Opinion Adam Goodes

[ydraw]

Good vid here:



Unlike most countries Australian accents don't really vary by geographical location but more by socioeconomic background. Broad accents are typical for working class Australians and people from regional areas, general accent is basically the middle class, and the cultivated accent is for toffs.

 

[GilG]

There actually are 3 recognised different Australian accents: Broad, General and Cultivated. If someone has only been exposed to the "Broad" version then they might be surprised to hear an Australian speaking with a Cultivated accent. It sounds much more like the RP British accent.

Gil, if you watch some of the videos of the Fremantle player interviews you can probably pick them out. Tommy Sheridan has a noticably broad accent for example, while Luke MacPharlin and Matthew Pavlich have General Accents.

Some examples of famous people with Broad (straya!) accents: Steve Irwin, Shane Warne.
General accents: Tony Abbott, Hugh Jackman
Cultivated: Clive James, Geoffrey Rush, Cate Blanchett etc.

They are all Australian accents, although obviously the stereotypical Australian character in a TV show or movie is likely to speak with a broad accent, since that is the accent most commonly associated with Australia by people from overseas. Similar to how a lot of people think all British people speak like Cockneys, or Americans either have a Southern Drawl or a Bostonian or Brooklyn accent.

http://dialectblog.com/2011/07/10/types-of-australian-accents/

Thanks for posting this! I took a language diversity class at uni and I find the whole topic fascinating. In America, there are too many accents to count, based on geography, ethnicity, degree of education, generation in America. With Australia, I've noticed similar differences. Geographically, I have Queenslander friends who sound different from Melbournians, who sound different from South Aussies, who sound different from West Australians.

If there's one thing I take particular pride in, it's the unique ability to impersonate almost anyone else's voice. I think my mates on this board who've met me would tell you I do a very good generic Aussie accent! I do a very good generic Irish one as well! Maybe if we meet one day, I'll treat you to my BT impression.

Oh! And how could I forget? Harry Reems does the BEST impression of American comedian Andrew Dice Clay of anyone I've ever heard. EVER. I mean, jaw-droppingly good.

 

[ydraw]

I enjoy trying to do the various British accents because they all sound so wildly different, but I am s**t at it. Some of them are barely intelligible even to other British people.

 

[ydraw]

Thanks for posting this! I took a language diversity class at uni and I find the whole topic fascinating. In America, there are too many accents to count, based on geography, ethnicity, degree of education, generation in America. With Australia, I've noticed similar differences. Geographically, I have Queenslander friends who sound different from Melbournians, who sound different from South Aussies, who sound different from West Australians.

If there's one thing I take particular pride in, it's the unique ability to impersonate almost anyone else's voice. I think my mates on this board who've met me would tell you I do a very good generic Aussie accent! I do a very good generic Irish one as well! Maybe if we meet one day, I'll treat you to my BT impression.

Oh! And how could I forget? Harry Reems does the BEST impression of American comedian Andrew Dice Clay of anyone I've ever heard. EVER. I mean, jaw-droppingly good.

Dice is Brooklyn, right? I sometimes get the Brooklyn and New Jersey accents mixed up. Mostly because every mafia movie ever is set in one of those 2 places and I forget which is which.

 

[Purple Jesus]

Reading back through this whole thread and the one on the main board, it seems that bigotry is not the sole dominion of the ignorant, and that's really sad.

 

[GilG]

Dice is Brooklyn, right? I sometimes get the Brooklyn and New Jersey accents mixed up. Mostly because every mafia movie ever is set in one of those 2 places and I forget which is which.

Yep, Dice is Brooklyn. Jersey accents are a little different — North Jersey is more like New York, while South Jersey accents are close to Philadelphia accents. By the way, Italian-Americans also continue to endure the same ridiculous cultural stereotyping — for years, the only Italian-American family portrayed on TV was the mafia one, "The Sopranos." Great show, but again, I cringe at thinking non-Italians formed their impressions on that show's characters.

 

[Purple Jesus]

There actually are 3 recognised different Australian accents: Broad, General and Cultivated. If someone has only been exposed to the "Broad" version then they might be surprised to hear an Australian speaking with a Cultivated accent. It sounds much more like the RP British accent.

If you watch some of the videos of the Fremantle player interviews you can probably pick them out. Tommy Sheridan has a noticably broad accent for example, while Luke MacPharlin and Matthew Pavlich have General Accents.

Some examples of famous people with Broad (straya!) accents: Steve Irwin, Shane Warne.
General accents: Tony Abbott, Hugh Jackman
Cultivated: Clive James, Geoffrey Rush, Cate Blanchett etc.

They are all Australian accents, although obviously the stereotypical Australian character in a TV show or movie is likely to speak with a broad accent, since that is the accent most commonly associated with Australia by people from overseas. Similar to how a lot of people think all British people speak like Cockneys, or Americans either have a Southern Drawl or a Bostonian or Brooklyn accent.

http://dialectblog.com/2011/07/10/types-of-australian-accents/

It's possible to change them obviously too, by prolonged exposure to one or the other. I had a broad accent growing up but now I have hybridized version of my original accent and a British accent caused by too many years living outside of Australia.

This explains why people in London think I'm English, I'm a cultivated w***er. How this happened growing up in Kelmscott is beyond me...

 

[ydraw]

Yep, Dice is Brooklyn. Jersey accents are a little different — North Jersey is more like New York, while South Jersey accents are close to Philadelphia accents. By the way, Italian-Americans also continue to endure the same ridiculous cultural stereotyping — for years, the only Italian-American family portrayed on TV was the mafia one, "The Sopranos." Great show, but again, I cringe at thinking non-Italians formed their impressions on that show's characters.

The Sopranos and Joey Tribbiani from "Friends".

 

[clogged]

Right Wing = Fascist, I see what you did there.

I don't remember Hirohito bombing Pearl Harbor in an aggressive push to lower taxation and the minimum wage.

Right Wing to me means liberal, in the small l sense of the word. But there's little point arguing that point because we all know exactly where everyone in this thread stands on the issue of anyone who doesn't vote Labor being a white supremacist redneck who kicks puppies.

What it means to you and what it actually means are two different things. Right wing, in the original etymology for it, means conservative. It stems from those on the right side of the National Assembly being defenders of institutions and traditions against the revolutionaries.

Fascists were anti modern and craved a return to pre-Revolutionary traditions and social order.

 

[basashi]

This explains why people in London think I'm English, I'm a cultivated ******. How this happened growing up in Kelmscott is beyond me...

Similar story. Starting work as a young guy I was the target of fun for my accent. I learnt to speak with a fake general accent and use it a lot. Ironically, if I speak with my natural accent I am taken as not being genuine. My fake accent is appreciated as genuine.

 

[Clems Knee]

Benefits are available to anyone needing help.I can't remember to many on benefits living in Peppie Grove.

But your discussion with Reg a few pages back is an interesting one.

I don't agree with your statement by the way. There is more welfare (ie benefits) available to the rich than any underprivileged groups. The good people of Peppermint Grove have more avenues available to them to avoid paying tax than just about anyone else - negative gearing, family trusts, tax breaks for donations to private schools, to name just a few. It's a bigger rort and creates a bigger imbalance to the economy than any social justice programmes for people of indigenous descent.

Reg, according to Clogged a few weeks ago, Tasmania is pretty much a welfare state. Tasmanians receive massive handouts not because of their aboriginality (and Pearce and Grey are proof that the genocide was not totally successful), but because they are Tasmanians.

 

[Stronzo]

Yes, I am sure the only reason it's never mentioned at all is because they simply don't have time.

I mean inserting a single paragraph mentioning it into a topic that warrants weeks of dicussion in history class is just not possible.

The reason they don't mention it is because it significantly weakens the argument that the stolen generations was a deliberate act of genocide.

Aborigines were controlled by separate state government departments, with their own act in each state. These had nothing to do with the illegitimate children of white unwed mothers and everything to do with Native folk.

Removal of illegitimate children was certainly not isolated to Australia either. Again, it is a separate issue.

 

[The Anchorite]

Because it was black men saying it to a white man?

I'm happy for you to explain why but am interested in your reasons? Discuss please

Because your diction is likely a function of class more than race.

Because you do not belong to an ethnicity that has been historically marginalised and oppressed.

It's not that difficult. And you can save your calls for reasoned discussion when you're lining up alongside two-faced bigots happy to lie, manipulate and spread hateful resentment while presenting a veneer of rationality.

 

[The Anchorite]

Or to put it another way, before I go do some work and never look at this hole of a thread again:

People are misconstruing racism, and don't understand what it is, because they've never experienced it.

How about, instead of trying to disqualify them, you listen to those who have?

And no, don't interrupt first saying that nobody listened to your no doubt awful gripe.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

But your discussion with Reg a few pages back is an interesting one.

I don't agree with your statement by the way. There is more welfare (ie benefits) available to the rich than any underprivileged groups. The good people of Peppermint Grove have more avenues available to them to avoid paying tax than just about anyone else - negative gearing, family trusts, tax breaks for donations to private schools, to name just a few. It's a bigger rort and creates a bigger imbalance to the economy than any social justice programmes for people of indigenous descent.

Reg, according to Clogged a few weeks ago, Tasmania is pretty much a welfare state. Tasmanians receive massive handouts not because of their aboriginality (and Pearce and Grey are proof that the genocide was not totally successful), but because they are Tasmanians.

I wouldn't say that Tasmania is a welfare state, but it appears to have a far greater proportion of people dependant on government assistance. If that's your definition then I guess I have to accept that. Places like George Town are virtual welfare enclaves, but then other states have those as well. You have to factor in that Tasmania has far less participants in education past year 10. The education system here is currently undergoing a long overdue overhaul.

Tasmania receives more overall government funding by virtue of historical political arrangements made with Tasmanian politicians like Senator Brian Harradine for successive governments to achieve the numbers required to pass their own political agendas. In terms of pure numbers, these arrangements were grossly unfair to places like WA on a per capita basis.

Since moving to Tasmania, I have heard it claimed that there are roughly 150,000 descendants of the original aboriginal inhabitants residing here.

 

[Clems Knee]

Or to put it another way, before I go do some work and never look at this hole of a thread again:

People are misconstruing racism, and don't understand what it is, because they've never experienced it.

How about, instead of trying to disqualify them, you listen to those who have?

And no, don't interrupt first saying that nobody listened to your no doubt awful gripe.

Plenty of people have experienced racism Anchorite. There were examples of someone being at a footy game, being called names because he is white, then complaining he wouldn't be able to call names back.
That's the level of racism many white people have experienced, occasional and while hurtful, not systemic.

The problem is that these people then tend to equate the low level racism they have experienced with the lifetime of experiences that most aboriginal people have. That is where well meaning people go wrong, along with the generalisation from a single incident eg "I went to school and the aboriginal kid bashed me..."

 

[jmadrox]

Hey Clems Knee , I respect you mate, but some of the below is just. BS.

But your discussion with Reg a few pages back is an interesting one.
I don't agree with your statement by the way. There is more welfare (ie benefits) available to the rich than any underprivileged groups.

Actually, no there isnt. I dont live in Peppi Grove, and I am alrwady cut off from ANY kind of welfare. I am just nudging the top tax bracket, so not like I am a huge earner.

The good people of Peppermint Grove have more avenues available to them to avoid paying tax than just about anyone else - negative gearing,

Ok, to GET negative gearing, you are making a loss on a property. The only benefit of negative gearing is when the delta in tax along with capital growth is greater than your losses. In the current market, this isnt so high. Could u imagine what would happen to the price of homes ( especially in the bottom end of the market where the peppe grove people have a lot of their rentals)? There would be an isntant drop in prices, which would put a lot of home owners in default in their loans.

family trusts,

Available to anyone. Not just the rich. Obviously those living of welfare wouldn't use one. Many small businesses are run with family trusts to disburse income to a non-working parent. It isn't a rich thing, just smart accounting.

tax breaks for donations to private schools, to name just a few.

For the record, i am a public school boy, and have no issues with public schools. How exactly is some one giving a donation to a private school benefiting them? If i gave $10K to a school, i claim it, i might get back 30% to a MAX 48% depending on my pay level, so at best case, i am still out of pocket ~$5k. How is that "welfare for the rich"?

Also do you realise that for every kid that goes to a public school the government covers ~90% of the cost? So every child that goes to a private school, is a child that the government doesn't need to pay for? So, even if the government gave 99% (which they dont, i think it is aout 50%, but I am sure I will be corrected) of what it costs to go to public school for each child in private, they would Still be better off? Donations to private schools help them stay afloat, and the fees paid by parents are not tax deductible. So each child in a private school is better for the gov't budget.

 

[pavsbootlace]

By definition, yes.

Everything has some degree of bias. The ones we read that confirm our already existing biases we see as "balanced". That applies every bit as much to the left as it does to the right. Liberal voters feel the same way about Fairfax and The ABC as you do about News Corp.

I think this should give you a fair view of where you sit on the political spectrum. If you think a media company that endorsed Tony Abbott as Prime Minister is Leftist then you're a long way to the right.

 

[Nodgey]

Been staying out of this for a while but thought I should put in my 2c instead of the occasional 'like'.

I actually don't think this is an overly complex case as has often been purported. Yes, there are several factors at play ('flog', 'dives', 'knees first' etc.) but the overriding factor is that he stands up and speaks out as an Aboriginal man. And the biggest/most widely reported example of that was calling out a racist comment when he heard it - and the age of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Calling a black person an ape/monkey is racist. End of story. We white folk can't deny that and we most certainly should not be telling black people how to feel about it.

You can call Travis Cloke an ape if you want - not racist. Calling Sandi an ape - not racist. Calling Hayden Ballantyne a monkey - not racist. But calling Goodes, or Mickey O or Paddy Rider one most certainly is. And I can't fathom how people can't (or more likely prefer not to) see the difference. It's a mean statement to one white person, but a damning disgusting comment to a whole race of people.

It's kinda, maybe, sort of like this:



Apologies if my attempt to embed failed...

 

[ydraw]

I think this should give you a fair view of where you sit on the political spectrum. If you think a media company that endorsed Tony Abbott as Prime Minister is Leftist then you're a long way to the right.

And News Corp endorsed Rudd, so what's the difference? It's widely accepted that News Corp leans right and Fairfax leans left. I didn't make it up.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/06/election-endorsements-newspapers-support-tony-abbott

 

[Nothing]

And News Corp endorsed Latham and Rudd, so what's the difference? It's widely accepted that News Corp leans right and Fairfax leans left.

Yep Fairfax were left leaning when Gina bought her controlling stake. They might be left leaning compared to News but that still leaves it a long way right of centre.

 

[ydraw]

Yep Fairfax were left leaning when Gina bought her controlling stake. They might be left leaning compared to News but that still leaves it a long way right of centre.

Yeah, nah.

http://theconversation.com/whose-vi...ote-out-labor-while-reporters-lean-left-13995

 

[poshman]

Or to put it another way, before I go do some work and never look at this hole of a thread again:

People are misconstruing racism, and don't understand what it is, because they've never experienced it.

How about, instead of trying to disqualify them, you listen to those who have?

And no, don't interrupt first saying that nobody listened to your no doubt awful gripe.

I can tell you that living in Africa and northern India for long periods have exposed me to racism on many incredibly personal levels. I Lived there as the son of a midwife (mum) who was trying to train midwives as 1/4 children in Africa die at birth from complications that could have been avoided if there was a trained midwife. My mother and many others were treated both amazingly well and at times with a cruelty that goes beyond what is mentionable on this board. And despite that continued too and still work to practically sustainably help. I was not aligning myself with anyone but simply trying to promote discussion. In order to promote discussion one must listen to others. As for proof of any of this pm me mate and you can visit or come on a trip with me to Orissa or now Mozambique where our clinics are.

The only way forward in any of these issues isn't force. But through long, frustrating, tiresome discussion followed by action that is well thought out. Personally I find it much easier to be involved over seas than locally. My personal history means that I have connections with tribes and elders that I don't here. I would love to see more practically done here and have yet to see much by way of answers. And the only way to get to those answers is reasoned, thorough debate.

 

[not_working]

Yeah, nah.

http://theconversation.com/whose-vi...ote-out-labor-while-reporters-lean-left-13995

Thanks for posting this, it is a really interesting study and report.
The distribution of journo voting intentions did surprise me, but I am not sure it supports your arguments all that well: the senior editors (ie the ones that write the opinion pieces and set the editorial direction) are coalition-leaning in the majority.

Also, and more relevant to the Adam Goodes debate, it also claims a strong under-representation of minorities, specifically Aboriginals.

 

[gungho]

I'm the only person in this thread who seemed to be aware of the 250,000 white kids who were taken away. They would never, ever be mentioned in a school lesson about the stolen generations.

I have been following your posts on here, and am utterly dismayed by them. Most of your posts are misinformed or false and to prove them you always seem to refer the person to a google search, and pass that off as "research".
Try reading the book The Biggest Estate on Earth, and when you have finished that read Dark Emu, and when you have finished that read Australians by Thomas Keneally (Volume 1) and when you have finished that read the Original Australians, and when you have done that go out and live with a remote Aborginal community for a year. (I have done all of these things and do not consider myself of knowing even one hundredth of the facts surrounding the stolen generation, the colonisation by the British, or the history or culture of Aboriginal people.)
I know we all like to talk about footy here. Most of the time all we are making educated guesses on tactics, team selection, players form ect, and that is fine. But when the subject is as important as this one, and you are passing off your ill-informed opinions as facts, then your opinions are dangerous. (Especially to those gullible enough to believe you.)