Question

why is this called Indigenous Australians... that is a colonisers term [closed]

Comments

There is that the few do not speak for the whole, so there are those who are offended by being termed "Australian", and others who are not.

---

I disagree, Jim.  Intent is the issue.

Among other issues, how are all of us old folks supposed to learn of every new choice by ethnic groups?  Should we be criticized for every less-than-up-to-date reference?

And what about the situations when people in a group disagree?  Just for example:  Apparently, some Americans with some African ancestry no longer want to be called "black."  Yet at the same time, there is a current political movement called "Black Lives Matter."

---

You're right Julie that it's complicated because of differing wishes and opinions. We with more power are walking on eggshells. But insofar as intent goes, the question is which side you want to be on. Listening is crucial; if in doubt it may be best not to make references at all.

---

Hmm, Jim.  I see I have one post left before running up against the "Check your speed" rule.  So...

If we can't make references, how are we to discuss anything?  Should we disable reasonable exchange for fear of insulting people?

---

I'm at the limit myself, Julie. But yes.

---

@Sharlene, I might wonder why, if viewing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as Australian is so offensive, you have chosen to do so repeatedly in your professional publications? Some examples:

Dyer, S. M. & Burgess, J. (2008). Workplace mentoring for Indigenous Australians: A case study. In Employment Relations Record, Proceedings from the 7th Annual PERA conference, Caloundra, QLD, Nov 07.

Burgess, J. & Dyer, S. (2009). Workplace mentoring for Indigenous Australians: A case study. Equal Opportunities International, 28(6), 465–485.

Dyer, S. M. (2010). Employing Indigenous Australians: Strategies for success. In G. Strachan, E. French & J. Burgess, Managing diversity in Australia: Theory and practice. Sydney, NSW: McGraw Hill.

Leroy-Dyer, S. (2014). A review of Indigenous labour market programs—Why they are unsuccessful in delivering outcomes for Indigenous Australians. Paper presented at the Australian Critical Race and Whiteness Studies Association Conference, December 2014.

Even in your acknowledgement of country in your PhD thesis (dated 2016) you referred to ‘Aboriginal Australia’ and have used the term ‘Indigenous Australians’ throughout your thesis.

Given your unique professional position and the opportunities it presents to change colonial conditioning, why are you choosing to perpetuate an offensive term?

---

The health department in Western Australia has taken advice from the Aboriginal community that 'Aboriginal' is the preferred term. Consequently it is required in my everyday work life. same meaning, different intention. Like calling non-Aboriginal people respectful terms they choose like -European, white or caucasian. Contrast that with with terms like Albino, honky, red-neck, invader, Bule, Gubba. These describe me, but I don't choose them. Go with the flow and you will catch on. Cultural courtesy is contagious.

---

@ Stephen -- the word "Indigenous" was not, apparently, the poster's problem.   It was the word "Australian".

As there are Aborigines/Aboriginal people across the globe, the normal thing for people to do in order to correctly identify which cultural group of Aboriginal people is to use the known country name.

Also, a growing number of Australian First Nations people (across the continent, not limited to a single State) have indicated, and are indicating, that they prefer "First Nations", as there was not one single, homogenous group of original inhabitants of the continent, but many and diverse Peoples with their own cultures, and own languages.

---

Apology. My bad for not reading the whole thread. Good luck in your deliberations and discourse.

---

if you check my latest work, it does not use it

Answer 1

the term that most Aboriginal people have an issue with is referring to us as Australian. so the term Indigenous Australian is insulting. We much prefer Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (with an (s) as we are not one people.

Comments

What is reconciliation?  https://www.reconciliation.org.au/reconciliation/what-is-reconciliation/

The five dimensions of reconciliation

Race Relations

All Australians understand and value Aboriginal and  Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous cultures,  rights and experiences, which results in stronger relationships based on trust and respect and that are  free of racism.

---

That is an aspiration, not a right. There are alternative approaches. See Édouard Glissant's right to opacity, which accepts cross-cultural unintelligibility, rather than attempting to reduce it.

---

No, it's what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are telling us they want - for us to understand.

Here's an article written last year by Dr Anthony Dillon, who pointed out some uncomfortable truths.  https://www.news.com.au/national/black-lives-matter-protesters-in-australia-are-just-rentacrowds/news-story/9c06a20372ff0b828b18b1222324b659

Take a look at who abused him and called him a coconut (brown on the outside, white on the inside) because he disrupted her false narrative.   https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/indigenous-academic-anthony-dillon-cops-barrage-of-abuse-for-opposing-black-lives-matter-rallies-in-australia/news-story/08e6b325c36e8910abd12bfefdc56d01

BTW, Dr Dillon identifies as both Aboriginal and Australian.  https://libertyfest.org.au/speaker/anthony-dillon/  Please read this and think carefully about his words. I've had conversations with other Aboriginal people who have similar views to Dr Dillon; they're angry about the false narratives that are detracting from the real problems. Ignoring the real issues and protesting for the sake of protesting is doing more harm than good to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Extreme views do not bring harmony in a diverse community.

---

Judging by the comparative line counts, Anthony Dillon got more of a hearing than Sharlene. You may not like her point of view, but it has support and merits attention too. Who is to decide what narratives are false? Beyond that, this seems to be tending towards personal critique. Is it appropriate here?

---

The statistics show that particular narrative is false. You're insisting it should be accepted without question as truth. Yes I think it is appropriate to point out the problem here, especially since we pledged to care about accuracy.

Perhaps you might consider getting involved in a project, gaining an insight into the work involved in organising a project, the challenges of devising effective and useful guidelines within a diverse group of people whilst trying to keep everyone happy, and the impracticality of complete upheaval whenever one person is offended.

---

SJ, as I understand it, as a non-Aboriginal Australian, the term 'Aboriginal peoples' is used because there were, and still are, many many different groups, with their own language, many of which have been unfortunately lost.

The term 'Aboriginal peoples' doesn't necessarily refer to all Aborigines in Australia, as you have interpreted the statement.

It is unfortunate that comments like these that are uninformed serve to drive people away, rather than welcome them to WikiTree.

commented Oct 16 by John Atkinson

John, I'm not sure whose comments you're referring to as uninformed.  It seems you're assuming that I'm taking a stand in this argument and that I've "interpreted" how particular groups should be named.  I merely replied to a comment that made fallacious statements and in doing so made inaccurate and un-provable arguments.  

What many people find unwelcoming in this G2G environment is when they do their best to be culturally sensitive only to be chastised and made to feel guilty that they didn't use the 'correct' or most contemporary group name or designation. 

---

I was talking to a 17 year old tonight about this thread. Said 17 year old has a very close friend, same age, who identifies as a Torres Strait Islander and their thoughts were sought.  As of about 2 hours ago, their thought was that it is fine to be called an Indigenous Australian…because…”how else are you supposed to be identified as indigenous to Australia”. I am raising this not to be provocative but to illustrate the different points of view which are in play, from the grass roots.

For me, what this brings to the forefront is how difficult it is to develop guidance and policy, within the WikiTree world (and beyond) when there are such different views held, which pleases everyone.  It is very very challenging.

---

And to be honest, the best way for anyone to influence the direction of this terminology issue or any other policy/guidance matter they are passionate about is to get involved in the actual project - that is the most constructive way to influence change.  Projects make decisions based on the best advice from the current contemporary/guiding bodies (from whatever era, country, organisation etc as appropriate) and their dedicated member base. That is where the nitty-gritty is worked through.

---

Good point(s) Susan.

---

I removed the "criticism" flag from Leandra's comment.