NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed. Part 2

[Wosh]

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread.
Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the report button, please and thank you.

If you feel upset or need to talk you can call either Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636 or Lifeline on 13 11 14 at any time.

- Crisis support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders 13YARN (13 92 76) 13YARN - Call 13 92 76 | 24 /7

This is a serious topic, please treat it as such.

Videos, statements etc in the OP here:

NO TROLLS - Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread. Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the...

www.bigfooty.com

Link to Hawthorn Statement. - Link to ABC Sports article. - Leaked Report

Process Plan - https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...erms-of-Reference-and-Process-Plan-FINAL-.pdf


DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[Del191229]

I've brought up JDG a couple of times in reference to this. Not in relation to Collingwood micromanagement, but all that ridiculous chatter from Cornes that Collingwood shouldn't have "allowed" him to go on holiday during his time off. Heaps inside and outside the Industry seem to expect the clubs to overreach enormously. Ultimately, I think that will become the biggest shift in this whole story - a clearer line between work and private lives for AFL footballers.

Agree,

 

[Del191229]

Possibly, but it might be a waste of time as at that point, without the Phil Egan led yarning, the players may not have been forthcoming to anyone, much less some random ABC journalist cold-calling every indigenous player.



The ABC article stated ABC Sport conducted interviews with the players, if you think it is factually wrong that's your choice, but that's what I'm going on.

Of course they interviewed the players, but as your own post suggests, it was Phil Egan's yarning that started it.

Jackson knew the details of the report, he knew exactly where it was in the process (handed to the Hawthorn the AFL integrity unit two weeks ago), he knew which players to talk to and they were ready to talk to him.

Not sure why so many are unwilling to accept Egan gave him access to the report and put him in touch with the players.

 

[Del191229]

I expect Jackson put out the feelers to everyone possibly involved.

I also expect that given the history of what and who he has covered he had one or more people the families trusted vouch for him.

When i said they might have reached out to him I meant more when it looked like the AFL and Hawthorn weren't doing anything the families might have gone back to his initial offer

The same person who gave him access to the report and briefed him on exactly where it was ... handed to Hawthorn and the AFL Integrity Unit a fortnight ago it would seem.

You can see why the handling of the report has become part of the AFL investigation.

 

[Del191229]

I thought you said you were a journalist at one point. You never went fishing for stories? Cold calling can get you in the door, you don't need a written introduction to ask someone for an interview.

This is laughably ignorant verging on racist itself.

 

[Gralin]

I dunno. You started talking about intersectionality ffs. Do you even know what it is?

Let alone know why trying to apply ideas that were obscure in non radical academic circles when the period this review covers is dodgy. As if white footy coaches were sposed to be across something white academics were only just getting their heads around. During a time when AFL personalities were openly and overtly racist in public.

Well you and Simmo are in the it can't be racist camp and pointing to white players treatment as evidence.
Intersectionality doesn't need the people doing bad shit to understand what it is for us to talk about it.
But now you're saying the AFL was openly racist but racism wasn't involved here?
Or is that just Simmo because he thinks coercive control beats all

Inherent racism and subconscious bias are completely different concepts that you're conflating and then making a dubious claim which you're calling a fact.

I was replying to a post saying everyone is inherently racist at least at an unconscious level.

That's simply not true.

Are you seriously suggesting unconscious bias and unconscious racist attitudes don't exist?

No I'm suggesting calling them unconscious is a cop out.
People have been taught it, they've been conditioned to treat it as normal and then they've been told its unconscious and therefore not their fault or something they can deal with.

Unconscious racial bias definitely exists; I've caught myself in the act. I don't think I could be convinced that all acts of racism are calculated and conscious.

It's not unconcious it's learned. That doesn't mean it's calculated or done with intent though.

But getting back to the reason this came up a poster was suggesting that having half the panel be Indigenous meant the AFL was looking for a guilty verdict because everyone is racist

 

[sr36]

Not sure why so many are unwilling to accept Egan gave him access to the report and put him in touch with the players.

Because you're smearing someone's character with zero evidence - purely a guess. Which is bizarre when you are aghast that the ABC report named the coaches.

 

[sr36]

Well you and Simmo are in the it can't be racist camp and pointing to white players treatment as evidence.
Intersectionality doesn't need the people doing bad s**t to understand what it is for us to talk about it.
But now you're saying the AFL was openly racist but racism wasn't involved here?
Or is that just Simmo because he thinks coercive control beats all

I was replying to a post saying everyone is inherently racist at least at an unconscious level.

That's simply not true.


No I'm suggesting calling them unconscious is a cop out.
People have been taught it, they've been conditioned to treat it as normal and then they've been told its unconscious and therefore not their fault or something they can deal with.


It's not unconcious it's learned. That doesn't mean it's calculated or done with intent though.

But getting back to the reason this came up a poster was suggesting that having half the panel be Indigenous meant the AFL was looking for a guilty verdict because everyone is racist

Fear or aggression towards the other doesn't just exist in the human world, it's right throughout the animal kingdom.

And when just looking at the human world, there's been long periods of history where fear of the other was justified with borders separating the others on all continents being the product of raids, looting and invasion.

I'm not convinced that the pack mentality that we hail from isn't inherent and something that we need to overcome as we re-imagine ourselves living within a global community as opposed to living in a pack. And regardless of it's origins, it does exist and still is something that hasn't been fully overcome.

 

[ferball]

Well you and Simmo are in the it can't be racist camp and pointing to white players treatment as evidence.
Intersectionality doesn't need the people doing bad s**t to understand what it is for us to talk about it.

Yeah that's not intersectionality, unless you're referring to the situation "Ian's" partner was in.

Intersectionality is the point where different forms of bigotry intersect in a person's lives. It was a concept developed by a black feminist (Kimberlé Crenshaw) in the US over years to explain why outcomes for women in black communities were so bad and why so little of the talk about racism in the US dealt with the issues black women face.

But now you're saying the AFL was openly racist but racism wasn't involved here?
Or is that just Simmo because he thinks coercive control beats all

I'm saying you are judging the behaviour of people who aren't explicitly racist by ideals most people hadn't even heard of years after the timeline for these events. At a time when the organisation running the comp was allowing openly racist behaviour by commentators and members of club administrations. Its an unreasonable position.

So yeah comparing racism from the likes of McGuire and Ling to this situation is stupid imo.

But here's what I think happened and why cultural sensitivity training in future might help prevent a similar situation.

Clarko is a fairly straight up white guy. He will speak his mind, probably in a way that seems forceful and he would probably fit the categorisation of a "straight talker". I doubt he'd beat about the bush or waste words but would come to the point bluntly and probably look someone in the eye while he did it. When he meets you he'll look you in the eye and shake your hand firmly and strongly. He also fits the role of an elder if you're a young blackfella coming into the footy club. He's significantly older, had a playing career was hard as nails and has earned a bunch of kudos over his lifetime.

SO that's probably his body language while discussing the situation. He may have told Ian (and maybe his partner) "I think you guys best option is to abort the pregnancy focus on footy and deal with that stuff in the future." Looked Ian in the eye and shook his hand strongly. All the while thinking he's been straight up, honest and respectful in his interactions with Ian, giving him the best advice he can.

However if you go meet elders from indigenous communities you don't behave like Carko did in my hypothetical assumption about things just above. You should more likely behave like this:

Looking someone in the eye is a challenge not a statement of honesty.

If you sit down and talk to an elder you both face the same direction, look at the ground and talk around the issue alot, covering all sorts of things that might or might not matter until youse have established some wide ranging common basis for the discussion you're about to have and some sort of rapport. Its part of serious "yarning" I spose. You might look each other in the eye briefly but not the way you do when you're talking to other non indigenous people.

Because that would be a direct challenge to an elder. If someone in indigenous society tells you to do something and looks you in the eye while forcefully making their point its quite likely there will be violence if you don't follow their orders, cos that's what they are - orders. But it rarely happens without some sort of anger and aggro in my experience.

So you can see that while Clarkson may have approached the situation in a way he thought was honest, honourable and "man to man" to Ian - straight talking about what Ian's options are and the possible consequences of his behaviour - its easy to see that Ian might have taken it as an elder instructing him how to behave and exactly what he had to do - ordering him to do that if you like.

If you meet and elder and shake their hand then you hold your hand gently and softly, in a way that some "real men" in white Australia would consider contemptible. After all no one likes a weak, limp wristed handshake. (Bear in mind you're talking to old men who could probably still dish out a flogging to those "real men" even now and even despite their genuinely gentle demeanor.) In this situation you're not armouring your hand, you're making yourself vulnerable when you meet that person. Its a sign of respect and trust. You don't need to be tough and ready to fight cos this is a situation where you both talk in peace and in good faith, its a safe space for you to talk to this old guy about stuff. (And he's making it safe for you, not the other way around.)

You're not trying to dominate the elder, who by virtue of being an elder in a community has implicit authority and a higher level of respect.

So if Ian approaches Clarko with this background understanding and Clarko tells his in a straight talking whitefella way that his best option is an abortion then leaves by shaking his hand firmly and looking him in the eye then Clarko leaves thinking its a straight talking no bullshit interaction between two equals and he has given Ian his opinion, not an order and Ian thinks Clarko is an old guy in power who has just told him to have his kid aborted.

This is what you're talking about with your "don't treat white people the same" stuff but where and when has Clarkson had the opportunity to be told or to learn this protocol? Especially at a club like Hawthorn.

Obviously its all hypothetical but to me this seems the most likely explanation of this situation. I wasn't there, I don't know for sure but I've seen that misunderstanding before and it seems plainly obvious its what happened here.

Personally I think this is a crucial point in this story. I don't think its appropriate to judge Clarkson on this situation the way I would if he was aware of all this and just said "Abort your kid I don't have time for you people and your bullshit" which is how it seems to be portrayed.

I would obviously have a different opinion if it comes out that Clarko understands all this and just didn't bother with showing care or protocol cos he didn't really give a **** about Ian or his family.

 

[sr36]

Yeah that's not intersectionality, unless you're referring to the situation "Ian's" partner was in.

Intersectionality is the point where different forms of bigotry intersect in a person's lives. It was a concept developed by a black feminist (Kimberlé Crenshaw) in the US over years to explain why outcomes for women in black communities were so bad and why so little of the talk about racism in the US dealt with the issues black women face.



I'm saying you are judging the behaviour of people who aren't explicitly racist by ideals most people hadn't even heard of years after the timeline for these events. At a time when the organisation running the comp was allowing openly racist behaviour by commentators and members of club administrations. Its an unreasonable position.

So yeah comparing racism from the likes of McGuire and Ling to this situation is stupid imo.

But here's what I think happened and why cultural sensitivity training in future might help prevent a similar situation.

Clarko is a fairly straight up white guy. He will speak his mind, probably in a way that seems forceful and he would probably fit the categorisation of a "straight talker". I doubt he'd beat about the bush or waste words but would come to the point bluntly and probably look someone in the eye while he did it. When he meets you he'll look you in the eye and shake your hand firmly and strongly. He also fits the role of an elder if you're a young blackfella coming into the footy club. He's significantly older, had a playing career was hard as nails and has earned a bunch of kudos over his lifetime.

SO that's probably his body language while discussing the situation. He may have told Ian (and maybe his partner) "I think you guys best option is to abort the pregnancy focus on footy and deal with that stuff in the future." Looked Ian in the eye and shook his hand strongly. All the while thinking he's been straight up, honest and respectful in his interactions with Ian, giving him the best advice he can.

However if you go meet elders from indigenous communities you don't behave like Carko did in my hypothetical assumption about things just above. You should more likely behave like this:

Looking someone in the eye is a challenge not a statement of honesty.

If you sit down and talk to an elder you both face the same direction, look at the ground and talk around the issue alot, covering all sorts of things that might or might not matter until youse have established some wide ranging common basis for the discussion you're about to have and some sort of rapport. Its part of serious "yarning" I spose. You might look each other in the eye briefly but not the way you do when you're talking to other non indigenous people.

Because that would be a direct challenge to an elder. If someone in indigenous society tells you to do something and looks you in the eye while forcefully making their point its quite likely there will be violence if you don't follow their orders, cos that's what they are - orders. But it rarely happens without some sort of anger and aggro in my experience.

So you can see that while Clarkson may have approached the situation in a way he thought was honest, honourable and "man to man" to Ian - straight talking about what Ian's options are and the possible consequences of his behaviour - its easy to see that Ian might have taken it as an elder instructing him how to behave and exactly what he had to do - ordering him to do that if you like.

If you meet and elder and shake their hand then you hold your hand gently and softly, in a way that some "real men" in white Australia would consider contemptible. After all no one likes a weak, limp wristed handshake. (Bear in mind you're talking to old men who could probably still dish out a flogging to those "real men" even now and even despite their genuinely gentle demeanor.) In this situation you're not armouring your hand, you're making yourself vulnerable when you meet that person. Its a sign of respect and trust. You don't need to be tough and ready to fight cos this is a situation where you both talk in peace and in good faith, its a safe space for you to talk to this old guy about stuff. (And he's making it safe for you, not the other way around.)

You're not trying to dominate the elder, who by virtue of being an elder in a community has implicit authority and a higher level of respect.

So if Ian approaches Clarko with this background understanding and Clarko tells his in a straight talking whitefella way that his best option is an abortion then leaves by shaking his hand firmly and looking him in the eye then Clarko leaves thinking its a straight talking no bullshit interaction between two equals and he has given Ian his opinion, not an order and Ian thinks Clarko is an old guy in power who has just told him to have his kid aborted.

This is what you're talking about with your "don't treat white people the same" stuff but where and when has Clarkson had the opportunity to be told or to learn this protocol? Especially at a club like Hawthorn.

Obviously its all hypothetical but to me this seems the most likely explanation of this situation. I wasn't there, I don't know for sure but I've seen that misunderstanding before and it seems plainly obvious its what happened here.

Personally I think this is a crucial point in this story. I don't think its appropriate to judge Clarkson on this situation the way I would if he was aware of all this and just said "Abort your kid I don't have time for you people and your bullshit" which is how it seems to be portrayed.

I would obviously have a different opinion if it comes out that Clarko understands all this and just didn't bother with showing care or protocol cos he didn't really give a * about Ian or his family.

I agree that something like this is a likely scenario. But where the coaches would still be in the shit, is that they were dabbling in private territory where they have absolutely no right to be and have denied wrongdoing, so if this hypothtetical scenario is how it occurred, they've got no idea about appropriate behaviour and boundaries towards their employees. so if an inquiry comes to a conclusion like this, they're still stuffed.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

All i've ever heard about recruiting Indigenous players from remote communities, is that they need additional support.
I guess there wasn't an instruction manual on how exactly this support worked, and Clarkson made it up as he went along.

 

[sr36]

All i've ever heard about recruiting Indigenous players from remote communities, is that they need additional support.
I guess there wasn't an instruction manual on how exactly this support worked, and Clarkson made it up as he went along.

I think that's the most likely scenario. And that they'll pay a heavy price for the dangerous negligent arrogance to think they had the knowledge, understanding and skillset to make it up as they went along. And that they made up such potentially damaging shit.

 

[ferball]

I agree that something like this is a likely scenario. But where the coaches would still be in the s**t, is that they were dabbling in private territory where they have absolutely no right to be and have denied wrongdoing, so if this hypothtetical scenario is how it occurred, they've got no idea about appropriate behaviour and boundaries towards their employees. so if an inquiry comes to a conclusion like this, they're still stuffed.

I think that depends on the context of the conversation. Did they force the discussion onto Ian or did it evolve thru other discussions? If Clarkson and Fagan approach the situation thinking they are giving mentorship and advice to someone suddenly facing a pregnancy they thought they weren't ready for, not making demands of players but the way they conducted themselves, their body language especially, gave that impression when they didn't intend it too then I disagree.

This is probably why Egan is sposed to have recommended mediation as a response - because thats how someone like Clarkson will learn from the situation and its how Ian and his family are most likely to get some healing out of the mess, and that's the most important outcome isn't it?

It would be nice to read the report without giving money to the Hun. Anyone know how to steal a copy?

 

[ferball]

I think that's the most likely scenario. And that they'll pay a heavy price for the dangerous negligent arrogance to think they had the knowledge, understanding and skillset to make it up as they went along. And that they made up such potentially damaging s**t.

This is most white people right now.

Did you know that stuff about interacting with indigenous people, especially elders? Most people don't. Most people think that a firm handshake and a direct look in the eye are universal human behaviours not culturally determined ones.

 

[JackOutback]

This is laughably ignorant verging on racist itself.

I think it's safe to say you used the 'I'm a journalist' card to try and assert some authority and not because it has any basis in fact. Cold calling or door stopping is bread and butter journalism. As for Aboriginal people, they aren't the mob, you don't need a letter of introduction to speak to them. They're human beings, like you and me.

 

[sr36]

This is most white people right now.

Did you know that stuff about interacting with indigenous people, especially elders? Most people don't. Most people think that a firm handshake and a direct look in the eye are universal human behaviours not culturally determined ones.

I've lived a lot in other countries and know of the need to adjust customs for cultural reasons, but not indigenous specific stuff. A lot of the eye contact that you're referencing in terms of Ingenous culture is seen similarly throughout Asia - same with the concept of whether it is interpreted as a suggestion rather than a command when it comes from the position of a person in power. Embarassingly, I know very little about indigenous culture - past or present. Probably even less than most, as I was overseas for much of the last 15 years when there has been a gradual shift towards understanding and accepting indigenous culture, rather than multiculturalism being viewed as people from different races all living like "Aussies", which was pretty much what most people meant when they talked about an ideal of multiculturalism - including during the time of the Hawthorn review.

 

[Forward Press]

I think it's safe to say you used the 'I'm a journalist' card to try and assert some authority and not because it has any basis in fact. Cold calling or door stopping is bread and butter journalism. As for Aboriginal people, they aren't the mob, you don't need a letter of introduction to speak to them. They're human beings, like you and me.

Isn't it amusing 'verging' on alarming that SBTDOTB is now throwing around the racist card for that entirely innocuous comment?

Basically, the goalpost on whether something is good journalism or not racist shifts depending on whether it disparages North, Hood and/or Clarkson or not.

 

[Osho]

Fear or aggression towards the other doesn't just exist in the human world, it's right throughout the animal kingdom.

And when just looking at the human world, there's been long periods of history where fear of the other was justified with borders separating the others on all continents being the product of raids, looting and invasion.

I'm not convinced that the pack mentality that we hail from isn't inherent and something that we need to overcome as we re-imagine ourselves living within a global community as opposed to living in a pack. And regardless of it's origins, it does exist and still is something that hasn't been fully overcome.

Creating the "other" has had evolutionary and survival value. It still does in some situations.

 

[sr36]

Creating the "other" has had evolutionary and survival value. It still does in some situations.

Yep. Said much more succinctly than me.

 

[Saucery]

Didn't know Bernard Quinn had overseen other 'independent investigations' for the AFL.

"In April, in the wake of the allegations, the AFL announced an independent review led by Bernard Quinn KC into McCrory’s historical medical research"

Prestigious medical journal retracts nine more articles authored by concussion expert Paul McCrory​

British Journal of Sports Medicine says investigation ‘revealed a pattern of publication misconduct’ by McCrory, has concerns over 38 other articles

www.theguardian.com

Bit of go to guy for them when things go pear shaped it would seem.

"The panel found instances of plagiarism from McCrory “do not affect or taint the work” he had undertaken for the league, “in large part because they do not involve the falsification or fabrication of relevant research.”

‘Embarrassing blemish’: AFL ‘apologises’ as 260-page report reveals ex-advisor plagiarised​

‘Embarrassing blemish’: AFL ‘apologises’ as 260-page report reveals ex-advisor plagiarised

www.foxsports.com.au

So no fault AFL.

And also another coincidence.

"As part of the release, the AFL stated it had asked Gordon Legal to continue to consult on a no-fault financial assistant scheme for players who have suffered debilitating head injuries during their careers."

 

[Del191229]

Because you're smearing someone's character with zero evidence - purely a guess.

Oh there's plenty of evidence.

How did Russell Jackson know the details of the report, and crucially, that it had been handed to Hawthorn and the AFL Integrity Unit a certain length of time previously?

Did a cleaner tell him that too?

 

[Chief]

Oh there's plenty of evidence.

How did Russell Jackson know the details of the report, and crucially, that it had been handed to Hawthorn and the AFL Integrity Unit a certain length of time previously?

Did a cleaner tell him that too?

Circumstantial evidence that could point to any number of people?

Good work.

 

[sr36]

Oh there's plenty of evidence.

How did Russell Jackson know the details of the report, and crucially, that it had been handed to Hawthorn and the AFL Integrity Unit a certain length of time previously?

Did a cleaner tell him that too?

That may be evidence that Jackson had seen the report. I don't really agree that it is conclusive though. How is it evidence that Egan leaked it to him?

Even if you are correct that the report was leaked to Jackson - you've got Egan - the rest of his team, the AFL and Hawthorn all with a copy of the report two weeks before the Jackson article was published. Yet you've chosen to claim repeatedly that Egan leaked it, without any evidence of this whatsoever. Yet you're outraged that the coaches were named, despite a lot of testimonial evidence at the very least. You just aren't making sense at all and are just showing ridiculous bias - over and over again.

 

[Del191229]

I think it's safe to say you used the 'I'm a journalist' card to try and assert some authority and not because it has any basis in fact. Cold calling or door stopping is bread and butter journalism. As for Aboriginal people, they aren't the mob, you don't need a letter of introduction to speak to them. They're human beings, like you and me.

When I worked as a journalist, both here and overseas, I understood that forming relationships with my sources was the best way to get stories.

That often took time, and certainly required respect and cultural understanding.

Going by your user name and the way you present, I suspect you worked for some shitty WA publications that demonised Aboriginal people to flog papers/get clicks.

It's interesting that Yolngu has repeatedly posted on this thread exactly how young Aboriginal people will react to media

It's the exact opposite of your cowboy approach.

 

[Del191229]

Circumstantial evidence that could point to any number of people?

Good work.

Which people would have known those details.

It's actually very very few.

Like, count on one hand.

So run me through who it could have been?

 

[Chief]

Which people would have known those details.

It's actually very very few.

Like, count on one hand.

So run me through who it could have been?

****ed if I know, but on the one hand you're screaming that poor Clarko got dun wrong by people who assume he's guilty, then on the other you're making a definite claim that Egan is the leaker.

Pick a lane.