Tue 13 Nov 2007
Toilet Culture
Posted by jangari under Culture, Indigenous, Land, Politics, The Intervention
[5] Comments
The people of the Numbulwar community, on the western coast of the Gulf, were appalled to find that one of their most important cultural sites had been desecrated by the digging of a pit toilet, right in the middle of it. The 7:30 Report has the full story here.
I wouldn’t want to ascribe any maliciousness to any of the five responsible contracted workers; it was most likely just a mistake, despite the fact that the sacred site was clearly signposted. In any case, they were specifically directed by the community to use the existing amenities. They ignored this request and built a toilet near where they were erecting a demountable building for use by the taskforce when they arrive.
Taken as an incident on its own, General Chalmers is probably right in denouncing it as a merely ‘individuals behaving thoughtlessly’. But taken in the context of this entire intervention in which the thoughts, arguments and wishes of indigenous people have been ignored, and it is another, though possibly a more abhorrent, example of the fundamental lack of respect with which this intervention is being carried out. It’s no wonder that it caused sentiments such as this:
They think that our culture is a toilet culture. You know, that they think it’s not real. But to us, it’s real, because we belong to this ground. (Billy Gumana)
Bobby Numggumajbarr, traditional owner, expands further on this and demonstrates how a lack of respect for the community inevitably results in a lack of trust from the community.
They’ve got no trust for them now because they’ve done this now, they’re thinking they might do it again in the long term. So really, they haven’t got no confidence with the intervention group now.
Really. If we want to effect change for the better in indigenous Australia without further disaffecting tens of thousands of people, we have to stop being so culturally abrasive. I know it’d be asking a lot from Australian white people who so desperately lack a culture of their own that they feel the need to denigrate others’ cultures, but for the sake of peace, let’s try, shall we?
November 14th, 2007 at 12:35 am
The problem with the “it’s just one bad apple” type of excuse for anything is that is ascribes intention to the individual and erases the setting in which the incident took place. That is, it ignores the structural problems that allow individuals to act comfortably in their arrogance and ignorance.
In this case, it dismisses the premise of the whole intervention which is based on dismissing Aboriginal people’s ideas, the role and function of Aboriginal organizations, and advise from people who may actually know something about living in remote areas and the issues at hand. You give more credit to Brough and the toilet diggers than I would given the arrogance and thougtlessness with which this whole pathetic intervention has been carried out.
November 14th, 2007 at 4:13 am
It’s an appropriate metaphor for the intervention as a whole…
November 14th, 2007 at 9:25 am
So true, Kim. Its the “rogue elements in the U.S. Army” defence for torture in Iraq all over again.
If only it were the “just one bad apple”. When we at Yuendumu got our demountable accomodation for the “intervention manager”, they destroyed someone’s camp, that they’d been living in for a long time. When Major-General Chalmers was asked about this at a press conference in Alice Springs he dismissed the question with something like: “get your facts straight lady, we don’t do such things” (this was prior to our story, complete with photographic evidence, being posted on several web sites).
I’m sure there are very many stories like this out there, including many preceding the intervention.
The dunny episode again illustrates that they haven’t a clue, and unfortunately their ethnocentric outlook has them believing that we haven’t either.
November 14th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
I don’t think Chalmers’ breezy classification of this as “thoughless” is at all adequate, and the fact that he can still apply that word whilst admitting the correlation with a similar desecration of a christian church or churchyard is absurd. The outrage that would be generated by any comparable incident in a mainstream religious site would obviously elevate the level of criminality associated with the action far above that of simple thoughtlessness. It merely speaks to the fact that white Australia continues to operate within a mindset that Aboriginal peoples’ use of land is invalid or immaterial, and may be ignored at will.
November 14th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Great comments. I agree, volition or not, the whole thing is symptomatic of an anglo culture that allows such brazen ignorance and disrespect, and the fact that the whole intervention is built upon this lack of respect only confounds the problem.
Claire, I was tempted to say something to that effect, very tempted.
And in keeping with the overlap to Abu Ghraib, we’re about to have an inquiry, so watch this space as this story fades into the bureaucratic æther.