@ Evelyne: I, like Laurence, write under a pseudonym due …

Comment on Pack of girls attacked me, says Chinese on working holiday by Ray.

@ Evelyne: I, like Laurence, write under a pseudonym due to where we work.
Erwin knows me, and he certainly understands the implications if I used my real name.
I do however enjoy the opportunity to contribute to community discussion without the fear of disciplinary action taken against me/us, and in the past, I have both agreed with you and shared arguments as well
I do agree that it takes a village to raise a child, as long as we live in a village, where a small number of people all must contribute to ensuring the survival of all.
Many villages in the traditional sense would be no more than 100 people. We are not a village, we are a large town with many different groups, cultures, beliefs, and expectations, and that expression is not relevant to our contemporary way of life.
The problem people like me have with this “throw away” expression is that it deflects responsibility, where people can say: “It’s not my fault, it takes a village to raise a child, so its the fault of the villagers, not me.”
Wrong, you gave the example of how you raised your children, I am raising mine and Dr Who raised his.
The people who helped were not villagers, they were paid professionals offering a service.
The concept of a village implies aunties, uncles, and close-knit members of a small group.
In those days if the kids mucked up, they would be given a clip under the ear by another villager who you knew.
Would you be happy with somebody smacking your child for running amok in Woolies?
Those days of a village are long gone, and the people who have the primary responsibility for raising the child are the parents, nobody else.
Yes, we may use doctors or teachers or police to augment our responsibilities, but the buck stops with the family.
The problem is many of the youths running wild today are from parents who probably were raised in that village environment, out bush on traditional lands, where the kids could run wild.
Unfortunately, the concept of urban drift has occurred, yet the additional responsibility that goes with living in an urban environment is not understood by these parents.
The grandparents probably say: “That’s alright, you used to run around when you were kids” without the understanding that the dangers of today were not there in those days, let alone the propensity to use violence to survive and then thrive on the streets.
My problem is that the euphemism of taking a village to raise a child ignores that fact that village life is far different to life in modern society, and is used as an excuse to abdicate responsibility.

Ray Also Commented

Pack of girls attacked me, says Chinese on working holiday
Would be interesting to see the outcome if Worksafe was contacted about this.
Absolutely the company has a duty to their employees, there should certainly be a policy dealing with the safety of employees departing late at night, especially where the hazards of this town are so well known.
Regardless, the employer has a duty to identify the risk and put controls in place, this would include making the staff finishing their shift aware of the risk to their health and safety by not having suitable transport home, and alternatives if transport was not available.
It could be a journey claim if the worker was traveling directly home at the completion of a shift.
A case in point is the woman attacked by the magpie, losing her eye on her way to work.
A joint responsibility between the employer and the shopping center, especially as the hazard had previously been identified.
There are additional duties imposed if it involves young or inexperienced workers.


Recent Comments by Ray

Alice councillors join new political party
Ha ha, love the moniker Local 3, maybe I started something, but have not seen any posts from local 2 yet. Maybe over time we will grow, and can have a locals get together. Position vacant: Local 4.


Make September 8 Australia Day, anthem in Pitjantjatjara
Shannon Spaulding: It is quite ironic that you chastise Mr Egan over his choice of words.
He has done far more for the Indigenous people in the NT (both fair skinned and full blood) than you could ever dream of, yet you chastise him on the words he uses.
It is ironic that you attribute the white Australia policy to relating to Aboriginal people whereas it actually was an immigration policy.
You quote things about the so called stolen generation that really prove you have no real understanding about that subject either, apart from the populist ideas of that myth.
I might identify as a Syrian Attack Helicopter, but does that mean I am one? How is it fair that an urban couple living in a million dollar house, a white male living with a mostly white woman whose great grandmother was Aboriginal, gets the same benefit, drawing from the same funding as a child living at Mutitjulu? Of corse not.
Be proud of your cultural identity, but acknowlege all sides. Whilst I do not agree with Ted’s proposal, I would never contemplate trying to educate him on Aboriginal affairs.
That would be like arguing with Stephen Hawking about what sort of cheese the moon is made from.


The stolen child who went to university
True Peter, sadly what happened when many of these children were taken away was traumatic, however the biggest mistake was the acceptance of the misnomer, stolen.
True, the term stolen usually means taken without permission, but unfortunately this term fails to address the reason they were taken.
In almost all cases it was due to either neglect or an inability to provide a safe environment, and in context, based on what European standards at the time deemed a safe environment.
There have been many prominent Aboriginal people who have gone on record claiming they were stolen, but this often led to heartbreak when the real circumstances are discovered, that their parents were unable to provide for them, for various reasons.
It’s easier to say the government stole you rather than say your parents were unable to provide for you. There has only ever been one truly stolen person in any court case in Australia.
Bruce Trevorow, who was adopter out when his parents left him in hospital and were uncountable for over 12 months.
The term stolen generation is now morphing into the more emotive term genocide.
In the meantime the children continue to suffer.


Australia Day: Alice’s role in it
@ Evelyn. The Australia Day celebrations that we celebrate today first began in 1818, when it was called Fist Landing Day, or Foundation day. The recommendation from Matthew Flinders that the country be called Australia was only accepted a year before that.
During the Centenary in 1888, leaders from around Australia and new Zeland gathered in Sydney to celebrate what was then changed to Anniversary Day. The Federal Australia Day Council began in 1946 until replaced by the National Australia Day Council in 1984.
So while July 9, 1900 is an important milestone in our history, it does not reflect the day of our beginnings, or in effect our birthday. Whilst Aboriginal history goes back thousands of years before European settlement, Australia’s history really began when first claimed by Philip on the shores of Port Jackson, on January 26, 1788.
The many events that occurred subsequently, whilst important, do not tell the story from the beginning.


Fiscal emergency: Get rid of Ministers, says Opposition
@ Pseudo Guru. Politicians are not public servants. Public servants are defined as “employed under the Public sector Employment and Management Act”.
Politicians are not employed under this Act, as they are elected.
They have similar guiding principles, however it is important to understand that they are NOT public servants.
In many Acts, the buck stops with the CEO of the agency, a “Minister of the Crown” cannot be prosecuted or charged for a failure or breach of an agency under their portfolio.
They are not elected to “serve the people”, rather to represent the people. Small words, but big difference.


Be Sociable, Share!