www.firstnationstelegraph.com
Dillon: I won’t be silenced
Anthony Dillon says to silence others in discussions on Aboriginal matters is proving deadly – sometimes too deadly for our people. Image Rhonda Hagan
by Anthony Dillon
W
hen discussing important matters affecting Aboriginal people, I often hear statements like “You can’t discuss that, it’s too sensitive” or “It’s offensive and it hurts”. I’ve been told that I hurt people with my words. Do I really have that much power over people? Perhaps we use ‘hurt feelings’ as a way of controlling others? Consider the following two examples. Whist in a supermarket, the twoyear old child wants a lolly. The parent says “No”. The child throws a tantrum. If the child was older she would probably say “You’ve hurt my feelings”.
What do some parents do? In order to avoid a scene, and perhaps motivated by guilt that he is ‘traumatising’ the child by not giving her the lolly, he finds it easy to simply give in. What has the child learnt? What does the child do the next time she wants a lolly? Consider another example. A year ago a young man told me his girlfriend makes him angry when she questions him about his whereabouts. His response to such questioning would typically consist of thumping the table and telling her “Mind your own fu***** business, I don’t have to explain myself to you”. He told me that his girlfriend makes him angry. In other words,
she is responsible for his anger and he is not. What happened after his ‘outburst’ (which he believes was caused by his girlfriend)? What does he do the next time he does not want to be questioned? Let’s consider both these examples more closely. In the first one, some of the people I have worked with in academia might say “The child was fearful of abandonment and felt disconnected from the parent’s provider role....” I would just say the child wanted a lolly and has worked out an effective way to get it. For the boyfriend, some might say “He felt his male ego structure was under attack and that the only way to address this was to ….” I would say he does not want his Page 1
girlfriend to know his whereabouts and has learnt an effective way to avoid being questioned. He knows how to silence his so girlfriend without having to rely on physical strength. Interestingly, those who do rely on physical strength to silence/ control their partners (domestic violence) would say “My partner causes me to get angry/violent and I am not responsible”. I would say BS! In these examples, I suggest that a better explanation for why each behaved the way they did is to look at what happens after the behaviour. There is a payoff. The child gets the lolly, and the man avoids being questioned. A very powerful principle of human nature is that “Behaviour is a function of it consequences”. Further, “Behaviour rewarded is behaviour reinforced”. Why do people keep feeding money into poker machines? Why do some people keep getting drunk? Why are some people easily offended? There is a pay off. Both the child and the man in the examples above get a payoff – control over others – they are rewarded. Control over others is a very powerful reward. The ability to silence others can mean not having to face some uncomfortable truths. So what does this have to do with Aboriginal affairs? Far too often people are silenced
in discussions on important Aboriginal issues. The people silenced can be non-Aboriginal who are told they have no right to have an opinion because they are not Aboriginal, or even Aboriginal people who will be accused of being a ‘sell out’ or ‘coconut’ for speaking words which others find uncomfortable. All it takes is a claim of “You’ve hurt my feelings” or “You are violating my cultural safety” and discussion ceases. I sometimes hear claims from people claiming to be ‘mighty warriors’ that they are hurt simply because someone disagrees with them. How mighty can they be? The ‘victim’ has avoided facing a discussion they did not want to face. Once in the role of the victim, they are free to make accusations of ‘paternalism’, ‘genocide’, ‘oppression’, and other empty emotive phrases without any justification, to further stifle discussion. In the examples above, I am not denying that the child is upset or that the man is angry. What I question is whether the upset/anger was caused by the words of others. Perhaps being angry/hurt is a way we have learnt in order to control others. Consider what happens when a parent confidently says to a child throwing a tantrum, “Darling, make yourself as upset as you want, you
are not having the lolly”. The child will no longer choose to throw a tantrum, as it simply won’t achieve the desired outcome. Consider what happens when the girlfriend says “Honey, make yourself as angry as you like, I may be the target of your anger, but I’m not the cause, even if you wish to believe it”. Silencing others, though providing a temporary gain, is extremely disempowering. And let’s not forget who the most disempowered group of people in Australia are. In Aboriginal affairs there are so many things we are not allowed to talk about for fear of hearing the response “You are culturally insensitive” or even worse “You are racist”. It is time to open up the discussion. Many elephants in the room need discussing. Let’s promote the right to disagree with others. To silence others by proclaiming “You make me upset” or “You’ve hurt me” prevents problems from being identified and solutions from being discussed. It is not the counter viewpoints that upset some. Being upset is simply their learnt way of silencing others. People do have a choice. To silence others in discussions on Aboriginal matters is proving deadly – sometimes too deadly for our people.