Before I forget there was a follow up article. With certain details lacking some reading between the lines is required, my own inferences based on what is presented rather than what may have occurred. Notably the article appears to muddy the waters by presenting ’reverse racism’ as an issue:
Another Herald reader said racism was not just against Asian migrants.
“We are from the UK and we have been told to go back England – we have been here 25 years,” the woman wrote.
This is, taken at face value, arguably xenophobia as opposed to racism – issues best not conflated, bearing in mind some may experience one *or* the other while others experience *both* – and obviously, as mentioned previously; the historic, systemic and power dynamics.
Of more relevance to my above point was another’s testimony:
The racism came from two colleagues but what was most alarming was that when he reported it to management “nothing really happened”, the man said.
“Management’s comment was, ‘It depends upon how you perceive it’,” he said.
In this instance:
’It depends upon how you perceive it’
ostensibly coming from the same school of thought as:
"If anyone felt that it was [racist], then of course we would apologise"
One from the public sphere the other from the private, and both very much in their way indicative of the types of gaslighting employed by the hegemony to minimise and erase the concerns of minorities:
these perceptions of racism are often treated as exaggerated or delusional.
The conclusion reached in this study being that these types of defensive responses to racism being called out are a product of positionality:
Together, these findings are consistent with the hypothesis that perceptions of racism are influenced by the relevance of one’s racial identity. Individuals in the majority group may be less likely to perceive systemic racism because it presents a greater challenge to a mainstream worldview.
and of historical and cultural awareness:
Ultimately, this research underscores the importance of historical knowledge — and activities, like Black History Month, that highlight marginalized forms of historical knowledge — for understanding current events.
“From 1893, the majority of women were able to vote, but Chinese people (of all genders) were not allowed to vote in New Zealand until 1952, because of their ‘alien’ status.”
duly elaborated on:
From 1893, the majority of women were able to vote, but Chinese people (of all genders) were not allowed to vote in New Zealand until 1952, because of their “alien” status. This is almost 60 years after the suffragettes achieved voting rights for Pākehā and Māori women. Chinese people weren’t allowed to vote because they weren’t allowed to become citizens of New Zealand between 1908-1952, this is over 100 years after the first Chinese person arrived. The structural racism in the New Zealand immigration system has denied the rights accorded to people based on this Pākehā idea of citizenship, or “naturalisation” as they called it. This is often omitted in accounts of how “we” were the first country to achieve women’s suffrage.
One of myriad examples of the hegemonic (invariably Pākehā) subjectivity and selective nostalgia being used to erase significant and prolonged instances of institutional discrimination in Aotearoa.
2018 marks the 125th anniversary of women’s suffrage in New Zealand. On 19 September 1893 the Electoral Act 1893 was passed, giving all women in New Zealand the right to vote. As a result of this landmark legislation, New Zealand became the first self-governing country in the world in which all women had the right to vote in parliamentary elections.
my general impression and experience is that as with any educated adult clinging to the notion that new zealand isn’t systemically and culturally “racist AF" – no amount of evidence i can furnish you with could banish those lingering quibbles.
which is not to say I can’t elaborate on the above allegations in some detail – but for what purpose? your entertainment? I left a snapshot of working conditions – take from it what you will.
That’s the state of things – supervisor was informed – I’d argue that blatant racism in the workplace without repercussions is a Government problem – I even assumed – perhaps wrongly – that this is why we have a Human Rights Commission – but more to my point – when folk inherit leadership – the leaders or leadership team tend to send signals – as we’re seeing with Winston right now – signals which may be taken as indication of the type of leadership to expect – the type of environment they’re comfortable with and may seek to maintain – and so – *checking pocketwatch* – who is it today? Rob Jones is the racist du jour, occupying what appears to be a much sought after position in the limelight since this administration took office. In a media environment which is exploiting it for all its worth. Power, influence and using both responsibly to send the most humanitarian – rather than the most politically expedient – signals is underrated.
TLDR: old skooly racism in the workplace sure as shit is my Government’s problem, I can’t speak for yours. in a structurally racist colony the Government is the last instrument I’d resolve of accountability for a racist culture.
“If anyone felt that it was [racist], then of course we would apologise for that. But that was not our intent.”
As an update to the state of race relations under the current "if anyone felt that it was racist" Labour led Government, my wife was given the "Chinese eyes" today at work by a migrant worker from Tuvalu.
I was astonished this thread ended up here and was reluctant to address at the time it but as no one has:
"Simply put, Morgan said reverse racism doesn’t exist and a person who claims otherwise is “outing themselves as someone who has little to no experience or knowledge of what racism is.
Racism is based on a couple of things—historical, systemic oppression and power, Morgan explained. And as far as history goes, white people have never been persecuted for the colour of their skin—so there’s no point comparing their experiences to those of black, brown, and Indigenous folks.
“It’s slavery, colonialism, theft all kinds of violations on systemic proportions… versus feelings being hurt."
Note; I’m not suggesting that a crime wasn’t committed – simply that as part of the Pākehā hegemony, what was experienced wasn’t racism as much as it was a backlash for being a colonial settler. Which is not to dispute – as Toi later pointed out on the show – that Māori can be racist – but to highlight that as a Pākehā, calling that racism, is to ignore the wider historical, systemic and power dynamics.
"But Morgan said even if all people of colour straight up said they hate white people, it wouldn’t affect a white person’s ability to get a job, an education, or increase the odds that they’d get carded or charged for a crime. “If all white people had that view [of black people], that would have a very dramatic life impact on the material reality of all those people."
Something MXR Dentith left here a few years back:
something kinda vintage but more summery
In 2010, of course, Public Address readers bypassed the news and opted for a neologism – the great ungendered insult that was “twatcock”.
So yeah, as I highlighted earlier last year after holding my tongue on the issue for a very.long.time, this is a dyadist neologism. It is, as you say, ungendered, but beyond contemporary cissexist narratives: all genitals are ungendered. It is however not unsexed. It is intersexed, it unequivocally describes the genital configuration of people like Sophia Young who was, as the article states, bullied mercilessly. This genital configuration – which affects anywhere between 1-500 to 1-80,000 human beings – was fashioned specifically as an insult, as a slur as it were.
Coercive and abusive normalisation of intersex people’s genitals is a particularly brutal manifestation of the gender binary and it is this mutilation (instigated here by the Europeans) which helps to erase the reality of intersex people – the reality of this type of genital configuration here being similarly erased by this slur which we’ve collectively coined.
This occurs in the same way that many abnormalities, disorders etc are fashioned as insults and latterly collated in ableist language lists.
which I’m afraid, isn’t great, but is something we’re familiar with. A reference.
This type of genital obsession is likewise evident with the discussion and enthusiasm for pussy hats in my top link – doesn’t make it right.
Just realised that’s probably not the Māori ‘rena’ given the ship was Greek owned and registered in Liberia.
Great words and superb results! I have a query Russell, noting that there are technically two Māori words in the top 10 this year, I’m wondering whether this is a first or what the precedent is for Māori words making the shortlist in years past. I’m struggling to easily find the pages though I did stumble on Rena in 2011. I’d certainly be interested in more data if you might have a list of the lists somewhere to answer that conveniently. If not, aua atu rā.