Summary Of Green Light Given To Homophobia By Rodney Croome

Rodney Croome’s opinion piece Green light given to homophobia and any bigot with a bible (2016) encourages readers to oppose a religious exemption to Tasmania’s anti-discrimination laws by broadcasting the author’s view on the issues of disestablishment and vilification. Hannah Gadsby’s words are used by Croome to represent her as oppressed by the harmful ideology of closeting and thus a structure and feature of victim, thereby inviting the audience to accept his idea of pervasive homophobia and his stance on the issue of hate speech. Concerning the issue of non-denominationalism, Croome conveys and influences readers to denounce the idea of privilege through a populist ideology depicting his opponents as a structure and feature of villain.

This emotionally appeals to readers to accept Croome’s truth on the issue of vilification, that unregulated discussion on LGBTI issues will cause damage that must be avoided. The historical context surrounding the quote of a Tasmania with criminalised homosexuality alongside public hatred and bashings of homosexual people further positions the modern-day audience to sympathise with Gadsby as someone ill-treated by archaic laws. The omission of other queer voices establishes Gadsby as the personification and representation of all LGBTI people. The predominance of Gadsby influences readers by characterising queer cultural values as just the helpless ones Gadsby embodies and none of the positive values the movement embodies. Croome’s privileging of Gadsby’s experience as a homosexual is intended to inform the audience that, when unrestricted debate is allowed, LGBTI existence is drab and oppressed, clearly stating his stance on the issue of hate speech. He effectively denies the queer community a voice by cherry-picking phrases to depict a diverse group

Croome writes the proposed legislation will allow “homophobia […] hate and denigration against religious or ethnic minorities, women, [and] people with disabilities,” (Croome). This invokes sympathy from the audience by highlighting the changes are against minority people groups, those unprivileged in society. The author creates the cultural representation of the marginalised as defenceless to introduce the social value of equality; he endorses the value by encouraging sympathy. Such is effective as any reader not against homophobia will surely be against xenophobia, misogyny, or ableism and it negatively portrays his opponents as condoning hate speech. On the other side of the issue of non-denominationalism, a churchly reading opposes Croome’s interpretation that a religious impunity to the current laws will cause hate and denigration, instead believing the exemption is necessary to convey scriptural teachings on family and marriage. In contrast to the oppression of minorities, the author conveys and challenges the idea of privilege by writing, “The government only cares about free speech for bishops,” (Croome). The dramatic term “only” (Croome) demonstrates Croome’s use of the language technique of exaggeration, which influences the audience to agree that clerics are treated by the