Calling on South Australian Candidates to Protect Children and Sex-Based Rights

LGB Alliance Australia has written to candidates contesting the 2026 South Australian election to raise two matters we believe the next Parliament should address urgently: the wellbeing and safeguarding of children and adolescents, and the protection of sex-based rights, including women’s rights and the rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. 

Dear Candidate, 

LGB Alliance Australia is a national advocacy organisation focused on the rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. We have members and supporters across Australia, including in South Australia, and are affiliated with LGB organisations internationally. We engage with parliaments and policymakers on matters affecting same-sex attracted people and the protection of sex-based rights. 

South Australia has not been immune to the contagion that has swept much of the Western world: the rise of gender identity ideology and the medicalisation of young people experiencing gender dysphoria, a condition that resolves after puberty for many. 

We believe the next South Australian Parliament should grapple with two urgent issues: the wellbeing and safeguarding of children and adolescents, and the protection of sex-based rights, particularly women’s rights. 

The wellbeing of children and adolescents

One can only feel compassion for a child or young person in distress. They depend on adults and institutions to respond ethically, with care, caution and sound judgement. 

Around the world, governments and health authorities are reassessing the medical treatment of minors experiencing gender distress. Independent reviews have identified serious weaknesses in the evidence base and called for greater caution. 

South Australian children continue to access puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones through public health services. These are complex interventions with lifelong implications and, in some cases, may lead to surgical procedures. They disproportionately affect gender non-conforming children, including children who may otherwise grow up to be gay or lesbian.   

We believe children are being increasingly exposed to gender ideology across social media, schools and public institutions. Concepts that remain contested among adults are now embedded in the daily lives of young people. 

Policies grounded in gender identity prioritise subjective self-identification over biological sex. Public policy, particularly where children are concerned, should be grounded in objective and evidence-based criteria and decision-making about gender identity restricted to competent adults. 

The next Parliament should examine whether current approaches adequately protect all young people. 

Sex-based rights, including women’s rights

South Australia was the first place in Australia to grant women both the right to vote and the right to stand for Parliament (1894). It has a proud history of leadership in recognising women’s legal and political rights. 

Sex-based legal protections underpin single-sex services including women’s refuges, prisons, hospital wards and change rooms, as well as sporting categories and the legal recognition of homosexuality. 

Sex must remain a clear and legally relevant category in law and public policy. When law and policy blur the distinction between sex and gender identity, the consequences are real. They affect single-sex services and the integrity of same-sex protections. 

Single-sex spaces exist to preserve privacy, dignity and safety of women. The law should be clear about how conflicts between sex-based protections and gender identity claims are resolved. 

Lesbian, gay and bisexual identity is grounded in biological sex. Same-sex attraction means attraction to the same sex, not to a gender identity. For example, current gender ideology makes it possible for a person born male, to claim or identify as a trans-female while having a heterosexual orientation, thereafter claiming to be a lesbian.  

Finally, the political construction of “LGBTQIA+” bundles very different concepts and competing interests into a single category. While it may be convenient for organisations seeking funding or for governments engaging with stakeholders, it does not necessarily represent our needs and aspirations. It blurs legal protections and sidelines the distinct rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. 

We enclose a brief background note outlining relevant international reviews and legal considerations. 

We ask that you consider these matters carefully.