Foreign musicians are not the reason so many Australian women are being killed by their partners. By focusing on one man, we let the government off the hook

In 1928 an American jazz outfit called Sonny Clay’s Colored Idea – a troupe of African American singers, musicians and dancers – toured Australia. As soon as they arrived, the commonwealth investigative branch – the forerunner to Asio – put the group under surveillance, determined to prevent them “consorting with white women”.

After one of the Colored Idea’s gigs, the police launched a 3am raid at the band’s apartment. The Melbourne Truth reported: “Empty glasses, half-dressed girls, and an atmosphere poisonous with cigarette smoke and fumes of liquor – and, lounging about the flat, six negroes.”

In parliament, an MP read out headlines like “Nude girls in Melbourne flat orgy” and “Raid discloses wild scene of abandon: flappers, wine, cocaine and revels”. Neville Howse, the minister for homes and territories, was asked whether he thought “that in the interests of the white Australia and moral decency, permits to such persons should be refused?”

As it happened, he did.

The Colored Idea were bundled out of the country, and it was not until 1954 that another band led by an African American would tour the country.

It’s worth thinking about that history in the context of suggestions by Michaelia Cash, the new minister for women, that the immigration department should ban Chris Brown from entering Australia.

There’s no doubt that Brown, convicted of punching and trying to strangle his then girlfriend Rihanna, is a nasty piece of work. Nor can anyone dispute the seriousness of violence against women in Australia. According to a much-quoted statistic, a woman is killed roughly once a week by a partner or former partner.

But the immigration department is not the solution.

Quite obviously, the perpetrators of domestic violence in Australia are everyday Australians, not foreign musicians. They’re ordinary people – husbands, partners, boyfriends. They’re steeped in Australian culture. They’re not brainwashed by American R&B or led astray by song lyrics.

“Chris Brown is an extremely influential figure,” explains a GetUp petition to the immigration minister, “particularly among young people. Allowing his entry into Australia sends the message that the Turnbull government does not place significant weight and condemnation on men’s violence against women.”

It’s difficult to imagine anyone seriously thinks a ban on Brown will diminish whatever influence he wields on young people who, by and large, don’t look to border patrol for affirmation of their musical tastes.

As for “sending a message”, GetUp puts the situation entirely the wrong way around.

At best, a ban on Brown is a distraction, a cheap headline-grabbing stunt that takes the focus away from the real work – and the allocation of real resources – necessary to make women safe.

By emphasising the menace of a foreign entertainer, it obscures the real locus of violence: the nuclear family. It’s much easier for politicians to denounce musicians than to acknowledge that most women are hurt or killed within their family, a fundamental social institution.

Furthermore, the exteriorisation of the threat via an immigration ban plays to persistent racial stereotypes about African American men, ideas not so dissimilar to those expressed in the campaign against Sonny Clay and his band.

Everyone knows that rock music is full of misogynists, many of whom have been known to express their sexism in song. Yet somehow it’s always black artists turned back at the borders.

“He has a whole string of convictions,” said Kevin Andrews back in 2007, as he explained why Snoop Dogg wouldn’t get a visa. “He doesn’t seem the sort of bloke we want in this country.”

Could you imagine a similar conversation about, say, serial drug abuser Keith Richards?

In 2015 it’s still far more palatable for politicians and moralists to denounce black artists working in black genres than it is to ban musicians who appeal to white baby boomers.

Over the past decade, border policing has become increasingly central to Australian politics. Think of the publicity the Abbott government gave to its proposal to render terrorism suspects stateless, a concept that appalled civil libertarians. Think of the asylum seekers held in permanent detention without trial, on the basis of Asio assessments that they can neither see nor challenge. Think of Scott Parkin, the non-violence activist denied a visa in 2006 on – wait for it – character grounds.

That’s the context for this debate.

“We urge you to refuse Chris Brown a visa to visit Australia,” says GetUp’s petition. “Due to his conviction of felony assault (a criminal charge), we believe he is in breach of the Australian visa character test, for having ‘a substantial criminal record’,”

When a progressive organisation campaigns for the government to apply its “character test”, it legitimises a mechanism that will invariably be used against asylum seekers, immigrants and progressive activists.

Yes, we must end domestic violence. But that’s not – or shouldn’t be – a fight to close the borders. It’s a fight to change Australia.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/25/banning-chris-brown-would-only-distract-from-the-fight-against-domestic-violence

I'm not a fan of the bloke's music. But this is absurd. It's political tokenism gone mad. It also sets a dangerous precedent.

The bloke has met the terms of his conviction. Full stop. The Australian Federal Government/Immigration Department hasn't got a prerogative to punish people for the rest of their lives. Somebody left a comment on the Guardian website alleging that Brown has apologised and is involved in activism for stopping violence against women. How does this help rehabilitation? It's utterly against any concept of natural justice or human rights.

As for the ramifications...

By rights, they should now be obliged to ban anybody with a similar previous conviction to Brown from entering Australia. And they should extend it to other things beyond violence against women.

Imagine if an English cricketer had a conviction, from years ago, similar to Brown's. They then shouldn't let him tour Australia for the Ashes. If said cricketer was good, there'd be uproar. The English, rightfully, would be fuming if one of their best players was denied entry to Australia. They would be well within their rights to cancel the tour and they probably would do that. That would mean there would be no Ashes.

All for the sake of Turnbull trying to regain ground by appealing to the women of the Australian electorate. Disgraceful.

It happens all the time mate. Even with lesser known bands and artists than Chris Brown.

You try getting a Norwegian black metal band out here and there's more red tape than with Chris Brown and they play to 1000 people max :lol:

OMFG.

People complaining about this are idiots. Just idiots.
You want action against domestic violence? Well it starts here. Of course there are other areas of it that need addressing, but it starts here. End of.

He has already met the terms of his conviction.

How does it start here? It's supposed to have ended. He has done the time.

This is just political tokenism. How does discriminating against a famous American who claims to be an musician do anything to address to domestic violence for Australian women?

Nobody should be punished beyond their sentence (and the Australian Immigration Department has mandate to do so).

I agree there's a culture of domestic violence. How bad it is and how terrible compared to violence in general, I'm not sure. Nevertheless, there's too much domestic violence and it needs to be cracked down on.

But this isn't doing that. This is just Malcolm Turnbull appealing to the sympathies of those women in the electorate who aren't the most cerebral.

[size=8]Suppose Australia were, one day, to hose the FIFA World Cup[/size]. If they're consistent, they Immigration Dept need to look into the backgrounds of all the players who play in the World Cup. Suppose the best player in the England side and the Brazil side had similar conviction to Brown. The Immigration Dept would be obliged to refuse them entry.

Can you imagine what would happen? We might lose the right to host the World Cup.

I think its time we had a national conversation about the out of control domestic violence epidemic.

Where have u been the last two years?

I'd say it's probably politica tokenism if Australia was the only country to do it, but fact of the matter is New Zealand, the UK and Canada have all denied him entry into the country before. Not like Brown is the first person this has happened to either, Floyd Mayweather was denied a visa earlier this year.

Also fairly sure the immigration department has the right to refuse a visa for anyone with a substantial criminal record, which is defined as being a prison sentence of at least 12 months or a suspended sentence. So really they have every right to refuse a visa if they want.

[size=8]US anti-abortion campaigner denied visa for Australia after Labor's intervention[/size]
Anti-abortion group Operation Rescue blames ‘viciously false accusations’ for denial of visa to its president, Troy Newman
Terri Butler
Labor’s Terri Butler, whose letter prompted Peter Dutton to cancel Troy Newman’s visa. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
Daniel Hurst and Shalailah Medhora
Wednesday 30 September 2015 14.19 AEST Last modified on Wednesday 30 September 2015 21.22 AEST

The American anti-abortion campaigner Troy Newman has been denied a visa to travel to Australia, just days after the government indicated it might block the American singer Chris Brown from touring the country.

Newman was due to speak on the topic “save the babies down under” at events promoted by the group Right to Life Australia, but was branded an “anti-choice extremist” by the Labor MP Terri Butler, who said Newman’s visa should be denied on character grounds.


Labor calls for visa ban on activist who called for abortion doctors to be killed

Butler wrote to the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, on Monday arguing that the campaigner could “cause significant harm to our community” because he had previously called for the execution of abortion doctors.

On Wednesday Dutton said the government was taking action. “I can confirm that my department has cancelled the visa for Mr Troy Newman under Section 128 of the Migration Act,” the minister said.

“Mr Newman can appeal for a revocation of this decision and no further comment will be made during this appeal period.”

Newman is president of Operation Rescue, an anti-abortion group that denounced the visa cancellation. The group blamed “viciously false accusations brought by Australian pro-abortion activists and news media that Newman supports violence against abortion providers”.

“Newman has never advocated violence and in fact, urges pro-life activists to work within the governmental and legal system to accomplish change,” Operation Rescue said in a statement.

“Newman boarded his flight in Wichita, Kansas, hoping that the situation would be resolved by the time he arrived in Los Angeles. However, while boarding a connecting flight in Dehownver, Colorado, Newman was stopped and told he could not board his flight to LA because of an order by the Australian government.”

Newman’s allies posted footage of the scene at Denver as Newman argued with airport staff who told him he would have to contact the Australian government to contest their refusal to let him on the flight.


Troy Newman is refused access to his connecting flight in Denver.
Operation Rescue’s senior policy adviser, Cheryl Sullenger, said Newman had been the victim of “political persecution, plain and simple, as well as an attempt to silence the pro-life message in Australia”.

In the same statement, Right to Life Australia said the group was “very upset that this has happened and are working furiously to turn it around”.

The national president of the organisation, Margaret Tighe, told Guardian Australia that the group has been in touch with Dutton’s office to overturn the decision, which she calls a “gross denial” of Newman’s rights.

“We’re working as hard as we can to make sure his visa is reinstated,” Tighe said. “The reason they want to stop him coming is because he had been very effective … the only reason they are doing this is to prevent freedom of speech.”

Butler had focused on comments in the book Their Blood Cries Out, which was co-authored by Newman. She pointed to this passage: “In addition to our personal guilt in abortion, the United States government has abrogated its responsibility to properly deal with the blood-guilty. This responsibility rightly involves executing convicted murderers, including abortionists, for their crimes in order to expunge bloodguilt from the land and people.”

On Wednesday Butler welcomed the minister’s decision to block the visa and rejected claims Newman had been subjected to false accusations.

Butler said her letter to Dutton had quoted Newman’s own direct comments. “Right to Life should concentrate on making sure there is responsible and respectful debate and not on importing people who advocated for doctors to be executed for doing things that are lawful,” she said.

[size=8]Labor’s Senate leader, Penny Wong, backed Butler’s request for the visa to be cancelled. “Mr Newman’s public comments go well beyond what would be regarded as acceptable debate in this country,” Wong said. “His views are repugnant. Mr Newman’s presence in Australia risks inciting intimidation and violence against vulnerable women.”[/size]

The government’s decision to cancel Newman’s visa is a different process from the one adopted in the case of Brown, whose travel was scheduled for December. Brown was issued with a notice of intention to consider visa refusal, giving the artist 28 days to present material as to why he should be allowed into the country.


Chris Brown denied visa to tour Australia on character grounds
Read more
Brown pleaded guilty to attacking his then girlfriend, the pop singer Rihanna, in 2009 and was sentenced to five years of probation.

He was due to travel to Australia for shows in Perth, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane, but a petition by campaign group GetUp! to deny him a visa has attracted more than 14,000 signatures.

In a series of comments posted on his official Twitter account on Tuesday, Brown argued that his “life mistakes should be a wake up call for everyone” and he should be allowed to proceed with his visit.

“I would be more than grateful to come to Australia to raise awareness about domestic violence,” he wrote.

Brown said young people did not listen to parents or public service announcements, but entertainers had the power to change lives.

Why has this bloke been denied entry to Australia?

I disagree with this bloke. But he's entitled to his opinion and to express it.

Australia is becoming very authoritarian if it's refusing entry to so many of these people. Plain wrong.

"Character grounds"?

I'm pretty sure that advocating killing of doctors doest fall under freedom of speech
its more like terrorism and hence why he was denied a visa

That is the definition of freedom of speech. Obviously no sane person is going to advocate it, but it is his right in ours and his country to speak his mind

there are laws against making threats

From what i can gather he has said doctors SHOULD be killed for partaking in abortions. Not that he would personally hunt down and slaughter all those who oppose him