Erased.

The Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 says sexual orientation includes heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality. These are defined by sex, and they have protected lesbian, gay and bisexual Tasmanians since 1998.

Schedule 1 of the bill removes that definition. It replaces it with attraction to persons of “a different gender, the same gender or more than one gender”. The words homosexuality and bisexuality no longer appear in the Act, and neither does the word “sex”.

Sex is the foundation of sexual orientation. Without it, the term has no meaning. Being lesbian, gay or bisexual means being attracted to people of the same sex, and our rights were won on that basis. Replacing sex with gender moves the definition away from the material reality of sex.

The bill doesn’t say. Neither does the Anti-Discrimination Act, which defines only “gender identity”, a person’s sense of self. Under Tasmania’s Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, gender can be changed by statutory declaration, with no medical requirement, and includes “non-binary” and any self-description.

There is no consistent definition of gender in Tasmanian law, or across Australian states. Definitions vary from Act to Act, and many come from government strategy reports shaped by consultation with lobby groups rather than from Parliament itself.

Building sexual orientation on a term this unsettled makes the law less clear for everyone.

Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Commissioner proposed it in her submission, as a definition for the conversion practices bill only.

No. The change wasn’t in the draft bill released for consultation.

The Greens used the Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Commissioner's submission to rewrite the Anti-Discrimination Act itself, which affects all discrimination law in Tasmania.

We do not agree the being lesbian, gay or bisexual is outdated.

The Commissioner said the existing definition was “outdated” because it does not expressly include identities such as "asexual" and "aromantic" and does not reflect the broader terminology now used by some Australian jurisdictions and Tasmanian Government agencies. The Commissioner therefore recommended replacing it with a new definition based on “gender”.

Importantly, the submission did not explain why recognising identities such as asexual and aromantic required removing the existing sexual orientation terms “heterosexuality”, “homosexuality” and “bisexuality”.

That was the stated aim. But people with asexual identities etc. can be included without removing homosexual and bisexual people. NSW’s 2024 conversion practices law defines sexual orientation by sex and even adds “a lack of sexual attraction” as an identity. Tasmania’s bill instead deletes homosexuality and bisexuality.

The Commissioner's submission pointed to three existing laws as possible models for a “contemporary” definition of sexual orientation: the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic), the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), and the Anti-Discrimination Act 1992 (NT).

It also referred to recommendations from the Victorian review of conversion-practices legislation and Tasmanian community feedback about expressly including people with asexual and aromantic identities.

No. They use materially different definitions.

• Commonwealth (Sex Discrimination Act 1984): sex-based. Attraction to people of the same sex, a different sex, or both.

• Victoria (Equal Opportunity Act 2010): gender-based. Attraction to people of a different gender, the same gender, or more than one gender. “Gender” isn’t defined.

• Northern Territory (Anti-Discrimination Act 1992): gender-identity-based. Attraction to people of the same "gender identity", a different "gender-identity", or more than one "gender-identity."

The Commissioner had a sex-based option in the federal law, and recommended a gender-based wording instead.

NSW keeps the definition explicitly sex-based. Under the Conversion Practices Ban Act 2024 (NSW), sexual orientation means a person’s sexual orientation towards:

• people of the same sex

• people of a different sex

• people of the same sex and a different sex

• or no sexual attraction

No. NSW introduced a conversion-practices ban while keeping sexual orientation explicitly sex-based. That shows Tasmania does not need to replace homosexuality and bisexuality with a gender-based definition in order to prohibit genuine conversion practices.

That makes NSW a useful comparison for Tasmania.

That is one of our central objections.

The bill is presented as protecting people from attempts to change or suppress sexual orientation, yet it removes “homosexuality” and “bisexuality” from the legal definition of sexual orientation itself.

We do not think protecting people from conversion practices requires erasing those terms from the law.

It weakens the clear legal recognition of same-sex attraction, the basis of our protections. That creates major new openings for discrimination and homophobia.

The bill removes the existing legal terms heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality and replaces them with a definition based on “gender”. That changes the legal meaning of sexual orientation for everyone, not just LGB people.

Keep the current definition, or adopt the NSW wording, which is based on sex and includes people with asexual identities. Either way, homosexuality and bisexuality stay in the law.

Tasmanians: sign the petition by 26 October. It asks the House of Assembly to reject the bill and hold a public inquiry before any new law.

Sign the petition

Everyone: tell other lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Most don’t know their protections are about to be rewritten. Share this page, especially with friends and community groups in Tasmania, so they can sign before it closes.