The biggest rob in all this political sexism

It has been a particularly vile week or so of public and political sexism. It really just seemed to be one incident after another. To recap for those who have been living in a remote cave with no electricity, carrier pigeons or mental telepathy, it went down like this: Firstly some soccer jock talks about how women should shut up in public. Then we had the wonderful “Julia Gillard Kentucky Fried Quail” menu item developed for a Liberal Party Fundraiser that is now so reviled that it has its own Wikipedia entry. Then we had Gillard being questioned over her partner's sexuality by Howard Sattler, a radio shockjock. Of course, all these incidents were "jokes", but I must have a different sense of humour... Oh, and let's not forget the wonderful Grace Collier, who, on clearly wanting equal rights for women to be misogynists, tried to outdo "teh menz" with this puzzling focus on Gillard's boobs. Granted, there have been some highlights such as Sattler now being sacked for his grossly unprofessional conduct, and this amazing speech from Lt-General David Morrison taking a stand against sexism in the Army and stating that it will not be tolerated. All-in-all though, it has been a rather exhausting week or so.

The thing is though, all this has, by no means, been "out of the ordinary". When it comes to the sexism directed towards our female Prime Minister, this has been a constant feature. It was so constant that it led to Gillard giving this now world-famous "I will not be lectured on sexism and misogyny by this man" speech in the House of Representatives. It led to this completely amazing and horrifying lecture from Anne Summers entitled "Her Rights at Work: The Political Persecution of Australia's First Female Prime Minister" (watch this. You need to). The cartoonist Larry Pickering has pretty much made a career of promoting his disgustingly sexist pictures of Gillard, usually naked and sometimes being gynaecologically interfered with. But it's more than that. It's the daily commentary I have heard from peers, family, the broader community that reinforce my view that the sexism has been constant. 

What's more, people really don't seem to give it much thought. They have genuinely looked surprised when I have called them out after they have used some sexist trope to refer to Gillard as if this "fact" has some bearing on her politics. It seems to be so damn unconscious that it speaks volumes about how society views a woman in charge. People don't even think twice before referring to Gillard's allegedly annoying voice, or the size of her backside, whilst talking about her role in the country. An entire media campaign appears to have been built on these "criticisms" in order to topple Gillard from the leadership and get a more popular male reinstalled, yet not many seem to be too discerning as to where a great deal of misgivings toward the PM seem to have come from. A lot of it is sexism, pure and simple. If you doubt that then I suggest you really do click on the link of Anne Summers' speech above and watch it from beginning to end. Gillard's politics have been continually conflated with her gender, and it shows just how immature this country is when it comes to gender relations. Many women rule countries across the world and are treated as rulers, rather than great impostors, so when the hell will this country grow up?

Here's the real rob for me: I fell off the ALP bandwagon years ago. This fact is still a sore point for my poor mother. I come from a strong ALP family yet broke ranks over a decade ago because I felt, and still feel, that the party my parents so strongly believe in is not the one that actually exists. I am critical of their policies, disgusted over their continuation of the NT Intervention (however rebranded), their asylum seeker stances, their cuts to tertiary education, their non-complete roll-back of WorkChoices legislation, their watering down of a promised Treaty in the 1980s to mere constitutional recognition at this point in time. And I openly criticise these things. Yet at times I have felt disempowered to openly criticise what does actually need to be criticised. Why? Because the sexist mud-slinging kicks in from others and it is difficult to be objectively critical of the Prime Minister's policy standpoints when you are busy having to defend her as a woman.

On more than one occasion I have written a post on some social media platform that is critical of a Gillard government standpoint and the conversation has been derailed by sexism. If I had a dollar for every time I have written something critical only to get back "well what do you expect from a backstabber like her?" I'd be buying up that desert island and relocating with 10 dogs, no problems. FFS, people; Julia Gillard is not Lady freakin' MacBeth! She mounted a leadership challenge in a party which is historically rather infamous for such challenges and she came out victorious. The reasons for why that challenge was mounted (sating the whining of those poor struggling mining moguls) might not have been much to brag about, but that doesn't change the fact that she is not the first to do so. It's that simple, but because she's a woman, her leadership tilt was seen differently to, say, the two challenges Keating mounted against Hawke. She's a "ranga bitch" apparently, or so I've been told, which I'm certain has nothing to do with the fact that her government detains people trying to escape persecution. I should also add that whilst the right-wing has been relentless in their sexism, it's fairly safe to say that a huge majority of people who read and respond to my stuff are not from the right. What's more, the sexism isn't only coming from the men. So why are left-aligned people, particularly women, buying into this?


This is where the true sexism lies for me. Myself, and similarly-left-aligned and usually politically-intersectional people across this country, due to some deeply socially-embedded sexist attitudes, are denied the ability to judge the Prime Minister on her own merits as a leader. We are denied the right to criticise her failings as a leader, praise her gains as a leader, criticise her party, and to objectively analyse anything. We are drowned out by the stupid and inane gender-related comments, rather than simply being able to take to bits some policy that is inherently discriminatory. And if we're not in there criticising some policy items because we are frankly exhausted from having to deal with the misogyny then we run the risk of being accused of being blind to the ALP's failings because we are too busy sticking up for the sisterhood. Oh yes, this has happened to me, despite the fact that I think I have made it rather clear that I am no ALP supporter. It really feels like a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario right now, and I would be understating things if I said I was a little over it.

What do I want? Well, in a nutshell, if people could get conscious of, and then get over, their embedded social misogyny that would be fabulous. It would be wonderful to have a good clean debate about the current ALP policies without hearing the "ditch the witch", the "blood on her hands" and the other, more subtle comments. I want to be able to open a newspaper and not read Gillard being judged in harsher and more arbitrary ways than her male contemporaries. I don't want to have to be sticking up for Gillard as a woman because I SHOULDN'T BLOODY HAVE TO! It shouldn't even be a factor as she is the elected leader of this country and deserves THE RIGHT to be able to do her job without this abuse. Whilst she can't just do that job though, you can bet your backside I will be doing the sisterhood thing and sticking up for her because she shouldn't be having to deal with sexism, and nor should any woman who comes after her. If Gillard was from the Liberal Party and was copping the same I WOULD STILL be sticking up for her as a woman who should not be having to deal with sexism. I will always be critical of her policies, but I want better for our women than what Gillard has been copping due to her gender, and what she is copping publicly at the top is a snapshot of what women face every day; from men and laterally.

So then: who's up for a discussion on why I think Constitutional Recognition is selling ourselves short? 

Happy birthday, blackfeministranter.blogspot.com!

Yep, "Rantings of an Aboriginal Feminist" turned 1 today. Who'd have thought, hey? Well I certainly wouldn't have. And I certainly didn't predict the rollercoaster ride that can happen if you decide to park yourself in a suitable domain and commence ranting. This site has now led to:

• 32 rants (so not quite 1 per week, but whatever...)
• 6 articles (there are more to come)
• 3 radio interviews
• 1 TV appearance (and let us never speak of it again)
• 1 film festival, and;
• 1 Conference

It has been an interesting ride. I never started this with the intention of it being anything but a place to write stuff, and although I would have been perfectly happy if it had remained as such, I have enjoyed the remarkable and unexpected journey it has taken me on. This was a little niche market activity that kind of took on a life of its own, and I hope it not only encourages others to write, but also encourages those that can to publicise more black voices.

So I want to thank everyone who has been reading and those who have continually encouraged me to keep writing. Whether you're a Facebook or a Twitter oomi, whether you're a journalist looking for different material, whether you're someone who has stumbled upon this via a google search or you're a uni student with a questioning mind. I am incredibly thankful that you gave my little corner of cyberspace a go!

By the way, a couple of days I had another piece published by Daily Life, who have been so encouraging of my writing. If you're interested, you will find it here: A platform for the people who are not always heard

And now for some celebratory music:

NOTE: This song has nothing to do with feminism, punk, black politics, lefty politics or birthdays. It's just my favourite car-dancing song. Or one of...

Last week I was accused of lateral violence...

Bet the Indigenous right-wing are happy to hear that they are not the only ones who cop that accusation. But before they go pointing their fingers in glee about how the left are the true evil perpetrators, I should state that there was no way in the world that the accusation had any merit at all. You see, I was accused because I was questioning Indigenous Beauty Pageants again following reading an article on the recent crowning of Miss NAIDOC in Perth. I wrote on this very topic last year and my piece ended up being republished. My basic argument was thus: how can an Indigenous beauty pageant ever be a truly empowering event for women whilst Indigenous people are still so fetishised and scrutinised, and when the broader notion of "beauty" is incredibly problematic on the basis of it reducing women to their arbitrary physical features. I also stated that individual empowerment through taking part in an event did not mean that the event itself was empowering as it reinforced social structures that are, in my estimation, oppressive. Not exactly an inconsistent opinion from me.

Back when I wrote that article I received a reasonably respectful, though dissenting, email through from one of the NAIDOC Committees. Their concerns with what I had written gave me the opportunity to better explain my views. I wrote at one point that regardless of anything I had to state on the topic of Indigenous beauty pageants, I was reasonably certain that they would get even more applicants for their pageant this year, and I argued that this was because the same oppressive social structures exist. From what I could tell, this has been the case and the event has been bigger and better than previous years. On viewing the Facebook page on the Miss NAIDOC event and reading the comments people had left there, I was reasonably convinced that my point was somewhat proven though with regards to the oppressive structures I had referred to still being the case. Women are judged and praised for their looks regardless of what other attributes they may have, and black women are even more so. It just seems to be the way it is. 

So my structural analysis on beauty and blackness led to a baseless accusation of lateral violence when I again questioned how black pageants are actually empowering in another forum. On looking back over that discussion I have to wonder whether the accuser was looking for a reason to have a go at me over something because they had not engaged with the previous posted material or my original article at all; it was a very focussed accusation. But this accusation did make me think how an accusation of lateral violence can be a silencing tactic. Never a good thing in a community when there are many informed debates to be had on so many issues. 

To sum up lateral violence in a nutshell, I will draw on this quote from a consulting organisation in Canada where a lot of the theory and research has come from:

"Lateral Violence occurs within marginalized groups where members strike out at each other as a result of being oppressed. The oppressed become the oppressors of themselves and each other. Common behaviours that prevent positive change from occurring include gossiping, bullying, finger-pointing, backstabbing and shunning."

There is a lot more literature out there, but it is a big issue and needs tackling. A lot of the early research on lateral violence came from the nursing profession and was therefore focussed on women. It is poignant to note this  because as I stated, my original reasons for writing the first article, and indeed my reasons for this post are to investigate structures of oppression. And that is what I did. The patriarchy was called into question for reducing women to objects and then building an entire commercial industry around it. Whiteness was called into question for objectifying blackness and creating a situation where people are forced to assert their identities in the face of scrutiny, eroticisation and erasure. 

What's more, although a lot of my posts allow for individual choice to be a factor, the individual reasons for those personal choices are not of huge concern to me. That's part of the live and let live deal. What is of concern is the contexts in which choices are made, why those choices have come to exist in the first place, and how empowerment can be a long-term and extensively beneficial state, rather than a fleeting and individual experience. I have said that I am certain that women who participate in Miss NAIDOC pageants DO find them to be empowering experiences, but why is this so? Could it be that in a world were the appearance of women is scrutinised AND where black women are subjected to the additional level of cultural scrutiny, that the very notion of being seen and having your appearance validated would be experienced as an empowering thing? If this is the case then do we promote Indigenous beauty and buy into the problematic world of centralising women's outward appearance or do we try and deconstruct the lot of it? 

I am very much of the "Audre Lorde" school of thought here whereby "The Master's tools will never dismantle the Master's house". Buying into coloniser notions of blackness, as well as patriarchal notions of beauty is not going to change anything for the better in the long term. Others disagree with me, and you know what, that's fantastic! Why? Because we need to have the ability to debate issues within our community. We're a diverse community and the more we do engage in debate, the more able we become to cover all of our needs. I would like to see a hell of a lot more debate out there in the www because there is not nearly enough, and our debate is generally not covered by Australian news sources. 

Dissenting view, you bet your life. But lateral violence? Not even remotely. I wish all the young women involved in the pageants the very best and I said this when I first raised the topic for discussion nearly a year ago. I hope they thoroughly enjoy their experiences and I hope that the community supports them 100%. I also hope that their involvement in these competitions propels them on to bigger and better things. But I really do hope for a world in which our women aren't made to feel like they have to be physically appealing; where they are seen as human beings of equal status and treated constantly with respect. Where their culture is also respected and is not continually misrepresented by the mainstream or just blatantly ignored. I want extensive and inclusive empowerment. 

One final note. As mentioned, lateral violence is a real issue. It exists BECAUSE racism and sexism exist* and it is therefore important to analyse those structural forms of oppression in order to combat it. It is a daily experience for members of our community and more awareness of it and the forms it takes are needed so people can check themselves and move from an oppressive to a supportive framework. Audre Lorde works here too: becoming an oppressor does not remove oppression. It only creates the "divide and conquer" paradigm. So call it out when you see it and work toward positive change. Don't use it as a tool to silence others wrongfully because essentially, that's just buying into it.


PS Through work, we conducted a members' survey on racism, discrimination and lateral violence in the workplace, and approximately 2/3 of the respondents indicated that they had encountered this issue. The full report is available here. 


* It exists in other forms of oppression but for the purposes of this piece, these are the types we're focussed on here

A note on this proudly biased site

I have stated this before here and here, but as it appears that some are exceptionally slow learners, I am writing this again for the benefit of those people.

This is a proudly black site. This is a proudly feminist site. This is also a proudly left-wing site. Additionally, this is a proudly moderated site. I started it because, well initially I just wanted a place to write stuff, but also because I wanted to claim a space in the www for an Aboriginal feminist lefty to express opinion in a way that we do not tend to get to opportunity to do in the Australian mainstream media. See, the Australian media is dominated by white men, and it is also 70% controlled by the Murdoch Press; hardly a radical left-wing organisation that's for damn sure. 

So I am dedicated to not replicating that continual cacophony of white male right-wing opinion in this forum and proclaim my little corner of cyberspace to be proudly biased. Black opinion, feminist opinion and left-wing opinion will be actively promoted here, and if you don't like that then you are free to start your own blog or post in forums that are more inline with your persuasions. God knows there are plenty.

I will occasionally allow dissenting views from people that respond to my posts, particularly if I think they are well thought-out and detailed responses. But I will not tolerate those who feel the need to "whitemansplain" stuff to me via sprawling diatribes. I've had a lifetime of your opinion. I will also not tolerate trolls. And I will not tolerate those that harass other people who post on this page for those ones are the utter scum of the earth. I am utterly disgusted that this has happened to some commentators on here and if I get even a sniff that someone is actively seeking to abuse others I will, from now on, simply block those people. 

So again, if you feel silenced by my stance, post elsewhere. The WWW is a vast playground and there is more than enough room for you to exist in another space. You can even express those opinions you think I need to read in full and unmoderated ways! Okay?    

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

Saying farewell to a mentor - A post on Geoffrey Milne

For the second time this year, I am interrupting this black feminist broadcast to write a memorial post on a Jeff/Geoff that changed my life for the better. I have just returned from the memorial service of Geoffrey Milne at the alternative theatre spiritual homelands of La Mama in Carlton, and I don't think I have been to a better send off ever. I had the pleasure of hearing many speak about what Geoff meant to them; from the theatre scene, from the higher education sector, from his personal life. And whilst I wrote a little when I heard of his passing, I have been inspired after hearing these stories to share my own memories and illustrate why Geoffrey Milne meant so much to me.

It's a well-known fact (and cause for much gaffawing) that when I first hit La Trobe University as an undergrad student in the late 90s I was actually a science student. Stranger still: I was a Geology major. I had headed towards science because I had done well in it in at one point whilst in high school, although a quick glance over my (somewhat embarrassing) year 12 marks highlights that I was always destined to end up in the arts. Despite taking a truckload of science subjects for my VCE, my highest marks ended up being in Drama and English. However, at the time this escaped me, and so I enrolled in a BSc.

At some point during semester 1, second year, I worked out that I didn't actually like science. There was no passion in it, everything was concrete and "fact-based" and working out molecular volume via titration every prac was failing to spin my wheels. I had also been involved in two plays at College by that point and was finding that it was this side of Uni that I was actually enjoying. I called into the Aboriginal Liaison Office and had a whinge, and through expressing an interest in drama, the then Aboriginal Liaison Officer hooked me up a meeting with the head of the Drama School to talk about taking some subjects. 

So a couple of days later I made the long long walk over to the Drama dept (then located in the demountable buildings of an old school away from the main campus) to meet this fellow called Geoffrey Milne. This short scruffy man in corduroy slacks and wearing a vest came out to greet me. On noticing that I had a packet of cigarettes in my hand, he invited me to come out to his "other office"; the alcove of a doorway with a couple of stairs to prop on, complete with an ashtray and a thoroughly uninspiring courtyard. It was there that he hit me with a few questions on my background, my family and my interests, talked me through the drama major sequence, and then just chatted away. We would meet probably several hundred times in that exact same "other office" over the next few years; talking through a lighting sequence I had come up with for a couple of the shows I directed, going through my thesis and why I needed to use the correct "to", thrashing out ideas. His real office was, of course, a fantastic space; usually with paperwork everywhere and had an extensive collection of texts so I felt at home in it too. More often than not though, the best ideas were thrashed out in the other office.

A lot of people tonight talked about Geoff's passion and his support for Australian theatre, and he was definitely a huge advocate for recognising the countless amazing works that have come out of this country. It was, however, his incredible support for Aboriginal theatre that hooked me. It was through Geoff that I was introduced to "The Cake Man" by Merritt, "Murras" by Johnson and all the amazing works of Jack Davis. Additionally, both Geoffrey and another of the wonderful lecturers I had when at LTU Drama, Peta Tait, said to me that the best works of the late 80s-90s were Aboriginal women's monodramas and made sure they introduced me to these works accordingly. Aboriginal works were celebrated on their own merits in these courses for the amazing scene-changing pieces they were, and not in that patronising "Indigenous studies 101" way which I had experienced so many times in my journey through the education system. Geoff was also incredibly anecdotal in his lectures, and I remember him talking about the time he saw Davis' "First Born Trilogy" performed over three nights. His recall for the set (tiered seating on opposing sides of a long rectangular area), the lighting, the performances, and the amazing "No Sugar" protest song was so remarkable that I thought I was there. I think Geoff had a particular connection to the works of Davis because he had come from a small country town in WA where he went to a very small school with a lot of mob. In recollections of these childhood times, he once spoke about the time none of the Nyoongah kids turned up to school because it had gotten around that the Kwetartye (feather foot) had been at the school near the water tank. The families and places Davis spoke of were people in Geoff's lived experiences in that country town, and this always came through in droves for me.

It wasn't just the written Aboriginal texts that Geoff recalled though. He would tell of examples of Aboriginal actors in the 70s utilising tactics from practitioners such as Artaud and Boal and staging scenes out on the streets in order to draw mainstream (though the crowd was not always aware that what they were viewing was a staged piece) attention to political issues being faced by the mob. I remember him talking, for example, of a blackfella and two white men dressed as cops staging a scene on the streets of Sydney in order to draw attention to the Aboriginal Legal Service. His interest in Aboriginal theatre was such that he ensured it was central in his teachings in all its varied forms.

As I mentioned, he was anecdotal, and through all his work on some of the most landmark alternative Australian theatre pieces over the years, he had accumulated some amazing stories which he would relay on. I wonder, for example, if any of my fellow LTU grads remember him telling a story about that drunken football team that had come to see "Stretch of the Imagination" at La Mama and the unfortunate tactics one player resorted to when he realised he couldn't wait until intermission to visit the lav? Or his pointing out of the stickers on Dorothy Hewitt's works stating "not to be sold in WA" and explaining to an extent why that was? There were so many funny anecdotes attached to these plays and even now I randomly remember another of them through the course of a day. It wasn't just that Geoff wanted his students to appreciate Australian theatre, rather he wanted to bring every bit of these plays alive and encourage more people to create new works. It really was a gift to hear him speak of them.

At the memorial, some spoke of his passion for the works of German Marxist playwright Bertholt Brecht. Brecht speaks for himself in my opinion; as does Geoff's fondness for Brecht. But what I want to highlight here is actually the role Geoff played in nurturing my political, as well as my dramatic, passions. Geoff would often refer to me as "Comrade Liddle", or just "comrade" or "Liddle". I was rarely "Celeste"! He cottoned on to my interest in the political fairly early on, possibly because I seemed to be drawn mostly to works that had something to say, and he encouraged that by continuing to put interesting texts in front of me. He also encouraged me to explore these topics through my honours thesis. Geoff wasn't the only one who did this in this department incidentally. Peta Tait drew my interest to feminist works and enhanced my interest in Aboriginal women's performance. Ian Carruthers bought me an Augusto Boal book to thank me for being his assistant director one year and encourage me further in my interest in agitprop. It seemed to be a bit of a theme in that department, really! When talking to other former LTU drama students over the years it has struck me that a good many of us have ended up being proud and active unionists and tonight I stated that not only were political interests nurtured, but they were considered to be essential to the work we were doing, whatever that may be. I also stated that without Geoff's nurturing of that political interest in me and teaching me that having a standpoint was essential rather than peripheral, my life may have turned out quite different to what it has. Well, I could have been an apolitical exploration geologist for starters...

Geoff was my honours supervisor, as mentioned previously. When it came to my want to look at Indigenous youth and women's theatre, as well as identity politics, he seemed the natural choice to approach with this idea. He was there through my research, my surveying and my conceptualising of the idea that became my play "Not One Nation". I wanted to say something that other Aboriginal Women's monodramas had not. I wanted to address urban identity and youth issues. I wanted to bag out Hansonism and Howardism on stage. I also wanted a freakin' exposition of my own life. Geoff helped me craft those ideas. He helped me stage them. I wanted some schmantzy lighting and he was getting up on ladders adjusting those par cans for me so they would hit right. Additionally, he had to proof-read my thesis and make suggestions for improvement prior to submission; no mean feat considering I wrote the majority of it up in about three weeks. He went right out of his way to give that feedback too. One night he even met me in a bar in Northcote to go through some edits before going to see another show. That play and that thesis earned me a First Class honours; an achievement I had not thought I was capable of when I left high school with barely enough marks to get into uni. That play also earnt me a repeat showing at LTU for the first year drama students and a short season at La Mama a year later, which Geoff came to see. After that La Mama show Geoff encouraged me to develop more pieces and expand upon "Not One Nation". I haven't actually ever done that; work, life and numerous other things got in the way, but one of these days I will.

Geoff affected my life in many ways. I think of him when I refuse to buy automatic cars because he felt that changing your own gears brought a more authentic driving experience. I think of him when I'm cursing my mobile phones (yes, plural) because he refused to have one for the longest time. I'm not the only one either. I knew the torch had been passed to the next generation of LTU drama students when I found on Facebook one day a few years back "The Geoffrey Milne Appreciation Society". I saw Geoff quite a few times after I left LTU as I would often just drop in and I did stay in email contact. When the news came through that he passed away, however, I was deeply regretful that I hadn't seen him for a couple of years. I am glad that tonight I got the opportunity to remember him with so many others who had been inspired by him, his openness, his passion for theatre (and politics!) and his encouragement.

So, how can you say "thanks" for all that, hey? It's really quite impossible but this post is a start. So thank you, Geoffrey John Milne for so much. Thank you for being a teacher, a mentor, a supporter and an inspiration. Thank you for giving me a spot in your classes and for assisting me in changing the course of my life. Thank you for realising talent in me and nurturing it. Thank you for leaving a mark on my life and on the lives of so many others. And thank you for the stories. Please charge your glasses, folks. 

Musings on 35 part 2: The personal "body shame" issue

I have been whinging of late that the "muse" has not been taking me, and this blog has been awfully quiet. Sure, on a daily basis there are plenty of things that make me want to rant. The ever-mounting pile of "draft" posts that I have on this thing are testament to this fact. But as usual, as I draw nearer to yet another birthday, I feel gripped by an endless tide of introspection. So what better to write upon, hey?

Today as I was walking back from a short lunch break, I found myself pondering my own personal journey with "body issues" and how I have felt quite liberated from that for a number of years. I was wondering why I felt liberated from it. Was this strength that I had drawn from feminism over the years? Was it the freedom I have felt in so many ways from being in my 30s rather than my teens or 20s? Was it as simple as me being within the recommended BMI and having been for years (PFFT to that idea!)? It struck me that there was a journey that got me to now and having that type of liberation was in fact an achievement, all things considered.

Many people know this, but for those that don't, I'm going to "come out" now: I'm a Jenny Craig Success Story! By the way, I mean that '!' in a rather ironic way. It's cool that I did well on that programme and four years later have maintained it with very little actual effort. I am being open about this though because as I read through that old success story it kind of makes me shudder. I am not ashamed that I lost weight, nor am I ashamed that I turned to a weight loss programme to do so. I am only too aware that weight loss programmes gain a bit of well-deserved flack because they do peddle a whole "you'll be healthier and feel more confident if you lose weight!" message which is consistent with a bunch of other body shame stuff which women do not friggin' need. By participating in the Success Stories (adhering, unfortunately, to the usual structure these companies use in the main) I probably contributed to some body shame in other women which is an awful thing and not something I intended. When I wrote that story I was elated at my "success". Was I healthier as mentioned in that piece? Well partially. My back (note: this was prior to a car accident that put me back to square one on this front) was not so easily aggravated, but as mentioned in the first piece on 35dom, I also landed myself a date in the hospital due to an ectopic, so in truth, "healthier" may have been a stretch. If I am honest, the most positive part of it all for me was as I outlined in the third-from-last paragraph: at a time when I was re-imagining my life as a single person and learning how to focus on myself for the first time in years, this was an outlet for me and gaining some affirmation at that time propelled me forward in other ways. Four years on though I can say without any shadow of a doubt that there are so many other things that can do that. The following things have since made me feel similarly elated:

1. Being published online!
2. Kicking arse at Uni
3. Working towards broader social change
4. Being at a stage in life where people are more accepting of me as I am rather than as I should be, and I am more accepting of that too
5. Having the most amazing group of friends ever

So if all these things have made me feel similar, why did I choose weight loss back then to feel better about myself? Well, unfortunately I was not immune to the numerous comments I had received about my size/shape etc over the years, and these had truly been constant. In a society where so much of a woman's/girl's worth is placed upon her appearance, it takes a damn strong individual to be immune to that sort of stuff. I definitely wasn't in a position of strength at that time; that was something that I was working towards. It gave me a starting point, but losing weight wasn't the end point and nor should it ever be considered to be.

Yes, consciousness about my size was something I had experienced from a young age. When I was a very little kid (we're talking 5 or 6 here) I remember being referred to as "solid", "tubby", "fat" and "stocky" on a regular basis. None of this was actually true. I was awkward kid-shaped. Definitely not a lean build, nor long and slender. Just tall and waiting to gain shape. Kids are pretty blobby-shaped in general, and their builds are usually quite genderless until puberty starts to kick in. Really, apart from a round face, blobby was what I was too. But commentary on appearance starts early with little girls, and I was clearly not ideal in other people's reckoning, even at such a young age. I think the first time I was told I needed to lose weight was when I was about 10, and honestly, when I read this piece about a 7 year old girl who was undertaking an exercise and weight loss regime, I could remember myself thinking that I needed to do similar when I was that age. Add this to how I was also experiencing enforced femininity at the same time and you have one girl who felt like she was rather NQR.

This scrutiny intensified when I was a teenager. I was still tall, and still more "solid" than "lean" but I had also been told I was "broad". I have broad shoulders naturally and through hearing that I was "broad", I assumed that the rest of my must be too. I remember from about the age of 16-30 referring to my "battleship hips". Additionally, I described my build as being a "large hourglass". I apparently also had "quadzillas". I knew I wasn't particularly busty despite early beginnings but I was reasonably comfortable with that. That was actually the only body-image thing I managed to be correct on. I would watch the TV and be convinced that there were no girls on any shows who had builds remotely like mine. The fact that I ever thought any of this (with the exception of the non-bustiness) about myself is completely laughable nowadays. It dawned on me only a couple of years ago when a jeans company FINALLY decided to bring out a range to fit a variety of women's shapes that I was somewhat wrong. My measurements put me in the "slight curve" category. Ergo: small hip-to-waist ratio, comparatively slender thighs and a derrière on the smaller side. Where on earth had I got those other ideas from? Could it have been that years of endless and unwarranted scrutiny had completely warped my mind to the point where I was almost seeing myself as the exact opposite of what I really was? Even more frightening: I had been an active feminist for roughly 17 years before that point so why on earth was I still so completely out-of-sync with my own body image? That was a huge "wake up call" for me. It completely changed the way that I relate to my body in a way that weight loss never did. It made me see that I had for YEARS been relating to myself wrong and I promised that I never would again, but nor would I ever listen to the bullshit that was fed to me about my image by others and use that to define how I relate to myself.

I still scrutinise. I still have my moments. A lifetime of scrutiny not only by others but also by yourself is difficult to shake, and I wonder if any of us truly ever completely shake it considering how reinforced it is in society, in the media, in family etc. Generally speaking though, for the most part I am emancipated from those rubbish body image messages of yesteryear. I will never be regretful that I lost weight through a programme, but nowadays I know that that little thing I was doing back then was part of a much broader programme of strengthening and coming into my own, and it is good to be able to look back on it within context, rather than as an achievement by itself. Because it wasn't. It was, to me, a mere grain of red dust in the Simpson.