The authors seem to be saying that all women, (whether they have children or not), should be released from detention centres, (leaving behind the men), but this would not be gender bias.

But what if all men (whether they have children or not) were released from detention centres (leaving behind the women). Would this be gender bias?

Theoretically not, Timkins, but it might be helpful to pay attention to cultural mores. As the Immigration Department admits it did not do when it incarcerated a Sabean Mandean woman and her children in Curtin Detention Centre, as the sole woman, and sole Mandean among 50 Muslim men (http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,15986262%255E1702,00.html). But what can we expect when we hand over the culturally-sensitive matter of immigration detention to private companies which run prisons and work off the assumption that the inmates are criminals who deserve whatever they get?

When are the bleeding hearts and others opposed to the policy of mandatory detention (introduced by the Labor Party) going to face the fact that the policy has overwhelming support among the people, particularly those in the Labor heartland?

Have you noticed the number of people arrested in connection with the recent London bombings who are illegal immigrants? Even the innocent brazilian shot down by the police because he refused to stop turned out to be an illegal. There is no better example of the security risks associated with allowing these people into the country. During WWII virtually none of the refugees we got were nazi sympathisers. Similarly during the cold war, but not now.

Do any supporters of unrestricted immigration think things are going to get any better? The world population is increasing at 6 million per month, and we are going to face a major problem keeping these people out. What with the collapse of the world economy due to the lack of cheap oil, it looks like being an interesting century.

Anomie,
I must admit that whenever I hear terms such as “women and their children” or “women’s special needs” I become immediately suspicious, because my experience to date has been that such terms are used to gain more and more privileges and benefits for the woman, and normally much gender bias develops, and eventually both males and children become much disadvantaged over time.

I understand that work by the authors on this detention issue was partially funded by the Pamela Denoon Trust for the Women's Electoral Lobby. That is an all female lobby group to my knowledge, so it would advocate a bias towards the female gender, and correspondingly, a bias against the male gender eventually.

There has been much said about Cornelia Rau and her mistreatment, but there are about 15,000 males in various prisons throughout Australia, with estimates that about 40% have significant mental illness that is rarely diagnosed or treated adequately, and even judges are saying that prisons are being used instead of mental hospitals. The number of males having their human rights of proper treatment denied to them has never been mentioned by such organisations as the Women's Electoral Lobby or by the HREOC. Those males have been left behind to rot in the system, because they don’t have “special needs” like a “woman and her children”. They are just mere males.

Oh, Timkins, it's quite amusing, in a bizarre way, to see how close we are on this. My husband has bipolar A, with occasional violent psychotic episodes. Fortunately, he's currently holding down a quite high-powered job, largely because when he's good, he's very, very good (a good side effect of bipolar – his brain works, not normally, but very fast), and his boss is the wettest of wet Liberals. But he's been sacked from quite a few jobs because of bizarre behaviour or paralysing depression. When he's depressed, he can't work. (This is the reason I take issue with Col Rouge and his kind and their "winners and bludgers" view of society. Sometimes it's a genetic unlucky dip). When he's hypermanic, he also can't work, and I also have good reason (and the scars to prove it) to fear for my safety. But the only means I have of getting treatment for him, according to the NSW police, in every encounter I've had with them, is to charge him with assault. Then they'll put him in the cells, get a psychiatric assessment, and get him hospitalised and stabilised. I won't do this: it's wrong, and I'm pretty much the last person he has left to trust, and I won't betray that. So instead, I have to cop whatever he hands out until he's well again. Not everyone in a similar situation has (a) a good left hook; (b) a large dog who loves only me and; (c) somewhere else to go if I can take no more again. They opt for custodial rescue.

It's well established in psychiatry that males are more prone to catastrophic mental illnesses. It's the downside of what can be seen as the superior creativity and energy of males. I don't totally dismiss that view. But I understand, from bitter experience, it's not an unmitigated blessing. My job, by the way, is editing a journal on disability. I'm just putting to bed an issue on mental health, railing against imprisonment of people with mental illness. Most of them male. You're wrong about HREOC, by the way.

It is sickening that someone can write an article about the treatment of women in detention centres, but due to political correctness, ignore major reasons why this occurs? What cowards!

I have followed the issue of detention centres closely, and was amazed that the HREOC report into children in detention, among others, didn't set alarm bells ringing about the all-too-often exploits of Islamic men sexually harrassing non-Muslim women, or Islamic women who are unacompanied by a male in our detention centre's.

Only three months ago, the young 14 year old Ilham Rhamati, who was released from Nauru detention centre said to the media in her statement about what the worst thing in detention was, and I quote:

"The worst thing for me wasn't the food, the staff, but that I was a single, unacompanied Muslim girl".

She went on to say that she "couldn't go outside her room, not because of the staff, but all the men" who incidentally, as we've heard from Islamic clerics, and seen in everyday practise (one can't help but notice the packs of middle-eastern men that hang about the front entrance to any Westfields in Sydney's west, who, whenever they see a young woman walking past, all run up to her offering their phone numbers, asking her for sex, calling her an "Aussie slut" when she tells them to get lost), they see it as their right to pressure unacompanied women for sex.

Indeed, the HREOC report last year into children in detention (Sections 8.5.1, 8.5.2, & 15.4.7) goes to the heart of abuse on children, non-Muslims & women, by Islamic men.

One Christian Iranian family consisting of three teenage girls & a mother were so sexually harassed that men would regularly peek through curtains & pressure them all for sex so often the entire family were moved to another compound.

This also happened to many non-Muslims, particularly Sabian Mandaens, although thats another matter. Another unacompanied teenage girl was pressured so often she tried to kill herself.

Poor girl.

"My husband has bipolar A, with occasional violent psychotic episodes."

Some catch you got there, what's the secret?
;-)

None of these people would be in detention centres if they hadn't entered the country illegally, overstayed their visas etc. etc. It's their fault, not ours. Let's concern ourselves with our own people; not with those who shouldn't be here in the first place, no matter what their supporters say. Getting them out the country is all that matters.

Anomie,
I don’t believe men have a monopoly on mental illness. From the US Surgeon General’s report on mental health:-

“Panic disorder is about twice as common among women as men”
“Agoraphobia occurs about two times more commonly among women than men”
“Generalized anxiety disorder occurs more often in women, with a sex ratio of about 2 women to 1 man”
“In the general population, the 1-year prevalence [of post-traumatic stress disorder] is about 3.6 percent, with women having almost twice the prevalence of men”
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/toc.html

Most of these conditions are not organic, with women generally being more fearful or anxious than men. There are people who have learnt to use women’s natural fears and anxieties to manipulate women and other people, and ready evidence of this can be found in women’s media, which uses every trick to play on women’s fears to get them to buy more products.

Many feminists will also carry out similar forms of emotional manipulation and playing on fears, and will often suggest that women are being abused or harmed because of male presence, or suggest that males will abuse or harm women. This article does just that.

EG:-
“The figures show women becoming an even smaller proportion of detainees and this will require careful management to ensure that they are not put at further risks.”

“We were concerned that women, who were in the minority, in a locked facility may be facing particular difficulties.”

How much these women are at risk is not fully defined, but suggested only, which is quite typical in feminist literature. But when someone avoids the issue of males being abused or denied human rights, or suggests that women should be removed from prisons or detention centres and the men left behind, then I would have to suspect that they are being highly gender biased. While being pro-female, they are not necessarily pro-male also.

I can imagine it now :- “Aussie not smart. Just tell Aussie you are woman, have children, are sex worker, and been abused. No need prove anything. Aussie let you go”

Plerdsus delights with his Andrew Boltisms; substitute Piers Ackermanerisms if your from NSW. This time "the left" seamlesly becomes the "bleeding Hearts".
The fact that the policy of mandatory detention was introduced by the labor party and had (now diminshing) wide spread support DOES NOT make it good policy - it is popular policy; and it is a brutal, damaging and poorly implemented policy.

It would be far less costly to staff DIMIA so it can process the claims quickly; although they have cornered the market on the brain dead already; so where they get new recruits from is any bodies guess. Incarceration in our semi arid gulags costs squillions. And most of them turn out to genuine refugess any way.

AND Puhleeeease enough with the refugess as a source of terror; they come in the front door in suits replete with explosives and credit cards letters of introduction and tickets to the Lion King.

The image of Osama sending a carrier pigeon to poor Mohamed in the rubble of Kabul telling him to wrap all his gear in a blanket up root his family travel over land to Pakistan, through India, make his way to Indonesia, pony up a few thousand dollars, float south in a leaky boat, maybe make it to the Australian coast and spend several years in detention, get freed half mad, set up a business importing nuts and dates from the middle east somewhere in Brunswick and then wait patiently for the call to arms - is a joke.

And as for keeping people out - we have little right to do so; and yes I hear the sovereign state stuff but I dont really care.
Indonesias population density is 107/sq kilometre India 324, England, 243 and the Netherlands 456 - us 2.5 to 4 depending on your source - if we think we can keep all this space to ourselves generation after generation - to paraphrase the father in that great Australian film The Castle " you've got to be dreamin'".

We are a very temporary feature on this landscape. Get used to it.

Eva Cox has achieved a good living and high profile career from riding on the back of her pet victims of society, women. It never ceases to amaze how these champions of the underdog can find victimization under every rock and behind every door. After all their careers depend on it.

Noticed how few illegal immigrants have arrived in boats since Howard got tough?. Suddenly there's somewhere else to go. Clearly, its Eva and Terry who are biased or lack awareness because they can't or dont want to see past the "All women are victims" show. The problem with this approach is that it is very DISABLING for people to see themselves a victims as the ability to take personal responsibility for their lives is undermined.

As people have already said, If you land in another country illegally then you are put into detention until your bona fides have been checked and its a bloody good idea.

BTW If you are mentally ill, only speak German, become aggressive and tell people nothing its not John Howard's fault you land in some form of institutional care. This case is one of the most overrated victim stories of our time. And guess what? I can just see someone and their sister putting their had out for some "money" for the whole deal can't you? And that's not capitalism?

I would agree there, Atman

The system being proposed seems to be as follows:-

I am a woman = I am a victim = Let me go free = Keep males locked up.

So the best way for someone to be set free from a detention centre or prison, is to simply say that they are female.

Reminds me of a lecture I had once at university where the guest lecturer told us how 52 per cent of the AIDS cases in Africa were women and this made AIDS a gender issue. Too bad for the 48 per cent of males who had the virus.
t.u.s

Part 1

I AM NOT ASHAMED TO ADMIT THAT I WAS IMPRISONED FOR 3 WEEKS, COURTESY OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA, in 1994, refusing to comply to their unconstitutional court orders.
Afterwards, when it was discovered the orders were unconstitutional, the State then passed laws backdating by 10 years to purportedly make the unconstitutional court order legal. Not that it did, as the original orders were made 10½ years earlier!

My daughter, now an adult, recently again made clear, she greatly respected that I stood up for her rights (I cared for her since she was 1 year old) even so I ended up in prison! But, that is another long story.

Now, I for one (a male) would not want to see any person, male or female to be incarcerated without their constitutional rights for DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

Why argue about females to be released from detention centres if the detention in the first place is unconstitutional?

See also my 30 September 2003 published book;

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® on CITIZENSHIP
A book on CD about Australians unduly harmed.
ISBN 0-9580569-6-X

DUE PROCESS OF LAW (Hansard 17-4-1897) means that not a single person can be detained/deported without a court order of a State Court.

With the Tampa incident, then already I warned that other people, including Australian nationals soon or later would likewise be detained/deported. Well Vivian Solon already was, as we later discovered!

If I was in power this very moment then by the unconstitutional laws in force I could “technically” imprison any person in the Commonwealth of Australia as a “non-citizen”, this as Australian nationality has got nothing to do with “citizenship”!
As like the Cross Vesting Act was unconstitutional so is the Australian Citizenship Act 1948 for so far it pursues to define/declare “citizenship”!

On 2-3-1898, the Delegates to the Constitution Convention Debates warned of the dangers to give the Commonwealth of Australia any powers to define/declare citizenship and voted against giving it this power and made clear that “citizenship” was for the States and in their legislative powers

Part 2

Once a person obtained State citizenship then the person automatically obtains Commonwealth citizenship (Australian citizenship).

Unless and until we appropriately pursue constitutional rights, we do no more but cloud the waters, so to say, and do not for one of iota assist those wrongly detained/deported.

“Citizenship” involves a persons political rights, including franchise, which is beyond the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth of Australia.

I am due to publish in October also;

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® on CITIZENSHIP & Why not voting
A book on CD about ELECTORAL AND CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS
ISBN 0-9751760-1-3

This follow up exposes facts from fiction!

Regardless of being man, women or child, without State Court order no person should be detained/deported!

Why should a man be denied to be released, even if the full time carer of a child, because of being of the male gender?

We should not harp upon gender, but we should pursue at great length pursue the legal validity of unconstitutional detention/deportation!

If DUE PROCESS OF LAW was applied many if not most people would never be detained, let alone deported.

Children born to refugees are Australian nationals by birth, but unconstitutionally deported as “Stateless”.

To accept people being deported as Stateless to get them out of detention is the wrong thing to do where in fact they are Australian nationals by birth, regardless what the Commonwealth of Australia may pretend otherwise.

Those fighting for the release of refugees may just play in the hands of the government to ignore their real legal rights in the process!

As I have set out in my books extensively, ADMINISTRATIVE DETENTION is a nonsense, and unconstitutional, regardless what the spin-doctor judges of the High Court of Australia may pretend otherwise!
Only State Courts can enforce Commonwealth law against any person who is subject to Commonwealth law! And, the State Courts can nullify Commonwealth law that is deemed unreasonable!
If just this was more acknowledged by all!

I wish on no person to be unconstitutionally imprisoned, after all I know what it is about!

Let no one suffer unduly detention/deportation!

I believe there are more internet sites coming on line in Australia. This will be a short post, keeping within the forum guidelines, about bi-polar disorder--anticipating an increase in sites.
__________________________
Readers interested in my bi-polar story in short segments can go to the NAMI site, the National Alliance on Mental Illness>Consumers Section>Posting 18/7/06.

Interested readers should go to the internet site HealthyPlace.com Forums. The bi-polar section at that site has a 22 part outline under “My Story” which places my experience of bi-polar disorder in a larger autobiographical context of several hundred pages. Readers may find this an excellent site for relevant information of a number of disorders, mental and otherwise.-Ron Price, Tasmania

I have a file of detailed notes on doctors’ visits, various treatments for various problems and background information. It is a file I opened in 1999 on my retirement to assist me in treating myself for particular medical problems that arise. But I have not commented on them here. The focus in this short account is on my bi-polar problem and some ancillary difficulties.