the threshold question: should the State construct and normalise a market that uses women’s reproductive capacity for the planned relinquishment of children? Drawing on AAWAA’s recent evidence and broader governance and UN work, they explain why sex-based women’s organisations must be consulted seriously if that question is to be answered honestly.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Surrogacy, exploitation and law reform: Why women’s rights are the foundational consideration

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/6/30/6/b7ba402e-f8cb-4c7e-b960-d8dc6d08e090__gaps_in_australia_s_draft_human_rights_report.mp3

<p>Emma and Amber examine Australia&#39;s draft seventh periodic report under the ICCPR — the international treaty that binds Australia to protect civil and political rights. They look at what the report says, what it leaves out, and why that matters. They discuss ABS data showing male sexual violence against women has increased over the last decade, an unresolved conflict at the heart of Australia&#39;s discrimination law, and FOI material showing that Australia declined to respond to the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. AAWAA has lodged a submission calling on the Government to give the UN Human Rights Committee an honest account before the report is finalised.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Official words, worsening record: Australia's draft UN report

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/7/22/6/c8bbce84-70b2-4684-af2f-f69f0ac82e79_csw_communication_ahead_of_the_august_deadline.mp3

<p>Emma and Luci cover AAWAA&#39;s follow-up communication to the UN Commission on the Status of Women, ahead of the 1 August deadline for submissions to CSW71. They discuss the continued silence from Australia&#39;s CSW70 delegation since AAWAA first wrote to them in March, and what the new submission documents — Federal Court findings on the Sex Discrimination Act, the AHRC&#39;s refusal to act on them, self-ID data from New South Wales, and Western Australia&#39;s surrogacy law passed with no genuine parliamentary scrutiny.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

Silence from the top: Top officials say nothing as Australia's CSW record deepens

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/6/24/2/d4aa8fc9-0f29-47e4-9941-ce44402e139c_australia_s_midwifery_regulator_left_undefined.mp3

<p>When a regulatory document governing pregnancy, birth and postnatal care can&#39;t say clearly what &#39;woman&#39; means, that&#39;s not a drafting oversight — it&#39;s a clinical and legal problem. Emma talks to Suzi about AAWAA&#39;s submission to the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia, the internal contradictions in the proposed revised guidelines, and why getting this right matters for midwives, for women, and for maternal health data.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

'Woman': What Australia's midwifery regulator left undefined

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/7/9/11/d7977629-0577-4cb7-8db1-26e802c47fad_chy__the_structure_we_are_not_supposed_to_name.mp3

<p>In this episode of <em>The Unmoved Feminist</em>, Martine and Liv unpack a word used everywhere and explained almost nowhere: patriarchy. Drawing on Wollstonecraft, Gilman, Frye&#39;s birdcage image, Mitchell&#39;s four structures of oppression, and Pateman&#39;s sexual contract, they trace why the analysis has never been superseded — and why its latest adaptations, from neoliberal feminism to the displacement of sex‑class analysis by self‑declared identity, make the word more indispensable than ever.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

TUF. Patriarchy: The structure we are not supposed to name

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/7/5/16/6aa7019d-a63c-4798-b574-02134b7ee60b_sda_timeline_final.mp3

<p>Emma and Sue walk through forty years of Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act, from its CEDAW roots and the creation of our sex‑based protections and rights, through to the AHRC’s growing role and the 2013 gender identity amendments, to Giggle v Tickle, the Lesbian Action Group case, and Julia Gillard’s comments on how those changes were made without women’s concerns ever being squarely put to Parliament.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

The SDA timeline: CEDAW, the 2013 amendments, and the loss of women’s sex‑based protections and rights

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/7/2/10/28f6566b-9985-46b7-a681-75af32329226_e___reckoning_with_the_2013_sda_amendments__.mp3

<p>Former prime minister Julia Gillard has finally broken her silence on the 2013 Sex Discrimination Act amendments, telling an audience at Manchester University that “it was a different time”. In this special edition of The Women&#39;s Advocate, Emma explains why that answer is not good enough – and why women are now living with the consequences.</p><p>__</p><h3>Donate</h3><p>If you wish to donate to AAWAA you can do so by making a direct deposit or bank transfer to:</p><ul><li>Account name: Affiliation of Australian Women’s Advocacy Alliances</li><li>Account number: 04201471</li><li>BSB: 325-185</li></ul><p>__</p><h3><em>Disclosure statement</em></h3><p><em>Voices in this podcast are AI-generated clones of real, named AAWAA members, created and used with their informed consent to help amplify women&#39;s words and stories. All scripts and spoken content are written by AAWAA women, and all editorial judgement, fact-checking, and production decisions remain entirely human. AI is used only to voice this content: never to generate, alter, or invent what is said. Learn more at womensadvocacy.net.</em></p><br /><br />This podcast provides general information and opinion only and does not constitute legal advice. Listeners should seek independent, professional legal advice before acting on any matters discussed. The hosts and AAWAA accept no liability for decisions made based on this content.

"A different time" is not an argument: Reckoning with the 2013 SDA amendments

Let’s get it done

Advocating for the protection and advancement of women and girls in areas where we are vulnerable on the basis of our sex.