Battle of the Bigots

I thought I'd move back to my antipodean roots this week and talk about a subject that has been captivating most of Australia for the past wee while - pure, unadulterated, down-under bigotry.

When I look back to the moment my parents told me we'd be leaving South Africa and moving to New Zealand for good, I remember my intense resistance for fear of racism. Now this sounds ironic given I was a mixed race person living in only-just-post-apartheid South Africa,  where I'd just been through I.Q tests to determine whether I was intelligent enough to go to school with white children. But in South Africa I wasn't a minority. Sure I was slightly different, but I had a social group, I had a name I could call myself, and I had others I could identify with who were just like me. I was terrified of moving to New Zealand and becoming an outlier. Attracting unwanted attention is basically the worst thing possible for a 14 year old girl, and I felt my racial make-up would guarantee I would never fit into NZ society.

Fast forward 13 years, and I had ended up being pretty comfortable with my life in NZ. Some of my teenage fears were realised, and people were often puzzled by my non-Maori brown-ness. But it was OK. I'd often thought about moving to Australia, but was often warned of their abysmal race relations record and the manifest racism and sexism. When we decided to take the leap and move across the ditch, we picked Melbourne as it had a reputation for being progressive and tolerant by Australian standards. But given this common perception of Australia, I'm again hyper paranoid and sensitive to any potential bigotry. So it was with great interest that I watched the Kyle Sandilands saga unfold.

Kyle Sandilands is the definition of a shock jock. Abrasive, offensive and arrogant, he made his name belittling contestants on Australian Idol and X-Factor (referring to contestant's 'tuck shop arms' and 'jelly bellies'). His Sydney-based radio show, which he co-hosts with Jackie-O, is one of the top-rated shows in Australia, and was apparently untarnished by an on-air incident where he compelled a 16 year old girl to admit, on air, that she'd been raped at the age of 12. He has a history of misogyny, bigotry and outbursts against anyone, mainly women, who dares to critique his impressive oeuvre.

However, he seems to have gone too far this time. A few weeks ago, a writer for the news.com.au website, called Sandilands's new show "awkward" and a "disaster". By all other accounts, it was both those things. His show, called A Night with the Stars, received damning reviews from all corners. But for some reason, this writer attracted the wrath of Sandilands. Some of his on-air abuse included:

fat slag

little troll

piece of shit

you haven't got enough titty to be wearing that low cut a blouse

and my favourite

I will hunt you down

People were outraged and the reaction has been swift. All major sponsors of the show (including Ford, McDonalds and Vodafone) pulled out within a day and have vowed to remain out for at least another year. Sandilands was almost universally condemned with online polls overwhelmingly calling for him to leave. I did not read or hear a single positive thing about him. And yet... he is still employed by his radio station.

Let's compare this to another public outcry against a notorious bigot - the Paul Henry scandal in New Zealand (which embarrassingly made it's way to headline news across the ditch!) Henry too had a history of being a douche (lady with a moustache, "retarded" Susan Boyle, etc). But it was Henry's questioning of the 'New Zealand-ness' of NZ born then Governor General Anand Satyanand and giggling like a school-boy at the name of Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit that was eventually his downfall. 

I think it's fair to say that the reaction was nowhere as swift. While Henry apologised the next day, it was half-arsed and done in typical 'sorry if you were offended' non-apology style. He also managed to squeeze another racial epithet into his apology (gypo). TVNZ's PR Manager defended him as 'just saying what we're all thinking',  I can't remember anything about sponsors withdrawing and it took a good few days before Henry was suspended. But the end result was that he was pushed to resign and we were free of him on our publicly funded TV for almost a year. I'd hazard a guess that he is still one of the most popular figures in New Zealand media though.

The reaction to these two idiots has been very different and I haven't quite been able to pinpoint why that is. Part of me wonders if it's a cultural thing, if New Zealanders, being a reserved bunch, needed a racist mouthpiece. And Australians, being a bit franker and easier with their opinions, don't feel they need a spokesperson for their bigotry - they can just say it for themselves. I also wonder if it reflects societal attitudes to sexism and racism. Sandilands's crimes are almost exclusively against women, and seem to hint at a deep-seated misogyny. Henry is an equal opportunities bigot, taking aim at gay people, people with disabilities and minorities alike. Perhaps we're more sophisticated in our understanding of sexism as a society, and it's easier for us to react when the infringements are so near violent in nature. Or maybe its the medium - radio versus TV? Or maybe it's that New Zealanders are just more bigoted? 

The public reaction to the Paul Henry saga made me doubt many of my fellow Kiwis. It deeply undermined my sense of self and of belonging as I questioned whether most citizens in the place I called home even wanted me there. The Australian public reaction to the Sandilands saga has made me feel the opposite, like I'm surrounded by people who are OK with calling out bigotry. It's a very shallow analysis, and probably not indicative of anything really. But for what it's worth, I never expected to feel so...at ease...here.