Win for children and freedom as drag queen’s legal complaint dismissed

Win for children and freedom as drag queens' legal complaint dismissed

A legal battle ends, but the war is far from over.

Freedom to speak to protect children from the harms of the LGBTIQA+ political movement’s drag queen story time agenda has been upheld in a landmark legal victory.

News broke in the mainstream media last night that the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal has dismissed a vilification complaint brought by two LGBTIQA+ drag queens against me.

In January 2020 I blogged in response to a drag queen story time event at a Brisbane City Council library.

I wrote that the two LGBTIQA+ drag queens were “dangerous role models for children”.

A few months later I was sued for allegedly committing vilification or “hate speech” under Queensland’s Anti-Discrimination Act.

Drag queens Johnny Valkyrie, a woman presenting as a man, and Dwayne Hill, a proud recipient of an award from the porn trade, had demanded I pay them $20,000, make a public apology, delete five blog posts that shone a spotlight on the invasion of the lives of young children by drag queens who are highly sexualised and promote harmful gender fluid ideology and never criticise them again.

I was compelled, under the threat of fines, to attend two mediations. Each time I politely declined to accede to their demands, resulting in a three-day trial in QCAT last November.

I was defended by Tony Morris KC and Simon Fisher who were instructed by the Human Rights Law Alliance, a not-for-profit law firm specialising in protecting freedom of religion and speech.

The drag queens were defended by the LGBTI Legal Service which is subsidised to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Queensland taxpayer.

In last week’s written decision, QCAT Member Jeremy Gordon said I had acted “honestly” and in “good faith” in my public commentary about drag queen story time and that I had not incited hatred or ridicule, nor had I vilified Valkyrie or Hill because of their gender identity or sexuality.

This is a big win for the freedom to speak publicly and boldly for the protection of little children from early sexualisation and indoctrination into harmful gender-fluid concepts promoted by LGBTIQA+ activists and many politicians.

While this is a great victory, Australians are still vulnerable to being sued in the way I was.

I will continue to campaign for change to Australia’s flawed regime of anti-discrimination and so-called anti-vilification laws.

No Australian should ever again be dragged through a three-year legal process costing hundreds of thousands of dollars for engaging in important public debate about the welfare of children.

In a free society debate should be met with debate, not taxpayer-funded legal action designed to silence and punish a fellow citizen.

I am indebted to the HRLA, Tony Morris KC and barrister Simon Fisher who represented me at the trial, with much of that assistance being provided on a pro bono basis.

I’m incredibly grateful to the 1293 people who donated $208,282 on-line over the past three years to fund the bulk of my legal defence.

Without your support and prayers and the professionalism of my legal team, I would not have had a hope.

Most Australians will be shocked to know that the price of freedom of speech is north of $200,000, will cost three years of your life and force you to be subject to hours of cross-examination by a Senior Counsel in a public trial. This is not the Australia I grew up in.

To quote US protest singer Oliver Anthony’s Rich Men North of Richmond, ‘it’s a damn shame what the world’s gotten to’.

While my legal nightmare is over, it is not for several other Australians.

LGBTIQA+ activists must now to drop all anti-free speech legal action against, and persecution of, people like Binary spokesperson Kirralie Smith, Hobart City Councillor Louise Elliot, women’s app founder Sal Grover, expelled Liberal Moira Deeming, Let Women Speak organiser Angie Jones, academic Holly Lawford-Smith, stood down children’s psychologist Dr Jillian Spencer, former Liberal candidate Katherine Deves and sacked Australian Breastfeeding Association counsellor Jasmine Sussex.

The consequences of the de-gendering of marriage in law since 2017 have been profound, emboldening activist to make use of flawed laws.

Politicians must now act to protect what most Australians thought they could take for granted - the freedom to speak freely about gender, women, girls’ and children’s rights.

Many people have asked now that I have won if I will be awarded costs.

Sadly no.

QCAT is a no costs jurisdiction. There is no way I can recover my donors’ money and refund them.

Anti-discrimination and anti-vilification laws favour those bringing the complaint. With taxpayer-subsidised legal help available to LGBTIQA+ activists, mainstream Australians are on the back foot.

One more thing. In his judgement, Member Gordon said I had made some incorrect statements about Hill.


(a) Passages  incorrectly saying that Mr Hill used the name ‘Diamond Good-Rim’ when performing to child audiences. He only used that name when performing to adult audiences; when performing to child audiences he used the name ‘Diamond’.

(b) Passages incorrectly saying that Mr Hill was in the pornography and ‘sex trade’ industries.

Below are the five blog posts the drag queens wanted censored. I’ll let the reader be the judge as to whether any material I wrote was “incorrect” as Member Gordon described it or “false”, as the media described it.