On being brown in the Antipodes

I've recently become even more of a cliche - a late 20-something educated Kiwi woman who has moved to Australia in search of greener (browner? redder?) pastures. I am living the brain drain. As such, I'm also living a life where everything is new to me. Not that I was ever a 'finger on the pulse' kind of person, but I'd like to think I had a general understanding of the feeling of my fellow New Zealanders on certain issues. But now, finding out what Australians think about things is tiring. Some things, like opinions on the carbon tax, whack you over the head with long emotive TV advertisements. Other things, like racism, are a bit trickier to get to the nub of.

One of Bolt's opinion pieces on 'White Aborigines'

Take, for example, the recent case of Eatock v Bolt where shock jock Andrew Bolt was found to have contravened key sections of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 with his combative articles undermining the right of fair skinned Aboriginal people to identify as such. If you feel like being sick, read the case as it cites numerous sickening quotes from Bolt. Other than that, its a progressive, fascinating and accessible read, even for this rusty law grad. It has a beautiful section on self-identification of mixed race people, but that's a blog for another day...

This case was a big deal. A "journalist" faced judicial censure for expressing his (frankly disgusting) opinions. After Paul-Henry-Gate in New Zealand, I braced myself for a flurry of pro-Bolt commentary along the lines of 'he's just saying what we're all thinking' or 'but it's the truth isn't it?' and my personal favourite (always exclaimed without any explanation) 'FREEDOM OF SPEECH!' I thought it would be worse than New Zealand as a) This is Australia - everyone knows Australians are racist! and b) this is an actual court case, with actual court-ordered punitive measures (well kind of). By comparison, Paul Henry only lost his job, and technically resigned (and thanks guys now we're stuck with him). 

But I was pleasantly surprised. Either my work was ordering some progressive newspapers for our lunch room reading, or Bolt was already a hated man in Australia, or the Australian commentariat's concept of freedom of speech is more advanced than that of their New Zealand equivalents. I suspected it was a little from columns a, b and c. I got the sense that Bolt was far from universally loved, but also that Australians have had a lot longer to get used to and digest the provisions of their race discrimination legislation. While this judgment pushed the boundaries of this legislation, most Australians seemed OK with that. 

But then the response to Steve William's delightful comments on Tiger Woods made me rethink that... The commentariat on both sides of the ditch universally dismissed his claims as not being racist, as simply pointing out the dark colour of Tiger Wood's skin, well something other than his skin... Golfers even came to his defence by hauling out the old 'but he has black friends' routine. Online polls here and in New Zealand overwhelming supported Steve William's othering of his ex-boss, and defended his right to continue stating the 'facts'.

And then I started attending events. No matter what the occasion, from a talk on dental health in Iraqi children, to a forum on the rights of older people, every occasion thus far has been opened by an acknowledgement of the traditional owners of the land, and a thanks to their elders past and present. Sure this is ceremonial and might not mean anything further than a tick-box exercise, but it's been much more consistent than I ever witnessed in New Zealand. 

And then I did further research. Race really is a big deal in Australia. 44% of the population was born overseas or to an overseas born parent. Indigenous Australians have been here for 75,000 years, yet they face some of the worst outcomes in Australia. Boat people present an ongoing challenge for every Australian government. This is a country of very recent migrants, struggling with a legacy of horrific discrimination against the lawful owners of the land, the people who weren't counted as people until recently. Their issues are certainly more complex than those of New Zealand, but what does that mean? Shall we give them more lenience as they struggle with bigger and wider reaching issues? Or do we expect greater sophistication in their dialogue, more progressive policies and greater societal acceptance of diversity? I don't yet know the answer to that, but I'm leaning towards the latter.

So what did I learn from all this, other than getting myself thoroughly confused? First, which newspapers to avoid (I'm looking at you Herald Sun!). But secondly, that judging the racial temperature of a country takes a lot more than reading some papers and blogs. It's going to be a long time before I get a sense of how I, as a visible immigrant, fit into this country. All I know so far, is that I never got called a wog in 14 years of life in New Zealand. It took me two weeks in Australia.