Had my son ask me a very interesting question about this sort of statement this morning.
"Dad, if I boo Adam Goodes, am I a Bogan or Redneck? Why are people allowed to make labels on me because of my skin color but I'm not allowed to boo someone I don't like because of theirs?".
Glad Mum fielded an answer for me, but raises a good point. Why is it okay to label and name call from people on the Goodes side of the argument? Why do these people make judgement calls and sweeping statements and that's okay? Like Goodes calling the school girl "uneducated". What gives him the right to make assumptions about her lifestyle, upbringing or background? What if she doesn't go to school because of a learning disability? What if her parents were deceased? He's made a statement without knowing the facts and the potential hurt it could cause, exactly like she did. Difference being, he's an adult and role model. Maybe to a 13 year old girl, a big hairy man does actually look like an Ape? Maybe she genuinely didn't understand the racial undertones of calling a black person an Ape and therefore it's Goodes and the media that missed an opportunity to make this a Winmar moment in public education. As an earlier poster said, call the girl (privately), go meet with her and make sure she's okay, her family is okay and see if you can't get her involved as a public face of a No campaign....as long as she's willing. But no, like the spear incident, Goodes' story on the night quickly changed and became about poor Adam, instead of an opportunity for change and education. Much like his Australia of the Year award speech, which instead of being about inclusion and togetherness, became a political statement and divisive. It just seems both sides of this debate are playing by different rules because of skin color and the irony is it's the name callers that are actually displaying the behavior they are so desperately trying to condemn.
Food for thought.