LOL at how prickly the local Australians are about their ongoing imperialism towards the natives. Apparently they thought that whole apology for the Stolen Generation thing would provide more cover than it did...
Aboriginal child abuse and the NT Intervention
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
No. It's more about people who don't have a clue what they're talking about making unfounded assumptions.
Got anything more than a sound-bite about "ongoing imperialism", or are you only in this thread because I am?
I think you're just flaming. No substance. Usual modus operandi.
thats absurd. the point of the table is to make a comparison.
the number sampled from the respective groups has to be the same to give a meaningful result. that would be the reasonable assumption.
Where does your table say that? It doesn't hense your exactly right, its usless and is no good as a comparison. Now if you were really interested in acuracy rather than propergander then you would go to the one place you would get unbiased and unmanipulated statistics, the ABS
That wouldn't have generated 7 pages of angry back-and-forth. If it were just a matter of SAM's usual antics, this thread would have died days ago. It's only the hilarious insecurity on the Aussie side that has sustained this spectacle.
If y'all were really so secure in your convictions, you'd not have been bothered by SAM's statements, nor invested yourself in disputing them. But you're neither secure nor smart enough to hide this fact from trolls, so now you've given SAM yet another hot button to press any time she wants to wind you up.
But hey, at least the rest of us get to enjoy the lulz :]
Sure, this thread has pages and pages and pages of examples. And regardless of any of the statistics or other nitpicks, it's Anglo Australians treating the natives as objects to be debated and dealt with via state power. They aren't people, so much as a policy problem. The term is "White Man's Burden."
You're such a cute little narcissist :]
This thread was a hilarious hot mess of Aussie insecurity and SAMian hostile obtusity before you showed up. Although I'll admit that your ongoing efforts to bolster Aussia solidarity in service of your vendetta against SAM have indeed upped the ante. I don't think I've seen anyone successfully troll 3 moderators simultaneously before, so I'm mostly here to tip my hat to SAM on that one.
Takes one to know one - how many vacuous posts in this thread have you spent just on telling Gustav to fuck off, for example? Let alone all the other bullshit.
If there were a Michelin Guide for troll feeding, you'd surely receive 3 stars. This is some gourmet shit - it's got righteous indignation, a brittle superiority complex, and plenty of uncritical side-picking and emotive response. If it weren't for Hanlon's Razor I'd think you a mastermind...
Okay, lets see some statistics where CSA among Aboriginal Australians and non-Aboriginal Australians is compared after correction for poverty, unemployment, alcoholism and health
Also, what is the reason for the high frequency of child removal from aboriginal communities? And also the removal of carers from families? How many non-Aboriginal children are placed in Aboriginal communities?
The "aboriginals are pedophiles" argument is a simple extension of the "black people are violent" claim made in other societies. I also note that the contribution of non-Aboriginals to the sexual abuse of aboriginal children is not considered a problem worthy of intervention.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
You do realise that no one has ever used the term "Aboriginals are pedophiles" except for you?
Bells
Staff member
Meh.. I'd bother to keep going but the last round of treatment has left me with severe nausea and vomitting, so can't really concentrate much atm.. Not enough to respond to each point.
I'll be back later on (probably in a few days) when I feel less meh and able to read words on the screen without throwing up.
When a military intervention is undertaken by non-Aboriginal Australians against indigenous communities to protect their children from child abuse you don't need a memo to understand the implications. Imagine a similar initiative taken against black people for violence.
Sam just for your Infomation there is a policy I strongly support and wish governments had the guts to put in place, that is that the government hires some builders, gets a stock standed house plan and builds a whole heep of houses and sell they at cost to low income earners as a way to fix the housing crisis. Now if the government decided to use the army to do that then YAY, even cheeper.
in all but two of the states, the non-indigent children suffered from higher incidences of csa than the natives
in 1 state they were the same
in the last, they are 9 vs 5 per hundred substantiated cases
therefore pedophilia is a greater problem in non indigenous populations
the recommendation is a tactical nuclear strike
??
in 1 state they were the same
in the last, they are 9 vs 5 per hundred substantiated cases
therefore pedophilia is a greater problem in non indigenous populations
the recommendation is a tactical nuclear strike
??
sam
would you know how to go about interpreting this? pick a state and type of abuse
/dizzy
Sure. Its a break up of the type of abuse that children are subjected to by region and indigenous/non-indigenous. Ideally, I'd like to see the raw data [its a must for such tables as they could be a meta-analysis]
What it shows is the proportion of abused children [indigenous/non-indigenous] who suffer from physical, sexual, emotional abuses and neglect [and "other"] across NSW, Victoria, Queensland, South A, West A, Tasmania, Northern Territory and Australian Capital Territory.
I'm going to describe the statistics for the northern territory, since that is the focus of this thread. For the purposes of discussion let us assume that there are 1000 indigenous and non-indigenous children each and assuming that aboriginals have massive child abuse let us say that the number of abused aboriginal children is 500 and the number of abused non-indgenous children is 100
According to this table, 43% of abused indigenous children [AIC] in NT were subjected to physical abuse as compared to 45% of abused non-indigenous children [ANC] in the same territory. So if there were 1000 aboriginal children of whom 500 were abused then 215 of them had been physically abused. Similarly, if there were 1000 non-indigenous children of whom 100 had been abused then 45 of them had been physically abused.
Similarly, out of the 500 AIC, 45 had been sexually abused while out of the 100 ANC, 9 had been sexually abused.
Based on these figures, it would appear that apart from neglect, the kind of abuse is equivalent across both indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in NT
It says nothing however about the rate of abuse, ie the proportion of abused children to the total number of children in NT.
Once again, only if by some fluke the total numbers were EXACTLY the same. I've told you that 3 separate times now. SAM has also told you this now too
Bells
Staff member
Have you been reading in this thread at all? Or just too busy spouting shite?
Few people agreed with the military intervention or with the level of intervention itself. When news first broke that the Government was putting billions into Aboriginal communities to combat child abuse and alcoholism and all that accompanied it, there was a sigh of relief. However when the extent of what was going to happen became clear, people were less relieved. We've all been saying it and you've been ignoring it. There are some Elders who agree at the type of intervention, but not all. There are some who suggested at some of the measures in the intervention.
Was intervention necessary? Yes. But not how it took place. Aboriginal Elders across the NT proposed a 5 year term/intervention, where programs would be put in place to promote education and awareness. And then you have issues which arose in some communities where the police would try to get involved in child sex abuse issues, only to be warned back by the Elders, being told it would inflame the community. A balance needed to be found. Unfortunately the Government went in the complete opposite direction.
Children were going to school and simulating sex acts in classrooms, that they saw in porno movies they would be made or allowed to watch with their parents.
Pretty much everyone agreed that something had to be done because that kind of thing was not uncommon, but had become common. Elders across the NT recommended tighter controls on pornography and alcohol. The Government took the route that other States have in place, which is to ban it entirely from certain communities.
That paper goes on to discuss self determination and Aboriginal dependency on Government services and payments. There are some who call for the complete withdrawal of all welfare payments - and cite it as being a means of complacency and a destruction of communities themselves. It is a very interesting paper about what we have been discussing and one I would recommend you read.
Few people agreed with the ceasing of land as punishment. I think the only people who agreed to that have been the Government and they were soundly beaten down by this by the community in general.
I should note, when this intervention commenced and the confusion that came with it, there was a lot of misinformation in the general media. A work colleague and friend, who is an Aboriginal, commented at the time of the protests that 'they are complaining because they're losing their dole'. And in a way he was right. But he was also wrong. They were and continue to protest about the whole scheme itself because of what else it did. While you concentrate on the denial of porn and alcohol in some communities as being a bad thing, many disagree with you and they include those who live in communities that were involved - control and bans were needed in some instances. Was there a need for intervention? Yes. But I think all agree that the intervention that took place was not what was needed.
The intervention should have been as the Elders proposed - that lasted several years and would reduce Aboriginal dependency on White Australia and lead to self Governance. As our history has shown, that won't happen anytime soon. Those of us who understand the issue know that it is complex and one that can't simply be fixed easily. A delicate balance needs to be found in providing support to communities to get them back on track - but they need to work to do it - and that is where many fall short - which again ties in to the reliance and dependency on welfare payments.
Parents don't bother about their children not going to school because they don't care - the kids grow up and follow in their footsteps of claiming welfare and it is a continuous cycle. So how do you get them interested in rebuilding their community if they can just sit on their arses and claim the Dole and do nothing? Cut the dole? Won't work. They need to eat. So there needs to be a balance. We can stop sending teachers and doctors to work in their communities and force them to become teachers and doctors themselves - but what happens in the meantime? Again.. balance and the only way to combat it is to work directly with them as equals. That hasn't happened yet. Self determination takes work and motivation on both sides. It's easy for you to talk the talking points, but putting it into practice is not so easy.
We've been arguing in circles about this and frankly, I'm tired. So say what you want, do what you want. At the end of the day you're irrelevant to this debate. Your attempt to tie this to Iran hanging homosexuals was amusing though - You are the first to claim that hanging homosexual is a part of Iranian culture. Classic comedy. But yeah.. I'm tired and I'm done.