Honi Soit: Week 12, Semester 2, 2025

Honi Soit

Publishing since 1929

Peace with Justice

There can be no retreat from peace with justice in our world in crisis.

Victor Zhang Feature, Page 14

Childcare?

If women are the foundation of the university, then childcare is the necessary infrastructure. Remove the barriers, and build.

Charlotte Saker Investigation, Page 11

Week 12, Semester 2, 2025

Abolish the Colleges

Even with decades of policy reform, external investigations, and consent education, the colleges have proven to simply be unreformable.

Ellie Robertson Investigation, Page 18

Acknowledgement of Country

Honi Soit operates and publishes on Gadigal land of the Eora nation. We work and produce this publication on stolen land where sovereignty was never ceded. The University of Sydney is a colonial institution. Honi Soit is a publication that prioritises the voices of those who challenge colonial rhetorics. We strive to continue its legacy as a radical left-wing newspaper providing students with a unique opportunity to express their diverse voices and counter the biases of mainstream media.

It is remarked that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism (attributed to Zizek, Jameson, and/or Fisher). Yet, there has never been a moment where there is a more intense need to radically change our society.

supporting existing power structures, which is what a lot of journalism does. My emphasis is on information that I hope will empower people to take action.”

Editors

Remember

v. Marr Tawny Soit SRC Pages Puzzles & Comedy

Earlier this month we witnessed a truly inspiring scene where Italian workers led a general strike in solidarity with Palestine, to shut down the supply of arms that aid and abet the genocide in Palestine. Up to one million Italians took to the streets, railway stations, and ports to block everything (Blocchiamo tutto).

In early 2024, I attended a picket at Port Botany to blockade a ship bound for Israel. Under the new anti-protest law regime, protests and demonstrations outside ‘major facilities’ including ports are criminalised with penalties of up to $22,000 in fines and a two-year imprisonment. Yet, hundreds showed up in defiance of these unjust antiprotest laws. This remains a moment etched in my memory, serving as a reminder for what solidarity should look like: solidarity from Gadigal to Gaza, from the river to sea.

During the 2025 Student Journalism Conference, I had the distinct honour of interviewing esteemed investigative journalists Antony Loewenstein and Wendy Bacon. Each had a wealth of experience and wisdom to share.

Wendy Bacon’s description of journalism serves as my guide to what good journalism is:

“I am an investigative journalist who is also a political activist. This means that I want my journalism to be useful to those who resist abuses of power and seek social justice rather than

Purny Ahmed, Mehnaaz Hossain, Ondine Karpinellison, Ellie Robertson, Imogen Sabey, Charlotte Saker, Will Winter, Victor Zhang

Front Cover

Chloe Drougas

In this edition, I cover the report and recommendations of the Expert Council on University Governance; Anatasia Dale, James Fitzgerald Sice, and Remy Lebreton interview Chris Hedges after the National Press Club cancelled his talk to discuss the responsibility of journalists when reporting on genocide; Jenna Rees reports on the introduction of the Human Rights Bill 2025 in NSW parliament, which is heading to an inquiry; and I report on the shameful vote against a disallowance motion that sought to close a loophole that watered down the laws ending no-grounds evictions.

One of my proudest moments this year was when the research I did for a story on the very topic of regulator loopholes that enabled dodgy ‘renovictions’ was quoted in NSW Parliament by no less than the NSW Liberals. The Liberals sought to disallow the same regulations that enabled the ‘renoviction’ loophole (ponder upon that for a moment), and quoted sources I had spoken to. The tell was that they quoted Labor for Ending Homelessness’s opposition to the regulatory loophole.

Needless to say, I enjoy a good wedge, though I would appreciate being credited next time. I’m not under any illusions that the Liberals are genuine friends of renters, but it warrants reflection how we got to this stage, where Labor is actively attempting to outflank the right on being pro-landlord.

It brings me immense joy to say that this edition has several long-form pieces and investigations. Charlotte investigates

the dire state of childcare on campus on page 11. This was also a topic that my late friend Nguyen Khanh Tran investigated and I am sure they would be glad that Charlotte is able to publish this vital piece.

I write about the history and role of the Sydney Peace Foundation and Peace and Conflict Studies on page 14. On page 18, Ellie investigates the continuing failure of the University and associated Colleges in delivering justice for victimsurvivors.

Last week, the Honi editors took an excursion to the News Limited printing facility to see how the sausage is made. Imogen, Charlotte, and I write about this experience on page 16.

Mehnaaz writes on page 26 of the continuing betrayal of Palestinian journalists and the truth at the hands of Western media. The Committee to Protect Journalists determined that between 2023 and 2025, Israel has killed over 200 journalists and media workers in Palestine. Israel has deliberately murdered 59 journalists and media workers. In the last decade, Israel is responsible for one in three journalists killed worldwide, and responsible for one in six journalists deliberately murdered.

My term as editor in the politburo running the campus rag Honi Soit draws ever closer to an end. As cliched as it is, there is no experience like this one. All the love to the family I have found in my term.

Dare to struggle, dare to win.

Tata and farewell,

Victor

Sath Balasuriya, Anastasia Dale, James Fitzgerald Sice, Ethan Floyd, Mehnaaz Hossain, Maeve Jenkins, Remy Lebreton, Eleanor McAnelly, Angus McGregor, Marc Paniza, Jenna Rees, Ellie Robertson, Imogen Sabey, Charlotte Saker, Zayed Tabish, Angel Tan, Ananya Thirumalai, Will Winter, Victor Zhang

Artists

Purny Ahmed, Charlotte Saker, Imogen Sabey, Will Winter

Letters to the Editor

Dear Honi,

After observing the elections and seeing those grassroots Independents exposing the Labor students... I sometimes think, what utility does being in NSW Labor students serve battling it out for the SRC beyond their careerist ambitions for CV padding? After all, it’s the only arena where they are the centrists and they must fight the left. In real politics its out and about right wing fucks you must contest.

Then I realised... they’re cutting their teeth for when they have to fight the left inside their party (Fergs) and the left from outside (Greens, NSW Socialists), and also learning to deal with Liberals for bipartisan legislation to fuck workers. It’s ALL applicable to their future careers... Much to consider.

Anonymous

We have not received any adequate letters this week, so we decided to reprint a good one.

Send us letters.

Expert review slams systemic governance failures in universities

Victor Zhang reports.

A landmark report by the Expert Council on University Governance slammed systemic failures in university governance.

The Australian Government commissioned the review in early 2025 in response to a priority action recommendation in the Interim Report of the Australia Universities Accords.

The Report of the Expert Council sets forth a set of principles for universities to abide by. The principles span eight key themes: accountability; diversity of perspectives; independence; transparency; trustworthiness; inclusivity and responsiveness; sustainability; and industrial responsibility.

Universities are now required to report annually to Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) on their conformance with the adopted principles of the Report. Where universities fall short, the Expert Council expects them “to have adequately addressed issues identified by TEQSA in their reporting the following year”.

The Expert Council recommends that failure to do so “should result in an escalation of consequences” but does not specify what the consequences might be.

The Australian Government, alongside the Commonwealth Remuneration Tribunal, and key stakeholders will establish a framework for Vice-Chancellor remuneration.

The remuneration of ViceChancellors has been widely criticised, having exceeded an average of $1 million per annum, with some Vice-Chancellors receiving six-figure pay rises this year.

The Interim Report of the Federal Senate Inquiry into the Quality of governance at Australian higher education providers also recommended that Vice-Chancellor and senior executive salaries be capped by a Remuneration Tribunal.

The Expert Council’s report notes that while public commentary focuses on Vice-Chancellor remuneration, “concerns regarding the structure and level of remuneration” also extend to university senior management.

University governing bodies, such as the USyd Senate, will be required to publish outcomes of meetings and decisions taken. They will also be required to

disclose consultancy spending, Vice-Chancellor external roles, and annual remuneration reports in line with requirements for public companies.

Expert Council Melinda Cilento said that she “hopes that universities and their leadership genuinely, proactively and transparently adopt the Principles”.

Cilento says that the implementation of the principles is “the best way to sustainably uplift governance given the diversity of the sector and the rapidly evolving environment in which universities operate”.

The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) celebrated the report as a “major win”, saying the “Expert Council’s report paints a damning picture of governance failures across Australian universities”.

NTEU National President Dr Alison Barnes said the report “is a massive vindication for NTEU members who’ve bravely stood up against poor governance, including toxic cultures on university governing bodies that have fuelled bullying, intimidation and secrecy.

“The principles make it clear something is rotten with university governance and attempt to address some of the serious failures we've seen — from systematic wage theft to toxic cultures that silence dissent.”

The University Chancellors Council (UCC) welcomed the report of the Expert Council. UCC Convenor and Chancellor of Swinburne University of Technology

John Pollaers OAM said the report “serve[s] as a sobering reminder that universities must continue to demonstrate humility, transparency, and accountability.

“We accept that we have not always met public expectations, and we have at times fallen short of the communities we exist within, and for.”

The Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations (CAPA) also welcomed the principles recommended by the Expert Council. However, CAPA National President Jesse Gardner-Russell warned that while university governance reform is essential, it should not come at the cost of university autonomy.

“CAPA acknowledges that Australian universities have grown in scale, complexity, and scope over the preceding decades. Universities are capable of self-governance, yet we must focus on the principle purpose of universities: to educate, to research and to uphold intellectual integrity. This necessitates that university governance incorporates the inefficient task of robust scholarship and debate.”

A University of Sydney spokesperson said that in response to the report, USyd is “carefully considering the report and recommendations to determine any steps we’ll need to take to implement these reforms.

“This is important work and we’ll update our community as it progresses.”

The Expert Council notes that “clear governance failings were either not acknowledged or understood as governance failings”. An example cited is that some stakeholders disputed the “idea that wage under-payments represented a governance failing”.

The Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) has linked wage-theft to governance failure. FWO noted five instances of Enforceable Undertakings, legally binding requirements for organisations to address non-compliance with industrial legislation. In FWO’s submission to the Federal Senate inquiry, they stated “through Enforceable Undertakings, universities are acknowledging breaches and governance failings”.

The Report also noted “a persistent theme across many consultations [was the] prioritisation and primacy of the views of management over other voices on the governing body, and of financial or operational objectives over broader purpose”.

The NSW Legislative Council Inquiry into the NSW University Sector is underway and the first hearing is scheduled for 7th November. The Victorian Government has also established a parliamentary inquiry into the governance of Victorian universities.

The Federal Senate Inquiry into the Quality of governance at Australian higher education providers chaired by Senator Tony Sheldon is expected to deliver its report on 4th December.

What ails our universities

The Honi view

Imogen Sabey and Victor Zhang analyse.

In Raewyn Connell’s book The Good University, she paints a terrifying picture of the future of higher education, overrun by the ideals of neoliberalism and an unfettered faith in the efficiency of the free market.

“In the mirror of the market we can see a possible future for this system. In this future all universities become proper firms, owned by investors and managers… Teaching is done online by the cheapest labour available in global markets, under automated surveillance.”

Both the Interim Report of the Federal Senate Inquiry into the Quality of governance at Australian higher education providers and the recent Expert Council on University Governance report have slammed systemic failures in university governance.

During our year of editing, we have personally witnessed the catastrophic failure of university systems to protect staff and students, while the government has washed their hands of all culpability and responsibility. While our universities have yet to reach the stage Connell describes, far too many staff and students see this grim vision taking form.

The final report of the Australian University Accords state in their first recommendation is that the “Australian Government specify that the objective of the national tertiary education system is to a) underpin a strong, equitable and resilient democracy and b) drive national economic and social development and environmental sustainability.” Economic development is the second objective, and democracy is the first objective.

If the purpose of a university is to underpin a robust democracy, then should our university not be governed democratically?

The Expert Council’s report found that some managerial stakeholders expressed “scepticism about the contribution of staff and student representatives in all aspects of university governance”.

Staff and student representation is a minority on most university governing bodies, and those that do sit on these bodies report being ostracised or excluded in a damning report by the National Tertiary Education Union.

As the Fair Work Ombudsman rightly points out, the rampant

wage theft in the university sector is a governance failure. If the voices of staff were not diminished, excluded, or marginalised, on the highest governing bodies of universities, would we be seeing such rampant wage theft?

Hannah Forsyth aptly points out in A History of the Modern Australian University, that a university’s line of accountability is ill-defined, leaving them with simultaneously far too few and far too many lines of accountability. A corporation is accountable to their shareholders, a union to their members, and a public agency to their minister. Who are universities accountable to, and what course of action does the university community have when universities fail?

A welcome principle in the Expert Council on University Governance’s report is that university governing bodies should be publicly accountable to their university community and the decisions of governing bodies must be made public and all consultancy expenses disclosed.

Why stop there? University Senate meetings should be held in public, like parliament, for the university community to scrutinise.

There is no evidence to show that higher vice-chancellor remuneration results in better student satisfaction. In fact, research from the Australia Institute suggests an inverse trend where universities with the highest vice-chancellor remuneration have lower student satisfaction.

Across the country, VCs uniformly receive over a million dollars, even during a time when most universities are facing some sort of deficit, course cut or staff axe.

We do not suggest that cutting executive pay is the silver bullet to fix the woes of higher education, rather that excessive executive remuneration is a symptom of the overall rot within the university sector.

The extraordinary state of crisis that faces our university can only be remedied by a democratic restructuring of the entire sector. We agree with Raewyn Connell’s definition of a ‘good university’ as one that is “democratic, engaged, truthful, creative, and sustainable”.

Save lives, Save SARC

Ananya Thirumalai reports.

“No cuts, no fees, no corporate universities.” The chant echoed across the University of Wollongong (UOW) on Thursday, 16th October as students, staff, and supporters rallied against plans to dismantle UOW’s Safe and Respectful Communities (SARC) service.

Established in 2018, SARC has been the only dedicated place on campus for survivors of sexual assault, harassment, domestic and family violence, bullying, and discrimination to seek support. In mid-September, staff received an email detailing a draft proposal to restructure the service. While management insists the changes are not about cuts, students and staff see a familiar pattern of erosion.

Wollongong University Students’ Association (WUSA) President Hanzel-Jude Pador opened the rally by acknowledging the Wodi Wodi people of the Dharawal and Yuin nations, reminding the crowd that “under metres of concrete and asphalt, this land is Indigenous land that was violently stolen, never ceded, and the effects of colonialism are still ongoing”.

Speaking as co-chair of the protest, Pador condemned UOW’s draft proposal to “effectively disestablish and reorganise” SARC, saying that students had been told the service was simply being made “more streamlined, more accessible to students, and compliant with the National Higher Education Code [NHEC]”.

He continued, “we’ve clearly seen this pattern before across the sector… when a university says it wants to make certain things more efficient and streamlined, it means it’s weighing up how many staff they can cut, how many courses can be cut, how many services can be cut, and it’s only a matter of time before things get gutted.” He argued that SARC has been “a vital and life-saving service at UOW,” supporting hundreds of students, already effectively compliant with the NHEC, and trusted by survivors.

“If SARC did not exist or was reduced,” he warned, “students would be left at the very least without the necessary support and, at the worst, abandoned to the complete detriment of their health, safety, and well-being.”

The anger at management’s approach was echoed by WUSA Education Officer Megan Guy, who reminded the crowd that UOW management had recently celebrated cutting “only 100 jobs out of 185,” gutting livelihoods off

Photography by Ananya Thirumalai

the back of years of casualisation and insecurity. “Max Lu, the new guy, he’s come fresh off the plane having sacked 140 staff at Surrey University just last year,” Guy said. “This man is so bad that he actually received a 97 per cent no-confidence vote from the union up there. And so UOW decided this guy’s our guy. He’s a ruthless manager.”

Guy argued that his consultation strategy is “all just a strategy to get people to accept” management’s broader agenda of funneling revenue to executives and corporate partners while cutting staff and student services. She pointed to UOW’s partnership with the NSW Minerals Council and ongoing ties to defence contractors, including companies linked to Israel, saying these moves show the university’s priorities lie in profit and exploitation rather than student wellbeing.

“If we save SARC, that’s just going to be the thin edge of the wedge,” she warned. “There’s a lot more thoroughgoing, deeper problems with the role of universities in society and that’s what we need to be pushing back on.”

The protest also heard from representatives of other universities. Ellena, UNSW’s Women’s Officer, spoke about the difficulty of accessing gendered violence support services at her campus, asking why it is “still impossible to access support services, let alone axing the SARC office here at the University of Wollongong.” She compared SARC to essential public health services: “We wouldn’t get rid of a doctor’s office, we wouldn’t get rid of a hospital, we wouldn’t get rid of a vaccination clinic. So why on earth are we threatening the Safe and Respectful Communities office that provides essential support and care to students?”

WUSA Women’s Representative Alexia Chipperfield closed the rally by thanking those who attended and warning that “if

Western Sydney University data breach saga continues

Imogen Sabey reports.

On 23rd October Western Sydney University (WSU) announced that it had sustained another breach of privacy regarding students’ information. This comes less than a month after Western’s last data breach scandal.

WSU confirmed on Thursday that the data breach took place between 19th June and 3rd September.

UOW goes ahead with this plan, hundreds of students will have nowhere safe to turn in their time of need, no assurance that they will be heard, let alone helped. Cutting SARC means abandoning students and putting lives at risk.”

She pointed out that the university has “changed their narrative multiple times, providing conflicting information and scrambling for damage control,” and urged students to continue submitting feedback and attending forums. “We must keep up this pressure… because this isn’t just a small campaign, this is UOW students and students across the sector demanding that SARC stay the same.”

While the university insists its proposal is about redesigning services to provide a more cohesive, consistent and improved experience, students remain unconvinced. For them, the fight is about more than a bureaucratic restructure: it is about preserving a service that survivors trust, resisting corporate logics of austerity, and demanding that universities put student safety before profit.

Vice-Chancellor George Williams said “I want to again apologise for the impact this is having, and give you my assurance that we are doing everything we can to rectify this issue and support our community.

“This starts with working closely with NSW Police Force Cybercrime Squad’s Strike Force Docker and includes our ongoing efforts to strengthen our cyber security. On 25th June 2025, NSW Police arrested and charged a former student of the University.”

WSU first detected the cyber attack when it identified unusual activity on 6th August and 11th August on the university’s Student Management System, which is hosted by a thirdparty provider. A subsequent investigation confirmed that the breach extended to the period between 19th June and 3rd September.

In the data breach, the stolen information included the following:

• Contact information (address, email address, phone number)

• Name, date of birth, student or staff ID

• Country of birth, nationality, citizenship and/or gender or identity information

• Ethnicity

• Employment and payroll details

• Bank account details

• Tax file number

• Driver licence details

• Passport details

• Visa information

• Complaint/case information

• Health and disability information

• Legal information

Some of this information was used earlier in the month to send fraudulent emails.

The administration confirmed that they notified NSW police as soon as this discovery was made, but the police “requested the University refrain from notifying its community” to allow the police investigation to be unimpeded. Police approved WSU’s announcement of the breach on 23rd October.

The statement said “The interim injunction previously granted to the University by the NSW Supreme Court continues to prohibit transmission, publication and use of any information or material obtained by the former student in an unauthorised manner from the University's IT systems and network.” The “former student” refers to Keira Kingston, who was arrested in June 2025 under allegations of cybercrimes against WSU committed from 2021 onwards. Honi Soit does not allege that Kingston is linked to this latest incident.

Williams commented “We encourage all students, staff and alumni who receive notifications to take the recommended actions, regardless of steps taken in the past, and to use the support services available.”

University of Sydney supercomputer Artemis decommissioned after decade of service

After a decade of service, the University of Sydney high performance computer Artemis has been decommissioned.

Over its decade, Artemis supported over 7,000 researchers on 4,000 research projects utilising 360 million CPU core-hours, helping researchers produce over 16,000 research papers.

Some of the achievements Artemis supported include the modelling of global plate tectonics; studying how human disturbance have disrupted animal movement; surveys of the Milky Way; and the mapping

of the COVID-19 genome, transmission, mutation, and resistance, which led Professor Edward Holmes to receive the honour of NSW Scientist of the Year in 2022.

Australia’s first digital computer, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Automatic Computer (CSIRAC) was built at the University of Sydney and became operational in 1949.

Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research Infrastructure) Professor Simon Ringer said that the University is working to establish the Sydney Research Cloud, “a user-friendly,

Victor Zhang reports.

flexible, scalable, configurable, and secure research computing platform”.

The University of Sydney established a new partnership with the Pawsey Supercomputing Research Centre, granting researchers at USyd access to 20 million compute hours per year to the Pawsey’s Setonix supercomputer.

Professor Ringer said that “It is an exciting time for our students and staff as our capacity for learning and inference is receiving a huge boost and we’ll be able to drive faster, more powerful modelling.”

“Stenographers To Power”

Chris Hedges on the Betrayal of Palestinian Journalists

Anastasia Dale, James Fitzgerald Sice, and Remy Lebreton report.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author Chris Hedges presented his speech about the betrayal of Palestinian journalists on 20th October at the NSW Teachers Federation Conference Centre. This address was initially scheduled for the National Press Club in Canberra, but was then cancelled with three weeks’ notice.

The Press Club’s Chief Executive Officer Maurice Reilly stated “in the interest of balancing out our program we will withdraw our offer”.

An Acknowledgement of Country was given by Laura Murphy-Oates, who spoke about Gadigal land as the site of invasion, Gadigal people as the first freedom fighters against the colonisation of Australia, and the parallels between Aboriginal struggle and Palestinian struggle.

Sara M. Saleh, Palestinian writer and human rights lawyer, then introduced Hedges’ speech by saying: “Tonight, he delivers the address as it should be: unfiltered and uncensored.”

Hedges began his speech with an announcement that the event was not sponsored by weapons companies, banks, or corporations who are complicit in genocide, and “this is how you know we are not at the National Press Club of Australia”.

He delivered the address fresh off an interview with David Marr for the ABC program Late Night Live, commenting “Australia produces some of the best journalists and some of the very worst. Being lynched

by David Marr was quite a little performance… listen to it. It was appalling”. He went on to label Marr as a careerist faux-journalist.

Hedges then began the cancelled address: “There are two types of war correspondents.” The first being a minority that report from combat zones, do not attend press conferences, and do not beg government officials for interviews. Then, Hedges said, there is the majority, the “inchoate blob” who “slavishly disseminate whatever they are fed by officials… and pretend it is news”. Hedges’ analysis was that “the mortal enemy of these poseurs are the real war reporters, in this case, Palestinian journalists in Gaza”.

“I fault those who pretend to be war correspondents. They do tremendous damage. They peddle false narratives, they mask reality. They serve as witting or unwitting propagandists. They discredit the voices of the victims and exonerate the killers. They betray those who take great risks to report the truth.”

Hedges spoke of the IDF “legitimisation cell” which carries out campaigns of misinformation to portray Palestinian journalists as Hamas operatives in an effort to delegitimise their reporting and justify their assassinations.

In recounting his seven years of on the ground experience covering Israel’s occupation of Gaza, Hedges stated that “If there was one indisputable fact, it is that Israel lies like it breathes.”

Hedges spoke of his own sacking by the New York Times, with their reasoning being he was “ruining the paper’s relationship with the military” because he pushed against the paper’s insistence on “balancing truth with lies”.

“There is no cost for betraying Palestinians. They are powerless. Call [Israeli] lies out, and you will swiftly find your requests for briefings and interviews with officials rebuffed. You won’t be invited by press officers to participate in staged visits to Israeli military units. You and your news organisation will be viciously attacked… Your editors will terminate your assignment and maybe your employment. Your talks will be canceled at press clubs.”

“The barrage of Israeli lies amplified and given credibility by the Western press violates a fundamental tenet of journalism, the duty to transmit the truth to the viewer or reader. It legitimises mass slaughter. It refuses to hold Israel to account. It betrays Palestinian journalists, those reporting and being killed in Gaza, and it exposes the bankruptcy of Western journalists whose primary attributes are careerism and cowardice.”

After Hedges’ speech, Saleh stated: “Is it any wonder they wanted to silence you?”

Saleh then asked Hedges what he believed the future for Gaza was after the ceasefire announcement. Hedges replied

The role of student journalists is no different from the role of all journalists, which is to the powerful to account.

that Trump’s peace plan is “a joke” and “designed to release the Israeli hostages” with Israel immediately breaking the ceasefire, and “the plan imposes conditions on the victims but not the oppressor”.

He stated he believed the only future for Gaza would be for the US to sanction Israel and stop sending weapons, or a naval and air intervention to stop the Israeli blockade of Gaza. He went on to state that the West Bank would be next after Gaza if nothing changes.

Following the event, Hedges granted a few questions to Honi reporters after we introduced ourselves and had our copies of his latest book, A Genocide Foretold, signed by him.

James Fitzgerald Sice: What is the role of student journalists in this genocide, and how can student journalists avoid becoming complicit by involving themselves with mainstream media organisations?

Chris Hedges: The role of student journalists is no different from the role of all journalists, which is to the powerful to account. Within the ecosystem of a university, that means holding the people who run the university to account and investigating what they don’t want you to know, in terms of donors and in terms of relationships with, for instance, Israel.

The United States has universities who have close alliances with Israeli contractors. MIT makes robotic drones, they have actually created the drone swarms that are used in Gaza. I suppose the difference for a student journalist is that you’re operating primarily within the microcosm. But within this and within any institution, there are

people who are abused by that institution. There are things that that institution seeks to hide and cover up. There are activities of that institution that are unethical, and it’s the role of student journalists to expose it.

Anastasia Dale: You spoke about your recent interaction with David Marr. This year, Marr was invited to speak at the Honi Soit Student Journalism Conference. When they uninvited a NewsCorp journalist due to her views on Palestine, David Marr also pulled out and sent a strongly worded email to Honi editors saying it was “not his idea of how a good newspaper should behave.” Do you have any thoughts on that, and if he should be speaking to journalistic behaviour?

Chris Hedges: I only have spent 30 minutes with David Marr, but those 30 minutes made it clear to me that he typifies all of those journalists who function as stenographers to power, who are primarily concerned about their own careers and who seek to discredit those of us who challenge dominant systems of authority, including within the media. These people make a very good living as quote unquote journalists, but I have no respect for them at all. I said to him when I left, you’ve never done what I did. You’ve sat in studios like this. You’ve never been to places like Gaza. You’ve never been on the receiving end of Israeli assaults. You’ve never had to count the bodies. It’s a completely different form of journalism, as I tried to make clear tonight. Those of us who do that kind of reporting battle not only the governments and the powerful, but we battle the majority of our own colleagues who slavishly serve those systems, because it’s good for them and it’s good for their news organisations. But it’s not good for readers and viewers because they are obscuring, distorting, and often openly discrediting the truth.

Human Rights Bill introduced in NSW Parliament

Jenna Rees and Victor Zhang report.

On 23rd October, Greens MP Jenny Leong introduced the historic Human Rights Bill 2025 in the NSW Legislative Assembly.

Over 100 organisations have endorsed the establishment of an inquiry to introduce a human rights act in NSW.

Leong said that “A human rights Act in New South Wales would protect the rights of all, while at the same time promoting a better understanding of human rights to empower everyone to seek justice if their rights are violated.

“A human rights Act brings together all our rights in one place, and requires public officials to respect them. Any laws introduced in [parliament] will need to have regard to those rights.”

Vice-President of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (ALHR) and spokesperson for Human Rights Act for NSW (HRA4NSW) Kerry Weste said that “every day in Victoria, the ACT, and Queensland people are benefiting in concrete ways because they have a human rights Act that helps government officials to make fair and caring decisions about things like access to government services.

The Australian Capital Territory, Victoria, and Queensland have state-based human rights acts, introduced in 2004, 2006, and 2019 respectively.

Weste continued: “It’s time for NSW to embrace the opportunity to learn from the experience in these jurisdictions. Referring this bill to an inquiry will give everyone in NSW the chance to participate in a community-wide conversation about putting in

disconnected from an essential utility unlawfully or arbitrarily.

CEO of the Tenants’ Union of NSW Leo Patterson Ross said “A human rights Act which delivers on the right to adequate housing will make an enormous difference in protecting communities from unfair evictions, excessive rent prices and unhealthy homes.”

A human rights Act which delivers on the right to adequate housing will make an enormous difference in protecting communities

Leo Patterson Ross, CEO of Tenants’ Union NSW

place a similar law to protect the wellbeing and dignity for everyone in our state.”

Claudia Robinson, Co-Chair of ALHR Human Rights Act Committee said that “this bill represents a landmark opportunity for an inquiry that can begin the process of bringing NSW in line with other jurisdictions.

“These laws have proven to be effective tools for improving public administration, enhancing transparency and fostering a culture of respect for public dignity.”

Deputy CEO of People With Disability Australia (PWDA) Megan Spindler-Smith said “We need a human rights approach that ensures people with disability are not forgotten or left behind when we talk about human rights.

“Existing human rights frameworks in New South Wales do not provide adequate protection or stop the violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation people with disability have endured for far too long.”

Housing

Leong noted that the ACT amended the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) in September 2025 to enshrine the “right to adequate housing”. The Human Rights (Housing) Amendment Bill 2025 was introduced by Greens member of the ACT Legislative Assembly Shane Rattenbury.

The amendment sets forth immediately realisable rights including the right to housing “without discrimination”, that “no-one may be unlawfully or arbitrarily evicted from their home”, and that no-one may be

Weste said in July that the “anti-protest measures passed in NSW… are incompatible with Australia’s international human rights law obligations, [and cast a disproportionately wide, ill defined, and punitive net”.

Former NSW Premier Bob Carr told the Sydney Morning Herald that “given the challenge for civil liberties, it justifies us considering” a human rights Act.

On 16th October, the Supreme Court of NSW ruled that the move-on powers granted to police outside places of worship was unconstitutional as it “impermissibly burdens the implied constitutional freedom of communication”.

Civil Liberties

President of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) Tim Roberts said that the a human rights Act would ensure that NSW is in line with Australia’s international legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

He said a human rights Act “would significantly improve the way our parliament, government and public entities develop laws, policies and make decisions”.

The NSW Government has come under fire for the passage of harsh anti-protest laws. In July 2025, unions, legal groups, and civil society organisations wrote to the Premier Chris Minns urging a review of the NSW anti-protest laws in light of NSW police’s grievous assault on Hannah Thomas at a peaceful protest.

First Nations

For too long, the inherent human rights of Aboriginal peoples have been treated as optional in NSW.

Blake Alan Cansdale, National Director of ANTAR

CEO of the Aboriginal Legal Service NSW/ACT Karly Warner said “the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are violated too often in NSW prisons, policing and child protection systems.

“Enacting a human rights Act for NSW could provide muchneeded protection and recourse for when these rights are not upheld as they should be.”

Warner called on the NSW government to conduct “comprehensive community consultation on a human rights Act and, in particular, to ensure the views of Aboriginal

communities are heard and honoured”.

National Director of ANTAR Blake Alan Cansdale said that “for too long, the inherent human rights of Aboriginal peoples have been treated as optional in NSW.

“A human rights Act would help change that, by embedding fairness, dignity, and accountability into the way that the NSW Government makes laws, develops policy and delivers services.

“It would also bring NSW standards of governance into greater alignment with international standards, including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).”

He added that “UNDRIP affirms restorative rights: universal rights that every human is entitled to, reframed to reflect the unique histories and injustices faced by First Nations peoples.”

A record number of Indigenous deaths in custody occurred in NSW this year. Despite being 3 per cent of the population in NSW, Indigenous peoples make up 33 per cent of the NSW adult prison population.

***

Leong acknowledged the campaign for the introduction of a human rights Act in NSW and that over 100 organisations “have signed on in support of sending this bill to a select committee to have an inquiry into the need for a Human Rights Act.”

The Human Rights Bill 2025 is expected to be referred to an inquiry for public consultation.

Renoviction loophole regulation disallowance motion voted down in Legislative Council

A motion in the NSW Legislative Council to disallow a controversial change to rental protections was voted down on 21st October.

Greens Member of the Legislative Council (MLC) Cate Faehrmann moved to disallow the Residential Tenancies Amendment (Termination Notice for Significant Renovations or Repairs) Regulation 2025

On 19th May 2025, legislation ending no-grounds evictions came into effect in NSW. Landlords that sought to evict tenants on the grounds of significant renovation or repair had to provide both a written statement and a piece of evidence, such as a contract or quote from a tradesperson, to show that they had a genuine intent to renovate or repair the premises.

On 20th June, 32 days after the new system came into effect, the NSW Government quietly passed an amendment removing the evidence requirement and only requiring the landlord to provide a written statement.

Faehrmann said the “disallowance is about protecting renters from being thrown out of their homes under false pretences and about holding this government to the commitments it made when it claimed to have ended unfair no grounds evictions”.

The evidence requirements were described by Faehrmann as “modest, reasonable protections.

“They didn’t stop legitimate repairs. They just stopped dodgy landlords from lying.”

Faehrmann noted the joint statement from over 30 peak tenancy advocacy, legal, and community groups stating their strong opposition to the regulations.

Greens MLC Abigail Boyd also spoke in favour of the disallowance motion, saying that the month between the enactment of the new reasonable-grounds eviction regime and the amendment was not enough time to assess the effects of the new system.

The Labor Government opposed the disallowance motion. Labor MLC Penny Sharpe, speaking for the Government, denied that evidence requirements were removed.

Sharpe said that landlords still had to provide a written statement explaining “one, why the renovations or repairs are significant. Two, why the property must be vacant for the words for the works to be carried out. And three, the proposed commencement date book works”.

Sharpe said that “feedback was considered from both tenant advocates and industry stakeholders in full and informed the content” of the amendment.

Scott Farlow MLC, speaking on behalf of the Member for Willoughby and NSW Shadow Minister for Fair Trading, spoke in favour of the disallowance motion.

In August, Tim James, Member for Willoughby, moved a similar disallowance motion in the Legislative Assembly. The motion also failed.

Victor Zhang reports.

Farlow referred to an investigation that suggested that Premier Chris Minns made a captain’s call in watering down the rental protections against evictions on the grounds of renovation and repair.

Farlow said “Twice now he has overridden his own Minister, blindsided stakeholders and undone months of careful consultation. Neither renters nor landlords asked for this change. The Rental Commissioner provided no advice requesting changes.”

Crossbenchers Tania Mihailuk and John Ruddick both spoke against the disallowance motion.

The disallowance motion failed with 18 ayes and 23 noes.

The Greens and the Coalition voted for the disallowance motion. Labor and the remainder of the crossbench voted against the motion.

USU August & September Board Meeting: The Vu Administration

Will Winter reports. BDS & Palestine

Readers, it’s your lucky day: you’re getting two months of USU Board coverage for the price of one! The bimonthly write-up works out perfectly in being able to gauge how the new term of President Phan Vu (Independent) is going.

In terms of vibes, the August and September ex camera Board sessions have felt less like open forum discussions and more like ‘the Board tell Honi all of the things they’ve agreed can be shared publicly’. Vu, at least, seems very equipped to be leading the USU Board, and very on top of appearances. Here are some of the highlights:

Finances

Let’s get the money out of the way. In the August Board meeting, an overall deficit was recorded for July, mostly attributed to lower than expected sales at Fisher Coffee Cart, Carslaw Kitchen, and Abercrombie Terrace.

For the September meeting, Honorary Treasurer James Dwyer (YCU) announced that the USU had hit an overall surplus of $382,000. Sponsorships and partnerships saw a higher than expected income. Speaking of sponsorships…

The three letters on everyone’s lips. In the August Board meeting, whether the USU would consider implementing Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) principles into their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) strategy. This was inspired by an email from SRC Ethnocultural officer Dana Kafina to select members of the USU Board. Vu suggested it was “something we should consider”.

At the September Board meeting, Honi once again asked about this potential incorporation of BDS into the ESG strategy, in light of advertising spotted by Honi at Fisher cafe for McDonald’s, a highly visible organic BDS target. With only a month’s difference, Vu affirmed that BDS was “not something we’ll adopt explicitly… We’re approaching through many lenses, and aligning with the university’s broader principles.”

Vu also said the decision was one which aimed to “maintain commercial viability” for the USU.

Room Renaming

It has finally been confirmed by Honorary Secretary Ethan Floyd (independent) that three USU assets will be officially renamed

in the coming months. The first is the renaming of the Disabilities Room in Manning to the ‘Nguyen Khanh Tran Disabilities Communities Room’. Nguyen Khanh Tran was a 2022 Honi editor and disabilities activist on campus who passed away in 2025. The second is renaming the USU People and Culture Offices in honour of Robin Fitzsimon, a neurologist, writer, and former fellow of the USyd Senate. The third is renaming the Wentworth Building to be the Judith Whelan Building. Whelan, a former Sydney Morning Herald editor and the 1983 President of the USU, died in 2024.

As of the September Board meeting, the Board is waiting for approval from the families in relation to the renamings, and for Senate approval. Hopefully we’ll see these changes actioned in the coming months.

Recent Vacancies

Honi was prepared to ask about several departures and internal shifts at the USU this year at the September Board meeting. Earlier this year, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Michelle Tonge left her position, replaced by Finance Manager Michelle Liang. Most recently, Sam Trodden, the Director of Student Experience, left the USU for a position in the Student Life Office of USyd.

Conveniently, Acting Head of Student Experience Kelsey Rimmer, explaining to Board Director Annika Wang (independent) that the consent signs on USU bathroom doors are already translated into four languages, said she’d be “offboarding” the rest of her welfare initiatives “before I depart”. Honi, after asking about this comment in the meeting, can confirm that Rimmer will be leaving her role before the end of the year. This, as well as the role of Director of People and Culture, will result in three key positions at the USU being currently unfulfilled.

Vu, when asked whether the USU had long-term concern as to the vacancies, suggested firstly that the “strategic restructuring” from CFO to Finance Manager had “been working okay”. She then claimed that “we have risk control in place to manage” unexpected departures, and “there hasn’t been much of a concern.”

Odds and Ends

It was confirmed in the September Board meeting that a USyd canteen will be housed in the Engineering Building (JO3), with a prognosis of opening in 2026. It was unclear who would be operationalising the canteen. Still, considering this has been a

figment of university discourse for what has felt like eons, it’s promising to see some wheels turning.

Vice-President Georgia Zhang (Independent) announced she was looking to implement governance and electoral changes. When asked by Honi as to what this covered specifically, Vu spoke to the changes, which regard “preference deals and how they’re regulated. [We’re] looking at ways to reinforce people to disclose their conflicts of interest before executive elections, but nothing is concrete… it’s hard to police what is exactly in a preference deal, since it’s by nature binding something in future and depending on who is elected.”

Board Director Wolifson spoke to his College’s portfolio. He’s looking to encourage more consumption by college students at USU outlets, “making sure they’re aware of how open the USU outlets are”, something “worth platforming to college students… particularly when they’re being initiated and having large parties.”

As a final note, thank you to the USU for finally taking formal portraits of the Board Directors for the website. The aesthetically incoherent phone selfies were very displeasing.

Unions NSW supports transport concessions for all students

Victor Zhang reports.

Unions NSW is supporting the campaign to extend transport concessions to all students, including international and parttime students.

NSW remains the only state in Australia to exclude international and part-time students from receiving transport fare concessions.

Unions NSW said that “no matter where [they’re] from, students face the same challenges — lower incomes, rising costs and the pressure of balancing study with life.

“Expanding concessions is good for students and good for our community. It makes transport fairer, more affordable and boosts public transport use.”

A petition was lodged earlier this year to the NSW Legislative Assembly calling on the NSW government to extend transport concessions to all students.

The petition currently has just over 8,000 signatures. Petitions that reach over 20,000 signatures trigger a parliamentary debate.

In October 2024, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) recommended that Transport for NSW work collaboratively with higher education and government stakeholders to explore the possibility of extending concession fares to students currently excluded from receiving them.

SUPRA and the USyd Students’ Representative Council have previously launched a petition

Transport Concession Campaign at NSW Parliament, Photography by SUPRA

calling for transport concessions for all students, which reached 21,000 signatures in April 2024.

Jenny Leong, NSW Legislative Assembly Member for Newtown, presented the 2024 petition to the Legislative Assembly, however the then Minister for Transport Jo Haylen cited budgetary reasons for the Government not supporting this policy.

If the current petition is successful, the Independent Legislative Assembly Member for Sydney, Alex Greenwich will present the petition to parliament.

Greenwich says that the government “should help [international students] avoid hardship in what is becoming one of the world’s most expensive cities to live”.

In the parliamentary debate for the previous petition Greenwich said that “as contributors to our economy and society, international students should be no less eligible for travel concessions than other students. It is discrimination to refuse them this basic subsidy”.

At the 2024 NSW Labor Conference, the Rail, Tram, and Bus Union (RTBU) along with

rank-and-file members of Labor moved that the NSW Labor Party should support “the provision of transport concessions to all tertiary students, including international and parttime students”. Despite the conference resolving to adopt this item in their platform, the NSW Labor Government gave no indication that there will be a change in government policy.

APAN Report reveals alarming evidence of Anti-Palestinian racism in schools

Sath Balasuriya reports.

The Australian Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN) released a national report on 25th September, revealing evidence of a disturbing trend of antiPalestinian racism across Australian primary and secondary schools.

The report analysed 84 testimonies from students, staff, and family members who claimed they had witnessed or experienced anti-Palestinian discrimination across Australian primary and secondary schools. The responses analysed in the report were submitted to APAN’s national register, which was created in 2024 in response to outcries of discrimination from the Palestinian diaspora following Israel’s bombardment of Gaza in late 2023.

The report’s findings from the collected testimonies were grouped into six

categories. The first covered how schools purposefully suppressed and censored expression of Palestinian symbolism. The section included statements from a Palestinian educator who had been told by a principal to remove their keffiyeh, a traditional headdress worn by Palestinians, after an Israeli parent complained to the school that they were “offended” seeing it be worn. Another instance detailed a witness who saw an assistant principal ask a student to remove a Palestinian flag from their shoulders, despite there being no school policy that prohibited wearing national flags.

The report observed that the schools surveyed often selectively enforced censorship on areas of speech related to the Gaza genocide and Palestinian solidarity, that were otherwise unapplied to other international conflicts or national

groups. The report warns that the double standards that this kind of vilification creates, poses a significant threat to the education sector.

Speaking to ABC News, report co-author Dr. Ryan Al-Natour said: “There is a huge contradiction happening here, whereby educational institutions are boasting about cultural diversity within Australian education, but at the same time, silencing those who want to speak out against ... the genocide currently happening right now.”

The report also covered how antiPalestinian sentiment at schools had led to increased levels of verbal and physical abuse directed at Palestinian students.

One example came from the testimony of a Palestinian parent, whose young child had reported that a Jewish student wearing an

Israeli flag, had told them that they “can’t wait to help the IDF kill Palestinians in Gaza”. Another Palestinian student in Victoria was reportedly physically attacked by a Jewish student because they “spoke Arabic”. The offender alleged that the Palestinian student had been speaking Arabic in order to “piss them off”.

In light of the report’s findings, it made several pedagogical recommendations. One recommendation suggests that schools should stop employing “punitive disciplinary measures… against students and teachers who displayed symbols of Palestine solidarity”, and instead focus on facilitating discourse where Arab or Palestinian people are respected as “subject-matter authorities”.

Linguistics on Trial: First Major Hearing of the Claims Against USyd Academics

Keane and Riemer

Sophie Grant and Ella McGrath report.

The racial discrimination proceedings against University of Sydney academics Professor John Keane and Dr Nick Riemer received their first interlocutory hearing in the Federal Court of Australia this week.

The joint cases are widely viewed as an early test of how hate speech provisions under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA) 1975 (Cth) apply to political identity. University of Sydney’s counsel, Robert Dick SC, described the matters as potentially establishing whether “protection of a political identity — Zionism — falls within the RDA.”

After two days of argument before Justice Kennett, judgment was reserved.

Keane and Riemer are being sued by Joseph Toltz, Professor Suzanne Rutland, Yaniv Levy and Ariel Eisner, who allege that the academics’ public criticisms of Israel and Zionism — considered individually or cumulatively — were reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate Jewish or Israeli people.

The Structure of the Proceedings

The two cases are proceeding separately but were heard together. The applicants also claim that the University of Sydney is vicariously liable for some of the alleged acts of vilification.

The University and Riemer applied to have parts of the claims struck out or summarily dismissed, arguing this would narrow the issues and shorten any trial.

“Zionism Is a Political Concept”: USyd’s StrikeOut Bid

Opening for the University, Robert Dick SC sought its dismissal from the proceedings where vicarious liability is alleged. Those allegations arise from three sources: an Overland article from 15th October 2023

‘It Has Never Been More Vital to Stand with Palestine’; a speech delivered at a protest on 12th November 2023 titled ‘No Room for Zionism in Our Unions’; and social-media posts relating to that speech.

Dick submitted that Dr Riemer’s references to Zionists could not automatically be equated with Jewish or Israeli people: “Zionism is, at its core, a political concept.”

Relying on last week’s Cassuto v Kostakidis judgment, he told the court: “It is plainly possible to criticise Zionism and the State of Israel without disparaging Jews or Israelis.”

He added that even if many Jewish people identify with Zionism, “not every Jewish person is a Zionist and Zionism transcends race, ethnicity and nationality … It is a movement, an ideology, a political philosophy.”

For the applicants, Adam Butt SC argued that Riemer had used “Zionism” as coded language for Jewish people and a “dog whistle” in the sense discussed in Kostakidis – and that criticism of Israel can, in some contexts, contravene section 18C of the RDA.

He submitted that “many Jewish Australians experience antiZionism as antisemitism” and that Riemer’s protest speech was “a powerful exclusion of Jewish beliefs.”

“He knows what he’s doing. He’s a linguistics professor.” Butt alleged.

“Your Honour Cannot Interpolate into the Text What Is Not There”

Dick compared the case to defamation proceedings because it turns on imputations which can be considered the implied meaning or ‘sting’ of the texts.

He argued that the applicants’ attempt to show an antisemitic tendency could not override the words’ actual content: “Your honour cannot interpolate into the text what is not there.”

He said Justice Kennett should consider only the pleaded words and imputations: “Nowhere is there anything said, expressly or implicitly, disparaging the Jewish or Israeli people.”

In reply, Butt maintained that the court is “in no way bound by imputations” and must consider the broader context of conduct and effect. He cited Kaplan v State of Victoria, in which cumulative

acts were held sufficient to breach the RDA without resort to formal imputations.

To demonstrate atmosphere, Butt drew analogies between antisemitic bullying at Brighton Secondary College, arguing that similar hostility had occurred at USyd during the 2024 Gaza Solidarity Encampment.

Objective vs Subjective Offence

Dick urged an objective test: the reaction of an “ordinary and reasonable member of the relevant group” excluding extremes of hypersensitivity or indifference.

“The subjective views of the offended group cannot override a reasonable and objective interpretation” he said.

He referred to Wertheim v Haddad (2024), where disparagement of Zionism was held to criticise an ideology, not a race.

“It is not antisemitic to criticise Israel” Dick told the court, arguing that political opinions within Jewish communities are diverse.

Butt disagreed, submitting that section 18C requires attention to the likely effect on the offended group: “This is a victim-focused test” he said.

Justice Kennett observed that the statute’s phrase “reasonably likely to offend” involves a factual question that excludes outliers of unreasonable sensitivity, to which Butt responded that “the victims’ perspective is critical.”

“Inadmissible”: Challenges to Applicants’ Evidence

On the second day, Jessie Taylor, counsel for Riemer, criticised the applicants’ 250-page evidence bundle as “inadmissible in parts” and of “limited forensic utility.”

She argued that several surveys cited failed methodological standards and that reports from organisations such as the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) and the Australian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS) relied on “convenient” samples and undefined terms.

Taylor noted that applicant Prof Rutland sits on the boards of 5A (Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism) and the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) delegation, both of which promote the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which she described as “hotly contested.”

Both University and Riemer’s counsel objected to the use of an internal SafeWork NSW report on campus antisemitism, describing it as “generalised, conclusory and partisan.”

Justice Kennett remarked: “The trial will be conducted on permissible evidence… the report is clearly controversial.”

Butt responded that different evidence would be relied upon at trial.

“This Hearing Has Been a Space to Prosecute the Conflation of Antisemitism with Criticism of Israel”

Taylor submitted that the applicants’ pleadings effectively conflate Jewish identity with Zionism, an “extraordinary proposition” in her words.

She argued that the court was being asked to “use interchangeably the words ‘Jew’ and ‘Zionist’”, contrary to the statute’s focus on race.

“This hearing has been a space to prosecute the conflation of antisemitism with criticism of Israel” she told the court, contending that Dr Riemer’s calls for ceasefire were being misconstrued as incitement to violence – a characterisation she rejected.

By Tuesday afternoon, the parties agreed on one factual point: that “a substantial proportion of Jewish and/or Israeli people identify themselves as Zionists.”

However, they continued to dispute the statement that “Zionists are predominantly Jewish and/or Israeli people.”

Justice Kennett observed: “Zionism is a political concept … and to some extent contested.”

“We’re

Not Writing a History Here”

Riemer’s counsel sought to strike out historical passages about the Intifadas, Hamas, and 7 October 2023, arguing they were vague and risked turning the court into a forum for geopolitical history.

“You are being asked to make a new charter on what the State of Israel means to Jews, from the Torah to Herzl to 1948” Taylor said.

Justice Kennett queried the relevance of those sections but acknowledged they might inform how Jewish people perceived Riemer’s statements.Butt replied that the background was necessary to show why certain comments were experienced as offensive.

“We’re not writing a history here,” the judge concluded. “Mr Butt is trying to establish 5 facts. It is not about another world of facts. We are not appealing to history to see who is an angel and who isn’t.”

Status of the Case

Justice Kennett has reserved his decision on the strike-out applications. No findings have been made, and all allegations remain contested.

Both sides agree the proceedings raise significant questions about the boundary between political speech and racial vilification.

Future hearings will determine whether the matters proceed to a full trial and, if so, how far the RDA extends to debates regarding the matters being contemplated.

No One (Child) Cares

As such, putative measures and unrealistic timelines are applied, when faced with students carrying the burden of raising young children without access to childcare that accommodates the university’s study requirements.

A prominent professor working on the case described the dilemma of “flexibility as a double-edged sword,” noting that women often use academic flexibility to “fill the gaps at home,” sacrificing career progress in the process. One PhD student captured the exhaustion succinctly: “My PhD used to be my baby, then I had a human baby, and I find it hard to stay motivated, especially when career opportunities are so limited in science.”

The report (2015), compiled after the workshop based on these testimonies, made recommendations that could have transformed the University’s approach to parenting students:

1. Create a dedicated Families Officer role within SUPRA;

2. Introduce occasional or crèche childcare for seminars and research days;

Charlotte Saker investigates.

“If you give birth we expect you back in four weeks.”

- Anonymous, 26 years old

“Women stay home because there’s no childcare available at the University.”

- Anonymous, 29 years old

“The University has no numbers on how many students with children study there.”

- Anonymous, 32 years old

Uni Wars

For all its billion-dollar prestige and illustrious sandstone campus the size of a small town, the University of Sydney, unlike most Australian universities, refuses to find space for on-campus childcare. Those most affected are women studying as post-graduate or international students as well as female staff, who remain the primary caretakers of their children. Even in the big 2025, these women study, work, and exist under an elitist system that seemingly prioritises a culture of selfimportance over accessibility.

The university does not provide a crèche (daytime nursery), a daycare, or casual care where parents can leave their child during major events like Welcome Week or for even an hour, to attend a class or finish an assignment at the library. Students, primarily women, who become parents,

are told to look elsewhere in neighbouring suburbs like Glebe or Redfern, where casual-care centres only operate from 9am to 4pm on weekdays.

There are no options for postgraduate evening classes (which often run from 6 to 9pm), no weekend care during exams, and no emergency options for parents facing last minute timetable changes. In addition, the daycare centres nearby have endless waitlists of 12 to 18 months, which delay parents’ ability to return to study and work.

The first real institutional acknowledgment of the barriers faced by student-parents at the University of Sydney came a decade ago. In October 2015, Sydney University Postgraduate Representative Association (SUPRA) and the School of Social and Political Sciences hosted a workshop titled Balancing Bubs & Books: Parenting through Higher Degree Research. The event, attended by 45 postgraduate students from 11 faculties, was the first time the University formally gathered testimony from student-parents about the pressures of combining research with childcare.

Despite the optimism that filled the day, the workshop’s findings painted a bleak picture. It revealed that Sydney University had no official data on how many Higher Degree Research (HDR) students were parents, a data gap that persists today.

The attendees, overwhelmingly women, described what organiser Veazey called “pressing and unmet needs”: unaffordable childcare; exclusion from evening seminars; a lack of maternity leave for the already underpaid HDR scholars whose scholarships are funded by private third party contributors; and supervisors who refused to reschedule meetings to accommodate children.

3. Fund childcare-related travel and conference costs;

4. Collect systematic data on student-parents;

5. Install breastfeeding and parenting rooms in every faculty;

6. Include parenting information in student handbooks and induction materials.

One of the most forward-thinking suggestions was the introduction of co-working childcare models, where parents could work at on-campus desks while children were cared for nearby, a concept later adopted by other Australian universities but never implemented at USyd.

Feedback from attendees was unanimously positive: 100 per cent found the workshop “helpful or very helpful”, and more than 80 per cent reported feeling less isolated. Yet, for all its clarity and community, Balancing Bubs & Books would ultimately become a historical document of inaction. Its recommendations, written with the hope of real reform, were shelved, and the University never established the proposed Families Officer or on-campus childcare service for students.

Further, according to the 2016 Review of Potential for Childcare by the University of Sydney, vacancies at nearby locations including KU Union Children’s Centre, KU Carillon Avenue Children’s Services, and Boundary Lane Children’s Centre “were low or nonexistent at all three centres”, with Boundary Lane Centre indicating a waiting list of 18 months.

The report noted that while KU-run centres like KU Union and KU Carillon Avenue prioritised staff and students, even there, demand far outstripped supply.

“Vacancies that do exist tend to be on odd days; Mondays and Fridays, making it impossible for parents to maintain consistent work or study schedules,” the review stated.

Investigation

Nearby “occasional care” options such as the City of Sydney’s Redfern Occasional Child Care Centre are little better: spots “fill up quickly, particularly on popular days,” and bookings “can be made only two weeks in advance,” with no guarantee of placement.

Even in 2016, when USyd commissioned the report, it found an overall shortfall of 386 childcare places within a 2 km radius of the campus. The University has been aware of this shortage for nearly a decade, and has chosen not to act on it.

While other universities have since expanded their childcare networks, USyd has built none. The absence of on-campus facilities forces students into an oversubscribed and expensive private market, where the average daily fee for a permanent daycare spot ranges from $145 to $250 per child. While casual care — operated by the city of Sydney — averages at about $80, spots are not guaranteed as parents compete for each time slot. For an international PhD candidate without access to the government’s Child Care Subsidy, this is approximately $3,000+ a fortnight, a largely unmanageable cost on top of tuition and rent.

By contrast, every other major Australian university, including those in the Group of Eight (Go8, the leading research intensive universities), has long recognised childcare as essential educational infrastructure.

At the University of New South Wales (UNSW), four university-owned and operated centres: Owl’s House, Tigger’s Honeypot, Kanga’s House (which closed during Covid) and House at Pooh Corner, collectively provided 289 childcare places for children from birth to school age. Each of these centres were rated as “Exceeding National Standards”, and all were prioritised for staff and students, who also received fee discounts of up to 22 per cent. Even with long waitlists of 14-22 months, UNSW had a clear leg up in providing for parents.

Macquarie University operates two centres: Banksia Cottage and Gumnut Cottage, with a combined 140 places, both ‘Exceeding National Standards’. Staff and students receive discounts of 13–15 per cent, and the university runs additional vacation care programs for primary-aged children during school holidays.

Outside NSW, the pattern continues. The University of Melbourne provides 138 long-day-care places across two campus centres; the University of Queensland operates four; the University of Western Australia and Australian National University each host not-for-profit or university-funded facilities with priority access for students and staff. In total, USyd stands alone among its Go8 peers in offering no on-campus childcare at all.

The absence of childcare centres at USyd is cultural and structural, where other unis treat childcare as a prerequisite for gender equity; Sydney treats it as an optional service best outsourced to a market which has no desire to accommodate the universities teaching schedule and students budget constraints.

Following years of complaints, the University announced its Child Care Expansion Program (CCEP) in 2017, promising new centres and a long-term “Centre of Excellence” in early childhood learning. Consultants KU Children’s Services and Community Child Care Cooperative were engaged to review potential sites and recommend how to meet the estimated shortfall of 653 childcare places, projected to grow to 740 by 2020. Proposed locations included Victoria Park, the McLeay Building, and St John’s College land, and a plan that would have integrated long day care with the Faculty of Education.

But by 2018, minutes from the University’s Child Care Advisory Committee show that the scheme had quietly stalled. Developers like G8 Education had claimed “demand in the area was extremely low”, a finding contradicted by every previous survey. Rather than building new on-campus centres, the University shifted to exploring off-site options with private providers. By the end of 2018, no new facilities had been built.

In the years that followed, the Sydney University Postgraduate Representative Association (SUPRA) tried to fill the gap. In 2019, Francine Seeto, a caseworker at SUPRA, assisted in a student-led campaign to establish an occasional-care service on campus. In 2021, SUPRA surveyed student childcare needs at USyd, a small-scale attempt to revive advocacy work that had stalled after earlier initiatives. According to Seeto, the campaign initially planned a petition but pivoted to a survey, which ultimately gathered 24 responses, all from PhD students, the majority international. These respondents generally reported that they needed only occasional or short-term care, such as for a few hours to attend classes or conduct research, but they faced serious barriers to access, affordability, and eligibility.

While other universities have since expanded their childcare networks, USyd has built none.

SUPRA had hoped to use these results to make a business case to the University’s Deputy ViceChancellor (Education), arguing that demand was sufficient to make occasional on-campus childcare financially viable.

“We felt there was enough demand that the University could make money and really help out student parents,” Seeto recalled. Yet the initiative collapsed before it could reach the University Senate. “We didn’t have the resources or data”, she said, “and then COVID came, and everything stopped, much to my regret”.

When the University revisited the issue in August 2022, its new Childcare Plan read less like a commitment and more like an apology. The review noted 2,618 places across 42 local centres, with 65 per cent rated ‘Exceeding National Standards’ and 83 per cent reporting “some vacancies”. Availability fluctuated by day, making regular bookings highly difficult for students. Despite this, the University declared that no new on-campus childcare facilities would be built. Instead, staff and students would be “assisted to find suitable care” off-campus, through a “childcare support team” and a promise to “consider the feasibility of a temporary crèche during exam periods”.

The language of the 2022 update, heavy on “awareness”, “support”, and “flexible work arrangements”, stood in stark contrast to the practical recommendations of 2016. What had once been a matter of educational access and gender equity had been reframed as a question of individual responsibility. As the University’s own report put it, there were “no resources (land or funding)” available for new builds. For a billion-dollar institution whose peers, UNSW, UniMelb, and UQ, operate multiple campus-based childcare centres, the decision reflected not a lack of space but a lack of will.

In effect, the University of Sydney had outsourced

childcare to the private market, ignoring the realities faced by postgraduate parents. SUPRA continues efforts to revive the issue and recently established a Carers Officer position in the SUPRA Council with responsibility for advocacy on behalf of student parents and carers. “We’ve had parents suspend or drop out entirely because they can’t find childcare”, Seeto said. “The University knows this, it’s been raised for years, but not much changes.”

The Women

There are no rooms or study spaces at the University of Sydney where students can bring their children. While breastfeeding rooms exist, they are few, hidden, and unsuited for study or play. They are available for privacy but not participation.

“You can feed your baby, but you can’t stay to write your thesis”, one parent quipped.

Until recently, postgraduate students with children could live at St Paul’s College Graduate House, an experiment led by former Dean Antone MartinhoTruswell who welcomed families and academics into shared community housing. After his departure, family housing was scrapped and postgraduates were folded into the undergraduate model.

Thirty-year-olds are now expected to live like firstyears, functioning as a Peter Pan setup, not a collegiate system seen at other prestigious universities like Oxford and Cambridge.

Martinho-Truswell now works as Operations Manager at the Sydney Policy Lab, with a focus on building flourishing communities. Clearly, the university has staff who can help guide the development of adequate policies on childcare and inclusion. The question remains why this topic seems forgotten; is it a lack of resources or rather, a lack of leadership?

Currently, St Paul’s has undeveloped land and mud piles behind the oval that could be used to develop purpose built housing for students with children, or a childcare centre. Such a project would not be a newly formed collaboration; the St Pauls College McMillan building (completed in 2018) hosts the Sydney University operated Physics Road Learning Hub on its first two floors.

Yet, the University offers no alternative housing for students with children, unlike universities such as UniMelb, which provides family apartments through UniLodge Carlton; ANU which offers “Childers Street family housing”; and UQ, which provides on-campus family flats for international students.

For international Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students, the system can become a nightmare of dependency. International students, on Student 500

Visas, who form relationships and have children with Australian or New Zealand citizens often find themselves locked out of both Medicare and the Child Care Subsidy (CCS), even when their child holds Australian citizenship. This exclusion forces them to shoulder exorbitant medical and childcare costs or rely financially and logistically on their partners, leaving many women trapped in situations of coercive control and domestic abuse.

Australia’s immigration and social support frameworks intersect to create what one advocate called “policymade vulnerability”. There is no visa pathway for international students who become the primary carers of Australian children, unlike in the United Kingdom, which grants custody-based visas. The domestic violence visa protections available under Australian law apply only to those previously on partner visas, excluding student visa holders entirely.

In some cases, the Family Court of Australia has ordered international student mothers to remain in the country with full custody of their child, even when their visa status, lack of income, and ineligibility for childcare support make compliance impossible. For these women, the choice is devastating: stay in Australia and risk destitution, or leave and lose their child.

The University’s policies compound this crisis. Without access to subsidised on-campus childcare or dedicated housing for student parents, international HDR candidates raising Australian children are left isolated and unsupported.

“If you give birth, we expect you back in four weeks,” said one international PhD candidate. Another said “If you stay home, your visa lapses; if you leave, your child loses their parent.”

While the University of Sydney’s HR policy regards itself as “family friendly”, parental support for HDR students remains uneven and often illusory. University scholarships allow paid leave of typically 12 weeks after a student completes their first 12 months in the award, but externally funded or faculty-based ones, which make up a large share of HDR programs, provide nothing. The result is a tiered system where a student’s right to recover from childbirth depends on which funding body happens to back their research.

An anonymous PhD candidate in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences described having no parental leave at all under her faculty scholarship. “I collated all my sick leave and holidays to get one month off”, she said. “I was wearing the baby in a carrier and working at the same time. I love my PhD, but it was exhausting. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.” She later developed burnout, explaining that the lack of paid leave and the pressure to maintain progress left her “doing two fulltime jobs without sleep”.

Under current rules, HDR students who take unpaid leave risk losing scholarship income or even visa status if they fall behind. International candidates are particularly vulnerable, since the University does not subsidise parental cover for faculty or externally funded scholarships. Honi Soit understands, ProVice-Chancellor (Researcher Training) Louise Sharpe indicated that the University would not allocate central funding at this time, for parental leave, and instead encouraged faculties to top up their scholarships if they wished to provide support, a responsibility most declined.

For staff, the picture is scarcely better. A lecturer in the Faculty of Medicine and Health called the University’s approach “explicitly hostile”.

“Taking maternity leave is treated like they’ve done you a favour”, she said. “You need to get a statutory declaration just to prove you’ll be the primary caregiver, I had to find a justice of the peace while my twins were in the NICU.”

She compared Sydney’s system to Cambridge, where she also teaches: “At Cambridge, I just emailed HR and it was approved. Here, there’s no guidance, no cover for your research grants, no one to supervise your PhD students. You end up working through your leave because the University hasn’t put structures in place to help. In fact, in the USA they have subsidised eggfreezing.”

Both women link the problem to corporatisation and sexism. “It’s all about profit and prestige”, she said. “They imagine every scholar to be a wealthy man with no caring duties. Female academics are expected to patch the system by relying on unpaid labour from mothers, sisters, and mothers-in-law. The University is literally subsidised by women’s invisible work.”

The other student echoed this: “Academia feels closed to pregnancy. I’d never seen another PhD student with a baby. If I had, maybe I’d have felt it was possible.”

“Taking maternity leave is treated like they’ve done you a favour.”

In reality, many students at USyd have children, even though the exact number is unknown due to USyd’s lack of data. To accommodate these needs, Eva Midtgaard, the current SUPRA Carer’s Officer, worked with SUPRA to establish a Carer Officer in 2023, hosting monthly events such as Zoo trips, movie screenings and play days for students and their children to attend on weekends. The events have been very successful, attracting 80 to 100 people — predominantly HDR students — at each event. SUPRA only receives $8,000 a year in Student Services and Amenities Fee (SSAF) to host these events. While the terms for SSAF funding is that it may cover childcare, 0 per cent of it is being used for this.

“There where no social events on campus welcoming students to bring their children, this felt exclusionary especially as our access to childcare is so poor.” Said Midtgaard.

Ultimately, the most vulnerable scholars, single parents, international parents, mothers on scholarships without parental leave, and families with limited means are backed into corners: do they study or do they survive? These often cannot coexist at USyd.

What Now?

If the University is serious about equity and inclusion, it should act on what its own reports and communities have been saying for years.

1. Establish on-campus childcare and occasional-care services

Reinstate the 2017 Childcare Expansion Program, with at least one Centre of Excellence integrated into the Faculty of Education and a smaller occasional-care facility for short-term needs.

2. Create a Student Family and Parenting Policy.

The University should establish a position that works with the SUPRA Carer’s Officer; a single administrative body should coordinate childcare access, parenting facilities, bursaries, and policy advocacy for both staff and students - reviving the “Families Officer” model proposed in 2015.

3. Guarantee paid parental leave across all HDR scholarships.

The University should immediately review all internally and externally funded HDR scholarships with a view

to require they provide minimum paid parental and partner leave. Faculties should not be allowed to decline support on the basis of funding source.

4. Collect and publish data on studentparents.

Systematic data collection on parents, number of children, need for childcare, completion rates, and attrition would make visible what has long been ignored. This should be included in enrollment forms.

5. Provide campus housing options for families.

The University should establish postgraduate family housing near campus, managed in partnership with existing colleges or University Residences.

6. Ensure support to international students.

Lobby for policy reform to include international HDR students with Australian children in the Child Care Subsidy (CCS) and domestic violence visa protections, while providing interim financial and legal assistance through the University.

7. Make flexibility structural and not personal.

Flexible work and study arrangements should not mean “you’re on your own.” Scheduling tutorials, seminars, and HDR events during family-friendly hours, and providing hybrid attendance options, would enable real accessibility.

55 per cent of undergraduate students identify as female, 59 per cent of postgraduate coursework students identify as female, and 52 per cent of research students identify as female: if women are the foundation of the university, then childcare is the necessary infrastructure. Remove the barriers, and build.

Statement attributed to University of Sydney spokesperson:

We have an opt-in approach to our support for our students who are also carers. We run welcome events for students with children to connect them with a social network at university and provide information about support.

Special considerations and timetable adjustments are available to help students manage short-term responsibilities, and students with ongoing caring responsibilities can register with our Inclusion and Disability Services to help develop an academic plan appropriate for their own particular needs.

Wellbeing support is also available to help students manage their caring responsibilities alongside their studies.

There’s no question students and staff with parent or carer responsibilities face additional hurdles, and we offer a range of resources to ensure they can access the support they need.

While we don’t currently offer childcare on our campuses, we do have existing relationships with some childcare centres near Camperdown and students and staff may be able to make use of those agreements.

We also provide information about nearby childcare centres, finding occasional care and out of hours school care and where to find facilities for parents across our campuses like baby change tables and parent rooms.

Student parents can also apply for special consideration or arrangements if they need.

Victor Zhang writes for peace with justice.

A Collective Voice for Peace with Justice

Earlier this year, the Sydney Peace Foundation separated from the University of Sydney after 27 years. The Foundation existed under the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences and awards Australia’s only international prize for peace.

The story of the Sydney Peace Foundation and Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney presents a vision for what education for peace with justice could be.

The Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS) was established at University of Sydney (USyd) in 1988 by Professor Stuart Rees, Dr Mary Lane, and Professor Peter King.

At the University of Sydney, Peace and Conflict Studies sits within the School of Social and Political Sciences in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences.

The inaugural Director of both the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS) and the Sydney Peace Foundation Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees spoke to Honi Soit about the history of the Foundation and the role of Peace and Conflict Studies.

Professor Rees described the unique interdisciplinary nature of Peace and Conflict Studies, saying “It has to trespass into all sorts of fields of inquiry. So it doesn’t fit into a discipline, paradoxically, it can only be a discipline by not being one.”

Associate Professor Jake Lynch, Director of CPACS from 2007–2016, said that Peace and Conflict Studies is a “value-explicit field of study, with a positive value of peace with justice”.

Describing its interdisciplinary nature, Professor Rees worked closely with the distinguished nuclear physicist Dr Gordon Rodley, saying “Whether it was nuclear physics, poetry, the law, or history, you had to be a bit of a polymath to progress in peace studies.”

Professor Rees points to the unique scale of work undertaken by the staff and students of CPACS outside the university walls. Students went down to Port Botany during an industrial dispute to learn about worker solidarity.

Professor Rees said “Students spent time on the picket line to learn about labour, to learn about the rights of workers, to learn about the consequences of privatisation, to learn about the apparent power of trade unions.

“More was learned in a couple of nights huddled around fires with workers” than from just theory alone. Professor Rees aptly summarises the hollowness in educating students in Peace and Conflict Studies without active advocacy in the field as akin to “pretending you could talk about the slaughter of people in Gaza without confronting the cruelty of Israel”.

The Sydney Peace Foundation was established in 1998, out of the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, as a foundation of the University of Sydney to promote a “collective voice for peace with justice”.

The Foundation awards the annual Sydney Peace Prize, Australia’s only international prize for peace, recognising and promoting leading figures in social justice, peace, and human rights.

Foundation

events and panels, engages in public debate, and partners with advocates in peacebuilding.

Past laureates of the Sydney Peace Prize include Archbishop Desmond Tutu for his work as Chairman of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission; Xanana Gusmão, First President of East Timor; Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International; author and journalist Naomi Klein; the Black Lives Matter movement; and the Uluru Statement from the Heart.

In 2003, the Sydney Peace Foundation awarded the Sydney Peace Prize to Palestinian scholar and legislator Hanan Ashrawi.

Ashrawi’s prize citation reads: “For her commitment to human rights, to the peace process in the Middle East, and for her courage in speaking against oppression, against corruption and for justice.”

By all means, Ashrawi is a moderate and principled voice. Her record suggests that she is nothing but a dedicated voice for peace: serving as Independent Commissioner for Human Rights in Palestine; believing in co-existence between Jews and Palestinians; calling for an end to occupation of the West Bank; supporting the right of resistance; and being skeptical

of US-led peace ‘processes’. Ashrawi served as a Minister in Yasser Arafat’s second cabinet from 1996–1998.

Ashrawi was unafraid to challenge Arafat. In an interview with Robert Fisk after Arafat’s death, Ashrawi said that over disagreements “[Arafat’s] advisers would come to me and say, ‘How can you speak to the Chairman like that? How dare you criticise him.’ But someone had to”.

Ashrawi’s award drew praise from previous Sydney Peace Prize laureates Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Chairman of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

However, the Peace Prize jury’s unanimous choice to award a Palestinian drew the ire of the Israel lobby who considered Ashrawi to be an apologist for terrorism.

The Foundation and everyone involved in the Peace Prize — including then NSW Premier Bob Carr, who presented the Prize — came under intense pressure from the Israel lobby to withdraw their support for Ashrawi.

Investigative journalist Antony Loewenstein, in his book My

Israel Question, observes the vitriolic deluge that sought to vilify Ashrawi and writes about the personal backlash he received in publicly defending Ashrawi’s award.

Loewenstein writes in Hanan Ashrawi and the Price of Dissent, first published in ZNet then the Sydney Morning Herald, that the concerted attack on Ashrawi was because Ashrawi is an articulate, moderate, Palestinian peace-maker. The attacks were designed “to delegitimise the Palestinian cause”.

Delivering the Peace Prize Lecture, Ashrawi made a powerful proclamation: “I will not be a broken or silenced Palestinian, especially when it comes to the cause of peace and I will continue to speak out against injustice and oppression everywhere and I will continue to relay my people’s message because I don’t believe peace is made by defeated people.”

In the following year, the 2004 Sydney Peace Prize was awarded to the esteemed Indian author and activist Arundhati Roy. Roy, being a fierce critic of American imperialism and the United States-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, was suggested by American political orthodoxy to be unfit to be the recipient of a peace prize.

Roy wrote in her Guardian pieces The Algebra of Infinite Justice and Brutality Smeared in Peanut Butter a scathing rebuke of the United State’s devastating incursion into Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11: “The bombing of Afghanistan is not revenge for New York and Washington. It is yet another act of terror against the people of the world”.

In the lead-up to the 2004 Sydney Peace Prize, Professor Rees rebutted Roy’s detractors stating that “to advocate peace with justice you have to be partisan on social and political issues” and that Roy “is painting a vision of justice and showing how it might be achieved”.

Professor Rees wrote that the ideal of peace with justice “is often perceived as controversial.

“The choice of a noncontroversial candidate for a peace prize would be a safe option but unlikely to prompt debate or to increase understanding. Consensus usually encourages compliance, often anaesthetises and seldom informs.”

Speaking to Honi, Professor Rees reflects that after awarding Ashrawi the 2003 Prize, while the “Foundation emerged from that year financially poorer, [they emerged] morally much stronger.

“We drew a line in the sand and said, ‘We won’t put up with this bullying. We won’t put up with this intimidation.’”

After 28 years of operation, the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies was downgraded into a Department in 2016. The University said that the Centre was restructured due to declining student enrolments and financial pressures.

The downgrade was opposed not just by academics and students within these walls, but by prominent members of the public including both federal

and state parliamentarians from Labor and the Greens.

Labor parliamentarians, including Federal MPs Laurie Ferguson, Melissa Parke, Maria Vamvakinou, State MPs Lynda Voltz, Julia Finn, and Shaoquette Moselmane wrote to the then Acting Dean of FASS Professor Barbara Caine saying “It cannot be good for our democracy and academic reputation to attenuate such voices.”

In a similar letter to Professor Caine, Greens parliamentarians, including Mehreen Faruqi, David Shoebridge, Jenny Leong, Jamie Parker, Jan Barham, and Jeremy Buckingham, defended CPACS saying that it “has been instrumental in bringing to the public agenda many vital and controversial issues which do not make headlines in the mainstream media”.

In 2021, the Department was closed altogether, with the Masters of Peace and Conflict Studies, alongside both Masters of Human Rights and Development Studies, merged into the Masters of Social Justice with the three specific disciplines offered as specialisations within the new degree.

At the time of the closure of the Department, the University said that the intent of the new Masters of Social Justice program was to “expose all students to units in human rights, peace and conflict and development studies” and that the closure of the Department had “no associated losses of employment or expertise”.

In response to the closure of the Department, Emeritus Professor in Political Economy Frank Stilwell, and former President of CPACS Erik Paul, wrote an impassioned plea in Pearls and Irritations on the value of Peace and Conflict Studies.

Stilwell and Paul argued that the intent of the Peace and Conflict Studies program was “to be far more comprehensive and educationally imaginative than just crafting courses to generate income, which seems to have become universities’ driving goal”.

They highlighted advocacy campaigns such as Indigenous Reconciliation, Defend and Extend Medicare, West Papuan Liberation, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions campaign, and supporting Tamil Liberation.

Recalling what Professor Rees

wrote, “to advocate peace with justice you have to be partisan on social and political issues”.

Stilwell and Paul called on USyd to reconsider and bolster the “continuation of existing research, advocacy and praxis projects, not to amalgamate it into eventual oblivion”.

After 27 years of operation, auspiced under USyd, the Sydney Peace Foundation was disestablished from the University in May 2025, and became an independent legal entity. The University cited “growing separation between the objectives of the Sydney Peace Foundation’s mission” and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences’.

The University said that the Foundation’s Council voted to separate and the University will continue to support the work of the Foundation.

The disestablishment drew fierce criticism from the Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW). In a letter to the Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott and Dean of FASS Lisa Adkins, President of MAPW Sue Wareham OAM expressed strong concerns over USyd’s “waning commitment to peace”.

Wareham described the disengagement as an “illtimed decision” at a time when Australia should be promoting peace and the importance of upholding international law.

In Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott’s reply to Wareham, as seen by Honi, Scott said that changing governance requirements and priorities led to the eventual separation of the University and Foundation.

This year’s Sydney Peace Prize is awarded to eminent jurist and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, “for a lifetime of advocating for fundamental human rights,

peace with justice, and the rights of women”.

Judge Pillay is currently the Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Commission handed down a report in September 2025 concluding that Israel has committed a genocide in Gaza.

Judge Pillay said that she is “deeply honoured” to accept the Peace Prize. Pillay said that “This award is not mine alone. It belongs to all those who, across decades and continents, have stood up against injusticeoften at great personal cost. It belongs to every survivor who found the courage to testify, to every human rights defender who remains steadfast in the face of threats and hostility, and to every young person who dares to believe in a better, more just world.”

In her career as jurist, Judge Pillay defended anti-apartheid activists in apartheid South Africa until she was appointed as the first woman of colour to the High Court of South Africa in 1995 by Nelson Mandela. Shortly after, she sat as Judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) after the Rwandan genocide from 1995–2003, where she was President Judge for the last four years.

Judge Pillay set an international legal precedent in the case of The Prosecutor v Jean-Paul Akayesu, where the ICTR ruled that rape and sexual assault is a component crime of genocide.

Judge Pillay served on the International Criminal Court from 2003–2008 before becoming UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. In 2021, she was appointed as Chair to the aforementioned UN fact-finding commission investigating war crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

In an interview with POLITICO, Judge Pillay emphatically states that “the international community need not wait for the report from a UN body like the commission. Third states have a duty under international law to not just punish genocide, but also to prevent genocide”.

Judge Pillay will accept the Prize from Lord Mayor of Sydney Clover Moore on 6th November at the Sydney Peace Prize Lecture and Award Ceremony at Sydney Town Hall.

In conversation with Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, we reflected on what education for peace with justice means. Professor Rees views the closure of the Sydney Peace Foundation and downgrade of the status of Peace and Conflict Studies, as linked to the “[mis]treatment of students and the casualisation of the labor force” and symptomatic of a wider crisis in our universities.

Professor Rees described a vigorous atmosphere of student engagement and debate when he served on the University Senate, the highest governing body of the University.

“When the idea of introducing fees came up, there were huge student protests the same night as the Senate meeting. So there was a kind of open chemistry of questioning, of debate, to hold university management accountable.”

Professor Rees says the atmosphere of vigorous debate has declined over the years. In the end, Professor Rees said that there is “no real place for an institution like peace studies or the Sydney Peace Foundation”.

Despite this change in atmosphere of the university, Professor Rees pointed to the 2024 Gaza Solidarity Encampment on the USyd Quadrangle Lawns as an uplifting example of vigorous debate. He described the Encampment as an “an encouraging feature of university life” and an example of a practical study in “peace and human rights”.

While the Foundation is now formally separated from the University and the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies long gone, they both reflect a vision for what education for good could be like.

Judge Pillay says that while our world is in crisis, “marred by war, poverty, racism, and inequality”, she acknowledges the “voices for justice are louder, more connected, and more courageous than ever before.

“The path ahead is neither easy nor short, but it is a path we must walk together: with integrity, with compassion, and with determination.”

There can be no retreat from peace with justice in our world in crisis.

Print Is Not Dead

Between the witching hours of 11pm and 2am, mere hours after the Semester 2 Week 11 was sent to print, the Honi editors went on an excursion to a place that up until now, has only existed in our dreams: the News Limited printing facility.

Last Monday night, Honi travelled to Chullora to receive the play-by-play of the mechanisms, mathematical complications, CMYK settings and the quite literal rollercoaster that our beloved paper undergoes to get printed every week.

This is the trip that many Honi editors past have yearned for, and each time the timing and logistics have been too difficult. The nature of our term is that while we’ve got so much work to do and so many grand ideas, there’s hardly time to do anything that’s not already baked into our annual schedule of commitments. Thanks to the dedication of our tireless Publications Manager Mickie Quick and Production Manager at Spot Newspapers Kieran, we had the extraordinary privilege of seeing exactly how our newspaper is made. As far as we know, this is the first time that Honi editors have ever visited our printing press.

We rolled up to the site courtesy of Ondine being one of the rare editors to hold a driver’s license, and on arrival we were all given hi-vis vests by our guide and Production Manager of the facility Kieran, and warned

that the security guard standing a few metres away from us had a gun.

This site happens to be the largest printing press in Australia, largely because there aren’t many printing sites left in the country. Kieran explained that the conditions in which Australia’s print culture was built have largely eroded, making it very difficult to build or even maintain the structures which allow our precious print media to survive.

He told us how the printing press relies on paper created at a newsprint paper mill, and that the only adequately-sized paper mill left in Australia is located in Tasmania. The Boyer Mill in Tasmania was owned by the Norwegian multinational paper and pulp manufacturer Norske Skog. Earlier this year the Boyer Mill was sold to Melbourne-based property developer David Marriner.

Another comparably large paper mill in Victoria is now defunct because of a particular species of possum, not native to the area, which has proliferated to an unmanageable degree on the plantation land and made it impossible to grow or harvest pine trees. Before that, the amount of paper produced in Victoria was so vast that the Port of Melbourne exported ten times as much paper as it consumed; now it’s barely able to meet all of its consumption needs. Kieran added that the maintenance

demands of printers such as News Limited were so intense that it would cost around $1 billion to cover annual maintenance and operations.

Back in the facility, we were shown to an area that was entirely fenced off: a cavernous concrete room with enormous wheels of newsprint stacked on top of one another, each weighing 1.5 tonnes. The facility uses roughly 100 tonnes of newsprint a week.

Looking upwards, the arm of the gantry crane had an attachment where it would vacuum up one of these enormous rolls to be removed from its casing.

The core of the newsprint wheel is made to spec by the paper mill to fit with the gantry crane attachment. Such is the level of vertical integration in the newspaper business. The crane lifts newsprint wheels to conveyor belts where each wheel is scanned and tagged, before it is picked up by robots that cart it off the next stage of production.

We were warned that if we were to enter the room, we ran the risk of being crushed by 1.5 tonnes of paper.

However, the paper needed something to be printed on it — and nothing happens automatically, as the Honi editors know all too well.

Papers have text and images printed on them thanks to plates: flat metal rectangles, each with a different pigment — cyan, magenta, yellow, and the last in black. These four plates had to be laid precisely on top of each other to ensure the colour was accurate, a process known as registration.

Colours are a bit complicated because the system is very different in digital and print formats, so printing something designed on a digital platform can cause problems. CMYK is the default setting for all print media, because it’s a setting that has no inherent light, something that is only necessary when you’re looking at something on a computer screen. However, on many digital media it’s more common to use RGB — red, green, and black — to achieve an effect that may look the same on a screen but can turn out very differently in print, because it integrates light that can’t be translated into print.

Kieran spoke about the dying art of being able to edit photos to look not just passable but good in print. He told us how sometimes he has to work with “desktop publishers” who don’t understand how the print process works and do things like send advertisements containing QR codes that can’t scan because they’re too small or printed in registration black rather than print black (which look the same on digital but function very differently in print), and how mistakes such as this happen because there’s a bridge between people who work in digital design, laying up Canva projects in their corporate offices, and people who are physically laying plates, who understand the history of paper and bromide, who know how blank sheets turn into smooth newspapers and who spend so much time awake at night that they call a midnight break “lunchtime”.

Plates used to be created by hand, with about thirty people working around the clock in one room to make them using bromide. This

was an extremely intensive and inefficient process that’s now been replaced with machines, meaning that only one person needs to be there to oversee about 60,000 newspapers being printed. The plates, made of 100 per cent recycled aluminium, can only be used once, and then have to be sent back to a smelter to be reused. Honi had the good fortune to keep a couple of plates from our own print run as a souvenir.

The plates are pressed between pressurised cylinders covered with rubber blankets that have to be cleaned for every job, as they tend to leave an imprint of ink residue. The cylinders turned at 15,000 rotations per minute, making the system very efficient and very fast.

Although 60,000 may seem like a lot, the press actually works at about 60 per cent capacity. Demand for print media has decreased over the last couple of decades, and technological advances like automatic plates have made it much easier to reduce labour demands and have as few people as possible on the 6pm–4am shift, when most papers get printed. Kieran spoke to us about how he had worked on the site for decades and had been reading Honi since he started studying at USyd in 1989. He told us that the News Limited site was “a really, really good system; the best I’ve ever seen”.

Being the largest printer in Australia, the News Limited press prints nearly all of the newspapers in NSW, as well as around half of the newspapers in both Victoria and Queensland. To give you an idea of how quickly the newspapers get printed, our 2,000 copy edition took a little less than 15 minutes; although it had to be reprinted when we noticed that there were words on the cover of our Honis that weren’t supposed to be there. The rubber blankets hadn’t quite been cleaned off from the previous job, which was a JB Hi-Fi catalogue, and so there

were several advertisements we could make out that had left faint imprints on every cover that had been printed.

The magic happened in a gigantic room full of conveyor belts streaming in all directions, thousands of newspapers held by robotic tongs, and slots where editions would neatly form identical piles, to be shipped out in a carton. Our edition had been rolled up into a reel, which is a tight round package that can contain up to 10,000 copies. It got rolled up into a second reel when it was reprinted to get rid of the ink residue, and the first lot got sent off to a place vaguely reminiscent of a foam pit. We wanted to swim in it. The pit had a flat pipe spewing damaged newspapers into it, and thousands of papers had somehow been bunched up into gigantic squares and sealed with zip ties. Most of the papers had gotten scrunched up into balls or half-shredded, so it was astonishing to think that they could be squished into such precise squares. These were sold, at $200 a ton, to paper recycling plants.

Meanwhile, the Week 11 edition — which was figuratively hot off the press and literally cold off the press — had transformed into a neat stack of bundles, which our Publications Manager Mickie loaded into his car to be put on stands later that day (it was past 2am at this point).

The Honi editors, having hardly recovered from finishing layup about 24 hours prior, stumbled back off to Ondine’s car, regretfully returning our hi-vis and bidding adieu to the astronomically underappreciated printing press that produces our beloved Honi Soit On the way back home at 3am, we were regaled with stories of Shanghainese vodka containing eyebrow-raising ingredients and sang a drastically inaccurate rendition of the ten-minute version of All Too Well

Is the University Doing Enough for Sexual Violence?

The Government Wants to Know

Ellie Robertson calls for more radical action.

Content Warning: This article mentions incidents of sexual violence, bullying, and gender-based violence.

On the 5th February 2025, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) issued a Compliance Assessment Notice, requesting the University of Sydney (USyd) to respond to specific regulatory concerns identified. This is a separate requirement outside of the annual reregistration process. These concerns focused on student safety and wellbeing and specifically noted the ongoing issues of sexual and gender-based (GBV) violence on campus. The notice requested that the university provide documentation showing their compliance with specific Threshold Standards (TS) in response to the identified risks in the notice.

This follows a long series of incidents of sexual violence at the University and University-affiliated Residential Colleges. Throughout 2022, St John’s College students were found to be non-consensually posting nude photos of residents into a Facebook Group. In November 2023, an incident occurred where a St Paul’s student allegedly had their ear bitten off at a St Andrew’s event. Following this, students at St Andrew’s were accused of actively being misogynistic, homophobic, and intimidating at multiple events, resulting in a ban from the Intercol Dinners that year.

In October 2024, 21 St Paul’s students were suspended, as well as six expelled, due to an incident of sexual degradation of a resident. In the same week, college students and members of the Young Liberals tore up a copy of the Red Zone Report during RepsElect — a Student Representative Council (SRC) meeting to appoint Office Bearers. Since these incidents, there have been multiple incidents on campus that prove the University are not doing enough for the culture of GBV and sexual violence on campus.

The incidents listed above are only within the Residential Colleges. In broader campus life, we have seen a consistent presence of ‘Abortion Abolitionists’ over the past couple of years, who are known for spreading hateful rhetoric against women, gender-diverse people, and victim-survivors. More recently, on 11th September, a student confronted a man in the female toilets photographing women under the cubicles. This left two female students and one female staff member victim-survivors to an unconsensual, disturbing act of GBV. In both of these incidents, recurring or not, the University have been complacent in their support for victim-survivors and bypassers.

What Has TEQSA Asked For?

The issued Compliance Assessment Notice is separate to the typical annual reregistration. The annual re-registration, after changes in policy in 2024, now includes a comprehensive Self-Assessment Report (SAR) that demonstrates how the institution’s corporate and academic governance bodies assure their compliance with the Threshold Standards, in addition to an explicit Research Requirements Report (RRR). The RRR must be accompanied with an Index of Evidence (IoE) which shows the institutional practices that support the relevant standards.

Honi has seen documents of the approved response to these requests, drafted by the University TEQSA Working Group. The group consisted of the Deputy

Vice-Chancellor (Education) Joanne Wright, interim Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) Julie Cairney, Chair of Academic Board Jane Hanrahan, Office of General Counsel, Academic Registrar Mark Erickson, and the University Governance Office. It went through multiple bodies for overview checks and endorsements: Senate Working Group on 7th August, University Executive on 14th August, Academic Board on 23rd September, and then at Senate on the 26th September for terminal approval.

In the cover letter email draft, there were a few key efforts noted as focus points of the documents — approved and signed off by Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott, Chancellor David Thodey, and Chair of Academic Board Jane Hanrahan.

The first point focused on a cultural renewal pushed by the findings of the 2017 Broderick Review and the 2018 Red Zone Report. The 2017 Broderick Review was an independent review, led by former Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick, into the culture of the Residential Colleges. She noted sexual violence, bullying, hazing, and an alcohol-centric culture as the main issues found. The 2018 Red Zone Report is an investigation led by End Rape on Campus Australia that detailed unsettling behaviour at the Residential Colleges, often being forms of sexual harassment and assault, alongside hazing rituals and pranks. This point then went on to note that the University and the Residential Colleges “continue to prioritise working together to promote student safety and wellbeing and to eliminate [GBV].”

In the draft of the SAR, the working group stated that “notable progress has been made in managing sexual harassment misconduct following the Broderick Review, including annual publication of a report on sexual misconduct and sexual harassment.” After this, the draft describes the “dedicated ongoing resources” that were implemented after the 2017 Broderick Review: a Revised Complaint Project, an Annual Report on Sexual Misconduct, responses to TEQSA’s annual compliance exercise on sexual harm prevention, and a quarterly student safety report. Furthermore, the University outlined their plans for 2026 to address the continuing standing issues: to “undertake closer monitoring and attestation activities with the Residential Colleges”, particularly through considering their affiliation status requirements.

Currently, the connections between the University and the Residential Colleges are interesting and complex. Whilst the Colleges are historically affiliated and outwardly represent the University, they are, and always have been, independent institutions, established by their own Acts of parliament; this means they have their own forms of governance and admissions systems. With the colleges having a lack of reliance on University funding or operations assistance, the University has had a consistent get-out-of-jail-free card when asked to take accountability for the issues within these institutions. Notably, former Vice-Chanceller Michael Spence emphasised this lack of involvement the University, as an institution, has in the governance and operations of the Colleges. Though they’re independent, the Colleges continue to be strongly and notoriously affiliated with the University.

Has the University Been Compliant?

One would think the countless media outrages would be enough for USyd to completely dissociate themselves from these establishments. That would,

of course, prove how willing they are to diminish sexual violence on campus once and for all. Unfortunately, the University has had a staunch history of refusing to do so, and finding any means possible to not disaffiliate. Instead, management has implemented policies, complaints systems, and taken symbolic ‘actions’ to rectify cultures of misogyny around campus — such as renaming ‘O-Week’ to ‘Welcome Week’ (a demonstrably really effective and important measure).

With management attempting to prove to TEQSA that their current model to deal with sexual and GBV on campus is compliant with the TS, it’s important to note exactly how well these changes have worked (or how they’ve barely changed anything).

One of the main implementations mentioned was the Revised Student Complaint Project, introduced in June 2025. This change included an updated complaint webpage which supposedly offers a “more accessible and comprehensive complaints system”. The complaint system allows students to report — either a disclosure or a complaint — sexual misconduct to the University.

A disclosure report is for victim-survivors who seek assistance and support after an incident, but do not want any investigation or further action by the University. A complaint report is a report from a victim-survivor who does want to take the incident further. In the most recent (2024) annual report, the statistics of reports showed a major jump from 2022, with 121 in 2022 to 231 in 2024. This could be partially due to the fact the annual report has become more established since its first round — 2022 was the first year of it being published publicly — but it is notable that the jump in numbers have risen alongside the increase in domestic violence and femicide in Australia. It’s also difficult to determine if that increase is due to increased assaults or people becoming more comfortable in reporting.

Within the 231 reports, 176 were disclosures and 55 were complaints: 38 complaints were filed by victim-survivors, 10 were bystanders, and 7 were University-led due to safety concerns for staff and students. The findings also detailed the extent to which the complaints were handled throughout the year. Of the 55 complaints, seven were fully substantiated with ten processes ongoing after 31st December 2024. Only two complaints proceeded in disciplinary action against the perpetrator.

This leaves 38 unresolved complaints across the year. This is due to various reasons that are outlined in the annual report, however a common reason that stood out was the complainant not providing enough detail. Something that isn’t mentioned in the report, and isn’t particularly prominent in any of the University’s discussions around sexual violence, is the complexities surrounding victim-survivors reporting and how trauma can impact this heavily. Particularly with USyd’s history of scandals surrounding its lack of support, accountability, and action on sexual and GBV, it is unsurprising that victim-survivors do not want to provide details about their assault to an institution that consistently upholds a culture of victim-blaming, shame, and elitism.

With many of the major news stories of sexual and GBV on campus deriving from the Colleges, addressing the fact that they have their own complaints system is crucial when looking at USyd’s overall safety issues. Students and residents are advised to begin by going through the college’s internal

administration, and then go through the University complaint system if they’re not satisfied with the outcome. The main issue with this is the lack of transparency around complaints from institutions widely known for silencing victim-survivors. The colleges’ complaint system also has no public report or statistics, and is only dealt with internally. Thus, it is far more difficult to hold them to account and understand the extent that the issue is prevalent.

A former College resident earlier this year told Honi that “[the colleges are] a shield from the outside world, there are no consequences.” Another College resident told Honi that “the staff are limited by the fact that student leadership wields a lot of influence at [said College].”

If the outcome and processes of these issues are mainly influenced by that of student leadership and overall culture of the colleges, how can sexual violence in these institutions truly be addressed by the University?

Practical, Non-Policy Driven Solutions

When sexual violence is a long-standing issue that lingers in the corners of our campus, the University must take more action than adding a couple more policies and procedures. Words on a page, evidence of compliance, publishing statistics…

None of this stops, or even limits, the very real, harmful, and disturbing culture of violence we see on our campus.

The incidents that are reported, and the many that go unreported, are not isolated or separate from each other. They are the result of an awful acceptance of misogynistic values and true inaction from the University. The University has been told time and time again, by people in student spaces all the way to parliament, that the colleges must be dismantled to ensure a true reform in USyd’s culture.

The ‘Abolish the Colleges’ campaign, initially started by the USyd Women’s Collective and more recently endorsed and supported by the NSW Greens, has been a movement that has been ongoing for years. There have been major protests and stunts on campus pushing for the Residential Colleges to be abolished and transformed into safe and affordable student housing. With the response to TEQSA having noted reviewing the affiliation requirements, it is crucial to understand that the Residential Colleges have had too many opportunities to reform their current system. Even with decades of policy reform, external investigations, and consent education, the colleges have proven to simply be unreformable.

We have seen enough additions of further consent education, new complaints systems, and statements of condemnation of sexual and GBV. These are not impactful changes. They have not worked so far, and they will not work in the near future. We need to see more radical and long-lasting changes on our campus to ensure students feel safe, listened to, and cared for.

I am unconvinced that the suggested changes being made in the draft to TEQSA will help students on campus. Hopefully, TEQSA will push the University to commit to more focus on abolishing the culture of sexual violence, rather than simply making promises they’ve already made before.

You Can’t Have This Empty Room!

Around a year ago, I committed what the university administration would probably call a crime. As a journalist, I am inherently nosy, and I have the tendency to snoop. Thus, I found myself in an old, historic building on campus, filled with all sorts of interesting things.

I came across an abandoned room, which had nothing in it except for a table, several empty shelves, a couple of windows, and a long-disused sink. If you know where to look, there are lots of sites like this around campus. USyd is the oldest Australian university, and carries an air of self-assured grandiosity that lends itself to mysterious vacant rooms. It was probably an office before it was vacated, but I decided to put it to use.

The USyd administration loves to pull the authorisation card the same way Trump loves tariffs.

I started off by bringing books, a handful at a time. I spent a month or two just carting books in every other day, gradually filling up the shelves. I brought in magazines, Honi Soit editions, a couple of random textbooks and dictionaries. Then I brought in a notebook. I used it as a record book, for people who visited the room to say that they’d been there and write a little review if they wanted. There were a lot of people who wrote that they had been there before I started filling it up with stuff and it was much more homely now that I had. There were others who had visited from different universities and even cities who were delighted that USyd had such hidden treasures.

Then it became a bit more elaborate. I took a bench from another area of the building, a friend found a bench cushion on Facebook Marketplace, someone else brought in tea, I brought in some wool in case anyone was able to knit (I can’t). Random bits and bobs appeared where people had tried to contribute to the space. I spent a couple of days cleaning everything up with my friends — as you can imagine, it was extremely dusty — and finally it started to look more cosy.

Imogen Sabey unveils her secret library.

In total, I managed to bring a couple hundred books before the feds campus security descended. It’s a pity. If they had left it alone it would definitely be full by now. The first sign came early in Semester 1 2025, when I went to visit the room and the door was locked. It had never been locked before, so I was instantly paranoid that it had been discovered by security.

Yes, it’s technically a violation of the rules. I believe the argument used by security was that it ‘wasn’t safe to have students unsupervised on campus’. Still, I can think of many, many instances where students were left unsupervised on campus without causing any incident and that that wasn’t an authorised use of the room. The USyd administration loves to pull the authorisation card the same way Trump loves tariffs.

But USyd isn’t famous for having students who stay put in the little boxes they are conscripted to, who only participate in university-sanctioned events and just stretch the limits of academic pursuits. USyd is famous because its students are creative, curious, rebellious, and active. We have the largest protest movements, the most intense space for student politics (and student

regulations to be changed. It’s not a university whose students are famous for following rules and doing everything in a peaceful (and boring) manner.

People come here because this is the place where interesting things happen.

Having empty rooms in our sandstone university is stupid and pointless. That room was of no use to anyone before I went in to spruce it up. The only thing that the University has achieved by taking it away from students is to stifle our collective freedom, to fence us in and remind us that this administration does not want the university to belong to us. It refuses to recognise that it would not exist without us. And given the uni gets such a kick out of calling itself the “real life Hogwarts”, it’s more than a little frustrating that something that might actually give it a little bit of mystery has been unceremoniously shut down.

Yes, it’s just one room, and few people knew about it (as far as I know). But it’s disappointing to think that there’s one less thing for a bright-eyed, curious first year student to discover when they come to uni. It’s a vast and beautiful campus that we’ve got, and most students aren’t very curious to explore it, because they don’t know that there’s anything interesting there.

People come here because this is the place where interesting things happen.

I’m not going to tell you exactly where that room is. If you know, you know, and if you don’t, you should bloody well go and find out. It’s locked now, because the university doesn’t like it when anything happens that they don’t know about. But the nice thing about USyd is it’s got so many buildings, so many rooms, so many students.

It would be a terrible nuisance for the security guards to keep track of every single abandoned room on campus; after all, the executives are too busy suspending students who write on whiteboards and doing maintenance on their tiles to Israel to worry about every little case of undergrad rebellion. The weight of USyd’s rebellious legacy is more than management can withstand.

Fisher Library’s Most Borrowed Item Might Be a Chair

Despite being an English and History major, I borrowed a mere five physical books from Fisher Library in the first two years of my degree. Before asking around, I doubted that this experience was uncommon. Most students treat libraries as a study space, booking rooms and claiming tables while relying almost entirely on their laptops to access the reading materials they need.

The gap is wider than I initially expected. According to the University of Sydney’s new head Librarian, Dr Caroline Williams, students physically borrowed 82,000 books in 2024. In the same year, over 18.4 million e-books and online journal articles were accessed.

None of this is newsworthy, but the ease of accessing everything at our fingertips means it’s rare that students reflect on the privilege of having a well-funded academic library. USyd spent almost $9.5 million last year on library materials alone. Stories about budget cuts almost always spotlight courses at risk, but libraries are under threat as well.

Despite a $90 million hidden surplus, the Australian National University has

permanently shut down its Art and Music Library. The University of Technology Sydney (UTS) is also cutting library staff. UTS’ restructuring proposal argues the extra work “related to the physical items, such as opening boxes, stamping books, receiving items, putting stickers on items, and checking physical invoices”, is not worth the cost.

With that reflection out of the way, why lug heavy books around? Dr Williams told Honi 62 per cent of the collection is digitised and that number is only ever increasing. Beyond the talked up aesthetic of turning physical pages, browsing the stacks can be helpful. Firstly, with books on similar topics placed together, physical shelves are an easy way to avoid cumbersome logins and keyword

The ease of accessing everything at our fingertips means it’s rare that students reflect on the privilege of having a well-funded academic library.

The situation in the United Kingdom is even worse. Library budgets at some UK universities have been reduced by up to 30 per cent, leaving the sector spending an estimated £51 million less this academic year compared to the previous one. Expensive journal subscriptions and access to academic monographs are the first services to go. At these universities/ institutions, doing basic research for assignments is getting increasingly difficult.

searches. Secondly, dropping the enticing Ctrl+F key means you actually read the material, instead of just looking for what you thought was there.

Finally, at least for me, visiting the library has reignited a love of reading outside of my courses, something young Australians are doing less and less. Something about the process of finding books I could not buy from bookstores, books marked with signs of having been read and read again, kept me coming back.

Unfortunately, the days of students shuffling around with noses in books seem to be over. According to library data, the top three most borrowed items from 2018 to 2025 were Economics: The user’s guide by Ha-Joon Chang, A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about studying organizations by Chris Grey and International Organisations and Global Problems by Susan Park. In other words, the weight of textbooks is crushing my dreams of a student body rushing to grab the latest bestseller or a lost classic.

After Trent Dalton’s Boy Swallows Universe came first in the ABC’s Top 100 Books of the 21st Century countdown, I quickly borrowed a copy from Fisher. Many more Australian novels ended up on my ‘to be read’ list as I searched the shelves. As everything becomes increasingly digitised and universities downsize, fewer students will be able to discover late in their degree that they are missing out.

Base, Superstructure, and Spin: Albanese’s Political Economy

James Fitzgerald Sice wants political economy with courage.

Earlier this year, the Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE) published a special issue celebrating the 50th anniversary of the establishment of a full undergraduate course in Political Economy (PE) at the University of Sydney (USyd). Under the heading “Voices of Former Students of Political Economy”, 18 PE graduates reflect on their experiences and career choices. Conveniently, the first of the alphabetically listed reflections is from former stupol Labor hack (and current Prime Minister) Anthony Albanese.

The editors state that the reflections on “university education, subsequent career choices and personal life experiences provide fascinating insights into why it all matters”. So what insight does Albanese’s passage provide? From an editorial perspective, the decision to include a reflection from one of the most powerful men in the country is obvious. However, the lack of editorial comment or analysis of this exceptional circumstance, or acknowledgement regarding the political context, betrays what I consider to be the very foundation of political economy. As a third-year PE student, I could not help but notice the missed opportunity.

In the required reading for my very first PE subject, disciplinary co-founder Frank Stilwell’s 2021 article The Future for Political Economy: Towards Unity in Diversity? provided a useful characterisation of the subject, which fundamentally shaped my understanding of the discipline:

“Political economy, as I understand it, challenges mainstream economics and offers alternative ways of understanding the nature, causes and consequences of economic activities. It draws from various currents of heterodox economic thought and cognate social sciences to analyse issues that affect the material wellbeing of people and the planet… Equity and sustainability are paramount considerations, broadening economists’ conventional economic concerns with efficiency and growth.”

In his contribution to the most recent JAPE issue, Stilwell states that “the presence of PE graduates ‘on the inside’ among the public servants preparing analyses and advice for Ministers is potentially the most significant channel of influence”. The PE buck stops at a PE graduate Prime Minister.

In his reflection, Albanese characterises PE as a “deeply practical” discipline wherein “you cannot hide weakness in your argument behind jargon… your ideas have to be capable of surviving contact with reality”. Let us, then, judge Albanese by his own standard and ask: how does PE fare in the hands of our nation’s Prime Minister? Does his rhetoric survive contact with reality?

From Solidarity to Silence

Albanese draws on this understanding of PE to argue that the “meaning and merit” of economics lies in its “impact on

people”, to ensure that “more Australians have the right to aspire to a better life for themselves and their family”. He presents this as the rationale behind his government’s agenda, citing wage rises, tax cuts, and investment in essential services as evidence of these values in action.

As an early career politician, Albanese regularly used his platform to speak for the cause of the Palestinians. He attended protests, and co-founded the bipartisan Parliamentary Friends of Palestine. As he ascended the upper echelons of parliamentary power, he began to speak less and less of this friendship, and more of his new friends: the US and Israel. When asked in a 2024 press conference what he has “personally done to help end the conflict” in Gaza, Albanese explicitly denied Australian involvement in arms supply, stating “the truth is that Australia is not a participant in this conflict” and that Australia “does not provide weapons to Israel… going back five years, so… even before October 7”.

However, evidence obtained by Declassified Australia details numerous items exported to Israel since 7th October 2023. The government is splitting hairs, permitting exports of “parts and components for weapons and equipment that are being used in the genocide in Gaza”. The extensive 90-page list of exports to Israel includes thousands of goods such as ‘T 2000 UAVL transponders’ used in drones, ‘Steel plates’ supplied by Australian company Bisalloy for Israeli defence systems (Rafael) add-on armour, and even the ‘Smash Hopper,’ a light-weight machine gun described as a Remote Controlled Weapon Station. This is in addition to the revelation that F-35 fighter jet parts have been shipped directly to Israel as recently as September 2025.

In supporting Netanyahu’s genocidal attack on Palestinian people, Albanese’s call on PE in humanising economics becomes hollow. Australians ‘deserve better lives’ but Palestinian lives work under a different metric in his eyes. It is insulting to so belatedly recognise the State while assisting and arming its oppressors in a genocide, and then further having the indecency to lie about it. Albanese, as a PE graduate, is well placed to know exactly how he is deceiving the Australian people.

Tax Cuts for All

Albanese states that “responsible economic management” is about “building an economy that repays hardwork, nourishes aspiration and creates opportunity for all” and that this is why his government “has focused on cutting taxes for every taxpayer”.

At what point is equality enhanced by cutting taxes for all tax payers when the tax system is embedded in inequality? Populist references to ‘tax cuts for all’ fail to address the complex policy reform required to fix structural inequality. In this financial year, the richest 10 per cent of Australians will receive an estimated $21 billion in superannuation tax concessions.

That’s more than is spent on childcare subsidies, on government-funded schools, or on the roughly $13.6 billion estimated to add dental care to Medicare.

Whilst beginning to address glaring superannuation wealth tax issues in its reform announcement this month, the government missed an opportunity to address structural inequality by introducing a tax on unrealised gains. The original proposal would have gone some way in disincentivising property ownership as a means of low risk wealth accumulation for high value superannuation portfolios by taxing unrealised gains on super balances above $3 million. Together with its failure to end negative gearing on investment property, the Albanese government has chosen to lock in property ownership as a primary instrument of wealth generation in Australia, rather than positioning secure housing as a right that hardworking Australians can reasonably attain.

If Albanese had a lifetime of HECs debt to repay for his PE education, then perhaps he would have taken its lessons more seriously.

Albanese says his government aims to “tackle cost of living pressures from every possible angle” while squandering opportunities to reduce wealth inequality such as this. His government did not win a landslide majority in the last election on a mandate of business as usual.

“Clean” Energy

Albanese also states that responsible economic management means “dealing with the challenges in front of us and meeting our obligations to the future”. He vaguely references investment in “clean energy” to give the impression of climate action while sidestepping the elephant in the room of Australia’s ongoing dependence on fossil fuels and its role as a major coal and gas exporter. Despite being elected in 2022 on a climate mandate, the Albanese government has made very little, if any, meaningful progress toward reducing Australia’s carbon footprint.

The Albanese government sets weak emissions reduction targets while approving 31 new fossil fuel projects since 2022 that are projected to emit 6.5 billion tonnes of carbon-equivalent over their lifetimes. Australia remains the third largest fossil fuel exporter, federal and state fossil-fuel subsidies have risen and multinational gas exporters continue to reap billions in largely untaxed export profits. Australia’s largest contribution to the climate crisis comes not from domestic consumption, but from exported fossil fuels, yet international accounting conveniently ignores these emissions, allowing the government to downplay its global responsibility.

Now, I’m no PE professor, but it seems to me that this is not responsible economic management. Albanese uses vaguely climate-friendly rhetoric to distract from his government’s deeply impractical shortterm focused approach to the climate

crisis. When it comes to meaningful climate action, the differences between Albanese and his Coalition predecessors are few and far between.

PE without courage is PR

I approached the PE Society for their perspective on the matter. They responded with a statement written by a collection of undergraduate and postgraduate PE students.

“We feel it was appropriate that such a notable past student as the Prime Minister should be featured among the reflections of past students.”

“The position of the Editors or the political economy discipline as a whole on the Albanese government’s policy directions does not impugn his perspective on the spirit, soul and function of political economy as a movement at the University.”

“While two paragraphs of spin for the ALP was to be expected, it is not welcome without critical introspection and, in our view, it detracted from otherwise thoughtful comments about the field.”

“Albanese’s reflection is composed of boilerplate platitudes to the discipline’s capacity as both an intellectual and political project, with which we do not strictly disagree, though it is expressed in an uncontroversial way which eschews the radical history and allegiance of the field.”

“Albanese is more appreciative of a political economy that produces propositions which support his personal political persuasions, rather than as a critical venture which can interrogate and dismantle the tacit deficiencies therein.”

“In the face of a horrific acceleration of the genocide in Palestine, which has been the subject of a great volume of excellent and necessary work in this very field spanning decades, the government led by Mr Albanese has been wholly dismissive of political economy’s insights and calls for action.”

The political state of the world and increasing corporatisation of universities makes the struggle to maintain PE more important than ever. In this climate, we must be careful who we choose to idolise. If PE at its peak looks like the version practised by our Prime Minister, the discipline reduced to rhetorical garnish for business-as-usual governance, then we must ask: where does PE go from here? Is the problem with the discipline itself, or with the man who claims its legacy? Political economy without courage is not critique but comfort; not praxis but PR.

The limitations of an Honi Soit-style analysis leave much to be desired. To that end, it may be worth JAPE inviting a collection of current PE students to write a critical academic response to the PM’s reflection in a future issue… here’s to 50 more years of PE.

The editors of JAPE were approached for comment.

Analysis

Blocchiamo Tutto: Lessons from Italy’s Autumn On Strike

Ethan Floyd is tired of strongly-worded statements.

Italy’s recent mass-strike and the millions who took to the streets for Palestine did something you rarely see in this era of electoral caution: they made the working class the centrepiece of international solidarity.

In early October 2025, strikes shut down railways, ports, and schools. The strikes were accompanied by gigantic demonstrations — the movement’s scale and militancy was only possible because rank-and-file organisations and a fierce student movement forced the mainstream unions to act. Their slogan, blocchiamo tutto (“block everything”), summed it up perfectly. The result was a politics of blockade, disruption, and refusal that materially impeded state and corporate business as usual.

Contrast that with so-called ‘Australia’.

Our union peaks, historically close to the Australian Labor Party (ALP), have largely responded with measured statements and cautious calls for ceasefires rather than workplace mobilisation on the scale Italy witnessed. The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) has rightly issued statements condemning the blockade on aid and calling for recognition of Palestine, but its public posture — institutional, diplomatic, anchored in a two-state formula and political compromise — does not translate into the kind of workplace action that can stop ports, derail logistics, or make governments feel an existential political cost.

The difference, I think, is institutional more than it is moral. Italy’s wave was driven from below: small, combative “base” unions, and autonomous port collectives that organise at the epicenter of production, together with mass student and civil society organisation. Their tactics were oriented towards disruption rather than towards a process of lobbying ministers or negotiating the language of a press release. In Australia, by contrast, the ACTU’s long political coordination with the ALP (formalised and normalised since the Accord era of the 1980s) has produced a peak body comfortable with political bargaining but ill-equipped to countenance painful, illegal, or politically explosive industrial action that risks electoral fallout.

Bold working-class action shifts public opinion and policy.

Other countries give examples worth noting. In Britain, unions embedded in broad coalitions, from transport to education and public services, have provided sustained workplace support for Palestine through workplace days of action, affiliation with solidarity campaigns, and public pressure on ministers. The Trades Union Congress and several affiliates have moved beyond statements to co-ordinate mass protests and targeted workplace pressure points.

Gen Z Protests Don’t Exist

Over the past few months, protests in Nepal, Indonesia, Madagascar, Morocco, Peru, and the Philippines have all been grouped under the same archetype headline. The ABC declared “A deadly ‘Gen Z’ protest in Nepal.” Time asked readers “What to Know About the ‘Gen Z’ Protests Roiling Countries Across the Globe.” NBC wondered “How Gen Z-led protests are rattling governments across Asia.” The pattern is unmistakable: from Kathmandu to Manila, dissent has been rebranded as generational unrest.

The reporting is not factually wrong. Journalists accurately identify the immediate causes: censorship in Nepal, labour reforms in Indonesia, corruption in the Philippines, economic collapse in Madagascar. What stands out is not what they report, but how they frame it. The generational label, repeated across outlets, turns deep political and social crises into a global coming-of-age story.

This framing works for everyone. It gives editors a neat narrative and governments a convenient way to downplay dissent. Once protesters are described as part of a restless generation, their demands lose structural weight and gain emotional charge. A headline like “Gen Z fights back” feels urgent and shareable, yet it drains context. Readers see personality instead of policy, novelty instead of continuity.

The point: union structures that allow more autonomous branch and industry action can translate political outrage into targeted workplace leverage.

Similarly, South African dockworkers have a long history of refusing to handle Israeli ships — concrete industrial solidarity that carries both symbolic and practical weight. Those refusals matter precisely because they are concentrated at choke-points in global capitalism: ports, rails, and factories where labour can turn protest into material stoppage.

If mass union mobilisation is the missing ingredient in Australia, how do we get it? The short answer is through rankand-file rebuilding. That means more than simply pressuring ACTU leaders. It means organising at workplace and branch levels: building rank-and-file caucuses, base unions, or especially insurgent caucuses inside existing unions, and training members explicitly in the tactics of disruption. This involves organising blockades, rolling industrial action, and targeted refusals to service key infrastructures. It also means feminising and de-hierarchising organising so that precarious and low-paid workers are made central to organising and direct action.

There are costs and contradictions, certainly, but the historical record we should draw on is clear: bold workingclass action shifts public opinion and policy. The Springbok tour actions and historical anti-apartheid port blockades

show unions can change the terms of the political debate when they put their collective power on the line. Those victories were won when union activists moved from institutional accommodation to mass mobilisation — a strategy Australia’s labour movement needs to revisit if it wants to be a progressive force rather than a political cover machine for Anthony Albanese.

Finally, the labour movement cannot silo Palestine as a single-issue solidarity. The same infrastructure where labour’s leverage is greatest is the same infrastructure implicated in climate destruction and corporate profiteering. Strengthening the links between climate justice, workers’ action, anti-racism, and anti-genocide politics is a strategic necessity.

If Australian unions want to be a genuine force for international justice, they need to relearn how to make employers, states, and markets stop. That learning will be messy, confrontational, and politically combustible. The alternative, though, is a continuation of the status quo: strong statements but weak impact. Italy’s autumn on strike shows what is possible when rank-and-file courage meets organised militancy.

Australia’s unions should treat that not as a foreign spectacle to admire from afar, but as a blueprint. Rebuild from below, make our workplaces and unions the beating heart of Palestine solidarity, and transform rhetoric into real change.

Marc Paniza on the framing that makes resistance disappear.

In Nepal, coverage of the government’s social media ban accurately captured frustration over censorship, but international outlets emphasised digital habits as the defining trait of protesters. The protests became a story about internet freedom instead of political control. In the Philippines, student demonstrations against corruption and political dynasties were portrayed as bursts of new energy, detached from the country’s long history of activism. In Indonesia, where students protested education reforms, precarious labour conditions, and democratic decline, the same label softened decades of campus organising into a story about generational impatience. These demonstrations continue the legacy of the 1998 movement that helped bring down Suharto, but that continuity disappears when the narrative insists on youth novelty.

A deeper issue here is about how journalism handles power. Calling these uprisings ‘Gen Z protests’ allows the press to appear progressive and attentive to change, while keeping the analysis safe and superficial. It frames resistance as generational culture instead of structural politics. This is not the rich cultural and political histories of organising that these movements actually draw from, but culture reduced to aesthetics and style. The focus shifts from concrete political failures like censorship, corruption, labor

exploitation, and democratic erosion to how Gen Z uniquely ‘expresses’ discontent. Protest becomes a matter of digital fluency and youthful energy, not a response to material conditions. The coverage lingers on the medium, such as social media coordination, viral hashtags, and new forms of expression, while ignoring the message that governments are failing, systems are broken, and accountability is absent. Dissent is rendered visionary and aspirational when it is actually reactive and necessary, as if it were just another generational fashion and not a confrontation with present political decay. By doing so, this framing shields older institutions like governments, corporations, and even media outlets themselves from being implicated in the failures that fuel protest in the first place.

Wendy Bacon once wrote that journalism should resist power, not reproduce it. The ‘Gen Z protest’ frame does the opposite. It allows the press to seem sympathetic to dissent while keeping it at a distance. By focusing on age, reporters isolate young citizens from broader society, implying that their discontent is temporary instead of evidence of shared political decay. The irony is that many of these young people grew up in democracies that promised opportunity, only to find precarious work, censored speech, and collapsing trust. Their protests are not a generational

rebellion but a collective reckoning with systems that were never truly designed to work.

Language also shapes accountability. When the BBC reports “Violence breaks out in Morocco as anti-government protests rage”, the phrase “violence breaks out” obscures who initiated force. “Youth unrest” frames the situation as chaos disrupting order. “State violence” names a different reality entirely. The words chosen decide which version of events survives the news cycle.

Better journalism should start from the demands rather than the demographics: freedom of expression, fair education, decent work, and honest governance. These are not generational issues. They are civic ones. Those leading these protests happen to be young because they have the least to lose and the most years left to live with the consequences.

If journalism truly wants to document change, it must move beyond branding. The next time citizens fill the streets of Kathmandu, Jakarta, or Manila, the story should not be that Gen Z is angry again. It should be that power was challenged, and that someone listened.

Pay Me Like a Cop

Ananya Thirumalai takes feminist unionists seriously.

They call it ‘women’s work’. The soft hands that soothe crying children, the bodies that lift patients from their beds, the voices that comfort the dying. Work that is constant, exhausting, indispensable, and yet, somehow, always treated as if it were worth less.

Australia runs on care, but has never wanted to pay for it.

If ‘theory of change’ means asking how injustice is overturned, then these feminised workers are writing it for us. Not in parliament, but in collective struggle; not in speeches, but in the refusal to keep society alive for scraps.

Care work is the foundation on which every other industry stands. Without educators, there are no future workers. Without nurses, there is no healthy workforce. Without aged care staff, there is no dignity in dying. Yet the people who do this labour are consistently treated as if they are interchangeable, their work low-value, their skills invisible.

The reason is not hidden: care has always been feminised. What was once unpaid domestic labour has been funnelled into paid sectors, but it carries with it the same stigma: this is ‘natural’ women’s work, an extension of motherhood, empathy, and selflessness. Under this logic, if it is natural, it does not need to be fairly compensated.

Early childhood education and care is around 90 per cent women. Nursing is almost the same. Yet male nurses consistently earn more, rise faster into management, and enjoy a 13 per cent pay gap over their female colleagues. The early childhood sector is now short 21,000 workers, a crisis driven by burnout, turnover, and pay so low that educators leave for retail or hospitality.

This is structural sexism. Capitalism has long divided work into ‘productive’ and ‘reproductive’, valuing mining, finance, and construction while extracting the unpaid and underpaid labour that sustains life. Feminised workers subsidise the rest of the economy with their exhaustion. Society has always assumed they will keep caring, even when the work breaks them.

Against this backdrop of structural neglect, workers have not stayed silent. Feminised labour has always organised, often in ways dismissed as ‘soft’ or ‘secondary’, yet their campaigns have been some of the most determined in recent years.

For more than a decade, early childhood educators have marched out of classrooms, rallied in city squares, and petitioned governments that told them their work was too expensive to value properly. In 2024, their persistence broke through: a 15 per cent government-funded wage increase, the largest in the sector’s history. It was a

victory won not in policy think tanks, but in the loud insistence of union members who refused to keep teaching on poverty wages.

Nurses, too, have been relentless. In NSW, the Nurses and Midwives Association mounted rolling strikes throughout 2023 and 2024, demanding safer staffing ratios and higher pay. Their placards — “Pay me like a cop” — captured the gendered double standard: essential, life-saving work treated as less important than professions coded masculine. These campaigns drew tens of thousands into the streets, making visible the hidden backbone of healthcare.

Unionism in feminised sectors looks different. It is about demanding dignity, recognition, and a rewriting of how society measures value. These workers remind us that collective struggle can expose the architecture of sexism itself. Their picket lines are about reimagining whose labour counts.

A theory of change that begins with care is both radical and obvious.

Mainstream stories about ‘change’ often begin and end with parliament: tweak a subsidy here, create a recruitment scheme there, pass another review. However, for feminised workers, these gestures rarely touch the root of the problem. A bonus does not undo decades of structural undervaluation. A campaign slogan does not keep an exhausted nurse at the bedside.

Feminist unionism offers a different horizon. Thinkers like Silvia Federici, in her book Wages Against Housework, have argued for wages for housework, exposing how capitalism thrives by treating women’s reproductive labour as natural, invisible, and free. Later, social reproduction theorists expanded the claim: all care work — from raising children to healing the sick — sustains the economy, yet is consistently devalued. What educators and nurses show on the ground is that collective action can make this exploitation visible, and confront it.

Even the state is being forced to admit what unions have said all along. The Fair

Work Commission’s 2025 gender-based undervaluation review acknowledged that sectors like children’s services and community care have been systematically underpaid precisely because they are female-dominated. The logic is simple and brutal: skills like nurturing, listening, and caring are assumed to belong to women, so they are not worth paying for.

Unionism in these sectors rewrites the terms of struggle. It insists that ‘women’s work’ is skilled work, essential work, and that valuing it requires reordering the economy itself. This is a theory of change built not on individual advancement but on collective disruption: on the refusal to keep subsidising capitalism with feminised exhaustion.

What would it mean to take care seriously — not as charity, but as the foundation of society? To imagine a future of work where early childhood educators are valued more than stockbrokers, where nurses earn more than police officers, where aged care workers are recognised as holding up the final stage of life itself?

This is the radical horizon that feminist unionism opens. By fighting for pay rises and safe conditions, these workers do more than improve their own sectors. They unsettle the entire hierarchy of labour. They expose the fiction that some jobs — usually tied to profit or control — are inherently more valuable than others. They remind us that all other industries rest on their shoulders.

The crises of care — staff shortages, burnout, resignations — are signs that the old system is collapsing. What unions in feminised sectors are offering is not a minor correction, but a new model: collective, life-centred, and anti-capitalist.

If the future of work is to be more than a corporate slogan, it must begin here: with the women and feminised workers who have already been keeping the world alive.

The strikes of early educators and nurses are glimpses of a different world. They show that change doesn’t arrive in the language of ministers or the neat lines of policy reviews. It arrives when feminised workers stop the machine, when they insist that the labour of keeping people alive cannot be treated as expendable.

A theory of change that begins with care is both radical and obvious: if the work that sustains life is properly valued, every other structure will have to bend. For once, the burden of “women’s work” becomes society’s responsibility.

The future of work won’t be written in corporate white papers. It will be written on the picket lines, in the chants, and in the quiet refusal of feminised workers to keep subsidising capitalism with their exhaustion.

Headlines and Hamas Allegations: Manufacturing Consent for Genocide

Israel has killed more than 270 journalists since October 2023. More journalists have been killed in Gaza than combined press casualties from the US Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and more. Israel has murdered more journalists in 2024 than in any other year in the last three decades, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Even before 2023, journalists reporting in the Gaza strip faced unfathomable threats and violence. Shireen Abu Akleh, Palestinian-American Al Jazeera journalist, was shot in the head and killed by Israeli forces in May 2022. Israeli forces later stormed her funeral in East Jerusalem, “nearly forcing pallbearers to drop Abu Akleh’s coffin”. Earlier this year, The Guardian investigated and concluded that “Israel knew right away that one of its soldiers had probably killed Shireen — even though Israeli leaders were falsely blaming Palestinian militants for her death.” Israel has systematically manufactured consent to kill journalists since October 2023, with The Guardian also reporting that “Israel has deliberately killed journalists in Gaza it has accused of being ‘combat propagandists’ working for news outlets affiliated with Palestinian militant groups.”

Anas Al-Sharif, Al Jazeera journalist and frontline correspondent in Northern Gaza, was among four journalists killed by Israel during intense bombardment which targeted a media tent outside al-Shifa hospital. Al Jazeera writes that Israel admitted to orchestrating “the deliberate killing of al-Sharif”, after the IDF “accused the journalist of heading a Hamas cell and ‘advancing rocket attacks against Israeli civilians and [Israeli] troops’”.

Al-Sharif was 28 years old. He left behind a family: a wife, a son, and a daughter. Al-Sharif penned a final message on 6th April, to be published in the event of his death:

“Despite that, I never hesitated to convey the truth as it is, without distortion or misrepresentation, hoping that God would witness those who remained silent, those who accepted our killing, and those who suffocated our very breaths.”

Meanwhile, oceans away, shielded from the threat of bombs and starvation, Australian journalists cannot bring themselves to even utter the word genocide. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Guardian Australia, and The Sydney Morning Herald have repeatedly framed it as a ‘war’, despite evidence to the contrary

supported by the United Nations and the International Court of Justice. 86 Australian journalists have taken press junkets to Israel, working across major mastheads like The Daily Telegraph and Australian Financial Review

“Israel has deliberately killed journalists in Gaza it has accused of being ‘combat propagandists”

Mastheads have continuously failed to situate 7th October in context, nor have they acknowledged the sheer asymmetry of warfare evident to anyone with internet access who can see countless, endless, horrific videos of Gaza burnt to ashes, flattened into absolute dust, while Tel Aviv remains comparatively unscathed.

Israel invests heavily in public diplomacy, hasbara, and has a dedicated ‘legitimisation cell’ military unit “tasked with identifying reporters it could smear as undercover

Hamas fighters, to target them and to blunt international outrage over the killing of media workers”. According to Israel, if it’s not hasbara then it’s Hamas. If we were operating out of Gaza, Israel would call us Hamas Soit

Australian media parrots these smear tactics, and also possesses a near-obsession with using passive voice in headlines. Palestinians gunned down by the Israeli Defence Force while queuing for aid are not killed, they simply die. Palestinians are routinely dehumanised by the media, not even afforded dignity in death.

“I never hesitated to convey the truth as it is...hoping that God would witness those who remained silent, those who accepted our killing...”

Even when Australian media is not explicitly biased, such as in headlines, the narrative and news angle is often Zionist-aligned or disproportionately sympathetic to Israeli. It explicitly omits the historical and situational context before 7th October; it de-contextualises Palestinian liberation, ignoring the nakba and decades of ethnic cleansing, violent displacement, dispossession, and apartheid. Outlets repeat known falsehoods about Hamas bases under hospitals, or bomb-making factories in refugee camps, to justify Israeli bombardment and war crimes. The media works on a systemic institutional level to manufacture consent for Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

This year, Honi privately rescinded news.com.au political editor Samantha Maiden’s invitation to the Student Journalism Conference after receiving notice and community concerns that Maiden had contributed to manufacturing consent for the genocide. The main concern in question was that Maiden had written an article, ‘Supporters of slaughter a horror for our nation’, about the first major pro-Palestine protest at the Opera House after 7th October.

Israel has a dedicated “legitimisation cell” military unit “tasked with identifying reporters it could smear as undercover Hamas fighters”

Maiden wrote “Imagine if hundreds of Australians were slaughtered by terrorists at a music festival and protestors gathered in ‘solidarity’ with their killers”. When she penned this, she blasted the ‘pro-Palestine must mean pro-Hamas’ view onto a major masthead and discredited the legitimate concerns of protestors peacefully rallying against an apartheid strike and the inevitable disproportionate mass bombardment from Israel. Maiden publicised our disinvitation in the form of a prominent news piece, writing that she’d been ‘cancelled’. In her lengthy article, she invoked Milan Kundera’s novel The Joke, and confused the right to freedom of speech with the irrevocable right to be listened to. Honi does not see how being rescinded a platform to speak to university students is equivalent to a forced labour camp. Editorially, Honi does not believe in platforming those who contribute to the institutional failure to speak up for Palestine.

Compare this situation to how pro-Palestine journalists and individuals have, for the last two years, been severely ‘cancelled’ or censored. Antoinette Lattouf lost her work and became embroiled in an incredibly public and arduous legal dispute with our nation’s biggest public broadcaster simply because she shared a post by Human Rights Watch. Outspoken academics on Palestine like Dr Nick Riemer and Professor John Keane, and journalists like Mary Kostakidis, have been sued for speaking against Zionists and allegedly violating the Racial Discrimination Act; this has cost them work opportunities and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Maiden’s disinvitation does not qualify as cancellation when other individuals speaking for Palestine have entirely lost or damaged their careers.

Meanwhile, shielded from the threat of bombs and starvation, Australian journalists cannot bring themselves to even utter the word genocide.

After this incident, ABC radio presenter and journalist David Marr rescinded his acceptance and penned a series of emails to us, which he publicised himself, citing “that’s not how a good newspaper… should behave”. Let us look to his recent interview with American journalist and former war correspondent Chris Hedges as an example of how good journalists ought to behave. Hedges is a former New York Times Middle East bureau chief who has over 30 years of journalistic experience; in 2002, he won a Pulitzer Prize as part of a Times investigative team reporting on Al Qaeda.He was initially slated to give the Edward Said Memorial Lecture on the betrayal of Palestinian journalists at the National Press Club in Canberra, which was later cancelled with short notice. He then gave his lecture at the NSW Teachers Federation Conference Centre. Just prior to his lecture, Hedges had been interviewed by Marr for ABC’s Late Night Live program, which he described as an experience of “being lynched”.

Marr began the interview by mistaking the Australian Friends of Palestine Association (AFOPA), who invited Hedges to give the lecture, for the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN). He then continuously grilled Hedges about whether he was “troubled” by this “fundamental breaking of the rules” in “being sponsored by an advocacy group”. This is despite the fact that AFOPA is notably different from APAN, with the former a South Australian not-for-profit community organisation and the latter a much larger national advocacy group. Hedges then responded that he has no problem being sponsored by Palestinian groups that “attempt to hold up the reality of the genocide” given that “most of Western media has done its best to obscure the reality of the genocide”.

Pro-Palestine journalists and individuals have, for the last two years, been severely ‘cancelled’ or censored.

When Hedges talked about how initial news reports always repeat Israeli lies, even if amendments follow, Marr established that “we have to report the excuses made by outfits like the IDF… that’s our job”. Hedges responded “No, our job is to report the truth” and explained that putting Israeli claims in the headline, as opposed to the body, lends Israel a kind of credibility they should not have given their frequent lies, such as in the case of Shireen Abu Akleh. He gave the example of Israel bombing Jabalia refugee camp and claimed it as a legitimate ‘surgical strike’; Hedges was on the ground as a war correspondent at the time and spoke about how he “counted the bodies, including children… I am not going to run ‘Israel said’ as my headline, because it was factually untrue”. Marr seemed insistent that Hedges was “just complaining about headlines”, willfully ignoring the implications and institutional genocide denial such headlines affirm.

Hedges repeatedly drew on his years-long ground experience in Gaza, to which Marr could only hypothesise that “might the Press Club have wanted… someone who’d been there more recently than you?” It’s unclear why Marr’s journalistic focus was on legitimising the Press Club’s event cancellation when the Press Club had already shot themselves in the foot by denying Hegde’s event confirmation and announcement despite material evidence to the contrary, from their very own website. Marr evoked the spirit of ABC’s Media Watch to contemptuously assert that Hedges “evidence of these sins… are really, really thin”, to which Hedges retorted that Marr has never been on the ground in Gaza. Marr’s only rebuttal was to repeatedly use Hedge’s focus on ‘headlines’ as a strawman, despite Hedge’s explanation that the headlines were merely examples in his broader point about media complicity and institutional demonisation of Palestinians.

“We have to report the excuses made by outfits like the IDF… that’s our job” “No, our job is to report the truth”

At Hedges’ lecture, which Honi reported on, when told about Marr’s strong words for Honi, he replied that:

“... he typifies all of those journalists who function as stenographers to power… who seek to discredit those of us who challenge dominant systems of authority, including within the media… I said to him when I left, you’ve never done what I did… You’ve never been on the receiving end of Israeli assaults… You’ve never had to count the bodies… Those of us who do that kind of reporting battle not only the governments and the powerful, but we battle the majority of our own colleagues who slavishly serve those systems…”

Marr’s interview shocked me for the very reason that Hedges — a powerful, incredibly experienced, acclaimed, and respected white male journalist — was being treated the way I’d seen people of colour treated in Australian media. It is one thing to see Nasser Mashni, President of APAN, spoken over and gaslit by television interviewers who refuse to listen to Palestinian experiences or demands. Not acceptable at all, of course, but wholly unsurprising given the pervasive racism in our so-called “lucky country” that gives everyone a “fair go”. It is another thing to see one of the media class betray the best of their very own.

“He typifies all of those journalists who function as stenographers to power”

Marr is deeply uncharitable and defensive in a way that would be absolutely unacceptable if the roles were reversed or the veil of whiteness lifted. Imagine if a respected Arab journalist sat down to interview Marr about his position on Israel and Palestine. Imagine if this journalist began the interview on a factually untrue premise, accusing Marr of being sponsored by the Australia Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) and pressing him on conflicts of interest. Imagine if this journalist disregarded Marr’s extensive on-the-ground experience in favour of repeating his rehearsed talking points. The hypothetical Arab interviewer in question would most likely be sacked within the hour after receiving public condemnations. The extent to which the Australian media has cancelled and disrespected Hedges speaks volumes. In Antoinette Lattouf’s book How to Lose Friends and Influence White People, she talks about how the racial gaslighting that people of colour face is akin to the victim-blaming that women face when talking about assault. It is interesting to me that gaslighting about Palestine extends beyond women and people of colour, to the farthest, most wellrespected realms of white professionals. The Hedges situation makes it clear how much any semblance of Palestinian humanisation threatens the status quo. Speaking the truth about the genocide in Palestine is an act so severe that its repercussions transcend the typical protections afforded by whiteness in Australia.

The Australia Institute’s chief political analyst Amy Remiekis sums up the issue with this interview best in her Deepcut News piece ‘Australian journalism prizes ‘objectivity’ over truth’:

“So much of what counts as ‘news’ now… is no analysis, no context… Much of legacy media relies on the ‘debate’ itself. It’s not the substance of the debate or even the tangible damage the debate causes in the real world that matters — it is the debate itself that counts.”

If we were operating out of Gaza, Israel would call us Hamas Soit.

When the time comes for Israel to be tried in The Hague, mainstream Australian media should hang their heads in shame.

Honi has long been aware of this reality, as one of the first mastheads to immediately refuse the façade of a ‘debate’ and explicitly attribute Israel’s brutal escalation in October 2023 to the word genocide; as frequent attendees at the pro-Palestine protests; as witnesses and participants in the University of Sydney’s 2024 Gaza Solidarity Encampment. As student journalists, it is horrifying and deeply disturbing to think of failing our comrades halfway across the world, who pen articles in tents and report while bombs fall, by not even giving them the decency of a headline in the active voice. Honi Soit refuses to manufacture consent for genocide and to contribute to the media’s institutional failure to speak truth to power. When the time comes for Israel to be tried in The Hague, mainstream Australian media should hang their heads in shame.

7th January, 2024, Nasr village

An Israeli drone strike murdered Mustafa Thuraya, a freelance video journalist for Agence France-Presse (AFP) and Hamza Al Dahdouh, a journalist and cameraman for Al Jazeera

The strike targeted their car as they were returning from an assignment for Al-Jazeera in Nasr village.

Two Palestine Today TV journalists, Amer Abu Amr and Ahmed alBursh, told CPJ they witnessed the fatal attack. Abu Amr and al-Bursh were injured in another Israeli strike several minutes before the one that killed Thuraya and Al Dahdouh.

The Palestinian Journalists Syndicate said that the journalists were killed simply because “they were journalists” and said Israel was attempting to “mislead and fabricate confusing narratives” about the pair.

In a July 31 statement, Al Jazeera described the killing as “part of a systematic targeting campaign against the network’s journalists and their families since October 2023.” It said that “Ismail and Rami were targeted with a missile, resulting in cold-blooded assassination”.

31st July, 2024, Al Shati Camp, near Gaza City

An Israeli drone strike murdered Ismail Al Ghoul, 27, journalist for Al Jazeera Arabic, and Rami Al Refee, 27, freelance camera operator for Al Jazeera Arabic

Al Ghoul and Al Refee were reporting on the aftermath of the assassination of the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Iran the night before, and were filming outside his family home in Gaza before they were killed.

Al Ghoul and Al Refee were murdered leaving Al Shati refugee camp, near Gaza City.

Murdered by Israel

26th December, 2024, Al-Awda Hospital

An Israeli drone strike murdered five journalists and media workers in a vehicle outside Al-Awda Hospital. The Associated Press reported that footage showed the van had visible press markings.

Israel murdered editor Mohammed Al-Ladaa, correspondent Faisal Abu Al Qumsan, camera operator Ayman Al Gedi, photographer and editor Fadi Hassouna, and field producer and fixer Ibrahim Sheikh Ali

Talal Al Arrouqi, a correspondent for privately owned Qatari-based broadcaster Al Jazeera Mubasher correspondent, told CPJ that he was sleeping in the hospital corridors when they heard an explosion around 1:30 a.m. “When we went out, we found a huge fire in the Al-Quds AlYoum satellite channel’s broadcast vehicle. There was only a wall separating us. We tried to put out the fire, but we failed.

“We found their bodies charred, and some of their limbs had been severed.” He said the air strike had caused a fire and “great destruction”.

15th March, 2025, Beit Lahia

An Israeli drone strike murdered Mahmoud Samir Islim AlBasos, a 25-year-old Palestinian photojournalist. The strike targeted him and a team of aid workers in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza.

Al-Basos was well known for his drone photography, which showed widespread destruction in Gaza from extensive bombing by Israel Defense Forces (IDF). His photos were widely used by media outlets. Al-Basos studied journalism and media at AlQuds Open University and graduated in 2023.

Tareq Al-Basos, Mahmoud’s cousin, told CPJ that the journalist was wearing a press vest and helmet when he was targeted by Israeli drones. Tareq Al-Basos said: “The occupation killed Mahmoud’s older brother a few months ago.”

24th March, 2025, Indonesian Hospital, Beit Lahia

An Israeli drone strike murdered Hossam Shabat, a 23-yearold Palestinian correspondent in northern Gaza for Al Jazeera Mubasher. The strike targeted his car near the Indonesian hospital in northern Gaza’s Beit Lahia.

He published: “If you’re reading this, it means I have been killed — most likely targeted — by the Israeli occupation forces. When this all began, I was only 21 years old—a college student with dreams like anyone else. For the past 18 months, I have dedicated every moment of my life to my people. I documented the horrors in northern Gaza minute by minute, determined to show the world the truth they tried to bury. I slept on pavements, in schools, in tents — anywhere I could. Each day was a battle for survival. I endured hunger for months, yet I never left my people’s side… For the last time, Hossam Shabat, from northern Gaza.”

7th April, 2025, Nasser Hospital, Khan Yunis

An Israeli airstrike murdered Palestine Today TV editor Ahmed Mansour and media manager Hilmi al-Faqaawi. The airstrike targeted a tent outside Nasser Hospital. Ahmed Mansour died late on 7th April, 2025, after being severely burned in the airstrike.

Eight other journalists were injured in the attack: BBC Arabic contributor Ahmed Al-Agha, freelance photojournalist and drone operator Mohammed Fayeq, Anadolu Agency photographer Abdullah Al-Attar, camera operator Ihab Al-Bardini, Al Jazeera camera operator Mahmoud Awad, Radio Algerie correspondent Majed Qudaih, Alam24 photographer Ali Eslayeh, and AFP photographer Abed Shaat.

5th June, 2025, Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital, Gaza City

An Israeli drone strike murdered Suleiman Hajjaj, a 32-year-old journalist for Palestine Today TV, Ismail Baddah, a 33-year-old photojournalist for Palestine Today TV, and Ahmad Qalaja, a 23-yearold freelance photojournalist working with Al-Araby TV.

The drone strike targeted them in the courtyard of Al-Ahli-Baptist Hospital. Ahmad Qalaja succumbed to injuries in the early hours of the next day.

“The strike happened at around 10:20 a.m. with a single missile fired by an Israeli drone directly at a group of journalists who were sitting in the courtyard, working on their laptops,” witness and journalist Islam Badr, who started filming minutes after his right leg was hit, told CPJ.

Qalaja had just graduated with a bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Media from Al-Azhar University in Gaza. Hajjaj was a father of two children. Baddah was a father of three children.

10th August, 2025, Al-Shifa Hospital, Gaza City

An Israeli drone strike murdered six journalists in the Al Jazeera tent inside the Al-Shifa medical complex. The attack killed Al Jazeera’s entire team of four staff journalists in the city, as well as two freelancers, one of whom was working for Al Jazeera

The drone strike murdered Al Jazeera reporter Anas al-Sharif; correspondent Mohammed Qreiqeh, 33; camera operator Mohammed Noufal, 28; camera operator Ibrahim Zaher, 25; freelance journalists Mohammad al-Khaldi and Moamen Aliwa.

Al Jazeera condemned the “targeted assassination” of its journalists as “yet another blatant and premeditated attack on press freedom.”

Yaniv Zohar

Ibrahim Mohammad Lafi

Mohammad Jarghoun

Mohammed Al-Salhi

Hisham Alnwajha

Mohammed Sobh

Saeed al-Taweel

Ahmed Shehab

Issam Abdallah

Salam Mema

Husam Mubarak

Yousef Maher Dawas

Abdulhadi Habib

Issam Bhar

Mohammad Balousha

Sameeh Al-Nady

Khalil Abu Aathra

Roee Idan

Mohammed Ali

Roshdi Sarraj

Mohammed Imad Labad

Tasneem Bkheet

Ibrahim Marzouq

Jamal Al-Faqaawi

Saed Al-Halabi

Ahmed Abu Mhadi

Duaa Sharaf

Yasser Abu Namous

Nazmi Al-Nadim

Imad Al-Wahidi

Majed Kashko

Majd Fadl Arandas

Iyad Matar

Mohamad Al-Bayyari

Mohammed Abu Hatab

Yahya Abu Manih

Mohamed Abu Hassira

Ahmed Al-Qara

Moussa Al-Borsh

Yacoup Al-Borsh

Mossab Ashour

Sari Mansour

Mostafa Al Sawaf

Hassouneh Salim

Abdel Rahman al-Tanani

Amal Zohud

Abdelhalim Awad

Amro Salah Abu Hayah

Bilal Jadallah

Ayat Khadoura

Farah Omar

Jamal Mohamed Haniyeh

Rabih Al Maamari

Mohamed Nabil Al-Zaq

Assem Al-Barsh

Mohamed Mouin Ayyash

Mostafa Bakeer

Abdullah Darwish

Montaser Al-Sawaf

Adham Hassouna

Marwan Al Sawaf

Shaima El-Gazzar

Hamada Al-Yaziji

Hassan Farajallah

Ola Atallah

Duaa Jabbour

Samer Abu Daqqa

Haneen Kashtan

Assem Kamal Moussa

Abdallah Alwan

Adel Zorob

Mohamed Khalifeh

Mohamed Naser Abu Huwaidi

Ahmad Jamal al Madhoun

Mohamad Al-Iff

Mohamed Azzaytouniyah

Ahmed Khaireddine

Jabr Abu Hadrous

Akram ElShafie

Mustafa Thuraya

Hamza Al Dahdouh

Abdallah Iyad Breis

Heba Al-Abadla

Ahmed Bdeir

Shareef Okasha

Mohamed Jamal Sobhi Al-Thalathini

Yazan al-Zuweidi

Iyad El-Ruwagh

Mohammed Atallah

Tariq Al-Maidna

Rizq Al-Gharabli

Nafez Abdel Jawad

Yasser Mamdouh El-Fady

Angam Ahmad Edwan

Alaa Al-Hams

Ayman Al-Rafati

Zayd Abu Zayed

Mohamed Yaghi

Muhammad Salama

Abdul Rahman Saima

Mohamed El-Reefi

Mohamed El Sayed Abu Skheil

Tarek El Sayed Abu Skheil

Saher Akram Rayan

Mohamed Adel Abu Skheil

Mustafa Bahr

Mohammed Bassam Al Jamal

Ibrahim Al-Gharbawi

Ayman Al-Gharbawi

Salem Abu Toyour

Mustafa Ayyad

Bahaaddine Yassine

Mahmoud Juhjouh

Ola Al Dahdouh

Rasheed Albably

Mohammed Abu Sharia

Mohammed Al-Sakani

Saadi Madoukh

Amjad Juhjouh

Wafaa Abu Dabaan

Rizq Abu Shakian

Mohamed Manhal Abu Armana

Mohamed Meshmesh

Mohammed Abu Jasser

Mohammed Abu Daqqa

Rami Al Refee

Ismail Al Ghoul

Mohammed Issa Abu Saada

Tamim Abu Muammar

Ibrahim Muhareb

Hamza Murtaja

Hussam al-Dabbaka

Mohammed Abed Rabbo

Wafa Al-Udaini

Nour Abu Oweimer

Abdul Rahman Bahr

AlHassan Hamad

Mohammed Al-Tanani

Tareq AlSalhi

Wissam Kassem

Ghassan Najjar

Mohammed Reda

Saed Radwan

Nadia Emad Al Sayed

Haneen Baroud

Amr Abu Odeh

Bilal Rajab

Ahmed Abu Skheil

Zahraa Abu Skheil

Mahdi Al-Mamluk

Ahmed Abu Sharia

Maisara Ahmed Salah

Mamdouh Qanita

Iman Al Shanti

Mohammed Al Qrinawi

Mohammed Balousha

Ahmed Al-Louh

Mohammed Al-Sharafi

Ayman Al Gedi

Faisal Abu Al Qumsan

Mohammed Al-Ladaa

Fadi Hassouna

Ibrahim Sheikh Ali

Hassan Al-Qishawi

Omar Al Dirawi

Areej Shaheen

Saed Abu Nabhan

Mohammed Al-Talmas

Ahmed Al Shayyah

Ahmed Abu Al-Rous

Mahmoud Islim Al-Basos

Mohammed Mansour

Hossam Shabat

Hilmi al-Faqaawi

Ahmed Mansour

Fatma Hassona

Yahya Sobeih

Noureddine Abdo

Hassan Samour

Ahmed Al-Helou

Hassan Abu Warda

Ismail Baddah

Suleiman Hajjaj

Ahmad Qalaja

Moamen Abu AlOuf

Ismail Abu Hatab

Anas al-Sharif

Mohammed Noufal

Ibrahim Zaher

Mohammed Qreiqeh

Moamen Aliwa

Mohammad al-Khaldi

Ahmed Abu Aziz

Mohammed Salama

Moaz Abu Taha

Hussam Al-Masri

Mariam Abu Dagga

Islam Abed

Rasmi Jihad Salem

Ayman Haniyeh

Osama Balousha

Mohammed Al Kuaifi

Mohammed Alaa Al-Sawalhi

Mohammed Al Daya

Yahia Barzaq

Saleh Aljafarawi

Ahmed Abu Mutair

There’s No Place Like The Bearded Tit

Angel Tan pens a letter.

“There’s no place like home. There’s no place like home. There’s no place like home.” She whispers as she clicks her scarlet heels thrice, igniting the magic that returns Dorothy back to her family. The echo of her voice rings clear in my head as we approach the end of October, 2025 — only, home in this context is the Bearded Tit of Redfern.

The beloved Tit of Redfern.

The Tit.

“A place for rebels and fluro beasts, where hard love and tender freaks rule.”

Home to some of the most intricate minds and queerest talents I have had the pleasure of witnessing in their natural cosmos. There, tangles of love are expressed freely, slick with passion and care for one another. There, in the booths that line one of many elaborately decorated walls, you can forget the world beyond the sky-clad hall and be present in the warmth of the neighbourhood queer bar.

“ I N M E M O R Y O F N O W ”

Now, in the intimacy of the backyard caravan, where we’re nestled on beanbags like chirping birds. Now, in the mischievous decor of the bathroom stalls, where we’ve drunkenly sat, confused by the conversational nature of the fellow pisser next door (only to realise it’s the sensual monologue of the sound art that plays from above and all around). Now, by the gentle hum of the fireplace, where we’ve admired the array of flyers, poems, and L word DVD sets that adorn the mantlepiece like a lesbian shrine. Now, upon the stage by the front window, where I’ve stood proudly and breathed in the community love this bar has built from the ground up.

“Brick by brick.” Johnny once said to me, “Joy built this place brick by brick and gave us a home.”

I think of the people when I think of the Tit. I haven’t lived long enough to have known them all, but those that I have met in my time at this home have been and will be forever held dearly in my heart. Johnny, who is like the gay uncle we’ve always needed in our lives, ran Queerbourhood every Wednesday and gave artists a platform to wholeheartedly honour their work. Meg, who is like the dyke uncle we’ve also always needed in our lives, ran Sad Dyke Sundays every Sunday and would capture the lez experience through black and white film. Auntie Wombat, our beautiful auntie who has kept us fed with the most enticing Asian fusion vegan food, and Ray, her butch cowboy, who has taken every order and always asks how we’re doing.

There is also Ce, the riddler of Inqueersition, a trivia night held every Tuesday. There is the magic of Sound Sorcery, a bi-monthly jazz jam for women and gender diverse baddies. There is the art of Fat Muses drawn under the many lamps of the Tit. There is a legacy of coming out DJs who have immersed the room in seas of sounds and scapes. There is Steegi’s delectable vegan pizzas. There is Imbi’s divinity and soul shifting. There is Kelly and Thom’s Late Night Queer Dance. There is Betty Grumble’s Thank You Body. There is the fashionable local who I talk with whenever I pass by the bar — he’s there every night and I envy him tenderly.

The list well and truly goes on, barely scratching at the surface of the community that has been built within these walls. Brick by brick, this home has stood for 11 glorious years, thanks to the love of Joy Ng.

To be loved is to be seen.

I met Joy before I met the Bearded Tit. I was 16 at a panel talk, trying to impress my girlfriend with queer adult dialogue but failing to really focus on what was being said. My only memory of the talk was when Joy locked eyes with me as she talked of gaysians in community spaces — that singular moment changed everything about me.

To be seen is to be loved.

The curation of the space that is the Bearded Tit is a result of the love Joy has poured into community, queerness, pride, and all. The fierce protection of the people is something that Joy and the team have always stood for, bringing to fruition a truly safe space for the queeros and POCs that very few places in Sydney have managed to do. The significance of this bar and the power behind its existence has never gone unnoticed, and its nonexistence will be felt by each and every one of us (‘you just had to be there’ is what we’ll be saying to the future generation) but by God, will we carry its memory in our loving. Joy is joy, manifest and eternal. Joy is who I want to be when I grow up; I knew this from the moment I saw her and she saw me.

Thank you, Bearded Tit, for everything.

There’s no place like the Bearded Tit.

Boys’ Club Points to Bigger Issues in Sydney Queer Scene

Anastasia Dale would not pass the door check.

A new club will be opening on Oxford Street this summer. The club, announced as PINK PONY, will be brought to us by Kevin Du-Val, “founding father” of iconic queer venue Palms on Oxford. Du-Val was labeled as such in a now-deleted Instagram post addressed to “Boys”, which set out the new club’s vision: “PINK PONY is created specifically for 18-35 (state of mind) Gay men.” This attracted criticism and confusion, as the venue was clearly named after the song Pink Pony Club by lesbian popstar Chappell Roan, yet appeared to aim for a more exclusionary door policy than Palms or many other Oxford Street clubs.

Despite Michael Lewis, CEO of the venue’s parent company Tuloch, claiming the response has been “overwhelmingly positive”, the venue has since decided to change its name. Their Instagram account deleted all of its former posts, changed its username to @new.name.coming for a few days, before recently landing on TRIBE @ 231. ‘Tribe’ is a word commonly used on Grindr and in the broader gay male space, denoting social and aesthetic groupings of gay men such as twink or bear.

Speaking to Gay Sydney News, Du-Val stated: “If the gay boys don’t feel comfortable anymore, they stop coming, and then of course the more they stop coming, the more it shifts in the other direction… [venues have] been caught in that trap of chasing revenue at any cost and not controlling their door or trying to filter their patrons…”

The venue will be explicitly targeted toward gay men, with Du-Val clearing up the nonexistent debate around the sexuality of the men who are the target audience.

There is no controversy about this being a queer bar, or about the prioritising of queer men over straight men. There are valid criticisms coming from many corners of the community around a queer space that is “unashamedly” for men, particularly one for which an ideal clientele is “90 per cent plus” gay men, and even mentions “legal hurdles… in terms of how much we can vet the crowd.” Businesses may refuse entry to anyone as long as they do not breach anti-discrimination laws, and this statement is an allusion to enforcing an exclusionary door policy. This view of the ideal crowd is pushed to the ridiculous when such a venue is named after a popular song by a famous lesbian, about herself finding community and acceptance in a nightlife space that welcomes all genders and orientations. The backtracking of the name, in conjunction with the comments by the leaders of the venue, does not display an acknowledgment of this but rather an attempt to mitigate bad press.

needs of our wider community.” This again frames gay men as the centre of the queer community, and other identities as an extended or wider part of the community.

Community concerns have long been raised regarding the diminishing amount of permanent spaces for queer women in Sydney, particularly with The Bearded Tit soon shutting its doors. Birdcage is a lesbian & queer night held at the Bank Hotel in Newtown, but only on Wednesdays and only in the upstairs bar. Junipero is a lesbian, queer, and nonbinary party held once a month in different locations. Butch Club is held semi-regularly at Darling Nikkis in St Peter’s.

One would be hard-pressed to say that, today, Sydney has any lesbian bars at all. It is in this context that yet another bar on Oxford Street catered to gay men opens its doors, looking to be even more stringent in its male focus, with a name that appeared almost to mock the very idea of a lesbian bar. For many, this new club is a symbol of the ways in which the patriarchy continues to reach into the queer community. In nightlife spaces, but also in corporate, political, and social mobility, white cis masculine gay men experience undoubtable privilege compared to other segments of the queer community. Hegemonic masculinity still exists in queer spaces. Even when this is brought up by more marginalised community members, there is often no acknowledgment or action taken by those who benefit from it.

Du-Val, now 80 years old, has a long history of doing good work in the gay nightlife space. Palms has been an iconic gay venue since the 1970s, a venue myself and many other queer women and nonbinary people have felt welcomed into. In the 1970s, Du-Val’s current perspectives would have perhaps been seen as timely and important. Now, it’s important Du-Val and the venue team hear the community’s concerns and genuinely strive to develop this new space as an inclusive one; a space befitting our current times. This piece is not designed to attack the venue management or their new club, but point out how far the community still has to go in terms of addressing systemic issues that privilege some members over others.

Sydney-based drag queen Ashley Madison recently posted a video discussing their work as the designer of the club’s original logo, a pink and blue pony. Madison stated “as soon as they posted their exclusive demographic online… I said, look, I can’t be a part of this… if you post an apology and commit to some change then I’ll consider moving forward with working with you… and they said, unfortunately, they were not willing to apologise for their target demographic.” Madison went on to say, “I would love to work for places that support our entire community.”

Venue management have since issued an apology and committed to a “renewed and broadened perspective” where “all members of our community are welcome”, despite stating to Madison they would not do either of these things. The apology is a step in the right direction, however there is reason to doubt their commitment to considered and meaningful change. Backtracking on the name and issuing a formal apology were clearly actions they did not want to take, but became their only options if they wanted the club to have a viable financial future. The new name is clearly a reference to the gay male patronage they wish to prioritise. Comments are turned off on the apology post.

The apology stated that the name ‘Pink Pony’ was an error “given Chappell Roan’s well deserved reverence among queer Women”, not quite hitting the nail on the head — Chappell Roan is a lesbian and the song is about a lesbian finding community in queer clubs. Taylor Swift and Ariana Grande have large fanbases of queer women, but there would not have been comparable uproar if the club was named Wildest Dreams or Break Free; though there may have been some confusion due to the remaining fact that naming a club for men after a song by a woman is a perplexing move. The apology went on to state “our nomination of a preferred mix [of patrons] was tone deaf and hurtful”. Over 90 per cent of one identity is not a mix, but rather a monopoly. The final sentence of the apology promised “sensitivity towards the views and

Aoife Brazil, a nonbinary academic who recently spoke at a UTS architecture panel titled Pride in Practice, commented: “First of all, I question the place of gender based exclusivity in contemporary Sydney as a model that seems regressive. There is and always has been in Sydney’s Gay district an overrepresentation of spaces oriented towards a white/cis/gay/male market. Queer people outside this pathology are either, as in this case explicitly excluded, or alienated. A fair amount of work has been done to change the language around Oxford Street to encompass all queer people and expressions, but the work for progression and inclusion has not tackled the structural reasons for the skewed demographic. Without the space to do so, queer people cannot participate in the creation of culture within what is, by name, their own district.”

Miranda Michalowski, award-winning queer playwright, stated: “As a queer woman, I find this a pretty disappointing and exclusive move. Not only is it overtly misogynistic, but it will also just inevitably lead to transphobia at the door, as there’s no way to categorically say on sight who is and isn’t a gay man. At a time of rising transphobia — and at a time when we’re losing historic and inclusive queer venues like The Bookshop [Darlinghurst] and The Bearded Tit — this just feels like a shame. I don’t think queer spaces should work on a logic of exclusion.”

Will Winter, queer man and Honi editor, added: “We need more spaces for all of the queer community, we need more spaces that aren’t segregated as hell. Birdcage is lesbian and nonbinary focused, but they’re chill with queer men being in the space who are clearly sensitive and respectful to the space, and that’s just all agreed upon in a community sense. Gay male spaces don’t really do that. Just changing the name is not really addressing the issues people have with the space.”

Butch Club regular Jimmy had this to say about the new venue: “Bitches be crazy.”

We can only hope the public apology represents just a small fraction of the rethinking process for the venue’s new vision. The communitywide uproar does point to a widespread acknowledgement that queer nightlife has to change, and that we will continue to fight for the rights of the whole queer community together.

Are identity politics, at least of the liberal and individualistic kind, a dead end for the left?

The right has been calling us virtue-signalers, wokies, and professional victims for a while, but now it seems the call is coming from inside the house.

Or rather, from Ash Sarkar, that darling of the UK left who went viral for correcting Piers Morgan when he accused her of supporting Barack Obama.

“I’m literally a communist you idiot!”

In Sarkar’s new book Minority Rule, she argues that “by making a virtue of marginalisation” the left has “made it impossible to build a mass movement capable of taking on extreme concentrations of wealth and power. Instead of uniting the minorities and the proletariat into an alliance of the oppressed,” she says, “the present-day left has pitted them against one another in an Olympics of victimhood.’ Sarkar recounts a panel at a left-wing convention where one speaker declared, to nods of approval, that “we should dismantle all our movements that aren’t majority people of colour”. With such a strategy in a country over 80 per cent white British, Sarkar writes: “we deserve to lose.”

Sarkar’s broader thesis is that fears of minority rule by a ‘nightmare for Sky News’ coalition of “ethnic minorities, graduates and people who regularly drink frothy coffees” is serving to legitimise a real minority power grab, the largest in history, by barons and billionaires. That observation is not entirely new: Laverne Cox put it more pithily when she reminded Americans that they were “worried about the wrong 1 per cent” on The View earlier this year. Where Sarkar’s argument gets more novel, and arguably more interesting, is in her willingness for self-scrutiny, “I want to take criticisms of this movement [the left] seriously” she writes, “and not just because it’s the mark of a weak culture to hide from your own failings”.

Sarkar levels two criticisms at modern identity politics. First, it has made the left more divided and less politically effective, and second, by making a “secular religion of individual, subjective experience, we’ve unwittingly crafted a playbook of grievance for reactionaries to wield against us.”

Sarkar’s most powerful example for this latter argument is in regards to Palestine, where, she writes, the lived experience of Jewish people has been “weaponised by political actors” to stifle protest against the genocide going on in Gaza.

We have seen this on our own campus where, in response to the encampment and protests for Palestine last year — which often had Jewish people marching in them — the University imposed the Campus Access Policy (CAP), a draconian anti-protest policy that stirred even the typically conservative law school to pen an open letter outlining their concern that the CAP would “unreasonably limit freedoms.” Vice Chancellor Mark Scott, in a string of obsequious emails, outlined the CAP’s raison d’etre: the encampment’s “very presence” had caused a great number of people “distress”. In one email, the encampment materialises as the backdrop to a “rise in antisemitism” that

Anal Isn’t

Everything

Will Winter is maybe not a virgin?

Historians will argue for centuries the day Will Winter lost his virginity. The exact moment, even, will be contentious.

They’ll debate whether the night I hold to be the night actually ‘counted’ as losing my v-card, in much the same way my friends, family, and total strangers will brazenly do in front of me. Often, my personal relationship to the encounter doesn’t matter.

Adventures in the Culture Wars

Eleanor McAnelly has concerns about identity politics.

Scott has “heard firsthand” from “Jewish staff, students, alumni and community.” Even in Scott’s closely edited officialese we can detect two things at work: one, the cynical deployment of a minority community to serve institutional ends, and two, the notion that ‘distress’ is a form of psychosocial harm from which people need protection. In this way, criticism of a foreign government gets blurred into antisemitism, and that gives the impetus for a crackdown on protest on campus that will extend beyond Israel/Palestine.

Guy Rundle, an Australian commentator, argues that the mobilisation of notions of “distress”, “offense” and “safety” to stifle protests is really the left’s own arguments coming home to roost. Rundle suggests that from the early 2010s a broad swathe of progressive academia has been advancing the notion that “words are a material act” that can do “violence” and that, therefore, speech can be not only confronting but actually “unsafe”. Such an idea, inherently opposed to open speech and inquiry, he argues, was always going to be vulnerable to being re-deployed by the powerful to shield themselves from critique.

Sarkar puts it even more plainly: “At some point we have got to admit that identity is a worse form of authority than truth. What people feel is important. But it’s not as important as a genocide, ethnic cleansing, or ongoing war crimes. It’s not as important as what’s actually happening.”

Sarkar is correct that, for young people, identity politics has become the framework through which contemporary politics is understood. The central questions now being not to do with

specific causes and material reality, but rather “Who am I? Who are you? And which of us has the better claim to belong here?”

It is also worth noting that Ash Sarkar wrote this book, which burns with frustration at the left’s marginalization, whilst living under a (notionally) leftist government. Down here in the Antipodes we too live under Labor. Yet both here and in the UK you would be hardpressed to find any self-respecting young leftist who feels that their views are represented by the government of the day. Of course, that is a reflection that the Labour/Labors of today have rather little to do with young leftists. Like children we are to be seen (trotting out our pointless little Labor preferences in inner-city Sydney) but not heard — especially not in a way that embarrasses your father!

So it must be said that whatever mild frustration I share with Sarkar at “left-liberals seduced by identity politics” it pales with the anger reserved for the toads that make up our political class. Just because it cannot be repeated enough, Murray Watts recently approved an extension to the Woodside North West Shelf gas project that will release some 6.1 billion tonnes of emissions over its lifetime. That is equivalent to ten years of Australia’s current nation-wide pollution. Overwhelmingly, it is the economic and political elite, not someone problematic in your tutorial, that proposes to make the rest of all our lives a living hell. Take us out Ash:

“When we are conscious of ourselves as a majority class, we can begin to take back all that was stolen from us – including our sense of comradeship with one another.”

Regardless of sexuality, political alignment, or age, I’ve heard voices from every side suggest that sex doesn’t qualify as virginity-taking unless it involves penetration. You can do hundreds of other things on the spectrum of sex, involving genitals or not, but that gosh darn label doesn’t fall away until something penile enters something hole-like. The discourse of virginity is tethered to that fundamental act.

tragedy of the twentysomething who was still like the biblical Mary. Even now, with my warped timeline, I feel there’s something deeply unsettled and unrecoverable from that time. I wasn’t waiting out of some religious devotion or lack of desire, so fighting the ever-growing assumption as I got older that I was part of the elite crowd of non-virginal people felt more like an exercise in optics management than a genuine desire to share my truth.

That discourse haunts me. It haunted me for years that I didn’t have my first kiss till I was 21, let alone anything else. I felt people could smell it on me, the

When the over-confident straight person (or well-meaning queer person) asks me “are you a top or bottom?” they’re dislodging a bundle of baggage I don’t always feel comfortable disclosing or unpacking. The question assumes that I’ve engaged in either of those activities with enough regularity to prescribe to their ideology of pleasure. I suddenly need to define my relationship to sex with contingencies. Let’s also not pretend that people are making assumptions apolitically — by virtue of being feminine, I am constantly fighting the ‘bottom’ allegations, a title which does not cleanly correlate with my history.

So I sit with this question of whether people think I am or am not a virgin, and ponder why it matters to me so much.

Virginity, historically, is ascribed to a sort of Abrahamic purity that holds much value to people of faith. In a secular context, however, I feel the rhetoric of virginity is one that holds status as to whether someone is ‘cool’, a different kind of doctrine. It scratches the part of my brain that was so desperate to be liked and respected in high school. I hate it.

The fundamental problem of modern virginity discourse is that the term is emotionally charged with undue shame, a supposed designation of who is and isn’t normative. It’s also prescriptive to a shallow logic of qualification.

Brown Noise

Zayed Tabish is listening to Bollywood Bhangra.

/ I didn’t even get a hint

Being a little shit comes naturally to most Year 10s. Following the Astroworld Concert, I decided to go up to a classmate, who had made Travis Scott a part of his personality, to ask him his thoughts.

“F*** Off Zayed, go listen to your bollywood bhangra music.”

Ironically he was also South Asian.

Slightly bemused (more offended than I’ll admit), I sat back down and plugged in my headphones, Eminem’s Venom tinnily leaking out for those around me to hear. Strangely, however, I found myself humming a certain tune I remembered from late night drives many moons ago.

/ Secretly and silently

The second lockdown was incredibly boring. Rather than some sort of productivity, I chose to perfect the art of bedrotting and movie piracy. I had exhausted every Star Wars movie and all 15 seasons of Doctor Who.

Almost instinctively, my mind drifted to the “Bollywood Bhangra” comment as curiosity pulled me into the film Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge. I expected clichés, melodrama, and dance sequences that made no sense. I found all of that. But strangely the music was something else entirely. It didn’t just accompany the story; it was the story. Throughout, there was a sense of complexity. The music was awash with instruments which sounded exotic but eerily familiar. Unfortunately, though likely through voluntary omission, my grasp of Urdu was similar to that of a preschooler. Even then, the strings of the sitaars whine of the pungi, and beat of the layered emotions reverberating through my mind.

Having grown up in a house where music was “noise” and a distraction from academic success, I hesitated to share this new fascination. Yet, much to the irritation of my family, I do have an inclination to fill silence with a blend of whistling and “buffalolike” singing. With my parents, this quickly led to conversations about old cassettes of Bollywood songs being played in car drives, evolving into discussions of spirituality of Sufi Qawalli music and metaphorical social commentary interwoven through music.

Phallocentric conceptions of virginity are tired and unimaginative. Fundamentally, a definition of virginity which centres on penetration assumes a heteronormative hierarchy of insertive dominance, completely overlooking the continuum of sexual pleasure which occurs before said act. It’s a frustrating and shitty discourse, echoed across time through peer pressure and insecurity.

/ When did the first sight of love

Exploring Hindustani music drew me deeper into its world. It carries an emotional and philosophical density with extraordinary range and intention.

My gateway to South Asian music was pop-like filmi music. The foundation of every bollywood movie, its highly commercialised nature reminded me of nearly every other song I had heard. However, despite this it seemed to reveal a sense of greater purpose. The songs, despite being written and sung in India, would use Urdu and Farsi, despite their foreign nature in an increasingly xenophobic society. Representing a temporary departure from cultural conflict, the nuanced words and poetic phrases provided hope for pluralism and unity in a divided region. Movies like Veer-Zaara and Mughal-eAzam use music to democratise social commentary and esteem love and unity amongst fractured groups.

However, I became more intrigued with what lay beyond the modern mainstream. Finding Qawalli music was simply searching for the roots of filmi music, yet it was different. The music comes from Sufi traditions that see music as a path toward divine union. Ishq was what they sought: Longing. It could be both romantic or divine. Yearning is reflected through repetition, call-and-response, and rising crescendos, evoking a sense of transcendence and peace. However, this yearning for union goes beyond its literal purpose. Once again, in a show of solidarity, artists such as the Fateh Ali Khans sing qawals, ghazals, and bhajans from different cultures. In essence, demonstrating how in the Subcontinent, music can go beyond ethno-religious divide. /

Took away, took my heart away

I no longer try to hide the inevitable listing of Indian artists on my Spotify Wrapped. My siblings cringe in embarrassment as I serenade the general populace with my rendition at the park and in restaurants. During attempted lock-ins, I blast songs, dubbed “temple music” by my friends, through my headphones.

To this day, I sometimes claim to be a “coconut”, and in many aspects, I am. If Edward Said was to analyse my initial foray to subcontinental music, he would probably validly critique it as a modern form of Orientalism. However, it seems that the “BollywoodBhangra” comment gave me something new. I am no longer scared of brown noise.

In heterosexual couplings, the conception of ‘real’ sex as occurring when a penis enters a vagina completely overlooks the many, many stages of intimacy which occur before this. It’s a common refrain that people, when having sex, will do “everything but penetration.” It’s this latitudinal thinking which abandons all other actions during intercourse as ‘foreplay’, dutifully demarcated as a prerequisite to the real sex. Even the temporal designation of ‘before penetration’ assumes a linearity which is blatantly untrue and absolutely not universal.

I’d extend the problematising of virginity to the imbalance of effort required for penetrative sex. To put it bluntly, it feels quite unfair that some people lose their virginity by sticking their junk in something (much like they would a pillow or a peach), whereas the other person is penetrated, an act which can be incredibly pleasurable, but also difficult without practice or experience. Those certainly don’t feel like equitable acts. The first time you have sex is already vulnerable; how can we expect it to be curious and joyful when both parties are pressured to reach a certain goal to make it ‘real’?

The most immediate complication to a phallocentric virginity is for lesbians, and/or sex between people with vaginas. Virginity remains an allegedly unconquerable summit by virtue of biology for people who don’t have sex with penises. For queer men, it raises questions as to whether people who ‘top’ qualify for the non-virginal committee in the same way as people who ‘bottom’. Many queer men identify as ‘sides’, engaging exclusively in non-penetrative modes of intimacy. How many times do they need to engage in non-penetrative sex before they can claim their title as sexually normative? Can they ever truly?

In short, there is a problem with virginity. If the term is saturated in problematic social meaning, what are we to do to fix this? Well, we could all agree that “losing your virginity” means being penetrated, and begin catching up on the backlog of straight boyfriends who are yet to be pegged by their partners. Or, we move that label into the hands of its owner, shaking the fog of ‘behindness’ and inadequacy that can cloud us so often, and let people self-define.

Safe, non-lineal desire, and bodily exploration can and should be fundamental to the sexual experience. The assumption that penetrative sex, which is intimidating and vulnerable as an isolated act, is the first step for those gaining sexual experience is dangerous. It’s not desired nor possible for many individuals. It’s also a definition which is boring. Sex is exciting! The labels we use to describe it should be too.

Feathered or Foe?

Living with Ornithophobia In a Bird-Loving Country

Maeve Jenkins is brave.

Before I first set foot on the University of Sydney campus, I had a basic idea of what it would look like. Old buildings, jacaranda trees, and lots of grass for my future multicultural friend group to relax on. What I failed to note, however, was the prominence of the infamous bin chicken. Yes, the white ibis is an iconic Australian bird, no less an iconic feature of the university itself. So why does its existence pose such a threat to my academic experience?

Well, day-to-day life in a country full of wildlife is akin to that of a war zone for someone with Ornithophobia such as myself… living with a crippling fear of birds.

I can’t exactly pin-point when I acquired Ornithophobia, but I’m certain it started in early childhood. My fear became glaringingly apparent to my parents when I was surrounded by a swarm of feathered beasts (chickens) and, almost in tears, my mum realised, ‘oh, she’s actually really scared’. Yes, I was horrified, because the mere sight of a bird is enough to make my skin crawl.

It’s almost like they’re teasing you with the knowledge that they could gorge your eyeballs out at any given moment, their ‘cute’ appeal used to bide time before they strike.

So, how do I exist happily when my greatest fear is everywhere I turn?

Well, the type of bird encountered holds great significance. You see, the bigger the bird, the worse my fears. Emus, cassowaries, and ostriches are an absolute no-go. Whoever decided that a walk-about park, where birds can roam freely amongst guests, was a good idea needs to rethink their business plan, and whatever teacher of mine decided to host my year 1 excursion at said park should be subjected to the same thinking time.

The tawny frogmouth, for example, may have won, but it exhibits some very notable flaws. Its excessively large mouth is the biggest red flag by far, like a gaping black hole acting as a passageway towards your deepest terrors. Its orb-like eyes might make the creature somewhat akin to a puppy, but don’t be fooled, hypnotism is yet to be ruled out of the equation.

Yet, with all these horrific features overtly shoved in our faces, the tawny frogmouth was still awarded the title of Australia’s Best Bird in 2025. How could this be? The only thing voters managed to do correctly was vote the emu out as soon as possible; though we should consider preparations for the next national war.

Their staggered feathers, sharp claws, and piercing eyes hold the power to put me in a frenzy, not to mention the way they walk with their beaks jutting

Considering birds are quite common in Australia, this phobia is something I’ve learned to live with, but all of a sudden, it’s been thrust in my face by a certain popularised competition: The 2025 Australian Bird of the Year. So now, not only are we acknowledging these native beasts, but we’re celebrating them? Clearly, voters have failed to consider the cons of each bird, or moreso, haven’t taken into consideration how they affect me personally.

Although my rhetoric is harsh, in reality, I encourage everyone to care for our native wildlife. I may not be the world’s #1 bird supporter, but so long as they keep to themselves, I suppose they’re no threat to mankind. So, next time you come across a bird on your morning walk, uni lunch, or even in your own home, please consider what it might be like to view it through the eyes of someone with Ornithophobia, and if you’re feeling brave, maybe we can reclaim our campus from the bothersome bin chicken.

I’ll bring the net.

Construction to commence on new wooden structure over quadrangle

Sath Balasuriya reports.

The University of Sydney has issued a shocking statement revealing that the Quadrangle is to be built over with a wooden structure, identical to the one which currently shields its northern entrance.

The statement contains elaborate architectural plans that showcase the proposed structure acting as a barrier over the Quadrangle’s sandstone surfaces. It forecasts the project to cost the University over $500 million dollars to build, and justified the costs with reference to the “exotic and weatherproof” wood that was being imported from overseas to complete the gargantuan task.

The statement claims that construction is to begin pending the conclusion of the 2025 graduation ceremonies, albeit without a clear date being provided. Honi believes this means that the Quadrangle will be out of operation for classes, but the statement did not

clarify on whether or not classes would continue in the active construction zone. Either way, it seems the lives of a few Philosophy students are a worthy sacrifice for the greater good of the structure being completed.

While the statement didn’t include a deadline for when construction was expected to wrap up, Honi estimates the project taking between 3-30 years until full completion, depending on if the University actually remembers to finish the job.

The statement went on to claim that the “overwhelming success” of the “beautiful covering” currently in place over the northern entrance was a major reason for moving ahead with the construction of the larger structure so soon.

The covering was put in place earlier this year to protect the iconic sandstone carvings of the front arch.

In April, a university spokesperson revealed that it had been done “out of an abundance of caution” for the building’s sandstone facade, which is frequently exposed to the Sydney weather.

While unacknowledged by the University, Honi can assume that the decision to build the structure also comes as part of the latest push of draconian cost cutting measures implemented by management. Simply, the Quadrangle’s delicate exterior requires too much upkeep from harmful tourist selfies for the University to justify its continual maintenance. This partly explains management’s desire to cover up the building’s iconic sandstone walls.

A tourist visiting the University told Honi that “it was a shame to see the Quad disappear”, describing how the covering would “put off tourists visiting

the uni”. The Quadrangle is one of the University’s oldest buildings, and is a frequented hotspot for tourists visiting the Camperdown campus.

Honi also spoke to a USyd student, who believed it to be “disastrous” to the “branding of the University of Sydney”. This sentiment was echoed by another student who said it would “mess up” the Quadrangle’s “iconic look”.

However, a senior University staff member who wished to remain anonymous suggested that the construction was “actually quite aesthetically pleasing”, and said they appreciated the touch of “rustic farmhouse” decor that it added to the Quadrangle’s otherwise colonial facade.

TAWNY SOIT

Week 12, Semester 2, 2025

For the Tawny Frogmouth

Publishing since 1929

Tawny Frogmouth crowned Guardian Bird of the Year

Bird McBirdFace reports.

The Tawny Frogmouth (Podargus strigoides) has been crowned Guardian Australian Bird of the Year 2025, securing 11,851 votes in the final round of voting.

The Tawny was crowned Bird of the Year after a ten-day competition from 9th to 15th

October where 50 species of Australian birds were nominated for the competition. The Tawny has finally secured its victory after being the bridesmaid candidate for the past three competitions.

The Australian Bird of the Year is a biennial competition

Confessions of an election rigger

EXCLUSIVE

Maggie Pie swoops.

Since their win in the 2017 Guardian Bird of the Year, the Magpie opens up about their role rigging the subsequent elections.

In an excluive interview with this masthead, the hungry and shadowy Magpie has opened up

by Guardian Australia and BirdLife Australia. Over 310,000 votes were cast in this year’s Bird of the Year competition.

The 10 species that made it to the final round were the Tawny Frogmouth, the Baudin’s Black Cockatoo, the Gang-gang Cockatoo, the Willie Wagtail, the Bush Stone-Curlew, the Southern Emu-wren, the Laughing Kookaburra, the Little Penguin, the Spotted Pardalote, and the Wedge-tailed Eagle.

about their motives.

“I am democracy manifest. Now where is my next succulent Chinese meal.”

Continued on Page 9

The Tawny Frogmouth received 11,851 votes in the final round of voting, while the Baudin’s Black Cockatoo came in

Rockets OPINION Page 6

second at 7,688 votes. This year the Tawny Frogmouth secured the endorsements of writer Wendy Harmer, Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt, Young Labor Left NSW, and, of course, Honi Soit

Continued on Page 4

President

Angus Fisher

Twenty-six editions of Honi Soit later, and we’re at my final President’s report. Let’s reflect on the year that was.

Despite the compulsive doubters and naysayers, empirically, I’ve been a good President. What I learned early is that you have very little time for proactive work. Days disappear into endless emails, factional fights, organisational issues, constant spotfires, and, yes, the occasional less-than-interesting meeting. Yet this reactive grind is what keeps the SRC functioning for students every day, and I did it, despite the constant cortisol spikes.

Amid the chaos, I still managed to move the needle for students. My top three?

I helped deliver the $5 meal initiative for students, feeding on average 500 students a day. Countless meetings were spent with SUPRA on the approach to get the university to support such an initiative; even more meetings and emails were spent pushing the university to get the service to be a genuinely good offering for students. I’m still working, so the service can be even bigger and better next year.

I fought for free speech and Palestine. During a live-broadcast genocide, I did not let the Presidency go unused in the fight. I spent hours writing a submission to scrap or at least weaken the Campus

General Secretaries

Grace Street, Anu Ujin-Khulan

It’s our last Honi report of the year, but there’s still lots that we’re finishing off before our term ends in a month. Don’t worry though, we have both been reelected as councillors and aren’t going anywhere for 2026!

Currently, Grace is working hard with the Enterprise Bargaining team to finish off the Agreement with our staff. She is also working with Angus and Chitra to secure enough SSAF funding for all of the SRC projects we want to run in 2026, while also making the case for Honi Soit editors to at least be paid at the rate of our other student office bearers. We will provide updates on this and particularly the newer applications we made for a broader influenza vaccination scheme and document translation services.

Access Policy (where the latter ended up happening), presented at NSW Parliament and the People’s Inquiry, and met with the Office of General Counsel to defend the student movement for Palestine and free speech. I spoke at and attended rallies to bring the fight to the streets.

I defended students’ academic welfare. Five-day simple extensions were kept despite proposed cuts, course cuts were fought in committees, many consultations were had on the implementation of USyd’s AI policy, and I ensured the university’s coursework policy and curriculum design principles put the student experience first, not “efficiency” or anything else.

The takeaway: You can simultaneously be an oppositional activist and negotiate with the powers that be. There are two prongs. You can walk and chew gum. My presidency confirmed that truth. NSWLS up! Also, Jasmine Donnelly is my GOAT.

In solidarity, Angus

P.S. Follow me on Instagram @ angusfisherr

Ethnocultural Officers

Dana Kafina

Coming up soon are a lot of important actions and campaigns. We are still calling on Mark Scott to debate students and answer questions about the University’s ties to weapons companies. On November 4, Students for Palestine are bringing a contingent to the blockade of the IndoPacific Weapons Expo at the ICC in Darling Harbour. We hope to also see people turn up in numbers to the action on November 1 at Town Hall against deaths in custody and police brutality, and at the Rising Tide people’s blockade of the world’s largest coal port in Newcastle from November 27 – December 2.

To the general student body,

This is my last ethnocultural report of the year. Admittedly, my reports have not been timely: ADHD has been horrible. But to Honi Soit! I have enjoyed writing these reports for you, and contemplating exactly what I and my collective have done throughout the semester. I will miss writing them, and I will miss convening ACAR when my term is over (prepare for a mournful post from me about it), but also so excited for what else is to come for the collective.

Week 13 will be ACAR’s first ever Liberation Week! This is a week on (and off) campus solely dedicated to discussion, organisation, and coming together on anti-racist, decolonial issues. Grasping things at the root. It’s also a celebration of what ACAR is and who ACAR has become! We’ve increased our

membership (with now 20 members in ACAR, the biggest in a long while!) and have ideas and visions for ACAR that have launched themselves organically. Please pitch your ideas by checking out ACAR’s instagram @usydacar, or attend! I am very very excited.

November 1st is a national day of action called by the Blak Caucus. Please be in attendance and reach out to your networks — let’s build this rally and show up for First Nations justice. A few days after on November 4th is the Indo-Pacific weapons expo! SHUT IT DOWN!

Free Palestine! Land Back! Nothing about us without us!

Dana Kafina

Sexual Violence Officers

Ishbel Dunsmore, Saskia Morgan, Grace Street, Lucy Sullivan

The Sexual Violence Officers did not submit a report this week.

Refugee Rights Officers

Laura Alivio, Ishbel Dunsmore, Sebastian Ranasinghe, Lucas Pierce

The Refugee Rights Officers did not submit a report this week.

International Student Officers

Fengxuan (Mary) Liu, Christine Peng, Yuanbo (Bob) Song

The International Student Officers did not submit a report this week.

Tips for Navigating the Centrelink Bureaucracy

Most of your interactions with Centrelink will be online. This helps them to manage their huge workload with minimal staff but does not lead to you having a good experience or an easy time managing your payment.

Give them documents

When applying for a payment you will be required to provide them with a lot of information and documents. Your application will not usually be processed until they receive all of this, so take the time to double-check that you have submitted everything they have requested. Sometimes there are delays in processing applications, so it might be helpful for you to see if you are eligible for any of the uni’s scholarships, bursaries, or loans

While you are on a payment there may be occasions where you are asked to provide information and documents. Carefully note the dates they give you as missing a deadline may lead to a reduction or cancellation of your payment. It is important to note that providing false information or documentation is considered fraud and may lead to prosecution. This might not just mean a reduction or cancellation of your payment, but it might also lead to criminal charges.

Tell them everything

Report any changes in your circumstances, even if you don’t think it is relevant. This includes a change of address or living arrangements, change in study load, receiving an inheritance or scholarship, going overseas, or changes in your relationship status. Any unreported events can be used as a reason to reduce or cancel your payment. Always report income when it is earned. It does not matter to them if you’ve been paid yet or not; it’s all about when you earn the money. If you are working while studying, the SRC has a leaflet about how

your income affects your Centrelink payment. Use this information to calculate what your payment should be and if you notice any mistakes talk to an SRC caseworker about your options.

What did you say?

If you speak to a Centrelink staff member on the phone or in person, ask them for a receipt number for that conversation. Email that number to yourself together with a short description of what you discussed, so that you have your own record.

What did they say?

Check your inbox regularly for messages, as it is assumed that you have read them. Respond as soon as possible to any requests to ensure that you do not miss any deadlines. Centrelink can be difficult to deal with

It’s not just you. They are difficult for everyone, starting with ridiculous wait times for telephone calls, through to onerous application processes, and hefty penalties to people who simply cannot afford it.

The SRC has leaflets on: Payments for Students Independence

The Effect of Your Parents’ Income

The Effect of Your Income Being in a Relationship Having Savings

Need more help or advice?

If you have any specific questions contact an SRC Caseworker.

bit.ly/contact-a-caseworker

If you need more advice about your specific situation contact an SRC Caseworker by completing the contact form (above) or call 9660 5222 and our reception team will complete the contact form with you.

Ask Abe

SRC Caseworker Help Q&A Procrastinatioon

Hi Abe,

I have a million things due soon, and I can’t seem to get started on any of them. Every time I sit at my desk, I find all sorts of other things to do, then I get overwhelmed with how much other stuff I have to do, and decide it’s easier to not do any of it. I hate that I haven’t been able to get anything done, and it’s really starting to get me down. What am I doing wrong?

Delayed

Hi Delayed,

What you’re describing is often called procrastination. I’m sorry to hear you are experiencing this.

Please don’t think of it as being lazy or undisciplined. There is a reason you are not able to start or finish these tasks. The best thing you can do to help this situation is to speak to a counsellor. They can help you develop strategies, depending on the underlying cause of your procrastination. No matter what it is, there is no reason to feel disappointed with yourself. Book an appointment with a counsellor (e.g., the Uni’s Wellbeing team, eHeadspace, or Uplift Psychological Services) or if you have difficulty doing that, ask one of your friends to book it for you. Maybe they would go to your first session with you.

Abe

If you need help and advice from an SRC Caseworker, start an enquiry here: bit.ly/contact-a-caseworker

LAST DAY TO DISCONTINUE FAIL (DF) NOVEMBER

To read the full article on Navigating Centrelink including links and resources, scan the QR code

If you withdraw from a subject before the last day of semester (9th NOVEMBER ) you will receive a DF grade. It still counts as a fail, but in many cases will not affect your WAM.

More Information: sydney.edu.au/students/ discontinue-unit-of-study.html

Across

1 Memory malady (7)

5 Famous Gustav Holst septet (7)

8 Volcanic crater (7)

9 Love to bits (5)

12 ___ Xiaoping (4)

13 Steno’s need (3)

15 City near Osaka known for its beef (4)

16 Between a Bass and Tenor (9)

17 Animated TV series about spy agency misadventures (6)

Down

1 1993 Tom Stoppard play (7)

2 Hosiery material (5)

3 Get rid of, as in skin (4)

4 “___: The Last Airbender” (6)

5 Veggie in a pod (3)

6 “Much ___ About Nothing” (3)

7 “Tough luck ... I don’t care I defamed you” (2,3,2)

10 Censure publicly (9)

11 Shoreline problem (7)

19 Current carrier (4)

20 Coveted credit rating (3)

21 ESE’s reverse (3)

23 Dungeonlike and musty (4)

26 Political challenger’s promise (6)

28 Takes away all types? (6,3)

30 Puffed up and pleased with oneself (4)

31 ___ Kapital (3)

32 Equitable or even handed (4)

13 Law office helper (9)

14 Villain in JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure (3)

15 Botanic gardens in London (3)

16 “__ _” pal! (2,1)

18 Lead an orchestra or choir (7)

22 “Please explain” (3)

23 Repudiate (7)

24 Beer or powder holder (3)

25 Modern light bulbs? (3)

Semester 2 Week 11 Crossword Answers

35 Gamblers’ giveaways (5)

38 What the ATO wants you to do right now (3,4)

39 Federal division held by Gough Whitlam, Laurie Ferguson, and Anne Stanley (7)

40 High esteem (7)

27 Like true believers (7)

29 Bob the Lebanese Uncle (6)

33 Not dead (5)

34 Old flames (4)

36 “Learn from ___ Feng” (3)

37 Family of cryptographic hash functions (3)

Across (by individual row): Daily Newspapers, Enhance, Absolve, Garb, Buble, Body, Ballot Box, Senior, TBH, Bien, PCB, Sob, Bloc, Eer, Vagina, Collapsed, Udon, Organ, Acts, Insular, Aliases, Heart of Darkness Down (by individual column): Dredges, Ichor, Yank, Eyeful, Sea, ABS, Shen Yun, Beethoven, Leo XIII, Barcelona, BLT, Lobs, Bob, Bop, Neocons, Bear, Bad, Brutish, Con, RPG, Assists, Sahara, Caste, Kink, Lot, RAF

Spilling Sounds

Fever Pitch

Fever Pitch is an alternative rock band from Wollongong. Whilst they take a lot of inspiration from 90s shoegaze and grunge, they continue to mix in hints of modernity into their music.

Their music varies through different genres; some songs have a lot of elements found in UK indie, whereas others lean into the psychedelic scene. If you enjoy a bunch of distorted guitars, you’ll love this band. It’s a gorgeous blend of genres to meet in the middle with an easylisten vibe.

Check out the band on Spotify here!

The Missing Part of the Human Rights Act Legislation

We, the undersigned, believe that all humans are entitled to one (1) day of jorkin’ it, paid for by their work. This “all out goon sesh” is a vital way to combat rising threats to psychosocial safety on our campuses.

My Pussy Palace

Who cheats on the woman who wrote Not Fair?

Out of context Honi editorial team quote of the week: “You think you know

Yaniv Zohar

Ibrahim Mohammad Lafi

Mohammad Jarghoun

Mohammed Al-Salhi

Hisham Alnwajha

Mohammed Sobh

Saeed al-Taweel

Ahmed Shehab

Issam Abdallah

Salam Mema

Husam Mubarak

Yousef Maher Dawas

Abdulhadi Habib

Issam Bhar

Mohammad Balousha

Sameeh Al-Nady

Khalil Abu Aathra

Roee Idan

Mohammed Ali

Hassouneh Salim

Abdel Rahman al-Tanani

Amal Zohud

Abdelhalim Awad

Amro Salah Abu Hayah

Bilal Jadallah

Ayat Khadoura

Farah Omar

Jamal Mohamed Haniyeh

Rabih Al Maamari

Mohamed Nabil Al-Zaq

Assem Al-Barsh

Mohamed Mouin Ayyash

Mostafa Bakeer

Abdullah Darwish

Montaser Al-Sawaf

Adham Hassouna

Marwan Al Sawaf

Shaima El-Gazzar

Mohamed Jamal Sobhi

Al-Thalathini

Yazan al-Zuweidi

Iyad El-Ruwagh

Mohammed Atallah

Tariq Al-Maidna

Rizq Al-Gharabli

Nafez Abdel Jawad

Yasser Mamdouh El-Fady

Angam Ahmad Edwan

Alaa Al-Hams

Ayman Al-Rafati

Zayd Abu Zayed

Mohamed Yaghi

Muhammad Salama

Abdul Rahman Saima

Mohamed El-Reefi

Mohamed El Sayed Abu Skheil

Mohammed Abu Jasser

Mohammed Abu Daqqa

Rami Al Refee

Ismail Al Ghoul

Mohammed Issa Abu

Saada

Tamim Abu Muammar

Ibrahim Muhareb

Hamza Murtaja

Hussam al-Dabbaka

Mohammed Abed Rabbo

Wafa Al-Udaini

Nour Abu Oweimer

Abdul Rahman Bahr

AlHassan Hamad

Mohammed Al-Tanani

Tareq AlSalhi

Wissam Kassem

Ghassan Najjar

Areej Shaheen

Saed Abu Nabhan

Mohammed Al-Talmas

Ahmed Al Shayyah

Ahmed Abu Al-Rous

Mahmoud Islim Al-Basos

Mohammed Mansour

Hossam Shabat

Hilmi al-Faqaawi

Ahmed Mansour

Fatma Hassona

Yahya Sobeih

Noureddine Abdo

Hassan Samour

Ahmed Al-Helou

Hassan Abu Warda

Ismail Baddah

Suleiman Hajjaj

Ahmad Qalaja

“Since October 7, 2023, Palestinian journalists have been slaughtered with impunity, while the world watches. This is a direct, unprecedented assault on press freedom. Journalists cannot carry out their work — let alone survive — while being deliberately starved and denied life-saving aid. Israel must allow humanitarians, international media, and human rights investigators into Gaza at once.”

Committee to Project Journalists Director Sara Qudah

Roshdi Sarraj

Mohammed Imad Labad

Tasneem Bkheet

Ibrahim Marzouq

Jamal Al-Faqaawi

Saed Al-Halabi

Ahmed Abu Mhadi

Duaa Sharaf

Yasser Abu Namous

Nazmi Al-Nadim

Imad Al-Wahidi

Majed Kashko

Majd Fadl Arandas

Iyad Matar

Mohamad Al-Bayyari

Mohammed Abu Hatab

Yahya Abu Manih

Mohamed Abu Hassira

Ahmed Al-Qara

Moussa Al-Borsh

Yacoup Al-Borsh

Mossab Ashour

Sari Mansour

Mostafa Al Sawaf

Hamada Al-Yaziji

Hassan Farajallah

Ola Atallah

Duaa Jabbour

Samer Abu Daqqa

Haneen Kashtan

Assem Kamal Moussa

Abdallah Alwan

Adel Zorob

Mohamed Khalifeh

Mohamed Naser Abu

Huwaidi

Ahmad Jamal al Madhoun

Mohamad Al-Iff

Mohamed Azzaytouniyah

Ahmed Khaireddine

Jabr Abu Hadrous

Akram ElShafie

Mustafa Thuraya

Hamza Al Dahdouh

Abdallah Iyad Breis

Heba Al-Abadla

Ahmed Bdeir

Shareef Okasha

Tarek El Sayed Abu Skheil

Saher Akram Rayan

Mohamed Adel Abu

Skheil

Mustafa Bahr

Mohammed Bassam Al Jamal

Ibrahim Al-Gharbawi

Ayman Al-Gharbawi

Salem Abu Toyour

Mustafa Ayyad

Bahaaddine Yassine

Mahmoud Juhjouh

Ola Al Dahdouh

Rasheed Albably

Mohammed Abu Sharia

Mohammed Al-Sakani

Saadi Madoukh

Amjad Juhjouh

Wafaa Abu Dabaan

Rizq Abu Shakian

Mohamed Manhal Abu Armana

Mohamed Meshmesh

Mohammed Reda

Saed Radwan

Nadia Emad Al Sayed

Haneen Baroud

Amr Abu Odeh

Bilal Rajab

Ahmed Abu Skheil

Zahraa Abu Skheil

Mahdi Al-Mamluk

Ahmed Abu Sharia

Maisara Ahmed Salah

Mamdouh Qanita

Iman Al Shanti

Mohammed Al Qrinawi

Mohammed Balousha

Ahmed Al-Louh

Mohammed Al-Sharafi

Ayman Al Gedi

Faisal Abu Al Qumsan

Mohammed Al-Ladaa

Fadi Hassouna

Ibrahim Sheikh Ali

Hassan Al-Qishawi

Omar Al Dirawi

Moamen Abu AlOuf

Ismail Abu Hatab

Anas al-Sharif

Mohammed Noufal

Ibrahim Zaher

Mohammed Qreiqeh

Moamen Aliwa

Mohammad al-Khaldi

Ahmed Abu Aziz

Mohammed Salama

Moaz Abu Taha

Hussam Al-Masri

Mariam Abu Dagga

Islam Abed

Rasmi Jihad Salem

Ayman Haniyeh

Osama Balousha

Mohammed Al Kuaifi

Mohammed Alaa

Al-Sawalhi

Mohammed Al Daya

Yahia Barzaq

Saleh Aljafarawi

Ahmed Abu Mutair