Australian Identity

Australian Symbols

Cultural Cringe

Language and Identity

Australian Stereotypes

Racism and Egalitarianism

Australian Racism

Email

Racism in Australia

Nuances in a Black and White Issue

Australia is renowned as a racist country. This is partly due to the actions of Australian academics such as Kevin Dunn and James Forrest writing books alleging that their country has a historical racist streak towards Muslims, Aborigines, Jews, and people of Asian background. It is partly also due to comedians/social commentators like Catherine Deveny creating stereotypes of racism to denigrate Australians that they dislike. For example, Deveny said:

"An Australian Flag in your front yard tells everyone you're only a couple of Bundy and Cokes away from lynching a wog, slope or Arab."

These kinds of Australians seem to believe that while racism defines their culture, they have been personally spared from being defined by the same racist vices. Ironically, this viewpoint is itself a form of prejudice. 

Whether Australia is indeed a racist society depends on the definition used to define racism. Perhaps the bigotry associated with fans of Australia’s competing football codes best illustrates the difficulties with seeing racism as a black and white issue or a social problem that has a simple solution. For example, in the southern states, Australian Football (AFL) is the most popular football code. In the states of NSW and Queensland; however, it is often derided as GAYAFL, or Mexican rules. Such references could be defined as prejudiced against homosexuals, Mexicans and people form the southern Australian states. Specifically, terms such as GAYAFL imply that being homosexual is inferior to being heterosexual. Likewise, Mexican rules uses a negative stereotype of Mexicans as a point of ridicule of an aspect of Australian culture. Finally, the AFL is a reflection of the history and values people of the southern states. To denigrate it, is to denigrate the people of the southern states. 

Despite the insults, few AFL fans would suffer emotional distress at being compared to homosexuals or Mexicans. Nor would they be overly bothered by their culture being denigrated. The more common reaction would be to insult Rugby League, the sport of choice in NSW and Queensland, as the sport of bum sniffers. Even if they didn’t denigrate Rugby League, AFL fans couldn’t take the high moral ground on bigotry considering that they refer to other AFL clubs in a bigoted manner. For example, Collingwood fans may be denigrated as bogans (low-class Australians of Anglo descent) while Carlton fans denigrated as wogs (Australians of southern European ancestry that can't speak English with a desirable accent). In each case, a derogatory stereotype of a social group is applied to fans of an opposing team in order to denigrate them. 

There is a pragmatic benefit with using the humour in such a way. The jokes have a way of releasing tension associated with encounters with diversity, which is important when Australian Football and Rugby League fans encounter each other. Both codes represent cultures that compete for fans much like religions compete for followers. If the stress of the rivalry can be released with a joke, then it is less likely that fans of the respective groups will resort to violence to prove their group is superior to the other.

Although the banter between AFL fans and Rugby League fans is a bit like the play fight of puppies, it becomes a little bit more problematic when the same insulting banter is extended to Soccer fans who are migrants and for whom Soccer is aligned with a nationalistic identity. For example, when NSW Rugby League fans refer to Victorian AFL fans as poofters or wogs, they can defend themselves by saying that they are referring to their own (Australian) culture. However, when they speak the same way about an Italian Soccer fan, and refer to Soccer as a sport for wogs, poofters and sheilas, their target is perhaps less likely to see the funny side. The target is also more likely to cry racism and see the insults as evidence that they have migrated to a racist country.  

 Even though bigotry is part of Australian sporting life, it rarely has malicious intent. If a homosexual AFL player encountered a Rugby League fan insulting Australian football as GAYAFL and duly informed him that he was a homosexual and offended, the majority of Rugby League fans would probably heed the words and find another insult. As yet, no AFL player has come out and pronounced themselves to be offended by the gay jibes; however, some players of Aboriginal descent, such as Michael Long and Nicky Winmar, came out and said they were offended by skin colour insults. In what could be seen as a strength of AFL culture, the players' pronouncements largely eradicated skin-colour insults from the crowds and the field. Once informed that it was not harmless fun that could be forgotten once the players left the field, fans and players changed their ways. While players may still be insulted for their hair style, nose size, physical proportions, and failings in life, vilification about skin colour is now taboo. This is a marked contrast from European Soccer where black players often have to endure crowds throwing bananas at them despite making it clear that they are offended by such actions. It is also a marked difference from Indian Cricket where coloured Australian cricketer Andrew Symmonds endured monkey chants from the crowd and opposing players despite stating his offence.

Sport is a reflection of a cultural approach and the cultural norms of Australian sport are also a feature of Australian culture at large. Australia is a country where insulting banter is used as a kind of joking way to build a sense of endearment, release tension associated with encounters with diversity, or take the piss in a harmless way. For example, Australians of anglo ancestry are often derided as bogans (low-class, uncultured, profane, uncivilised yobbos that wears ugg boots.) Australians of southern European ancestry may be derided as wogs (mono-browed, hairy backed with too much grease in their hair and problems speaking correctly.) Foreigners may also be denigrated. The English may be referred to as Whinging Poms, Americans as Seppos and New Zealanders as sheep fuckers. Most Australians see nothing malicious in their actions and perhaps the majority of their targets don’t see anything malicious either. Australians will joke about others and about themselves with the intention of smoothing social interaction.

Kath and Kim - Stereotyped bogan Australians

Effie (Mary Coustas) - Stereotyped wog Australian

Paul Hogan - Jokes about inaccurate stereotypes and respect for cultural traditions

This cultural trait is perhaps an extreme version of psychological behaviour seen in most countries. Most forms of humour, be it self-directed or directed at others, involve laughing at someone else. For example, a pie to the face, a ball to the groin, or your-mumma-is-so-fat oneliner all involve a loss of face for someone. Additionally, most cultures have some groups using derogatory terminology to signal endearment or group membership. For example, African Americans may refer to each others as Niggers. The use of a term that had negative connotations as a term of endearment changes the connotations of the word. Perhaps the real problem with its use is that only other African Americans can use it, which in turn discriminates against non-African Americans and signals a racial exclusion.

 Even though a derogatory joke may have no malicious intent, targets sometimes take offence. Academics such as Kevin Dunn and James Forrest note their offence and decide to write books in order to portray themselves as a kind of champion of the repressed underdog. In the process of insulting Australia at large, these academics see themselves as being spared the bigoted tendencies that define everyone else from their culture. It is the classic burn-the-witch-at-the-stake-to-show-conformity-to-the-bible psychology. As long as others can be denounced as racists, then those who allege racism are open-minded. It is a simplistic way of adapting to some of the problems associated with diversity, but perhaps not an effective one.

The behaviour of Kevin Dunn and James Forrest  is commonly seen in cultures that are lost of moral compass points and which lack clear ideas about how to behave. For example, during China’s Cultural Revolution, the denigration of the past left the present generation without role models to guide behaviour. This became highly problematic when Chairman Mao created the Red Guards (student activists) in order to purify the nation’s soul. The Red Guard’s tried to purify China by attacking right-wingers, teachers, academics, homosexuals, adulterers, and their parents. As told in the book Mao and China by Stanley Karnow, the Red Guards had trouble purifying their own soul, let alone the soul of anyone else:

“We forced the teachers to wear caps and collars which stated things like “I am a monster.” Each class confronted and reviled them in turn with slogans, accusations, and injunctions to reform their ways. We made them clean out the toilets, smeared them with black paint, and organized “Control Monster teams” to see that it was properly done. We would charge them with specific mistakes and not relent until they admitted that they were true. It took a week of nearly constant struggle to make the man admit he had said, “Mao was wrong” in conversation with one of his fellow teachers. They had little rest and were forced to sleep apart from their fellow teachers. We would join informal groups, raid their quarters and begin to work on them again. They could not escape us."

One Red Guard later explained his poor behaviour by blaming Chairman Mao for not being clear about how they should act:

"All the factionalism, fighting, the shifting alliances, and the different positions arose because the instructions from Chairman Mao just didn't work. He might say that all members of the 'left' should unite, but we were never told how to determine who was 'left' and who was 'right.' His statements were so general that everybody, even those who opposed him, could find something to justify his own position."

Whether anyone is ever entitled to be offended, either by a joking insult or being referred to as a racist, will always be debated; however, the fact that most Australians are willing to change once they have been informed of offence is an indication of the absence of malicious intention. It is also an indication that most Australians want to be friends. That in itself is perhaps the best evidence that Australia is not a racist society, despite the bigoted banter that may indicate something to the contrary.

Those who refuse to change, be that academics that allege racism in others or "comedians" that persist with making "jokes" about others despite being told it isn’t funny, are really the only Australians that give their country a bad name. Such "comedians" include the likes of Catherine Deveny who built a career out of insulting people, but then refused to apologise when informed that people found her humour highly offensive and not funny at all. Her humour rarely had the tension-relieving or self-effacing characteristics that define much Australian humour. To the contrary, her humour was directed at other social groups, intended to belittle, and to portray the superiority of her own values. With such an intention, it was impossible for her to apologise when others stated their hurt. In other words, she was a true bigot.

Even though the the likes of Catherine Deveny exist in Australia, receive institutional backing, they are also common in many other cultures around the world. Furthermore, the malcious actions of a few shouldn't be used to define all Australians as having malcious intent.  Equally, just as the Red Guards were not being egalitarian when they smeared shit into the hair of "elites", Anglo academics are not being open-minded when they spend their time writing about how all Anglo Australians, except for themselves, are racist. Racism is not a black and white issue nor are encounters with diversity always smooth and easy. On the whole, Australia is a relatively harmonious culture where a diverse range of cultures are able to use humour to live quite happily with each other, and without the bloodloss that defines many multicultural societies.