Search the Community

I have watched the stuff in the 'manson' thread with some interest. I thought that it might be interesting to thrash out ideas raised in the Manson thread here - not polluting a footy thread any further but not stifling discussion either. When is it racist to consider 'racial' issues? One possible take on Barry Dawson's post was that aboriginal players are a greater risk of not having their potential drawn out at AFL level than other (white) players. It is an idea that is based entirely on 'race' as a deciding factor. While I have been raised in a anti-racism context my whole life, I do wonder about this issue. I wonder about the different between 'race' and 'culture'? Are we confusing the names of factors - aren't they cultural rather than racial (i.e., genetic)? Aboringial people have been treated in an abominable fashion for significant lengths of Australia's history. Disadvantage is endemic within Aboriginal populations. Is it 'racist' to acknowledge the realities of this disadvantage and the effect that it can have - the added burden it creates, the hurdles it creates - when recruiting players? Isn't it fair to say that life will be harder in melbourne for Jurrah than Trengove (for example) because of factors uniquely associated with aboriginality? Young Jack knows english as a first language, for example. The things Jurrah overcomes to just get this far are bloody extraordinary. Shouldn't we acknowledge the 'risk' in recruiting terms - and the welfare demands that success will require? And is this race or culture? I'd argue that it is cultural - that there is nothing 'genetic' about risk and that culture creates disadvantage which plays out in the lives of individuals. I think that many 'risk' factors exist at the level of the individual, their family, history and culture. Doesn't this apply to aboriginal players too? And are we getting hung up on the name of the type of risk that exists and arguing about issues that miss the point?