I suspect it won't shock you to know that I have zero interest in your vapid opinions of me.

Child abuse is a serious problem today in some remote Aboriginal communities. Unfortunately this sad state of affairs is virtually never mentioned by those that want to paint Australia as an extremely racist country. It's a problem today, as it was 100 years ago.

It makes utter sense to me that some children over the decades have been spared more abuse by removing them from dangerous situations. But being able to identify all child removal as racist government policy versus some child removal for protection purposes would blur the lines, in my opinion.

Naturally, there are bellicose bloviators like you, who want to scream that everything is either black or white.

So on that basis would you remove children from catholic families? Child abuse happens in all communities but historically they have been removed from which families?

I was a racist, I probably still have some views that could be considered racist, I am learning. I was happier as a racist now I am more aware and sad.

"Ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise." Thomas Gray.

You may think you are smart and happy, read more. (Not just Andrew Bolt)

Maybe this thread should be locked

It seems to have come down to "I and not racist". "Yes you are"

Not to mention that old chestnut, "I'm not racist but ..."

So on that basis would you remove children from catholic families? Child abuse happens in all communities but historically they have been removed from which families?

I was a racist, I probably still have some views that could be considered racist, I am learning. I was happier as a racist now I am more aware and sad.

"Ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise." Thomas Gray.

You may think you are smart and happy, read more. (Not just Andrew Bolt)

You should remove any child from any family that is suffering sexual or serious physical abuse or any other dangerous situation.

Btw, Catholicism isn't a "race".

Oh and glad you're no longer a racist. Big of you.

Not to mention that old chestnut, "I'm not racist but ..."

I prefer the

"I respect your opinion but........."

Please AzzKika unless you are deliberately trolling stop and think before you post.

If you are trolling then you have certainly perfected the art

I try my best.

I heard this a while back, I think on rabbit proof fence. Sorry if it offended and if it did explain why it did so I can understand your outrage. Or was it because I wrote THEY in capitals?

Clearly I'm one of these bigots and short minded people that you and others are all so horrified by. I never knew i was that bad.

Since my first outrageous post I have tried to understand but cannot because all you naysayers seem to do is tell me how wrong I am without providing the why except for your own stuck up look down at me opinion.

Numerous times I asked for an answer to a post for understanding on my part and not one of you helped me see past my bigotry, so how as a nation do we do that if we cant do it on a tiny little forum? If it is left up to the bigot, why would they/I bother?

My parents are quite racist and i cannot help that I was brought up that way, all I can do is take in the fact of what I am and when someone explains things to me in a level headed way it gets me thinking differently, but if i ask questions and try to understand i would prefer to be responded to with a little more than being called a troll.

You should remove any child from any family that is suffering sexual or serious physical abuse or any other dangerous situation.

Btw, Catholicism isn't a "race".

Oh and glad you're no longer a racist. Big of you.

I thought that was the objective ProDee

So no one is allowed to change their mind for the better?

Edited June 3, 201510 yr by old dee

Goodes is not portraying him or his people as perfect, far from it, He's standing up for what he believes. He believes his people were wronged and continue to be. He believes racism must end however difficult that is.He puts his view forward with passion and pride. Something I know Prodee has none of. He wouldn't know true connection to a people or a place if it bit him on the arse Prodee you're basically a neocon complete with the white supremacist, money is all, power is everything bolony that was probably shoved down your throat like a good little boy by your parents and the private school you went to.Time to get your snout out of the trough and realise how wrong you and those like you have got it.

didn't know neo-con meant racist

just love demonland, learn something every day

seems private school educated means racist too

any other epithets i might have missed?

if racism is stereotyping i wonder what your post is

You should remove any child from any family that is suffering sexual or serious physical abuse or any other dangerous situation.

Btw, Catholicism isn't a "race".

Oh and glad you're no longer a racist. Big of you.

My point, too subtle for some was that the only example of removing children* in Australia has been from Aboriginal families. That is racism.

At no point did I mention that Catholism was a race, I said community. Perhaps facts and logic are lost on you.

Edit * En masse

Edited June 3, 201510 yr by ManDee

didn't know neo-con meant racist

just love demonland, learn something every day

seems private school educated means racist too

any other epithets i might have missed?

if racism is stereotyping i wonder what your post is

Back to your best dc

I prefer the

"I respect your opinion but........."

not as good as "some of my best friends are...."

I try my best.

I heard this a while back, I think on rabbit proof fence. Sorry if it offended and if it did explain why it did so I can understand your outrage. Or was it because I wrote THEY in capitals?

Clearly I'm one of these bigots and short minded people that you and others are all so horrified by. I never knew i was that bad.

Since my first outrageous post I have tried to understand but cannot because all you naysayers seem to do is tell me how wrong I am without providing the why except for your own stuck up look down at me opinion.

Numerous times I asked for an answer to a post for understanding on my part and not one of you helped me see past my bigotry, so how as a nation do we do that if we cant do it on a tiny little forum? If it is left up to the bigot, why would they/I bother?

My parents are quite racist and i cannot help that I was brought up that way, all I can do is take in the fact of what I am and when someone explains things to me in a level headed way it gets me thinking differently, but if i ask questions and try to understand i would prefer to be responded to with a little more than being called a troll.

Fair enough AK, you seem sincere. Apologies for implying you might be trolling, though to be honest i suspected you weren't. Good on you for wanting to make an effort to reach a deeper understanding of what is a very complex issue. Too complex for a footy forum.

I reckon a good start to understanding this issue is getting a handle on the history of colonization, the impact on Aboriginals and the subsequent history. Geoffrey Blainey's works might be a good place to start if wanting to read about it or perhaps get hold of the documentary series that aired on SBS a while back, The First Australians (an excellent series).

My point, too subtle for some was that the only example of removing children* in Australia has been from Aboriginal families. That is racism.

At no point did I mention that Catholism was a race, I said community. Perhaps facts and logic are lost on you.

Edit * En masse

Facts and logic ? That's a laugh.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are NOT the only children removed from dangerous situations.

Right now there are less Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in OOHC than non-Aboriginal. Although their percentage is greatly higher.

This link may be of interest to you. Thank me later.

https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/child-abuse-and-neglect-statistics

I prefer the

"I respect your opinion but........."

I could go with

"hey OD, you're an old codger, no offense"

And you reply "No offense taken"

( seriously - what is it with "no offense but.." and " I don't mean to sound rude but...." and "with all due respect....." - you know the next words uttered are going to be offensive, rude and show no respect whatsoever)

not as good as "some of my best friends are...."

not that there is anything wrong with that......

I could go with

"hey OD, you're an old codger, no offense"

And you reply "No offense taken"

( seriously - what is it with "no offense but.." and " I don't mean to sound rude but...." and "with all due respect....." - you know the next words uttered are going to be offensive, rude and show no respect whatsoever)

like "none of my business, nut, but....."

like "none of my business, nut, but....."

insert nose here...

didn't know neo-con meant racist

just love demonland, learn something every day

seems private school educated means racist too

any other epithets i might have missed?

if racism is stereotyping i wonder what your post is

It's certainly stereotyping. But Prodee fits in there so well there's no need for me to look elsewhere. He's no different that so many of his kind

I could go with

"hey OD, you're an old codger, no offense"

And you reply "No offense taken"

( seriously - what is it with "no offense but.." and " I don't mean to sound rude but...." and "with all due respect....." - you know the next words uttered are going to be offensive, rude and show no respect whatsoever)

The whole subject amuses me nutbean.

They are all phrases uttered as apologies before you make an offending comment.

As though that makes the objectionable comment ok.

I always thought that half blooded Aborigines were not readily accepted by full-blood society, that they considered them inferior, wonder how THEY feel about Goodes representing them.

I think that may have been the case in the past though these days I'm not so sure it is as much of an issue.

I guess something to remember is that you can't really try and lump all indigenous people or communities into the one basket - they use to be hundreds of nations before the continent was colonised by the British and even then it would be like trying to say all Australians or Victorians (or even Melbourne supporters ) can be lumped into the same group. It is clear there is going to be a variance of opinion in most groups however on the whole I don't think the indigenous community would be too concerned with Goodes being seen as a spokesperson for them although you'd have to ask them.

Facts and logic ? That's a laugh.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are NOT the only children removed from dangerous situations.

Right now there are less Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in OOHC than non-Aboriginal. Although their percentage is greatly higher.

This link may be of interest to you. Thank me later.

https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/child-abuse-and-neglect-statistics

yeh and these conditions have nothing to do with whiteman do they.

It's certainly stereotyping. But Prodee fits in there so well there's no need for me to look elsewhere. He's no different that so many of his kind

hard to see, roostit, how your irrelevant and extraneous characterisations added any validity to your argument

if you are trying to convince or educate someone to change their position it seems a pretty unproductive way to go about it

Facts and logic ? That's a laugh.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are NOT the only children removed from dangerous situations.

Right now there are less Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in OOHC than non-Aboriginal. Although their percentage is greatly higher.

This link may be of interest to you. Thank me later.

https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/child-abuse-and-neglect-statistics

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are over-represented in child protection and out-of-home care services compared to non-Indigenous1 children. The reasons for this are complex and are influenced by past policies like forced removals, the effects of lower socio-economic status and differences in child rearing practices and intergenerational trauma (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [hrEOC], 1997).

Child protection data tells us how many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children come into contact with child protection services. It is the only data routinely collected in Australia that gives an idea of the number of children experiencing child abuse and neglect. However, there are several problems with these data that result in some children who:

• have been abused or neglected not being included in child protection statistics; and
• have not been abused or neglected being included in child protection statistics.

So basically A&TSI's are over-represented and the statistics don't actually confirm abuse or neglect has occurred. I'd be interested to see their definitions as well as case studies because from anecdotal evidence I've seen in media reports there are still forced removals happening unrelated to abuse or neglect.

Edited June 3, 201510 yr by Dr. Gonzo

Roost It, on 03 Jun 2015 - 12:31 PM, said:

Adam Goodes pointing out the girl who racially abused him. He cracked after copping the same abuse for his entire life. He later spoke of compassion for the girl. It was a hard lesson for sure but not as hard as the [censored] he and his people have had to edure for over 200 years

You could be right Roost, so I've taken another look . .

I decided to reframe this whole incident by using a more factual caption and see where that might lead.
My choice: "Indigenous tribal elder humiliates 13 yo white girl"! is factual enough (if a bit confronting).
Then I went to the academic literature to learn up on how women in general were treated in primitive

Australian societies and specifically young women and their treatment by tribal elders.
Lots of peer reviewed literature out there, I could post a selection here if you wish but to read it
could be detrimental to your innocence!
My next step was to ask "does a tribal elder in 21st century Australia hold the same attitudes toward

women, do they sanction those same behaviors?" Adam needs to step up and answer that one for me!

My take 'Roost it' is: if you want to set yourself up as a leader of your people then you better take ownership

of the good and the bad. . the romantic and the barbaric, better be aware of the dark symbolism you portray

and don't ever play the guilt game with modern multicultural Australians, you will be found out!

Adam has been "found out" and is being treated accordingly!

Chrs

Racist. Simple as that. No "reframing" required.

Stuie, what is it about you and the facts?

"Indigenous tribal elder . . humiliates 13 yo . . white girl"!

1. Adam describes himself as "A very proud Indigenous man from Adnyamathanha tribe" and sees football as " an opportunity to show that passion, and that pride about being
a warrior and representing my people and where I come from".

Tick fact 1. Adam is Adnyamathanha tribal elder! Uses football "to show pride about being a warrior!"

2. A 13-year-old girl was ejected from the MCG. MCG security told her family to remain seated as they ejected the girl - and police detained her for what she said was two
hours. The teenager was initially questioned by police without an adult present. When police found out she was only 13, they went and got her grandmother.
Her mother said she believed her daughter was "very scared" when she was taken away by security.

Tick fact 2. Reasonably assume she felt humiliated. Her age was stated as 13 years old!

3. Going by vision of the incident seems beyond question she was of European heritage ie "white".

Tick fact 3. White 13 year old girl!

"Indigenous tribal elder . . humiliates 13 yo . . white girl" Tick! Tick! Tick!


So Stuie, facts still remain facts even if they are a bit confronting and presented in a manner not to your liking!

Well you were stupid weren't you. I wasn't quoting Goodes verbatim. Why would I think I needed to ? The AFL didn't either.

But now you've been set straight and know exactly what he said. Fancy making a public declaration and stating "Racism had a face - and it was a 13 year old girl...". She isn't the face of racism and it was despicable for Goodes to suggest she was - even with his lame attempt to then absolve her of blame.

Btw, I knew you wouldn't "man up". And your mate Stu should cast for Dumb and dumber.

You're a class act Mr Irvin... I mean Hannibal/Ben Her... you selectively quote, deliberately omitting the statements that Goodes consistently made absolving the girl once the press had blown things way out of proportion.

It does not suit you to see Goodes as being contrite and attempting to settle things down. You know exactly what prompted his comment and that it was not Goodes who labelled the girl as the face of racism but rather stated that she had become the face of racism courtesy of the media. He pointed out someone who had made racist taunts without realising he was pointing out a 13 year old girl... even the girl's mother as she expressed concern over the treatment her daughter received apologised unreservedly to Goodes for the comments made by her daughter (this was after her daughter had apologised so there was no compulsion for her to do so other than her own conscience).

Anyway, you have to live with yourself I suppose, so it's no skin off my teeth.

Edited June 3, 201510 yr by hardtack

Again, I think it's important to remember that while there may be some abuse or neglect occurring, it is not endemic as politicians and the media sometimes like to make out (for instance when the NT Intervention was undertaken), there are non-indigenous communities where it occurs and the government does not intervene on the scale it does in indigenous communities and these issues are largely borne of poverty, not race. Therefore addressing the underlying issues in the community (indigenous and non-indigenous alike) is the best way to prevent these horrors and horrific living standards occurring in the first place.