Indigenous People

[Neferti]

You do realise, Brian, that the ONLY way to record aboriginals pre-1850 was via DRAWING them. Some of Captain Cook's diaries have DRAWINGS of what they saw.

The aboriginals were, obviously, scared of their own shadows and were not "friendly" nor "hostile" (like the Maori) ... they hid behind trees .... I wonder whether they were afraid of the Kangaroo ....

Oh, and who said they discovered "the stick"? They were PRIMITIVES ... running around in the nuddy, since they hadn't discovered or needed to cover their genitals .... and running fast to catch dinner ... maybe they just ate gum leaves, berries and weeds? The odd fish, perhaps. Their life-span was about 40 and that was BEFORE the Whiteys introduced beer and MONEY to buy it.

Do you have more than 0.2% African in your DNA, Brian or are you 55% "monkey"?

[The Reboot]

They are all drawings (and a photo) made by white Colonists, why do you assume they are telling the truth? MMmmm?

Geez

It is a relevant question, Black Orchid. White Artists were well known not to portray alien landscapes and peoples correctly. So, why does Neferti assume that these pictures are truthful? Why do you have problems with me asking that question?

Didn't you say race was a "social construct"? So, by that logic, does it really fucking matter who drew those pictures? We are all equal. twat.

You really don't understand the difference between a "social construct" and scientific views such as Genetics, do you? Tsk, tsk, what level of education did you finish again? Year 10?

Here's another example for Bogan's case files

When confronted with something he can't respond to (especially if it's objective truth, i.e he is a liar) he shifts the goal posts and adds some arrogant ad hominem on the end (often stale and recycled -- he has a strange fixation on "kiddie's playgrounds, which is disturbing in itself) , trying to distract everybody from shining a light on the obvious truth -- that he is a lying, delusional, pompous twat.

Brian:

This isn't about what I may or may not believe. You contradicted yourself. That fragile, weak as piss lefty part of your ego is offended cause white people drew the blacks".

So by your logic and belief (race is not a social construct) it shouldn't really matter if a white person draws a black person. The fact you are pointing it out and showing outrage is merely based on colour. A social construct.

I am not arguing science, dickhead. I'm pointing out your hypocrisy.

For somebody with a billion diplomas --the epitome of high intelligence -- you're a simple little twat, aren't you?

[brian ross]

Personally, I don't care who drew the blacks. I want to know why Neferti believes they are truthful representations of the Blacks, when as I have already noted, White Artists, when presented with the Alien, often drew things that were not real to represent what was actually occurring or were. When you can answer if they were real or not, then I might be interested in your opinion, Reboot. Until then, instead of attacking me, why not address the question I have asked, Mmmmm?

[Black Orchid]

Why is Brian trying to dispute that these representations of Aboriginals are not truthful representations just because a 'white' drew them? What about the pictures should be in dispute?

That they fished and cooked? That they had spears? That the kids played football?

It seems to me to be a rather bizarre stance to take just for the sake of argument.

[The Reboot]

Personally, I don't care who drew the blacks. I want to know why Neferti believes they are truthful representations of the Blacks, when as I have already noted, White Artists, when presented with the Alien, often drew things that were not real to represent what was actually occurring or were. When you can answer if they were real or not, then I might be interested in your opinion, Reboot. Until then, instead of attacking me, why not address the question I have asked, Mmmmm?

What makes you think I give a shit if you're interested in my opinion? You're a tosser.

I don't particularly care and most people with half a brain wouldn't. It's only pathetic little fuckers with nothing better to do (like yourself) who care. Why can't a person (who happens to be white. Oh no, what a travesty!) draw a picture based on what they themselves have observed?
Run along back to your vegan protest, dickhead.

[brian ross]

You do realise, Brian, that the ONLY way to record aboriginals pre-1850 was via DRAWING them. Some of Captain Cook's diaries have DRAWINGS of what they saw.

Yes, I am aware that it was not until the daguerreotype was invented in the 1940s. drawing was the only method of displaying pictures. However, my question is, why do you assume these are realistic drawings? White artists were known when first encountering Australian scenes that they painted them to look like English domestic scenes. They just couldn't draw a realistic gun tree or an Indigenous Australian.

The aboriginals were, obviously, scared of their own shadows and were not "friendly" nor "hostile" (like the Maori) ... they hid behind trees .... I wonder whether they were afraid of the Kangaroo ....

They were, when riled, fierce warriors, Neferti. They killed many White colonists. Yagan was a warrior from the Noongar people and he led the resistance against the first colonists in WA. He terrified the white colonists until he was killed. Just as did Jandamarra, Pemulwuy and Windradyne amongst others. There was resistance.

Oh, and who said they discovered "the stick"? They were PRIMITIVES ... running around in the nuddy, since they hadn't discovered or needed to cover their genitals .... and running fast to catch dinner ... maybe they just ate gum leaves, berries and weeds? The odd fish, perhaps. Their life-span was about 40 and that was BEFORE the Whiteys introduced beer and MONEY to buy it.

Indigenous Australians were no more primitive than Scots Highlanders or Irish people as far as clothing went, Neferti. It varied, depending on where and when you're talking about. Possum cloaks were common in Victoria and Tasmanian. Less clothing, the further north you go. You attempt to suggest that they only discovered the "stick" shows your Racism. Indigenous Australians were quite ingenious users of wood and stone implements which they created as they needed. Ask any Archaeologist if you need more information. Visit your local Museum. You will no doubt be astounded at what you will discover.

Do you have more than 0.2% African in your DNA, Brian or are you 55% "monkey"?

No idea. I know I have a mix of West Indian, Irish, Scottish, Silesian and other "isms" in me. My ancestry was quite varied. What about you, Neferti? How much Chimpanzee is in your Genetic makeup?

[Bogan]

f65.png

[The Reboot]

f65.png

[sprintcyclist]

I heard from Roly Sussex that 'Indigenous' means person born in the country.

So anyone born in Australia is indigenous to Australia.
So, not me. My sons are indigenous.

[Valkie]

Why is Brian trying to dispute that these representations of Aboriginals are not truthful representations just because a 'white' drew them? What about the pictures should be in dispute?

That they fished and cooked? That they had spears? That the kids played football?

It seems to me to be a rather bizarre stance to take just for the sake of argument.

What bwyannnnnnn should do is get a hold of some of the marble statues done by the abbos, 2000 years ago the Romans were making exceptional statues.

Or how about some art, showing the abbos standing proudly in front of their farm houses.

How about some stone carvings like the Egyptians, their artwork was also quite exceptional 2000 years ago.

Oh, that's right
Abbos have no real art, just dot paintings.
And as for any sort of carving, that would require the need to have a sharp edge.
You know, like a sharp rock attached to a stick.
Abbos were too primitive to lash a rock to a stick, so I suppose there is no chance of that.

And in 200 years, they are still too lazy to get off their collective arses and work.

What a wast of oxygen