What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

New Zealand 2 will deal a massive blow to NZ rugby

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,581
Nice rant. But completely over the top. It doesn't define people as non genuine Australians, it just allows them to play for a heritage team if they want to. That doesn't stop them being genuine Australians - I think it's telling that you think one means the other. It doesn't.

Playing sport doesn't define if someone is or isn't Australian, that's plain silly.

It's really not zero sum as you're making out.

The other odd thing in your take on this is the terminology "genuine Australian", what on earth is that? Why do you get to decide what constitutes a genuine Australian? It's a nonsense term.
This deconstructionist, wishy-washy, have your cake and eat it too BS, is just that, BS.

Do you truly believe that there're no social and psychological impacts on a person by constantly telling them that they're not an e.g. Australian because of their ancestral heritage, but are in fact something else?
Furthermore can you not see how they might interpret that as being told that they aren't, and never can be, a genuine Australian, even if it's just subconsciously?

Taking a kid that's born, raised, educated, speaks the language in the local dialect, etc, etc, and consistently insisting that they aren't a member of said cultural group, but are in fact something else, because of their ancestral blood ties to another ethnic or racial group that they have only vestigial connections to is f**king disgusting. It's just the same archaic ideas about racial lineage and cultural belonging (specifically imported American ideas) repackaged in a pretty new pseudointellectual packaging.

Take, e.g., Jarome Luai for example, he isn't a Samoan Australian, he's just an Australian, and until our societies accept that we will continue to suffer from pointless base level racial and ethnic tensions.

BTW, I love how you're literally pushing the f**king one-drop rule, yet I'm the one that's going on a 'rant' lol.
 

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,186
The ARLC controls the game. The players are paid with money that's provided to the clubs by the ARLC. Players who hold different political views to the ARLC are punished. The Manly "pride" saga is a case in point.



Israel Folau?

He wasn't free to play for whoever he wanted. Clubs weren't allowed to sign him. He didn't support the latest fad.

Todd Carney?

Players stood down because they were accused of doing something but haven't had their day in court?

Most players have limited options. Only one club might be interested in a player.



There's nothing fair about taking from the providers and giving it to the bludgers. Storm have been budging off SEQ for decades.

The first two examples are contractual and workplace issues. As an employee at the company I work for I have obligations to my employer and they have obligations to me.

If either us fail to meet their obligations, then the contract is voided. Simple. Both Folau and Carney signed contracts at the time with their employers knowing their obligations to them. They failed to meet them and they are no longer employed.

They are also free to go to court if they wish - nobody is stopping them. Also, I could be wrong but wasn’t Folau paid a settlement from the ARU?

Lastly, the ARLC might have to register a contract but they don’t own the clubs. It’s a franchise system and they have a licence with the ARLC. For example if the clubs really wanted to sign Falou or Carney, they can take the ARLC to court in order for the contract to be registered - something they couldn’t do in a non democratic society.

On the most players only have one option, that’s really a nothing comment. Again they have the freedom to play for the one club who wants them or do something else. They are a free agent in this example.

On the last example, that’s just your opinion on what is fair and what is not. Players go choose to sign with whomever they wish. The ‘providers’ could have signed any of the players that have played for the Storm. They didn’t and if they were great then that’s their fault.
 

Matua

Bench
Messages
4,436
This deconstructionist, wishy-washy, have your cake and eat it too BS, is just that, BS.

Do you truly believe that there're no social and psychological impacts on a person by constantly telling them that they're not an e.g. Australian because of their ancestral heritage, but are in fact something else?
Furthermore can you not see how they might interpret that as being told that they aren't, and never can be, a genuine Australian, even if it's just subconsciously?

Taking a kid that's born, raised, educated, speaks the language in the local dialect, etc, etc, and consistently insisting that they aren't a member of said cultural group, but are in fact something else, because of their ancestral blood ties to another ethnic or racial group that they have only vestigial connections to is f**king disgusting. It's just the same archaic ideas about racial lineage and cultural belonging (specifically imported American ideas) repackaged in a pretty new pseudointellectual packaging.

Take, e.g., Jarome Luai for example, he isn't a Samoan Australian, he's just an Australian, and until our societies accept that we will continue to suffer from pointless base level racial and ethnic tensions.

BTW, I love how you're literally pushing the f**king one-drop rule, yet I'm the one that's going on a 'rant' lol.
You have some genuinely weird ideas on citizenship, ethnicity and culture.

If Luai wants to be a Samoan-Maori-Australian then who are you to tell him otherwise? I have Maori Australian cousins. The only time I've ever heard someone claim that attaching a prefix to Australian doesn't make them Australian is from you.

You are the only one saying "they aren't a member of that cultural group".

You are the only person in this discussion claiming people aren't genuine Australians.

This is a you issue.





Ps: Your one-drop rule comment is particularly stupid in this context. You are the only one using ethnic identity for negative reasons.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,223
Take, e.g., Jarome Luai for example, he isn't a Samoan Australian, he's just an Australian, and until our societies accept that we will continue to suffer from pointless base level racial and ethnic tensions.
No one is pushing Luai, To'o and co to play for Samoa, they have a choice and chose Samoa. I'm pretty sure if you ask them also, they will proudly tell you they are Samoan-Australian
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,581
You have some genuinely weird ideas on citizenship, ethnicity and culture.
No, you're just parroting semantic word game arguments, that you clearly don't even truly understand, that I frankly can't be bothered with anymore.

Your argument, or rather the argument you are repeating, is inherently race essentialist because, whether you realise and accept it or not, you're arguing that there're intangible elements of a person's cultural identity that is handed down by birth that can't be escaped. In other words you're saying the nature of e.g. Luke Keary's grandmother being Irish ipso facto makes him Irish as well, which is false on face value.
Let's move away from sport to a clearer historic example for a second; you would argue that the nature of her birth and ancestry, i.e. her race, means that, e.g., Cynthia Ann Parker (Google is your friend) was a "white" (a loaded term in of itself in this context) American despite the fact that she had little to no memory of her American family, lost her ability to speak English fluently, completely abandoned Texan cultural norms, assimilated completely into Comanche culture and society, had a Comanche family and children, and the attempt to reassimilate her into Texan society after she was recaptured totally failed. I would not, I'd say she was a Comanche.

E.g. Samoan Australian, and other dual cultural identities, are oxymorons. A nonsense facade of contradictory terms that can only exist in ideal conditions. At a base level you cannot be both, and let's not flaff around and jump straight to the extreme example of why; unfortunately the worse has happened and Samoa and Australia are at war, Now what? Are the Samoan Australians picking up their guns for Samoa or Australia? No matter how much you may want to, you cannot be both, and you are not both. Which leads into a much deeper discussion of what are you then, that I simply don't have the time for at the moment.

You are the one with screwy ideas on citizenship, culture, etc, you just don't realise it because you, others that think like you, and the philosophical and intellectual traditions that these ideas are derived from, have been a protected species in the mainstream public arena for far too long now...
 
Last edited:

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
64,627
Its an interesting debate and not that relevant to RL lol,
but as someone who has lived large chunks of his life in 3 different countries, and has ancestry from two others, my take on it is you are what you feel you are. And thats not even about nationality for me.
I'll always be a Yorkshireman (more than an Englishman), Perth is home and I have great affinity for western Australia (more than Australia) and my childhood in USA gives me a fondness for the best bits of that country.

What does that make me? Just a speck on a large planet lol
Others can define me by passport or genetics I suppose, or attach convenient labels, but doesnt change how I feel about my identity and culture.

I can fully understand why people born in a country who have a strong cultural affinity or influence from somewhere else their family originated may choose to identify with both.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,581
No one is pushing Luai, To'o and co to play for Samoa, they have a choice and chose Samoa. I'm pretty sure if you ask them also, they will proudly tell you they are Samoan-Australian
Absolute nonsense. There's huge social and cultural pressure for people to categorise by ethnicity and race in our society at the moment, and only the wilfully blind would pretend otherwise.

At the last RLWC alone there were significant groups of people, including public figures, openly accusing players of being race and cultural traitors, and others openly lamenting the fact that players chose to play for their country rather than their "heritage" for 'the good of the game' and other such nonsense. You've also had blatant mercenary behaviour in international RL for a few years now, with many players making themselves available for whoever has a spot and/or is offering the biggest pay check, over their nation.

Frankly, the whole concept of national identity has been conflated with ethnic identity, and national teams are rapidly being replaced with glorified ethnic teams as a result.

All of that behaviour is disgusting and would have been called out if the victims and culprits identities were slightly different. The two tier policing of these issues in the mainstream culture is very unhealthy as well.
 
Last edited:

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,581
Its an interesting debate and not that relevant to RL lol,
but as someone who has lived large chunks of his life in 3 different countries, and has ancestry from two others, my take on it is you are what you feel you are. And thats not even about nationality for me.
I'll always be a Yorkshireman (more than an Englishman), Perth is home and I have great affinity for western Australia (more than Australia) and my childhood in USA gives me a fondness for the best bits of that country.

What does that make me? Just a speck on a large planet lol
Others can define me by passport or genetics I suppose, or attach convenient labels, but doesnt change how I feel about my identity and culture.

I can fully understand why people born in a country who have a strong cultural affinity or influence from somewhere else their family originated may choose to identify with both.
Too simplistic. Being born in a stable doesn't make a man a horse, but simply running in the field with them doesn't make him one either.

I'm sick to death of this debate. You think most all the weeds have been pulled, then like clockwork they sprout up again with each new generation.
 

The Great Dane

First Grade
Messages
7,581
I would love to see dane telling luai to his face he isn’t Samoan
To be honest with you, I have no problem with Luai choosing to represent Samoa if he so wishes. What I do have a problem with is him choosing to have his cake and eat it too.

If he's Samoan he is Samoan for good and bad, he shouldn't then get to be Australian when it's convenient. Like when there're Blue's jerseys and Origin pay checks up for grabs as a single example.
 

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
20,219
To be honest with you, I have no problem with Luai choosing to represent Samoa if he so wishes. What I do have a problem with is him choosing to have his cake and eat it too.

If he's Samoan he is Samoan for good and bad, he shouldn't then get to be Australian when it's convenient. Like when there're Blue's jerseys and Origin pay checks up for grabs as a single example.
Why the system allows it
 

Latest posts

Top