Row erupts over South Australia court ruling on ‘gender pronouns’

Controversy has erupted over a ruling published last week by the South Australia Supreme Court allowing court attendees to submit their “gender pronouns” for use during court proceedings.

“The Supreme Court, District Court, ERD Court, Magistrates Court, Youth Court and Coroners Court recognises that the correct pronunciation of names and use of the preferred gender pronoun is a matter of respect and is an important component of ensuring public confidence in the proper administration of justice,” began a proclamation from the Supreme Court Chief Justice Chris Kourakis last Wednesday.

“A practitioner may provide guidance as to the gender pronouns of a person in square brackets directly after the name by inserting the preferred pronoun. For example: ‘The Defendant [they/them] …’ or ‘The Defendant uses the pronouns ‘they/them’,” added the missive.

While the edict does not use obligatory language, its assertion that using a person’s “preferred pronouns” is “a matter of respect” and ensures “public confidence” in justice appears to compel all court attendees to use those pronouns.

This would also include, noted Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, a woman raped by a man who claims to be a woman.

“Asking a woman to refer to her male rapist or violent assaulter as ‘she’ in court is a form of state-sanctioned abuse,” Rowling wrote on X Friday. “Female victims of male violence are further traumatised by being forced to speak a lie.”

As of this report Rowling’s tweet received over four million views and 69,000 likes. When a user commented that she could not imagine being compelled to address her male rapist as “she” Rowling responded, “Personally, I wouldn’t be compelled, I’d take contempt of court. It’s time for mass non-compliance with this bullsh*t.”

The children’s author’s comments prompted a statement from Chief Justice Kourakis who insisted that “Ms Rowling has misunderstood the protocol” and that “a victim of crime would never be asked to address an accused person in a way which caused the victim distress.”

While Kourakis’ words may sound encouraging, the law is not. Australian states like Victoria have made refusal to call someone by their preferred pronouns a punishable offense. According to the organization Idohabit, deliberate use of “incorrect pronouns” violates Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act 1984. The Australian government also openly instructs the public to use “preferred pronouns.”

Rowling’s scenario has happened before in a Commonwealth realm. In a 2018 case in the UK, a judge rebuked a woman in court for not referring to her male attacker as “she.”