Showing posts with label Violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Violence. Show all posts

Sunday, 19 July 2015

Divisive rallies bring violence to the streets of Melbourne and a forceful police intervention as Muslims celebrate Eid

THESE ARE THE HEADLINES REGARDING 
WHAT HAPPENED IN MELBOURNE
ON SATURDAY 18 JULY 2015 
AT PARLIAMENT HOUSE.

Who was the centre of attention in front of and near Victoria's Parliament House yesterday?  Reclaim Australia and their associates wanted to provide a double focus of attention: themselves and Muslims living in Australia.

No Room for Racism and its sympathisers were equally determined on a dual focus: to counter the racism of Reclaim Australia and its cohort and to make the public aware of their organisation.

Did the events of the day go as planned for both sides?  Possibly. Possibly not.  However, it seems that there were elements on both sides who were prepared for trouble one way or another.  

A group with a similar title to Reclaim Australia hit Ballarat early in 2014.  Restore Australia arrived in Ballarat trying to incite antagonism to the building of a mosque in the city - a city which was the site of Australia's first document demanding democratic rights.  As can be seen from this Facebook presence, drumming up opposition to the mosque being built by Ballarat's small Islamic community was not too successful.  

What Restore Australia did not take into account in the Ballarat situation is that community friendships had already been forged within the broader community by the time they blew into town.  The local Islamic community had friends - a broad spectrum of friends.  And the then Mayor was an early responder.

Meanwhile, amid all this swirling of clashing tensions and violent police intervention, what were Muslims doing? Yesterday was the beginning of Eid celebrations. Muslims were enjoying themselves. Behind them was a month of fasting. Now can come the feasting.  Perhaps Reclaim Australia chose the day and date deliberately with an intent to insult Muslims - or perhaps they knew there would not be a Muslim in sight or hearing of their rampage!

The Faith Communities Council of Victoria has issued the following statement.

Statement on Nationwide Rallies: 

Faith Communities Council of Victoria

The Faith Communities Council of Victoria (FCCV) has issued the following statement in light of reports that over the weekend of the 18/19th July 2015, Reclaim Australia is planning nationwide rallies which we believe are divisive and not in the nation’s best interests. 

The acceptance of our multicultural and multifaith society is one of Australia's greatest achievements and assets. The celebration of this rich diversity that exists in our society ensures we remain innovative, resilient and globally competitive - all of which enhances our society and increases our standard of living.

Like any asset, our multicultural and multifaith identity needs to be continuously nourished and threats to undermine it need be addressed. The current environment fueled by economic uncertainty and fear is encouraging the rise of extreme groups like Reclaim Australia and UPF (United Patriots Front), who are intent on disenfranchising minorities and disturbing the peace within our society.

These groups demonstrate they possess anti-Muslim, anti-Asian, anti-Indigenous, anti-Semitic and anti-Refugee sentiments.

We, the Faith Communities Council of Victoria, actively discourage any kind of involvement with these groups and see them as a threat to peace and social cohesion within our society. 

We believe there has to be a continuous dialogue promoting multiculturalism and multifaith.

We also encourage all to discourage others from supporting these groups in any way.

The harmony and diversity in our society is the basis of the beauty of Australia, and we request your support in maintaining this.

Faith Communities Council of Victoria
Faith Communities Council of Victoria is comprised of the following peak bodies: Baha'i Community of Victoria, Brahma Kumaris Australia, Buddhist Council of Victoria, Hindu Community Council of Victoria, Islamic Council of Victoria, Jewish Community Council of Victoria, Sikh Interfaith Council of Victoria and Victorian Council of Churches.

Tuesday, 22 October 2013

Dale Hess Calendar 13-10-21


Tuesday 22 October, 7 pm sharp: Climate Change vs. Nukes: Screening Climate of Hope andWomen of Fukushima. Discussion with Jim Green, Friends of the Earth. Free event. Venue: Longplay Bar and Cinema, 318 St Georges Road, North Fitzroy. Full program and more details at the Facebook event here.




Wednesday 23 October, 9.30 am – 11.30 am: Linking Asylum Seekers with Volunteering Opportunities. MORELAND CITY COUNCIL, 90 Bell Street, Coburg ( Concert Hall, entry from Council foyer) parking off Urquhart St. - Mel ref: 17 J12. Contact: Anne Gedye, Community Strengthening Officer, Moreland City Council, agedye@moreland.vic.gov.au or phone: 9240 2367

 < 

Thursday 24 October, 5.30 pm for 6 pm start: Film screening of 'From Fear to Freedom: Ending Violence Against Women'. The film will be followed by a public forum on how to address this global epidemic. Panelists: Stephen Fontana, Assistant Commissioner, Victoria Police; Roscel Diego, Gender Advisor, International Programs, World Vision; Murray McInnis, Director and Lead Ambassador (Legal Sector), White Ribbon; Fran O’Toole, Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Director of Services, Berry Street; Facilitator: Professor Jacqui True, Professor of Politics & International Relations, Associate Dean Research, Faculty of Arts, Monash University. Deakin Edge, Federation Square, Melbourne. Free event. RSVP essential. REGISTER ONLINE NOW



Friday 25 October, 2 pm – 3 pm: Wurundjeri Stories Event. Reconciliation and landcare supporters, as well as local residents, community groups, churches and schools are warmly invited to join the Wurundjeri Elders at a very special ceremonial event at the Bukkertilibul Dreaming Site at Wittons Reserve in Wonga Park. The site is known as a sacred women's space and ancient dreaming site, and is possibly the most significant Aboriginal site in the area. The ceremony will involve a welcome to Country and Smoking Ceremony, and a cleansing ceremony, dance and song performed by the Wurundjeri women, who will share their connection to this sacred space to help build knowledge and future care for this sacred site, 'Bukkertilibul'. Please join us to support and celebrate our unique Wurundjeri cultural heritage at Wittons Reserve, Reserve Road, Wonga Park. This is a free event, no bookings required.

Monday 28 October, 7 pm – 8 pm:  Webinar on Renewables. Things are unfolding fast in the renewables campaigning world, and it is high time we got together for an update on the priorities for 100% and Solar Citizens. Low down from 100% Renewable National Director,Lindsay Soutar, and update on next steps for 100% and Solar Citizens. Register:https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5266473034304243969 



Friday 1 November, 6.30 pm – 8.30 pm: ICAN film screening: FALLOUT. FALLOUT is the documentary that explores the iconic filming of Nevil Shute's novel 'On The Beach' in Melbourne in the late 50s. Shute’s novel depicts the last huddle of humanity preparing to die as a cloud of nuclear fallout drifts towards Australia. World leaders instructed each other to read it, and Hollywood liberal Stanley Kramer headed to Melbourne to make a star-studded film of it which staring Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner, Fred Astaire and Anthony Perkins. Cinema Nova, 380 Lygon Street, Carlton.





Sunday 3 November, 6.30 pm: Premier of film: Mary Meets Mohammad. This film follows the arrival of Tasmania’s first detention centre through the eyes of local Christian woman and knitting club member Mary and Muslim Afghan Hazara asylum seeker Mohammad, who is detained inside the centre, as they connect through the gift of a knitted beanie. Venue: Kino at45 Collins Street with a filmmaker Q&A after the screening. On Thursday 7 November, 7 pm: Special Q&A after; screening with film composer David Bridie & Filmmaker. On Friday 8November, 7 pm: Q&A after screening with QC Julian Burnside & filmmaker. Please book, limited seats, & encourages more sessions to be scheduled! Phone (03) 9650 2100 to book tickets or go online here:
http://www.palacecinemas.com.au/movies/marymeetsmohammad/
 
Tuesday 12 November, 7 pm sharp: 17,300 Nuclear Weapons: Screening Maralinga Pieces, Genie in a bottle: Unleashed and The War Game. Discussion with Dimity Hawkins, Tim Wright (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons) and Gisela Gardener. Free event. Venue: Longplay Bar and Cinema, 318 St Georges Road, North Fitzroy. Full program and more details at the Facebook eventhere.



Wednesday 13 November, 6.30 pm - 8.30 pm: Human Rights Under Threat in Australia? Spirit of Eureka (Melbourne) together with Rob Stary & Associates are organising a public forum. Speakers so far include: Ged Kearney, ACTU President; David Manne, Human Rights Lawyer, Refugee and Immigration Legal Centre; Humphrey McQueen, activist historian. Invitations to speak have also been sent to Julian Burnside and Robert Richter. The forum will be chaired by Rob Stary, democratic rights lawyer. The forum has been endorsed by Liberty Victoria, IPAN, and several other community organisations. The Wheeler Centre, 176 Little Lonsdale Street, Melbourne. Further info:Shirley 0417 456 001.



Tuesday 26 November, 7 pm sharp: Muckaty and Radioactive Waste: Screening Muckaty Voicesand Into Eternity. Discussion with Dave Sweeney, Australian Conservation Foundation. Free event. Venue: Longplay Bar and Cinema, 318 St Georges Road, North Fitzroy. Full program and more details at the Facebook event here.

Friday, 24 May 2013

Are you all for in rather than out? Inclusion, exclusion, neo-liberalism, racism and the Swedish riots


Racism is a complex issue.  Sometimes it appears as a rational response, sometimes as irrational.  Few, if any, nations or people groupings are free of racism.  What is its wellspring?  And if it is possible to identify the wellspring, do we want to acknowledge it and face it.

Since White Settlement, Australia has had racism in its national lifeblood.  We need to think about what is racism because even some of our most respected people who appear open and even-handed can fail to recognise race discrimination when it appears in policies, attitudes, and relationships.

This is a prelude to saying that the current Swedish riots have caught my attention.  They have caught my attention not only because they appear to have a race/ethnicity element but also because the Swedish nation has moved away in recent times from a strong social inclusion model of governance to a form of neo-liberalism and small government.  This model of governance has advocates both in the Liberal-National Parties of Australia and the Australian Labor Party.  The third reason I have for my interest is that as I look back on a long life of political involvement and activism I find my self coming back to thoughts of inclusion and I'm alert to elements of public life and social policy and human interaction which demonstrate exclusion, difference, inequity rather than inclusion, acceptance, and equity.

Governments can subscribe to and enact all the human rights legislation they like - and, perhaps but not always likely, enforce such legislation.  However, in the end such governance has little weight if society - or a large section of it - is left to glory in its own prejudices and exclusions.

Prejudice and exclusion are attributed to many factors - religion, lack of education, ability to exert dominance, ideology explaining dominance or inferiority and so on.  For me, these factors may to some extent hold the key but not entirely.  My view is that humanity demarcs.  If skin colour, physiognomy, language, gender were not used as factors of human demarcation, we would find other ways to describe, ascribe, and separate. 

RACISM IN AUSTRALIA
How did large groupings of people occupy certain lands and eventually come to describe themselves as nations?  When White Settlement began in Australia, there were 600-700 distinct Aboriginal nations.  Within those nations there are/were distinct subdivisions down to clan and family levels.  These nations - while apparently, at least to white Australians, of one race or ethnicity - held certain lands as their own.  They did, however, war with other nations in disputes about land ownership and boundaries.  In addition, incest laws in Aboriginal nations are quite strong and, among some nations, quite complex.  Aboriginal 'right skin' laws make Anglo-Celtic taboos look fast and loose by comparison.


So, early in the 21st Century, across the globe human beings know about each other - who we are, where we are, the languages we speak, the economic circumstances under which we live.  We are mobile; have advanced technology; most of us have some form of education and literacy.  Just as people of old moved to other nations, lands, countries when there were adverse situations of famine, floods, and war, so people of to-day still move.  Most nations of the developed world walk a fine line about who is acceptable and not acceptable within their bounds.  Those with wealth or access are more acceptable no matter what their race or ethnicity.  They find a way to come in.  Those with no financial advantage are more likely to be the victims of exclusionist policies.

The most dreadful story of exclusion and hysteria in relation to Australia of which I am aware is that of the "Dunera Boys".  It shows the paranoia of human exclusion when refugees from Nazi Europe were imprisoned and transported to Australia like the convicts of the eighteenth century - in case they betrayed the British cause to the Nazis they ran away from!!!  Australia to-day recognises this wonderful story of human determination and community and acknowledges the way we have benefitted from the 900 "boys" who remained in Australia and we are still benefitting to-day through many of their distinguished descendants.  

Australians - at least it seems like a majority of them but I hope it is a minority - decry the boat people and complain of people jumping some distant yet non-existent queue.  People came this way after the Vietnam war but any outcry or exclusion was not as strong as it is to-day.  Australia has now become an exclusion zone.  Refugees cannot apply for refugee status by landing on Australian soil. 

RACISM IN SWEDEN
Some of us in Australia have admired the social policies implemented in the Scandinavian countries of Norway, Sweden and Denmark.  Some of us have even thought at times that Australia was becoming somewhat like these nations that we admired.  What we idealists didn't readily acknowledge was that, just as Australia has its racist underbelly, so do these nations.  In these nations there were found ready bedfellows for Nazi ideology and its racist claptrap in the 1930s and 1940s.

Picture below from here
More recently, Norway has been rocked and sadden by its lone wolf racist attacks. Questions are raised about racism in Denmark.







The Swedish writer, Stieg Larrson, was an outspoken advocate against racism.  References to current day Nazis and racism in Sweden found their way into his "Girl" trilogy. In 1999, Larrson was appointed Chief Editor of Expo, a Swedish magazine that exposes racism and the activities of the extreme right. 





Below is a discussion of racist violence in Denmark



AFTERWORD FOR AUSTRALIA
Australia is a modern nation but it needs to be aware of too readily adopting, in the name of modernity and current trends, the governance exhibited by other nations.  The governance and economics of neo-liberalism may find favour in terms of dollar values but is it worth the cost of rupturing the social fabric of a nation?  

Is casting all our doings, our business in the bureaucratic models of government and major corporations wise?  Where is there time for people, their wishes, their abilities, their sound ambitions in these models which don't spare time for thorough down-on-the-ground consultations or have the ability for close and empathetic listening?  We have had our taste of racial violence on one sunny January day of surf and sand at Cronulla.


We need to think hard and long on what exclusion and inclusion means in terms of our nation.  We can turn away boat people all we like but are we really thinking about our humanity and theirs?  Are we really thinking of the consequences of our actions?  Every action has consequences.  I am naive enough to believe that good actions bring good consequences and bad actions bring bad consequences.  And who are we to think that we, as part of the human race, are any better than other members of the human race. Sure there are societies that are more equitable, tolerant, peace loving with highly developed economies and sophisticated and equitable rules of law than others.  But our systems while admirable are far from perfect.  White collar criminals who wreck the lives of others walk free.  We have seen senior bureaucrats and the Prime Minister of our nation being less than open and truthful  before a Royal Commission and get away with it.  Corruption may not be all pervasive in Australia - yet - but it operates in some very high and mighty places with great subtlety and has done since White Settlement in 1788!  

So what we need is humanity - to empathise, understand, communicate - and we need humility - to recognise our individual shortcomings and our national shortcomings.  Out of these reflections should come a spirit of inclusion so that governments, institutions and individuals will have an openness of the size and sort that is not displayed at this time.  I'm all for in - rather than out.  Are you?

Thursday, 23 May 2013

Celeste Liddle responds to Bess Price's NT Legislative Assembly speech. A strong, intelligent perspective.

Earlier this week, I posted Bess Price's speech to the NT Legislative Assembly of which she is a member.  I posted it without any comment by me - although I was not well pleased with Price's taking of the opportunity to vent on the women who have opposed or criticised her.  That was less than gracious of someone who has sought and won a position which should be of some honour in Australian society.

To-day I am publishing an open letter from Celeste Liddle.  It is published in her blog, Rantings of an Aboriginal Feminist.  If you have spent more than five minutes in the Centre, you will hear the Liddle name often. It is a large and well-known Arrente family.  I have Barb Shaw to thank for mentioning this open letter on her Facebook site.

I have to say that while I respect the sadness and sentiment expressed by Price in relation to the Aboriginal on Aboriginal violence, I lean very much to Celeste Liddle's point of view.  I also like the fact that while there are some cultural, geographic and gender specifics in relation to domestic violence, Liddle acknowledges the way in which domestic violence has commonalities across cultural, geographic and gender separations. I also like her reference to intimate partner violence.

Please go to Celeste Liddle's blog and read the comments.  Some interesting people have commented and there are some interesting differences of opinion happening in the comments section.

I would ask Celeste Liddle and Bess Price to continue to debate this issue, to give it prominence, to find a way out of opinion differences towards some decisions and actions which will benefit men and women everywhere - whether remote or urban; black or white or yellow.  All our children could be well served by the positive results of such constructive public decision.

An open letter to Bess Price

Dear MLA Price,

I read with much interest the direct report from the NT Hansard of your speech to the Legislative Assembly as published in the Alice Springs News on the 17/5/13. I was alternatively moved, saddened, angered and perturbed by what you said to the point of where I have felt the need to write this post on my blog. I could, of course, send this to you directly and privately, but by posting it publicly I hope to achieve more than just exchanged notes between two people. I hope, like you would have through making the speech in the first place and then agreeing to the publishing of the Hansard record in a news publication, to raise awareness. I therefore hope that you will recognise that my reasoning for choosing public, rather than private, means of exchange is one that is made with the purest of intentions and with a true dedication to progress.

I am writing to you as an Arrernte woman, as a black feminist, and as a dyed in the wool member of the left. I am also writing to you as someone who lives in Melbourne (although half my life has been spent on the Stuart Highway) and whilst I am definitely not "middle class", I am clearly urban and am an educated professional. I am a committed trade unionist. I identify as being a "critical thinker" rather than a "cultural relativist" (a fact that has led to some conflict with family over the years), and the right to self-determination is of the highest importance to me, in all possible ways. Politically, I am not affiliated to any party at this point in time and whilst I have held memberships to a couple of parties over the years, I find it difficult to adhere to a party line because generally speaking, Indigenous and Feminist politics are what are at my core and my personal beliefs do not always align with a Political party's vision. On the spectrum, I have described myself as "socialist" and "anarchist" but generally speaking, I am radical left. I wanted to put this all upfront because in your speech you have levelled your criticism at the left, and whilst I have first-hand experience of the left not always getting issues related to gender or race correct, I feel that your criticism of the left is somewhat misplaced and erroneous and I hope that I can show you why I feel this is the case. At the end of the day I believe in striving for an egalitarian society and I don't believe the ability to buy into what are essentially corrupt practices of a coloniser society, whether this is "celebrating" Aboriginal women's beauty, or whether this is the ability to exploit people and land to achieve material wealth, is the way forward.

Additionally, in the interest of openness I will state that we have made acquaintance before, although not actually met. We were both on that fateful episode of Insight. I saw you looking at me prior to the show and felt that you may have recognised me through my family, although I could be wrong. My family is known to you regardless, as you are a resident of Alice Springs. You know many members of my family and of course are aware that there are streets, natural features and hostels named after members of my family in the centre. In that forum, I accused you of "social Darwinism" as I felt, very strongly, that your opinions stated within that forum reflected those principles. Additionally, as you do reside in the Alice and are therefore profiteering off the displacement of the Arrernte through murder, removal policies leading to the Stolen Generation, and numerous other practices, I felt that your opinions showed a neglect of the significance of those facts and how they may shape the identity of those around you. That comment barely made it to screen; I was almost inaudible and really only our reactions to it were clear. I don't take that comment back, incidentally, for I still feel it was true. You made it clear in that forum that your claim to Aboriginality is stronger than those of us who are of mixed decent because you are "full blood" and you know language, culture and song, yet you are living on lands of acknowledged "frontier battles" and could not acknowledge that some may not have had that same access to culture because these things occurred on their lands. Culture is not a static entity. It has never been pre-or-post-colonisation, and I believe that shared historical experience is as valid a cultural element as anything else.

Speaking of culture, as stated, I identify as a critical thinker rather than a "cultural relativist". This very fact has made for some rather "interesting" conversations over the years. To give a small example, I have had arguments with people when I have felt those people have idealised gender roles in traditional society. I don't necessarily believe that gender equivalence equals gender equality and whilst indeed we are a culture that celebrates strong women who have authority, there are enough well-known cultural markers (for example, marriage rites) to indicate that "equality" may not be a completely accurate description in most tribal circumstances. Hell, we are the most studied people in the world, or close to, and even those with little knowledge are able to crack open a book and read passages that have been written, including ones from Marcia Langton, detailing patriarchal practices within desert cultures. Also, having set roles in a society based on gender has rarely been consistent with "equality" anywhere in the world. This is one of the many reasons of why I am so for the concept of "self-determination"; we must have the ability to critically examine ALL culture and assert our identity, both as Aboriginal people and as women, in order to move society forward as a strong and healthy unit. I argue that through having to continually defend ourselves in the face of colonisation and gender inequality, individually and structurally, we are currently denied that right of self-determination and can are therefore diminished in our ability to re-imagine society, social structures, legal systems etc in ways that are inclusive and owned by us. Long story short: I question and will always do so. I don't believe everything I was told and I certainly will not forgive what are transgressions of basic human rights when arguments of cultural practice are used. It is completely possible to practice culture and respect culture whilst questioning elements of it and pushing for change, in my opinion.

Here's where I get to the nitty-gritty of this open letter: despite my clear left-wing views, I do not stand for the abuse and murder of our women as you assert that the left does. The cases you mention are shocking, and the fact that there may never be justice AND that people stood by and watched it happen sickens me to the core. It reminds me of cases a few years back that reached the mainstream media across the country involving rapes and bashings of girls being hidden or legally glossed under the cultural guise of "promised marriage". This should NEVER have been allowed to happen and the fact that so many stood back, for years in one of the cases, and allowed it to just is incomprehensible. I know that these cases are so outrageous, due to the age of the victims, the brutality of the crimes, and the amount of people who turned a blind eye to it all, that this is why they make the mainstream media on the East Coast. I also know from my broader knowledge of women's rights that for every one case that does make the media there are countless others that do not; because the crimes go unreported; because the victim is not quite so young; because they were not quite so brutalised by the perpetrator; because the community was not so blatantly aware. Unfortunately the situation does not always seem to get a whole lot better for those Aboriginal women who live in the cities and have a number of support mechanisms at their disposal that they try to call on, as the case of Andrea Pickett shows us. The system, the media, the communities and the ignorance of the greater Australian community continually fail our women. That is why this has never, and will never be a simple left-right divide for me. This is sexism, compounded by racism, and the suffering it causes is unacceptable.

You state in your address that "Dr Jarrett is saying there are elements to our traditional culture that we must change if we are to stop the violence that is destroying us" and that you agree with this summation. I remain a huge proponent of self-determination and I believe that a core part of that is the ability to proudly engage in, and celebrate culture in ways that reinforce one's identity and sense of pride. This includes acknowledging systematic oppression and how this contributes to situations and issues in our communities because it is, most certainly, a factor. I don't believe that this ever means glossing over culture and failing to cast a critical eye upon those practices that need to be examined from a basic human rights perspective. Indeed, I think that to fail to examine all culture would run contrary to the goals of self-determination. What I do find difficult to stomach though are the additional arguments supplied by Jarrett whereby an apparent answer lies in the ability to have a greater ability to share in mainstream Australia and assimilate, to an extent. I state this as one who lives in mainstream Australia and who experiences it every day as an Arrernte woman. Mainstream Australia is not free from sexism and it most certainly is not free from racism, therefore it really cannot guarantee a better life for those that access it.

Whilst you're fighting to stop violence against women on communities, the trade union I work for is currently trying to get domestic violence clauses into collective agreements in universities in acknowledgement of the approximately 1/3 of the women who work in the sector and will experience domestic violence. These clauses will, of course, cover the approximately 700 Aboriginal women (including some who live in remote communities) that work in the sector and who are, it is estimated, twice as likely as their non-Aboriginal colleagues to experience violence. It will also cover the approximately 450 Aboriginal men in the sector who are also significantly more likely to experience violence than their non-Aboriginal colleagues. Domestic violence is considered a workplace issue now because, far from being something that simply happens in the privacy of a home, or publicly in an isolated community, it effects a victim's ability to participate in everyday life, and that includes holding down a job. It makes sense that women who have their own income and who are empowered by being in a supportive environment are more likely to be able to take action and leave a situation of domestic violence than those that are not independent and are not being supported. The left may be going about it in ways that are different to ways you would pursue the issue but they are certainly not ignoring it.


Whilst you're noting that community members stood around and watched a young mother be brutally murdered in a town camp, on the streets of Melbourne since the 1970s women have marched to change deeply embedded social attitudes dictating that women ask to be attacked if they walk around by themselves late at night, if they dress certain ways or if they act in certain ways. It is not as blatant as people watching it happen before their eyes and doing nothing (or even, on occasion, joining in) but through the reinforcement of certain attitudes, society, rather than re-educating itself and changing the message, allows these acts against of violence against women to continue. We saw this play out in Melbourne most recently in the case of Jill Meagher who, whilst she was afforded a great deal of coverage in the media which the women you mention were utterly denied down here, was being questioned as to why she was out late that night, why was she drinking, why had she walked home alone? The media, and many members of society, rarely seemed to ask question of why would a man ever feel he has the right to deny a woman of her civil liberties. Simply put, when it comes to the nuts and bolts of it all, society does not believe that a woman has a right to participate fully within it and not suffer repercussions for her actions. Actions men take for granted are the very same things that bring women into question. If she is attacked it will be her fault. Whether they're standing around watching it, or they are questioning a victim's actions in the media, society, such as it may be, is approving the perpetuation of violence against women and allowing it to continue. Assimilation will not solve it, only shift how it is publicly reacted to and perhaps lessen the tallies a little. Much more radical solutions are needed in my opinion.

You state that “Convictions usually lead to light sentences. I was told by a senior lawyer that no jury in Alice Springs will convict an Aboriginal person for murder if the victim is also Aboriginal and he or she is only stabbed once”. As I've already highlighted through the case of Andrea Pickett, whilst this may well be the case in Alice, being in a more urban setting won't always protect the victim either. On a broader social sense though, as mentioned, women who are victims of violence rarely pursue it through the avenues available to them. This is because the legal system and society continually fails them. Sentences are often a joke, conviction rates are low and women are rarely believed. If they do decide to pursue, for example, a claim of domestic violence or rape through the justice system they can expect that their lives and how they conduct themselves will be placed under a microscope. If they are unlucky enough to be attacked by a public figure, for example a top football player, they will also receive trial by the media and by the general public. A lot of women therefore will never come forward. It is well documented that Aboriginal women are significantly more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence, of sexual violence and of homicide and this of course requires specific programmes targeting communities and then tailor-made in collaboration with those communities based on their specific requirements. Targeting domestic violence against Aboriginal women in Melbourne from Aboriginal perpetrators of course requires a different approach to targeting it in Mutitjulu. All these need measures that are again specific from mainstream approaches. Measures that examine how culture, poverty, history and substance abuse can be contributing factors to the unique ways that violence can manifest within our communities in all their different forms (urban, rural, remote). Here's the thing though: our Aboriginal women in the cities with access to what you deem is a fairer system are still presenting to Aboriginal Health Organisations with injuries, they are still ending up in refuge hostels trying to escape violence and they still cannot guarantee that if they pursue the matter it will be dealt with fairly in a legal system that is dominated by white males and based upon laws from another country. White women cannot be guaranteed that they will be dealt with fairly so what real chance does a black woman have at this point in time?

This is the crux of it all for me: are we actually looking to just lessen the impacts and numbers of victims here or do we wish these issues to be eradicated? We may lessen impacts by drawing on tactics of the left-right divide to suit our own purposes but if you ask me, we need to transgress this. Culture needs to be examined and parts that state that women are of lesser value and
men have little control over their actions need to be tossed out. Parts that state that Aboriginal people are of lesser worth and that their social problems cannot be examined need to also be tossed out. I do not agree, being of the left, with top down approaches such as the ones you praise when you talk of the braveness of Macklin, because I believe that these just end up replacing one form of abuse with another. You cannot empower a community to positively address these serious issues by further disempowering them and removing their agency. This is amplified by the fact that the very powers imposing these measures have not been successful in eradicating similar issues within the mainstream. I am for collaboration and those that wish to take a stand and improve situations being given the tools and the power to do so. You state that “For the left and for many Aboriginal politicians on the national stage, it seemed the only issues worth talking about were the Stolen Generations and Aboriginal deaths in custody”. I'm here to say that this is not the case. I am Arrernte, I am a feminist and I am most definitely of the left and I want better for our women. I personally can name a number of Aboriginal women and men who are also of the left and who want the same. I can additionally name a number of non-Indigenous members of the left who echo this. There are many of us who would stand up and assist in this goal.

But here's the thing: whilst you continue to deny my existence as an Aboriginal woman and the right of myself and my family, as well as many other Aboriginal families to claim our heritage and history, and whilst you continue to deny that my family, and thousands across the country have been subjected to years of government policies and procedures and you assert that we therefore are not “true blackfellas”, we cannot stand side-by-side in your cause. We are rendered unable to share information because you, with your unique experience of remote communities and culture, are blocked to our experiences from elsewhere and how these may be linked. You deny us the ability to speak of violence in these communities in our own ways because you deem us as having no right due to where we live or what other heritage we may have. I don't want this to be the case but feel that after seeing you reported so many times in the media as well as witnessing it first-hand in a TV studio that you are not particularly interested in what I, and what others like me, may have to say on the topic. If this is not the case then I would be very interested in opening a dialogue with you and seeing how a bit of side-by-side activism could contribute to the combating of these issues and making a better world for our women. I believe that you possess a passion for change and a great deal of knowledge that can definitely assist in the goal of eradicating these issues of violence. I look forward to your response should you deem a response appropriate.

With warm regards,

Celeste Liddle

Friday, 19 April 2013

Preventing Men's Violence Against Women : White Ribbon International Conference, Sydney, 13-15 May 2013

: : : : Global to Local: Preventing Men's Violence against Women - White Ribbon International Conference, 13-15 May : : : :

White Ribbon International Conference

White Ribbon Australia is proud to host its first international conference in Sydney this May (13-15), featuring key researchers, practitioners, policy makers and activists, from both national and international settings, to showcase research, policies and programs that work to change men's attitudes and behaviours that perpetuate violence.
The theme, Global to Local: Preventing Men's Violence against Women - Research, Policy and Practice in One Space, focuses attention on what is a shattering issue in our society that results in devastating costs to individuals, our communities and the nation.
Visit www.whiteribbon.org.au/globaltolocal for further information.

Thursday, 30 August 2012

Mind your language: the role of language in creating and destroying with thx to @davidbewart

I love this video embedded below. 
 It has come to me on Twitter from @davidbewart. 
I strongly believe in the power of words.  

In a civilised and secular society like ours, I know it is not fashionable to believe that words can build up or tear down.  I put as evidence though the words Whitlam spoke on 11 November 1975.
Well may we say 'God Save the Queen'; because nothing will save the Governor-General. The proclamation you have just heard was counter-signed 'Malcom Fraser' - who will go down in history as 'Kerr's Cur'.
And nothing did save the Governor-General.  He became a pathetic figure in the public life of Australia.  However, the Malcolm Fraser curse has not come true.  In fact, late in their lives, they have become friends. Perhaps this means, that as important as words are in creating or destroying, actions can nullify our words.  In short, bad deeds can mock good words and good deeds can overcome bad words.

Since Julia Gillard came to be Prime Minister of Australia many destructive words have been pour forth against her and about her.  Large sections of the Australian polity believe these words go beyond the political argy-bargy and indicate a deep-seated mysogyny among a lot of Australian men - well educated and not; influential figures and not.  Then there is the asylum seeker debate and the topics of climate change and carbon pricing.

Australia's political discourse has become distinctly uncivil.  Those of us with long political memories can not recall anything as witless and excoriating as the recent and current discourse of Liberal and National Party politicians and their influential allies in some sections of the media.  Added to this are the bigots, the racists, the ignorant and the ill-informed. A quite disgusting dawn chorus!

What a great disservice we perpetrate when we don't mind our language.  If we don't allow for another valid perspective; if we don't carry a widespread love and respect in our beings from which we can give voice.  A change of words, respectful and intelligent discourse among us all can change things.  It is the difference between confidence in troubled times, instead of fear.  It is the difference between hiding behind an insular xenophobia and opening ourselves to new ways of being on this planet.  Our lives could be so much better if we just remembered to mind our language.



~~~~~~


PRESS RELEASE
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH: 
VIOLENT SPEECH HAS NO PLACE 
IN PUBLIC DEBATE

Feminists and supporters across the country are calling for an end to use of language that is symptomatic of violence towards women in current political commentary.

“We accept that debate, commentary and opinion are important avenues for public discussion and information about issues that affect us all” said spokesperson Betty Green

“Violent hate speech directed at women political leaders reveals a concerning acceptance of abusive tactics in public life”

While we expect that from time to time such discussions and conversations will be passionate, dynamic and robust, we do not accept that the language used should ever express sentiments which are reflective of violence against women.

We have heard or read about comments and statements in a variety of media directed at Julia Gillard the first female Prime Minister of Australia that deeply concerns us. 

Influential commentators and leaders have suggested placing her in a bag and drowning herat sea (Alan Jones June 2011, July 2011), kicking her to death (Grahame MorrisFeb 2012) and having a “target on her head” (Tony Abbott March 2011), “burn thewitch” placards (Carbon Tax Rally March 2011) and the persistent use of the language “liar” and “bitch”

Comments such as these may well be described as “off the cuff”, “the rough and tumble of politics” however, we find these comments disturbing and troubling.
Violence against women is not a trivial matter. In Australia 1 in 4 women will experience some form of intimate partner violence in their lifetime, and cost the Australian economy approximately $13.6 billion per year.

On average 76 women are killed annually in Australia at the hands of their current or former partners.

“We and our supporters are saying clearly that this trend is not acceptable”

Attitudinal change has been identified as a key strategy in reducing violence against women in this country. Millions of dollars in public campaigns and initiatives work towards this end

If we as a community accept speech reflective of violence towards women as being “par for the course” in public life then we undermine each and every one of these efforts.

Coalition for a Feminist Agenda: Contact person: Dr. Betty McLellan: Phone: 0410 218 990.
And 
Women Everywhere Advocating Violence Elimination: http://weaveinc.org.au
Contact:  Dr. Elspeth McInnes. Phone 0421 787 080: Email: Elspeth.McInnes@unisa.edu.au or
Betty Green: Phone: 0417 331 759:  Email: greenbetty09@gmail.com

Further reading:
Pyne extends his tongue tip to the speaker Anna Burke
Read more at http://yfrog.com/esee5cvj#gLsBj7GuJoLpSYRf.99

Enhanced by Zemanta

Total Pageviews