Su Dharmapala
by SU DHARMAPALA
Tony Abbott could learn something from my funny little four-year old. You see, four year old children are disarmingly honest and forthright.
My son only really started speaking properly recently. It was like he held everything in for a long time and he is now letting it all out. So while I am terribly proud of this suddenly articulate little man who uses words like “terribly spectacular”, I am also desperately trying to teach him tact.
Case in point: last week at Woolworths we were at the checkout when a lady who was morbidly obese queued behind us.
Now, we had been reading a great deal about the body and good nutrition lately so it didn’t surprise me much when my son mumbled something about fat cells. Having a background in biochemistry, I had explained to him that excess sugar gets stored as fat. But I wanted the earth to open up and swallow me whole when he pointed to the fizzy drinks in her cart and said in a loud voice, “My mummy says fizzy drinks gives you fat cells and you are already have loads of fat cells. Why do you want to collect more?”
I was genuinely trapped. I could not back out and leave – I had unloaded half my cart already – so I took refuge in apologising profusely and admonishing my child for rudeness. I was mortified. At which point my son took umbrage and called me on it.
“But you tell me to always tell the truth! And I was telling the truth. This lady has loads of fat cells. Why does she want more?”
Thankfully the lady just wheeled her cart away. Wherever you are, I am so so sorry. I am so sorry for the hurt my son caused and I am so sorry you cannot do your shopping without a rude four-year old making your life hell. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry.
Tony Abbott, Leader of the Opposition
Which brings me to the point made by Tony Abbott in his address to Institute of Public Affairs in Sydney on Monday. Particularly he wants 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, the section which conservative columnist Andrew Bolt was prosecuted under last year repealed.
“Expression or advocacy should never be unlawful. And this is not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with Bolt. It’s a matter of the right to free speech.”
Yeah, I disagree. It’s not an issue of freedom of speech but an issue of tact. It is an issue of hurt. It is an issue of being civil in a civilised society. And it is a sad state of affairs that the legislation needs to exist but it does because being civil is no longer a valued trait.
Don’t get me wrong. I believe in human rights. Especially in the right to hold my own views and to speak them freely in society. But unlike my four-year-old, I understand that using my vocal chords in concert with my brain comes with great responsibility. It requires that you use your words kindly, gently and for good.
Another point made by Tony Abbott was that “hurt” was legally difficult to test. And I agree with him entirely on this point. It would have indeed been difficult to “legally test” the hurt that I endured as a teenager being taunted by a gang of schoolboys who demanded to know where my “waga” was. I had just got off a plane from Singapore, how was I to know they wanted to know where my spear was?
Likewise, it would have been equally difficult to “legally test” the hurt I felt when I was pelted with apple cores while on my afternoon walk seven months pregnant with my son and told, “Black bitch, go home.” Maybe it was the hormones, but I can tell you that night I seriously considered going “home” and questioned whether Australia was the place I wanted raise my child.
At length my son and I discussed tact, tolerance and the importance of not hurting people’s feelings. I told him what my mum had taught me as a little girl; that it is essential to think before you speak. And even if you have a view on something, is it the right place and time to express it? Yes, the lady was overweight but you did not need to point it out. Her feelings would have been hurt. It is never nice to feel pain inside your heart.
My mum also taught me that it is not good enough to have an opinion and that it needs to be an informed opinion. So my son and I chatted at length about finding out about things and how to have an informed opinion – within reason. He is four, after all.
I must say I am proud of my son though. A few days later, he told me he resisted teasing a girl at school for wearing a silly ribbon in her hair. That he did not want her to hurt on the inside. Clearly my four year old son got it. Do you get it, Mr Abbott?
Su Dharmapala is an author and blogger from Melbourne. Her debut novel, The Wedding Season, was published in May by Simon & Schuster. She will be presenting at the Melbourne Writers Festival on 26 August about the fine art of romance writing.
Can we protect ‘free speech’ too much? Where is the line between being tactless and being cruel?
Comments
104 Comments so far
This really was a terrible article, that pretty much was wide of the mark from start to finish.
Alarm bells always go off for me when I see an author trying to use overly simplistic arguments to mount a case.
A Freedom of Speech debate is never enhanced by unrelated tales of what children say at inappropriate times and those idiots throwing apple cores at you are breaking the law of assault and are a Red Herring to this debate.
If a Government rewards members of particular Identity Groups, then questioning how one gets into these particular Identity Groups is clearly a legitimate topic of conversation.
Section 18c of the RDA is an abomination to a free society and it really says something about its defenders.
loading...
My comment isn’t here?
Is it considered spam (am confident it wasn’t deleted for inappropriateness) even without a link to another page?
loading...
Lovely article, Su!
It’s such a good idea to have these conversations (about the world being comprised of different peoples) with kids while they’re young. They model their behaviour based on how we handle situations. And they ask the most interesting questions! My daughter was intrigued by the concept of inter-racial marriage, for example. Though I admit being slightly beside myself when she asks these questions loudly, and in the presence of, say, an inter-racial couple
My little girl’s bestie at preschool is half-Japanese, which means we’ve attended birthdays parties with adorably dressed children and three years in a row of amazing Hello Kitty themed parties.
My daughter was adamant. “I want to be Japanese when I grow up!”
loading...
Excellent article.
Australia is a great country and it is a terrible shame that we have so many racist people in this country.
I was first exposed to racism at the age of 6 or 7 while at school in a remote town.
“Don’t drink from there – that’s where the [derogatory term for an aboriginal]‘s drink from – drink from here”.
I hadn’t realised that apartheid was present at my primary school, but that’s how it was.
As a teenager – with dark looks due to spending time out in the sun – I was also subjected to racist abuse that very nearly because racist physical abuse when I was attending a relative’s wedding in a rather large country town – Toowoomba.
A white teenager being labeled as an aboriginal because of my dark skin, and for that, I was nearly beaten up by some white kids who felt it was their responsibility to teach aboriginal kids a lesson.
But what really got me was where these kids – either at primary school or the wedding – had picked up their racist beliefs.
At such a young age, it had to have started with their parents and grown from there.
Racism isn’t something that’s necessarily picked up in the schoolyard.
We teach our kids to do the right thing – “don’t swear, don’t steal, don’t hit other people”, and yet for many, “don’t treat someone differently because of the colour of their skin, or because of their nationality” seems to be forgotten.
As parents, we have a duty to teach our kids to be tolerant and understanding of others who might be different to us in one way or another.
The colour of someone’s skin, their sexual orientation, physical or mental differences – what gives anyone the right to pick on someone because they are different?
loading...
Hi PTA,
I am amazed by the number of parents who say “Well it is free country, they can say what they want,” but by that same token, quite easily backhand their child for talking back or giving lip.
I sometimes wonder whether parenting has been reduced to taking a child to activities and just keeping them fed and watered.
I am no great fan of organised religions but there was something about being forced to go to Sunday (Buddhist) school and listen to tales full of morals. Tales of good vs. evil where people were forced to exercise their moral fibre. Ok lie, I loved Sunday school. They always served curry sandwiches during the break.
Su
loading...
Great article, Su. Not much more that I can add. The touchstone for offensive comments is not about where the commenter draws the ‘hurtful/offensive’ line, but where the commentee group/demographic/individual (subject of the comments) draws the line.
loading...
Great article , it reminded me that we teach our children honesty but also need to teach them tact lol. When my eldest was in the supermarket, aged about 5, a very tall, imposing (and gorgeous) Sudanese man walked past us. She said, very loudly, “Mummy, look at that man’ he’s black….” . I cringed and went to apologize and to tell her to be more tactful as he turned and looked at her, while she continued to say “and he is soooooooo beautiful!!”. He laughed and patted her on the head, gave me a huge smile, I was proud in a weird way lol. She recognized difference and saw beauty, at 5. If she can do that, why can’t so many Australians, huh?
loading...
I really enjoyed this thoughtful article, Su.
(By the way, I’m so sorry you were subjected to such a horrible act of racist abuse when you were pregnant).
loading...
For every hurtful and nasty thing I have heard in my life, I have had ten more wonderful things happen to me. I know I am having a good day when I can focus on the ten wonderful things rather than thenasty thing.
Have a good one sister!
Su
loading...
Great article, Su. I too have had to teach my twins this. They are mixed race and have been subjected to some pretty horrid insults on the basis of their race – fortunately not too often. When it comes from other kids, it is especially sad because I just feel so sorry for them that they are growing up with this ingrained into them. Their upbringing is denying them the opportunity to make friends and enjoy healthy relationships with whole races or categories of people. We have had to teach them that they receive these comments either because the person saying them is unhappy with themselves and tries to make themselves feel better by putting down others. Or that they have not learnt to love people on the basis of their character but on the basis of skin colour and physical (or socio-economic or cultural) likeness to themselves.
I’ve also – through the course of research – visited white supremacist websites where I have learned about the regard that I am held, as a ‘race traitor’ in what is hopefully a tiny minority of the population. When I hear and read these things, a very small part of me wants us to legislate against this. The other part of my knows that legislation is not the answer, that the answer can be found in how we learn as a society to treat each other.
Having said that, I think that existing legislation that affords protection against incitement to violence and defamation needs to remain. I also think that incitement to racial hatred is worth considering. I’m not sure whether legislation exists in Australia for that but it does in many parts of Europe.
The reason I think that it is important to consider is in the context of history, genocides specifically. Likes the Jews were subjected to a campaign of racial (yes, we can argue about whether or not Jewish constitutes a race, but it is recognised by the UN that it does) hatred in the lead up to WWII, like the Tutsis who were subjected to a campaign of racial hatred in the lead up to the Rwandan genocide, there is a basis in history to recognise that racial vilification can and sometimes does lead to extreme violence.
But I do think that you have identified the bigger issue. It is more about learning basic social skills – manners, politeness, thinking before speaking and, when saying something negative, framing it as tactfully as possible. Learning those skills does not preclude honesty or robust discussion, in fact, it can enhance it.
loading...
Hi Anon,
Like you I worry for my child.
I think there is always be an undercurrent of hate. There will always be awful people in the world. And I agree with you entirely, whilst we say the Holocaust will never happen again, it did happen a scant ten years ago in Rwanda. And it happens in places all over the world.
Which is why I think it is important that people like you and I stand and speak. Kindly, gently and with compassion to people who are so full of hate, anger and pain themselves that they let in out of the bodies with such vitriol.
And I think legislation is good. I think it codifies and protects the vulnerable. And to those who bleat on about a nanny state, I just want to point out that the people who care for our children, do so with great love. There have been many times the carers who have supported me through the hood (motherhood) have literally saved me.
Su
loading...
Kids seem to understand facts, but not context or variance. Something to consider during discussions with our kids.
loading...
It is a developmental thing. Most eventually get it. Some don’t.
Su
loading...
I dont know…it seems like legislating for good manners, these are issues that should be taught at home rather than governments spending $100,000′s on more laws.
loading...
Hi Jackie,
If it were only about what could be taught and absorbed at home, then we’d have no need for any legislation. No responsible parent teaches a child to thieve, lie or cheat.
It is about how we live in a civil society and how that society functions. And what enables that society to become more compassionate and kind. Surely more kindness is always needed.
loading...
I find everything Andrew Bolt says offensive he is an overbearing bully. Tony Abbott only wants to repeal section 18C so Andrew will continue to rant Tony’s view of politics.
loading...
Have you ever actually read one of his columns or are you just part of the cool clique, the 28 percenters, who are prepared to defend this Government no matter what they do?
loading...
It’s not just ALP voters who think that Andrew Bolt is an idiot.
loading...
Yeah greens voters don’t like him much either.
loading...
I’ve read his columns and he has gotten progressively worse over the years.
It’s not about defending the govt no matter what they do.
loading...
Actually Faybian, you’re wrong.
loading...
Thats just your opinion.
loading...
Mel I haven’t read Andrew Bolt’s column however I have seen him on the Today Show and he is in my opinion like Alan Jones so blantantly Liberal and arrogant that they can not view anything objectively. I’m not one of the 28 Percenters who defend everything the Government does, they have done some really good things and some really stupid, I would in fact lean more toward the coalition if they had a more moderate leader like Malcolm Turnbull my issue is that the likes of Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones incite a very radical and narrow minded element of our country and that is what concerns me.
loading...
D, I think Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt are fantastic. Both of them have great minds. I love hearing them or reading what they have to say. I’m in my 80′s and I have more degrees than I know what to do with. I’m also a volunteer and am involved with my children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. If I were assessing either one of these two gentlemen they would score a very high mark. My university days are gone. So I just listen to them and in the case of Andrew Bolt, I follow his blog. Don’t be concerned about me. I’m broader in my outlook than you appear to be.
loading...
I think it might be a maturity thing, Deanne. I absolutely agree with your opinion on Jones and Bolt but in my younger years I would never believe I would be listening to talkback instead of Triple J! It was only when Rudd appeared in all his dysfunctional glory that I work up and started to find out was was going on.
D, there is nothing radical about Tony Abbott. It’s a media beat up and an Emily’s List vendetta. Like all sensible, mature Australians, his stand on abortion is ‘safe, legal and rare.’ He has paid a mortgage, his wife runs her own child care business, he has three educated, strong daughters who he protected, as any loving father would, by telling them to concentrate on their education instead of being used by teenage boys. He’s a community volunteer and fundraiser for the disabled and their carers and he wears speedos like thousands of other lifesavers, not around Parliament or shopping centres. And his sister is gay. Abbott is an ordinary man, but he is also a Rhodes scholar and a man with dignity and honor. I’m convinced of it.
With the filth that’s coming to light daily about the unions, and let’s face it, Labor and the unions are one, I can’t see any future for the ALP.
Sorry Su, didn’t mean to hijack your article.
loading...
Funny that, I am guessing you didnt have to pay for your degree like we are now. Like it was said before these two people are liberal minded and it was labor who put that through.
This comment is not even discussing what was written about the act. Again people distracted from the root caused.
loading...
Oh please! A “maturity thing”? How insulting. So when we all ‘grow up’ we’ll think like you? There are people of the same age as you who aren’t into racial discrimination (thank goodness)! ‘maturity’ my ass!
loading...
AJ fan, you’re like a breath of fresh air. Agree with you completely. I can not add anything further except to say thank you for your thoughtful comment. It’s a welcome relief.
loading...
“Both of them have great minds.”
If so, they’re keeping them *very* well-hidden.
loading...
D, Just find it so funny to read that you find everything Andrew Bolt says is offensive but you haven’t read any of his columns!!! Bizarre!
loading...
I’ve learned more from Andrew Bolt and a couple of other conservative journalists than I’ve learned from all the left wing journalists of Australia combined. I agree with about 90% of his ideas. But even when I disagree I think he still makes a good case representing his point of view. It’s so easy to just say negative things about Andrew Bolt. What’s important is to actually put your mind into gear and give some consideration to his arguments. The depth, breadth, clarity and knowledge is breath-taking. And as a communicator he’s one of the best. He’s also extremely fair. In fact he was a Gillard fan when she deposed Rudd. He was pro Gillard for quite some time. It was only when she started to unravel as a PM that he thought she was out of her depth and that Labor had made another mistake. When you’re a public figure I suppose you have to cop the nasty assaults from people. Andrew Bolt doesn’t need me to defend him. He’s tough enough to do that himself. I’m glad I discovered his blog. I’m the better for it.
loading...
Jacinta, I have to agree with you, and with Mel. The other journalist who is marvelous and unfairly maligned is Alan Jones. He gives a serve where it’s due, Labor and Liberal. The fact that there is little (nothing) good to say about this government is hardly his fault. I’ve also found him to be incredibly supportive and generous in promoting young talent in the arts and across all sport and academic achievement. He’s also working himself into the ground trying to stop coal seam gas and the destruction if our agricultural land. I don’t mean to sound like an ad for him, but people speak so badly of him when it’s simply not true. I can only presume its so that people don’t listen and learn what’s really going on.
I must say, he did an incredibly disturbing interview with Michael Smith a few weeks ago. Apparently there’s something about to blow up big time.
And Su, what a wonderful mother you are.
loading...
Clearly you’ve not read Jonestown. The man is an egomaniac. When he was rugby coach at Oxford he had a University student’s full scholarship revoked because he went against Jones preferred candidate when nominating a football captain (the outgoing captain gets to nominate the incoming). A man who is willing to destroy a young man’s education because he went against his recommendation is totally morally corrupt!
loading...
Who wrote Jonestown and why? Hmm?
loading...
AJ fan, I don’t know where I would be without Alan Jones. Agree with you completely. I don’t know how he has the stamina to do what he does on so little sleep. I used to vote Labor. I loathed John Howard. I loathed all conservative journalists and then Kevin Rudd was elected. Yep I voted for him. It was then I started to get angry. Really angry. Kevin Rudd turned out to be a dysfunctional nightmare. At least I didn’t vote for Julia Gillard. Not long before Kevin Rudd was toppled by Julia Gillard I read David Marr’s Quarterly Essay on him. I was horrified at how we had been sold a turkey. Gillard was worse. I discovered conservative journalists and commentators and the rest as they say is history. I’m waiting for the real story on Labor and the unions to be told. In the coming weeks the truth will be revealed. If it wasn’t for people like Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt and Michael Smith the dirt would still be lying under the carpet.
loading...
I’ve voted Libs several times and I don’t like Andrew Bolt.
loading...
Well, your son does have a point.
Besides, this article assumes hurt is always bad. What if the hurt that lady felt was ultimately the motivating factor for her to change her lifestyle to a healthier one? And don’t even get me started on issues of how far do we need to go to protect people’s precious feelings. Just because it hurts someone doesn’t mean we shouldn’t speak the truth.
loading...
While there may be something you can do about fat cells there’s really nothing you can do about your heritage. And people like Andrew Bolt shouldn’t have the right to criticise for something you can’t change.
loading...
Well, obviously you can’t be derogatory towards aspects of a person or group that they cannot change. Really I’m not sure why Abbot thinks it should be okay to be racist?
loading...
Zyra, for many years Tony Abbott has spent his holidays living in Aboriginal communities – without fanfare and without TV cameras.
You have just given a perfect illustration of what he is trying to prevent.
‘I’m not sure why Tony Abbott *thinks* it should be ok to be racist.’
How the hell do you know what Tony Abbott ‘thinks’ when what he ‘said’ was that comments containing racial slurs and hatred are never acceptable?
loading...
I know that he’s trying to repeal a law that makes it illegal to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people” “because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin” of that person or groups of people. If he thought that racism was unacceptable then he wouldn’t be trying to repeal a law that makes it illegal.
loading...
Zyra and the Purple Mel – I have an idea. Let’s ask an Aboriginal person. Oh wait! My stepfather is Aboriginal. And I can assure you that he feels that in NO WAY does Tony Abbott stand up for or represent his people. And if he actually does spend his holidays *experiencing* their lives, then he’s doing a shit-house job about saying anything about it. Instead, he’s saying people like Andrew Bolt should have the right to say whatever they like about things they know nothing about. Tony Abbott also pointed out when asked yesterday that social media should have a different set of laws regarding what people say – why in the hell should their be a different law for talk-show hosts and social media? If anything, Bolt has a louder platform from which to preach.
loading...
Oops, I can’t edit – *there*
loading...
Mel, “living” implies residing. You know, putting up with the lack of employment, lack of infrastructure, lack of opportunity for a period of more than a few (paid) weeks.
That’s like me saying that I live in Cambodia or Malawi or Haiti during my holidays. I holiday there. I choose to be there and I have the choice to leave when I want. I have enough money to get there in the first place and to get out of there when I’ve had enough of ‘keeping it real’.
loading...
This!
loading...
See, that’s were the problem arises, Anon and your articulate minion, Guest. People all interpret things according to their personal bias. Would it offend you less if I changed ‘living’ to ‘experiencing?’
Does that make it easier for you to understand that Tony Abbott has a solid understanding of Aboriginal issues and is a staunch advocate for them?
loading...
Mel, my point would still stand. Yes, it is great that he bothers to see how other Australians live. It is one thing to know all the statistics of inferior indicators such as health outcomes, socio-economic outcomes and the like but it is more powerful to see what those mean to the populations living with those.
However, it is another thing to say that one has *experienced* them when one has been given opportunities and choices not available to these people. I stand by my opinion that it he is not having the same experience as them simply because he chooses to holiday there. Yes, it is a good thing that he does. Yes, it may improve his understanding of the issues that these populations face. But is he experiencing these issues at a personal level in the same way? No.
It doesn’t mean that he should apologise for the circumstances in which he was born. But I don’t think he would be naive enough to claim that his living/experiencing/holidaying (delete as appropriate) in these communities means that he understands what it is like to be born and raised in these communities.
loading...
With all due respect Zyra, it is not my son’s job to further that lady’s weight loss issues. Indeed if there were issues she could dress. It is absolutely about protecting her feelings and I do not want a single drop of tear being dropped because of something my child did or said to anyone. I value people above all.
And when I have had issues I’d needed to address in my life, I have done so because I came to the realisation I needed to address them rather than someone being cruel. Reverse psychology has very poor returns.
loading...
Firstly, I never said it was his job. And from the way you told the story it certainly sounded like there were things she could do to help her health, for example cutting out soft drinks.
And I never said that being cruel was the answer, I just meant that sometimes the truth hurts, and just because it hurts doesn’t mean we should avoid it.
loading...
So you are saying you like the idea of a nanny state where the government controls everything we say and do? This story sounded more like a chance for you to gloat about your 4 year old’s intelligence above anything else. *yawn*
loading...
Looks like someone missed the point of the article then…
loading...
You’re lovely, Su, and you will bring up lovely children. Just wanted to say that!
loading...
I hope so.
Su
loading...
This is a great post Su. Your perspective and sharing of teachable moments with your child were gentle and thoughtful. I loved it.
Children, and adults, need to be taught tact and sensitivity. The truth does and can hurt when it is applied with a lack of knowledge or sensitivity.
The innocence of children is excusable and, as you demonstrated, an opportunity to teach. However, adults, particularly those with a public voice should be more careful.
loading...
Brilliant stuff, Su. My son was recently teased at school for being Aboriginal. He isn’t- he is olive skinned, tans ridiculously quickly and we just spent a month in Broome- but boy, it opened up a discussion for us. He was really hurt at being sworn at for being something he wasn’t, but then realised how much worse it would be to be called names for something he WAS. There’s nothing worth protecting about that sort of free speech.
loading...
And what really saddens me is that that kind of hurt can last a lifetime. It can affect a person’s self esteem and it can make them question their value. We live in a society where young men get kinghit and youth suicide is so high, surely a little kindness and compassion may make a dent in that.
loading...
Here’s a link to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act u see which proceedings were brought against Andrew Bolt. This is the section which Tony Abbott wants repealed:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rda1975202/s18c.html
It doesn’t refer to hurt feelings. It relates to public acts that are reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate based on race and other related grounds.
Because you have to consider whether the humiliation etc is “reasonably likely” it’s an objective measure – not a test of whether a particular person was offended or hurt.
Tact and civility have nothing to do with the section. Neither do hurt feelings.
Also, whilst it is unlawful, it’s not necessarily criminal to breach the section. So it’s damages rather than jail time that result from breaches.
loading...
I’ve just read the info.
Does this mean that Bess Price is guilty of racial discrimination or of telling the truth ?
loading...
S18C isn’t about racial discrimination. It’s about offensive behaviour. Would a “reasonable person” find her were comments offensive or insulting to another person or group? If so, is it because if the race of that person or group? If so – it’s probably unlawful. What she’s reported to have said seems to be more opinion than matters of fact, so it’s hard to say if what she’s said is true. But truth isn’t a defence to offensive behaviour claims under section 18C anyway.
loading...
I only have one problem with the “reasonable person” test.
Most of those who wish to apply it, rarely give in to reason.
loading...
I disagree. It is the Court that decides whether a theoretical reasonable person would be offended. Not the person complaining.
loading...
Say no more ! I’d think that as of late, many of the decisions handed down by members of the judiciary, and the word “reason”, would never be mentioned in the same breath.
loading...
woww i thought our number of fat cells didnt change – just the size. The things you learn!
loading...
The number of fat cells you can have can increase. But the size of them do fluctuate. But then again, it has been 16 (oh crickey) years since I finished by science degree.
Su
loading...
The more recent studies have shown that after adolescence the number of fat cells stays the same, even with significant weight increase or loss. So someone who establishes a high number of fat cells in childhood has higher capacity to store lipids later on. They think that this might account for why some people find it much harder to keep the weight off when they lose it, and that’s why they are now trying to target childhood obesity – they believe that people who are overweight as a child or adolescent are more likely to struggle with their weight in adulthood. It’s all quite interesting really.
loading...
This a good article and makes some excellent points but appears to have drifted in from a parallel universe in which Tony Abott was arguing against good manners in public discourse. In the universe we live in I understand his query to be whether there should be laws against people saying things that hurt the feelings of others which your article completely failed to address. Should your son (or you as the responsible parent as he’s well under legal liability age) be legally liable for saying things that in all probability hurt that woman deeply, perhaps as much as illegal speech such as querying someone’s aboriginality? Clearly absurd you might say but why? Personally I tend towards the traditional free speech view where criminal liability is restricted to speech that insights violence or threatens someone and false and hurtful statements should be dealt with via defamation law. I think for instance that it’s extremely rude for someone to state that they think a given race or religion is inferior but as long as they are not standing up saying let’s go over and beat up a [insert race or religion here] there shouldn’t be a law against it and the rest of us can see them for the ill mannered bigot they are.
loading...
I think so too, Guest.
I feel also, that having an opinion at home but trying to ensure a watered down and ‘tactful’ version of events, or even ensuring it does not come ‘out of the mouth of babes’ can be a little disingenuous.
Often the recipient of this information is not stupid and knows what you are really trying to say.
And yes, I feel my anger flare at times when people have no filter but as you say it is a brilliant way to ascertain what a complete fool someone is, and disassociate accordingly.
loading...
I love this post! I can totally understand your mortification but I just love the way your 4-year-old expressed himself at the shops.
“you are already have loads of fat cells. Why do you want to collect more?” made me laugh and is frankly one of the best ways I have seen that expressed!
I’m so impressed by your teaching – sounds like your son learns things well and will grow up to be an amazing, compassionate adult.
Bravo.
loading...
I can only stop and ponder what might have happened had the lady who was gathering fat cells decided to sue because her feelings had been hurt.
Would this be a completely different article had the author been sued for planting the seeds of discontent in the mind of her four year old ? She freely admits to making this statement to her child.
loading...
It would be completely bizarre. Truly. An example of ‘world gone mad’.
I don’t know anything about the Andrew Bolt affair being discussed, so I don’t have context around this whole ‘sue if offended’ thing.
loading...
you can read about it here.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_white_is_the_new_black
loading...
The obese lady couldn’t sue anyway because body size isn’t one of the grounds a person can sue for under s18C of the RDA.
loading...
I should have indicated that I was using this example as a hypothetical.
loading...
I really hope he does. I hope he grows to be a kind man. A good man with good values that does good in the community.
Su
loading...
Bravo Su, a great article! I saw The Wedding Season in store recently, but I was broke as hell and it was sitting alongside The Help, so only The Help came home. I have to go back and get The Wedding Season now. I agree with your sentiments completely. Sorry about your experiences of people being rude based on colour – it’s interesting what constitutes ‘black’, isn’t it? A mildly tanned Indian person is ‘black’, but a Bondi beach babe with fifty million layers of fake tan is ‘white’. Uh-huh. Just out of curiosity, does anyone know when Section 18C was introduced? Might be owed some hefty backpay!
loading...
Hi Alexandra,
I hope you enjoy the The Wedding Season. I had loads of fun writing it.
By and large, when someone calls me a black b*tch, I tell them to get more creative with their insults if they want me to take them seriously.
But the fact remain that people who yell out foul obscenities at pregnant women (I was very clearly pregnant at the time) get off scot free. I did not have the emotional energy or the want to take them to court. They had driven off in their ute anyway.
Interestingly though, I have always found that incidences of hate language I have had to experience rise directly in proportion with what people in the spotlight, politicians etc. have to say. That incident when I was pregnant was not long after or close to when the then Minister for Immigration made a very disparaging remark about Sudanese immigrants and not fitting it.
When people in power and those with supposed “moral” authority speak, it make it easier for others to give vent to their baser emotions. That bloke said it, I can it too.
Remember when Steve Irwin died and some idiots went out killing sting rays? The same applies.
Su
loading...
Just a note that racial abuse cuts both ways, people in Australia are vilified for being Anglo , having red hair etc .
loading...
I agree, Su, for the most part. Freedom of speech has always been tempered by legislation of some sort: national security provisions; naming/showing images of people charged but not yet convicted of certain crimes, naming/showing images of child offenders and other contempt of court provisions; slander and libel legislation; privacy legislation and/or common law…
I think that Tony Abbott’s speech does little to advance the discourse around striking the appropriate balance between our freedoms and our responsibilities. Just because we have particular rights, should they be exercised without due regard to the likely consequences of those being exercised? Are we attacking an argument (reasonable) or a person (generally less reasonable)? Is it in the public interest that a particular subject is raised and framed in such a way at any given time and place? For example, is it appropriate to denigrate Steve Irwin fairly immediately following his death or should be wait a respectful while to have the argument about whether his contribution to Australia/animals/conservation was a net positive or negative? Finally, if we are saying something so negative, is it helpful to anything? Can it be used to advance society, precipitate discussion around sensitive but important social issues or used to bring about improvement (constructive)? Or is it just being nasty because, well, we can.
Someone commented on another thread last week around how nastiness online usually reflects poorly on the person being nasty rather than the object of their vitriol. I’ve since seen that supported on the Fairfox blogs as well in an article on trolling. Just because something is legal (being nasty, saying something nasty) do we really need legality to drive our actions rather than personal morality. I don’t say racist things not because of the law but because my morals don’t support it. Ditto homophobic things. The law can only do so much – it won’t change the behaviour of all the people, all the time. But that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t reflect the personal morals of many and the general societal ethic which is that this kind of commentary should not be moderated or tempered by legislation.
loading...
Legislation doesn’t prevent racism, prejudice or ignorance. And it won’t prevent Bolt et al from expressing idiotic and ill-formed views.
People with hurt feelings already have a legal remedy – defamation proceedings.
loading...
What a great message you deliver.
When you disagree…..sue !
loading...
Um … how do you think the RDA provisions get enforced?
loading...
My response didn’t come through. I don’t know if that is a technical hiccup or what.
So…..I’d like to give you my honest response, but someone may feel hurt and I’ll end up in court for having an opinion. That is the price of free thought in today’s Australia.
loading...
I’m not a lawyer, but pretty sure it cannot be defamation if it’s true. The lady’s feeling may have been hurt but she is obese, so it’s not untrue, so no grounds to sue.
loading...
Truth is an absolute defence to defamation.
However, personal injuries claims are when they get a bit more murky!
loading...
Personal injuries claims relate to physical injuries not “hurt feelings”.
As well as truth being a defence to a defamation claim, so too is the defence of an “honest opinion” (section 31 of the Defamation Act 2005 NSW).
loading...
Not many people have the wherewithal for legal remedy. And there is a requirement for police investigations. And with the state of crime, I doubt I want to pull police off the road so that they can chase a bogan who screamed nasty things at me.
Su
loading...
Quite so, Su. Clearly your son thinks that this woman is a worthless human being who should have all access to public healthcare cut and be incarcerated until she starves to death. Just because he said one thing doesn’t mean that he wasn’t thinking something far more sinister. It’s imperative that in this age of feigned outrage that we take nothing at face value and be ever vigilant in our quest for totalitarian political correctness.
The gall of Tony Abbott to want to stop him being prosecuted by the thought police is typical of his heinous commonsense and should be derided at every opportunity.
On the other hand … the left hand … it’s perfectly reasonable for Larissa Behrendt to let fly the most vile tweets about Bess Price. After all, Price is just an Aboriginal woman at the coalface who has the temerity to agree with Intervention.
And of course, you can clearly see that Julian Burnside was in no way meaning to offend Abbott or other Catholics with his slanderous pedophile tweets.
So the Champagne Left are allowed to say what they want about whom they want (the uncool Conservatives and even the ALP voter foundation -those bogans who name their children funny names) but everyone else had better watch what they say or they’ll be locked up for thought crimes.
loading...
The attacks on Bess Price have disgusted me in ways that words cannot express. But because she doesn’t echo the opinions of the leftie PC brigade she becomes an easy target.
Disgraceful ! Disgraceful ! Disgraceful !
loading...
I am not impressed with the attacks on Bess Price either, they dont use logic or debate to attack her either but just vile trash.
loading...
Support Bess Price, now !
loading...
When individuals aren’t free to ask questions, then society as a whole is in trouble.
Some questions may hurt feelings. Hurt feelings are a natural part of life as are thoughts and opinions. I may well disagree with your thoughts and opinions as that is my right. It is your right to disagree with me.
loading...
I guess as long as those feelings are considered when asking the questions, that is fine. But to ask away and not to even give thought as to whether that might hurt or offend is thoughtless and cruel.
loading...
I’m not advocating cruelty. But ultimately, how do I tell if you might be the type of person who is likely to be offended when I ask the question ? Should I simply not risk asking the question ? Should curiousity be declared a crime punishable by jail ? I can give you numerous examples where curious people or those with different views have been jailed.
As I suggest, sometimes the question will hurt feelings. That is part of life. You can ask the same question of ten people and receive ten different responses. Where do you draw the line ? Should it be written in stone the things that we can and can’t ask ? Who makes that decision ?
loading...
I agree. I cannot imagine suing based on hurt feelings.
loading...
you are not advocating ‘cruelty’ But you are : )
loading...
No I’m not. You can dispute that if you wish. I don’t mind.
loading...
Ha ha. Bolt is posing as ‘Bradley’.
loading...
But there is a time and place to ask questions. There is decorum and good manners. It is what enables society to function.
Sure hurt feelings are a part of life. But it is not how I chose to raise my child. To be an oafish buffoon without any sense of empathy or kindness. And believe you me, we need a great deal more kindness in this society.
Su
loading...
You sound like an excellent mum Su!
loading...
Congratulations on a great article. I think you should email it to Tony Abbott and cc Andrew Bolt.
loading...
That’s right !
Legal reasons would prevent an honest right of reply should either see fit to reply.
loading...
It’s an interesting proposition. The problem with censoring speech is the hypocrisy of those doing it as there will always be those who blindly think that what ever they want banned is fair, just not their own expressions.
Do we want discourse? Do we want bigots to hang on their words? I think there is value in that, but I think the real value is in people developing thicker skins so we can actually have the honest civilization we need.
The more we white lie, the more dishonest we become to appease the self appointed correct, the more integrity we lose and a spiral of downwards escalating dishonesty is the inevitable conclusion.
More critical thinking, more honesty.
loading...
Hear, here !
loading...
I do not for a second not support critical thinking or honesty. More of it is always needed. If if a message needs to be delivered, it can be done kindly and in fashion that that message gets through. It it make take a moment or two longer, but that moment or two could make the world of a difference to the person receiving that message. And it could also mean the difference between accepting the message or not.
Su
loading...