Speaking on ABC’s AFL coverage on Saturday night, Chris Johnson took issue with people who disregard or downplay comments made to Indigenous Australians that cause hurt or embarrassment.
“We as Indigenous people think a flippant comment is not a flippant comment; it’s a comment,” Johnson said.
"It’s a comment to hurt, it’s a comment to embarrass, it’s a comment to degrade somebody.
Imagine saying that Kennett should not be blamed for anything he said. What a bizarre standpoint.
semantically debating about what is and isn’t racist, in a vacuum, in order to defend - of all people - Jeff ■■■■■■■ Kennett
some of you are cooked
It certainly wasn’t a joke - intended to belittle and demean in public. This was not something between different generations in a family, it was insulting.
Not sure about racist but definitely unprofessional at best.
If the Chairman at our work said that to my wife and then offered cash to get it fixed. I’d be pretty ■■■■■■.
If the ‘dad joke’ was coming from her Dad or Grandpa then it would be fine.
How do you know Chris? What gives you the right to impute intention on someone else’s speech?
This is a pretty good summation of the problem with this issue as it stands today
Chris Johnson doesn’t say he’s talking about Kennett’s intention. He’s talking about the comments and the underlying structure. I really dislike Jeff Kennett but I think it’s fair to say that he, in his mind, was just making a joke. The joke however relies on a number of assumptions and dynamics such as:
Add to that the extra historical and geographical meaning of someone as privileged as Kennett making those comments to a First Nations woman, one where they have barely any pre-existing relationship.
I don’t think anyone making the joke necessarily breaks it down and thinks about it like that, they just think it’s a funny thing that you say to someone who wears ripped jeans. But it doesn’t mean that the whole underlying structure of the comments don’t have those built in meanings that can hurt, embarrass or degrade someone. And it’s not the fault of the person on the receiving end of the comments if that’s how the comments make them feel.
Also, an action by the Club President, not to be overlooked, to whom you are supposed to accord respect. Not one of your peers engaging in banter.
And you need context too…
But it’s not his intention that golliwogs are offensive.
Instead of focusing on the ripped pants joke, ■■■■ should’ve mentioned who made the boong comment and the observations of indigenous players only sitting amongst themselves
I’d argue those comments are far worse than the comment made by Kennett
The point is some people and ■■■■ are trying to get rid of Kennet, not the other guy who said that stuff, though it hopefully will come out.
She’s not championing indigenous people, she’s just using it to hammer Kennet.
And it seems ■■■■ has leveraged the timing off Cyril’s partner coming to Melbourne for a career move or education? (Cbf rereading the article)
The racism stuff is what everyone will talk about.
but they were granted million dollars for indigenous programs and blew it on their NgA accademy i bet.
The Hawthorn Next Generation Academy visited Katherine and its surrounding communities’ numerous times this year to run educational and football skills programs.
The Hawthorn Next Generation Academy will provide the Indigenous and Multicultural youth of the Katherine region with the opportunity to be involved in an elite talent pathway as opportunities in this area has been quite scarce.
There has been some great talent on display and the Hawthorn Football Club is excited to see the development of the Next Generation Academy in the area over the years.
“It’s a comment to” indicates he’s attempting to characterise the intention of the comment. Pretty straightforward English.
why are you defending kennett?
If Cyril relocates to melbourne would be a good choice for indigenous liaison manager if that’s what he wants to do.
I would still imagine a forwardline of Rioli, Wanaganeen and McDonald-Tipungwuti
Yes, and you can talk about comments in general terms, outside of a specific occasion of them being delivered.
According to the article there were many different incidents that could serve as a precedence. The torn jeans joke perhaps being the last of a series of them. The joke by itself might have been laughed off, but then offering money as a hand out, reeks of classism and a superior attitude.
Those are precedents. Different word. Bacchus was talking about a white person being given precedence, out of order, in a shop.
Would David Myers’ missus have worn torn jeans?
