Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Remaining Balanced in Judgement

In all my experience in case management (managing naughty employees) there is one thing that holds true every time. There are two sides to every story and the truth ALWAYS lies someplace in the middle. I remember getting dragged into meetings with management as they tell me how horrible an employee has been. How they have behaved inappropriately; how they have ignored reasonable requests and been downright distracting to the rest of the team. I used to immediately jump into action, handing out warnings to anyone who would listen to me.

What usually would eventuate is the employee would present a whole bunch of facts which were once unknown to me (strategically left out by the manager) which would either lesson the seriousness of the issues or completely eliminate them. This often resulted in some form of embarrassment to me and the manager. You would think then that I would not be quick to judge people when someone gives me their point of view on a person or their actions.

Turns out I do...

Example 1:
Recently Catherine Deveny lost her job as a columnist at The Age in Melbourne because of comments she made through Twitter during the Logies. The comments made by her were absolutely appalling. Sexually referencing Bindi Irwin, referring to Rove McManus' new wife and hoping she doesn't 'die like the last one'. You get the idea. Not nice stuff. Immediately I got on my high horse and judged her. I decided the women should be shunned from any media and that her actions were unforgivable. I felt her dismissal from The Age was completely warranted and serves her right for using her position to publicly say the things that she did.

Well.... again I took one side to the story and not once looked into her response. I did eventually come across her response to this. Surprisingly not on The Age, but rather the ABC. It's here if your interested.

In my view her response to why she acted in this way does not excuse her actions, as I still feel they were distasteful. BUT!!!! if you were to read anything Catherine Deveny had written in the last 10 years you would realise the context in which this was written. Deveny is a controversial feminist writer who believes strongly in equality for woman and the right for young ladies to not be exposed as sexual beings until they are of the right age or feel ready. Her comments were in jest to make a point.

Now when I look at this issue from a balanced perspective I think it was irrational to act on the matter to the extent The Age did but also realise why they felt forced to act in this way. I certainly don't think it is unforgivable and actually, I now follow her Twitter account and look out for her articles on the ABC. She's a very good writer.




Example 2:
Penny Wong. An Asian Lesbian Member of Federal Parliament on the front bench as the Minister for Climate Change. I previously thought she was fantastic representation. A great communicator and role model. As early as yesterday I found out that Penny Wong did not support Gay Marriage and 'toed the party line' of Labor which believes in Marriage between a man and a women which shouldn't be changed because of 'cultural, religious and historic' reasons. I was quite frustrated at this and immediately thought less of her. I wondered how someone could possibly sit in parliament as a Lesbian and not stand up for the equality of all minority groups including homosexual Australians. I decided I had no interest in her any further and considered her shameful to the GBLT community.

WELL... Last night I stumbled across 'Q and A' on the ABC (good stuff by the way, an interesting program). Funnily enough Penny Wong was apart of the panel debating different issues. A lady from the audience questioned Penny's view on same sex marriage and asked her why she supported Labor on this issue.

Penny's response bought silence to the panel and audience (for the first time in the hour long program). Penny made reference to the fact that she knows first hand what it is like to be at the hand of discrimination. The Herald Sun reported it accurately:

"By virtue of who I am, prejudice and discrimination are things I have firsthand knowledge of," she told ABC television on Monday.

"When I entered the parliament, I did actually think very carefully about how to handle being Asian and gay and in the parliament, because it hadn't been done before."

Senator Wong said that before entering public life, she decided to be "absolutely open" about who she was.

"Part of the reason I did that was because I thought it was very important to show that you should never be ashamed of who you are," she said.


As the first federal member of parliament from an Asian descent and as a Lesbian she has been subjected to discrimination both before and during her time in parliament. During her parties time in government she has seen a dramatic shift in the rights of GBLT Australians. She then rattled off a whole range of things done by the Labor government to remove the amount of discrimination against this minority group. She then went on to say that she believes that a team player is exactly that. She respects the views of her peers in this matter and at this time would support them in their views. She then got questioned by another member in the audience which put Penny in an even more difficult position when some guy on her right (Richo I think) jumped in to her defence to explain how she is only one person in a caucus of people and that whilst she does her best challenge their views in this area, at this time Labors view on marriage remained unchanged. The Herald Sun again:

"I'm amazed somewhat by these questions, really," he said.

Labor's policies to help gay de facto couples would not have happened without Senator Wong's place in the government, Mr Richardson said, adding that many ALP members were opposed to the homosexual civil rights measures.


Hmmm... I hadn't provided a second of thought to how it must feel to be Penny Wong on the front bench of the Labor government. I didn't sympathise with the challenges coming her way for even a moment. I jumped in to judge her and wrongly so. Her performance on 'Q and A' was one of the best I've seen in a Minister for a very long time and her response to why she felt this way, in my view, was completely justified. I'm not saying I agree with Labor's view on this, because I absolutely don't, but I do now understand her point of view. Had this been an employee warning meeting, I would have cancelled the formal meeting and issued the warning to the manager for bringing the issue to me in the first place. Shame on you Australian media and even Bob Brown for attacking Penny Wong's view in this matter. And Shame on me for listening to them and forming my opinion based on their comments alone.



In future I'm going to do my best to research things more thoroughly before placing judgement on people. Knowing both sides of a story and drawing a logical reasonable response certainly has a lot to be said for it. If for nothing else, it removes that embarrassment factor.

No comments:

Post a Comment