Why is the CWA joining the gender politics crusade?
THEY might not be a bunch of bra burners, but they are still a group of strong women making a difference alongside the scones and tea, writes Louise Roberts. They don’t need to join the ranks of ridiculous progressives.
Rendezview
Don't miss out on the headlines from Rendezview. Followed categories will be added to My News.
PULL up in the main street of any rural town and you may be lucky enough to find a stall manned by the Country Women’s Association.
One bite of their light-as-air jam and cream scones with the most refreshing cup of tea and a few kind words and you’ll be immersed in a moment of calm and agenda-free Aussie decency.
Delightful yes, but we know the value of CWA’s real strengths.
It’s a group that’s all about brimming with community pride and polished crisis skills while never being boastful or showy. The CWA is reliable. Inclusive. Respectful. And they focus on the important stuff in life.
But it is with weary inevitability that the CWA too is now in the sights of the noisy minority intent on ‘genderfying’ anything they can get their hands on.
That’s right, the perpetual progressive revolution is now threatening to barrel down high street of a country town near you, as seen this week at the CWA’s annual state conference in Armidale.
The nonsense was led by Sydney City Branch president Elizabeth Nash who said her branch believed a uniform for kids should “provide girls and boys with equal access to a full range of school activities.”
But in a rare 2018 victory for common sense, the proposal was defeated with the final tally showing 285 votes against and 192 votes in favour. In essence, surely it is down to a school community to decide its own uniform policy.
The CWA’s Wellington branch secretary Phillipa Smith injected a note of sanity when she said: “It’s political correctness gone mad.”
But it raises the inevitable question: are we now at the level where there is not a single space ‘safe’ from gender debate?
On its website, the Sydney branch champions itself as “challenging the CWA stereotype, we’re an enthusiastic, dynamic group aiming to help make a difference, especially for those in our community who may need.”
My question is, if they set themselves up to “challenge the CWA stereotype”, why didn’t they just set up their own political group, rather than try to interfere with the traditions and cultures of a much-loved Australian organisation?
It’s outrageous to assume the CWA has a culture and an image that needs changing.
Yes, the CWA will lobby for women and families and for the bush. They’ll also work quietly in the background, thanks all the same, and get on with helping whoever needs them.
It’s like a thousand mums all with your best interests at heart.
Even just a cursory glance of the CWA national website shows that this is not an organisation stuck in Federation times but a vibrant group of community minded individuals who are quite capable of staying relevant.
They have just published a cookbook in time for Mother’s Day with tried and true recipes, from Anzac biscuits to lamb chops and pavlova, alongside household hints for soap and furniture polish. My daughter will love it.
Why do people feel the need to ‘fix’ this organisation like this? Why is ‘conservative’ a dirty word? It takes all kinds in this world. The CWA might not be a bunch of bra burners but that doesn’t mean they’re not a collective group of strong women who are making a difference.
What charitable organisation is next on the cultural warriors’ hit list? Perhaps St Vincent De Paul (Vinnies) — by using the name of a man, albeit a saint, are not as ‘gender neutral’ as they should be?
Or the Red Cross, celebrating a 104th birthday this year? No doubt some individual will eventually take issue with the colour red (a symbol of violence) or the use of a cross (it has religious connotations).
The Salvation Army too. Maybe it is not as representative of peace as it should be, given the fact it calls itself an army.
It’s a conveyor belt to nowhere.
It’s the systematic meddling in traditions that most parents want their children to experience, the warmth of a kind pair of eyes and reassurance from the CWA, Rotary, Lions or any other precious community group that everything will be turn out right.
It’s the futile nit picking of institutions deemed as old fashioned in a misguided effort to keep them alive when their very core message — decency and heart — is what we need more than ever in this era of self-importance.
My father-in-law recently clocked up more 30 years in Rotary. That’s a lot of sausage sizzles, raffle tickets and Wednesday evenings devoted to thinking up new ways to help people. My mum has spent years knitting for hospital auxiliaries and comforting new mothers.
I am fortunate enough to have been surrounded by community-minded people all my life. They don’t want a fanfare or a mission statement, just like the core CWA.
As a young nation, we have fewer years of culture to be proud of and to protect compared to other nations. The CWA is a national treasure and should be allowed to do what they do without the evangelical determination of city women who feel they need to change.
Last year a CWA member said on talkback radio she would cancel her membership following the move to support same-sex marriage among Victorian members. Wherever you sit on marriage equality, the organisation’s political skew was unwelcome, the woman, identified as Carmel, said.
“It actually discriminates against people who do believe in that tradition.
“I can’t in good conscious renew my membership and I’m very sad about that. The CWA has been such a beautiful part of my life.”
There are plenty of progressive agitating outfits to join for those who so wish. Let’s cherish our authentic community groups and charities while we still have them.