Interracial relationships

Vyoos

follow this blog

32 followers

251 daily readers

rank of 26

E-mail Subscription

Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:

Interracial relationships - Vyoos

Australias multicultural tomorrow

October 22nd 2010 02:24

: Vyoos news

VYOOS EDITORIAL
I have lost interest in the multiculturalism debate which periodically consumes Australia.

The debate springs to life every so often, invariably with passion and earnest argument from all points, usually started by old politicians finding support waning or new politicians needing to build support.

IÂm sick of it.

Former conservative Australian Prime Minister John Howard made global headlines last month by claiming the English-speaking world had generally confused multiracialism and multiculturalism. Its Howard thats confusing, but I dont care.

Australian-based, British journalist Pallavi Jain said this week that multiculturalism is dead. If she really believes that, its her brain thats dead, but Im over it.

In a speech in the Australian parliament yesterday, the Federal Member for Calwell, Maria Vamvakinou, accused both major political parties of abandoning multiculturalism and leaving Âthe field open to its enemies.

Maria, I dont care any more, and neither should you.

The only concern I have is that Australia will change its immigration policy. The politicians can grandstand all they like, so long as they dont meddle with our current immigration mix.

I see the results of that policy when I walk through the Footscray pedestrian mall. Muslim head scarves. Jewish beards. African faces. Vietnamese shop signs. Indian supermarkets. Chinese restaurants full of Chinese-speaking people.

Not all urban malls are as colourful and diverse as this probably few in the world are. Im just lucky to live close by.

Thats where multiculturalism is alive and well. That is where we can see today the vibrant, rich and culturally diverse landscape which is the Australia of tomorrow.

They are building that tomorrow in the corridors of the Department of Immigration. Down there, away from the bright lights and glaring egos, they are getting on with the job.

They probably dont care any more about multiculturalism than I do. They dont need labels to describe what theyre achieving, because the labels just become political footballs.

No labels, no egos and precious little acknowledgement. Just achievement. And that I care about.

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Chris Champion - Category: Interracial relationships, Leadership, Politics, Vyoos Editorial

Email this Post to a Friend

Ricky Martin is a tabloid gay

April 3rd 2010 05:17

VYOOS EDITORIAL
The main news stories around the world on Monday, March 29, were the terrorist attacks on the Moscow subway, a surprise visit by the US president to Afghanistan, and the announcement by Ricky Martin that he is gay.

Most non-tabloid media rated the first two stories more important, but you wouldn't know it from the astonishment, applause, approbation, anger, angst and airheadedness with which the community greeted the third.

Why all the song and dance? Well, the strident reactions came mostly from America, where conservative, prurient, judgmental, religious conservatism is, like Sarah Palin's glasses, a fashion accessory. America is the world's biggest importer of eggshells, upon which the country's liberal-minded citizens walk.

Admittedly, Martin's announcement was itself less than robustly self-affirming. It came on his web site, as follows: "To keep living as I did up until today would be to indirectly diminish the glow that my kids where born with. Enough is enough. This has to change."

Indirect diminution is not a concept that commonly confronts the fans (or foes) of pop stars, so we will try to clarify. The children to which Martin refers are his twin sons, Matteo and Valentino, who were born in August 2008. So what Ricky is saying is that having children made it clear to him that he was gay.

We hope that's clear.

Of course, Ricky could have said something like "I knew I was gay years ago" but, as his marketing advisers would have pointed out, there is little headline mileage in such banalities. Often, truth isn't sexy.

Also, you don't have the fun of teasing the religious right.

184

Vote

Comments (4)

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Chris Champion - Category: Entertainment, Human nature, Interracial relationships, US, Vyoos Editorial

Email this Post to a Friend

Should people adopt children of a different race?

January 24th 2009 05:18

I saw this question on a blog recently: should people adopt children of a different race?

My first reaction was distaste because the question implies a moral dilemma which I couldn't see. But it got me thinking, and a little research suggested that the question could perhaps be a fair one in some circumstances.

In the United States, for example, there are more people looking to adopt than there are children in need of adoption. This has led to many Americans looking overseas, and especially to poor countries, where for all sorts of sad political, economic and social reasons, there are plenty of orphans. Many of those Americans are caucasians whose first choice would have been a caucasian American child.

But now I find myself thinking, is this the same question? Isn't the question in these circumstances: do you understand what's involved in adopting a child from another country?

There are good reasons why people choose to adopt children from different racial or cultural backgrounds. They may have lived in another country and developed an affinity for it, for example, or they may have ancestral links.

And there are potential negatives, such as people not understanding that a child may need time to assimilate, may need help forgetting a traumatic past, and may later develop an interest in the identity and culture of their birth, an interest which the adoptive parents can't intimately share.

Internet research reveals that the experts disagree on some basic points. What a surprise.

One school of thinking is that children available for adoption need at least one parent of the same race or culture as the child so the child can develop a racial or cultural identity. Another school disagrees, saying a loving family is all that matters. A third "expert" actually suggests adoption agencies should work hard to place children with families of the same race, but failing that the child should be placed with a loving family of any race or culture.

I have returned to my original feeling of distaste. The question "should people adopt children of a different race" suggests censure. It sounds like a platform for moralising and sermonising.

It's the wrong question. The real question is simpler: is someone ready to adopt a child? Because if they are, they will know that all children are different and they have to be committed to meeting the needs of the individual. They will also know that a child - any child - will thrive on care and affection and love.

What on earth has race got to do with it?