An Australian Anti-Vaxxer Group Posted A Graphic Photo Comparing ‘No Jab, No Pay’ To Rape

With public opinion practically forcing controversial anti-vaxxers out of the country, and Tony Abbott up and announcing the ‘No Jab No Pay’ policy a couple of weeks ago, it’s clear the issue of vaccination is well and truly on the national agenda. But, much like those in the US, it seems like we’re having trouble finding the right tone in which to have the debate.

Though the vast majority of Australians — around 92 percent — already vaccinate their children, the government’s plan to withhold family welfare payments has many questioning whether it’ll successfully engage the remaining objectors. In fact, there are a number of reasons which suggest it could just distance them further.

Now, we’re starting to see the results.

Late yesterday afternoon a Facebook page for the Australian Vaccination Skeptics Network — a group of volunteers who provide alternative information to parents considering vaccinations — posted a distressing statement. Obviously directed at the government’s new policy, it featured a picture of a man violently silencing a woman and a caption which compared mandatory vaccination to rape.

It is not great.

As AVN technically describes itself as “pro-choice” rather than “anti-vaccination”, this message seemed far too aggressive for many of the page’s 8,000 followers. The post has since been taken down, but the Sydney Morning Herald recorded a number of comments objecting to the statement.

“This is disgusting. Are you saying you believe your child being immunised is as bad as your child being raped? This could also be very triggering for victims of sexual assault,” said one.

The manager of the page then responded to the criticism saying, “this post isn’t tasteless — it is honest”. “What truly IS tasteless is our elected government trying to tell us that we have to vaccinate our children even if we don’t believe it is best for their health.”

After this, AVN’s founder Meryl Dorey stepped in and posted an apology of sorts with a clarification about the page itself.

Though it’s true that the page is managed by a volunteer whose views may differ from that of the original organisation, a few hours later another statement was posted from Dorey which essentially defended the initial post.

Towards the end, she does make a good point: both sides of this debate should maintain a sense of civility in all this. There’s absolutely nothing to be gained from threatening people and any suggestions of violence should be totally condemned.

But, here’s a small tip: that point would be better made if it weren’t prefaced by a list of synonyms for “rape” and a soliloquy justifying why you’re allowed to flippantly reference sexual assault when talking about children’s health issues.