Culture, Health And Sexuality In Australia’s Indigenous Communities

The Significance of Aborigine Culture

Discuss about the Indigenous Education for Educational Administration and Policy.

My take on culture, health and sexuality is pretty simple. It is set and determined by the indigenous community. The song I have written is based on the aborigines of Australia and their take on history, sex and sexuality.Indeed, there has been significant events in which the Australian indigenous people have had a confrontation with reality. For example, there has been an upcoming debate in which duo citizenship will mean for Australian and indigenous identity.  

The aboriginal culture has been associated with a lot of practices that has been centered on a dreamtime belief. Traditions have been emphasized in practice. The culture of Australian aborigines is exhibited by language groupings and divisions of tribe. In my song, the art has existed for many years and ranges from watercolor landscapes and ancient rock art. Country music is the contemporary aborigine music that has been developed (Bristow, 2014). Some of the practices that have been initiated by the aborigines include the Bora which is an initiation in which the young men pass through a birth right to become men. Others include a corroboree which is a ceremonial meeting which involves the aboriginal people. The aborigines also had a smoking ceremony in which a cleansing ritual was performed for special occasions. Other practices by the aborigine culture includes fire stick farming which was a practice of burning patches of vegetarian to facilitate hunting. The walkabouts refers to a belief that is commonly held in adolescent ages of an aborigine. However due to due citizenship the culture will be eroded in the future (Ghosh, C., 2018). Duo citizenship means that an Australian citizen by birth may get another citizenship from any other country that he wishes to reside.  

In today’s world, the presence of new information and communication technologies is already common, which promise to “develop and modernize” humanity. The indigenous peoples of Latin America are not exempt from these promises, despite the marginalization and abandonment in which they live (Sandall, R., 2018).

I think Australia is more than kangaroos, koalas, beaches and people surfing. That sounds pretty obvious, but there is one aspect of Australia that is not as popular: its indigenous communities. I suspect that the fault was not only my ignorance, but the lack of recognition of the indigenous people within the same country. Before being colonized by the British, in Australia there were thousands (between 375 thousand – 700 thousand) of indigenous people, between aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, divided into hundreds of clans. It is estimated that when the Europeans arrived in 1788, approximately 700 languages ??were spoken (Hunter, N.D., 2017). Duo citizenship opened the world of aborigines and Australians therefore leading to erosion of cultures and values. Like any other civilization, time catches up with peoples cultures. Aborigines have still been denied full citizenship.

Aboriginal Traditions and Practices

Although duo citizenship is a plus to postmodern Australia, it remains a cultural diluting factor as many cultures are brought in to Australia. Examples include;

The current process of transforming the world stage has three major aspects: the economic one, which defines access to things, politics, which defines the relations of power, and the ideological-cultural, occupied with meaning and meaning.

In Australia there has been a long road to recognition and reconciliation with indigenous communities. It was only in 1967 when, after a referendum, it was decided to count them in the census as part of the population. Social movements, indigenous groups, trade unions and other groups and organizations around the world are looking for ways to counteract this power and implement a true democracy. One of the most important ways is precisely through the use of new technologies (Liebenberg, and Wood, 2015). The analysis criteria of all the websites found for my research, as well as the specific analyzes conducted on the five selected websites, are based on the concepts of Representation and Self-representation, Democracy, Indigenous Development and Indigenous Peoples. 

In February 2008, the Australian prime minister apologized, in a speech in parliament, for the poor treatment the indigenous communities had received. Especially, for the “stolen generation”, which refers to the generation of aboriginal children who were robbed from their families by the government and the church to expose them to Anglo-Saxon customs.

Currently, indigenous communities make up only 3% of the Australian population. They are subject to racism, about 97% say they experience it often and discrimination is considered common. There are government programs that work for reconciliation with Aboriginal communities, trying to close the gap not only in health, quality of life, wages, but also in prejudice and racism between indigenous and whites.

Write your own letter addressing Marriage Equality. It can be to a public figure or to someone you care about impacted by the plebiscite/change to marriage laws. It must include consideration of how Indigenous people are impacted by current definitions of marriage and sexuality (Lewthwaite, B., 2017). You might want to consider how politicians sang ‘We Are Australian’ when the bill was passed or how Margaret Court’s argument involves Christianity.

To Prime Minister

Australia

Re; Marriage Equality in Australia

Australia is largely a Christian nation. Most of the people are Christians but there are muslims and other religions who are minority. Equality in marriage is something that has been discussed in Australia. Indigenous people have been impacted by the equality in marriage in both positive and negative ways. As for public opinion, courts that are dealing with equality in marriage have a much less steep cost than escalation

The Impact of Duo Citizenship on Indigenous Identity

In recent times it has become commonplace to speak of language as a constructor of realities and, indeed, this has every reason to be. The social dynamics of a State and its legal regulations throughout history have been configured through linguistic discourses, faithful to a structural moment that influences the culture of a given society, which is accentuated in the semantic beyond what grammatical through a game of meanings and signifiers. 

Undoubtedly the Civil Union Agreement (AUC) was an advance in the incorporation of patrimonial rights in unions of same-sex couples. However, as we can see, its debt is given by the limitation underlying the mere patrimonial sphere, leaving out an element of fundamental importance for family law such as filiation, and others that are extrapolated to social security as the quality of family load between cohabitants, and several others.  

The new institution of coexistence that was the result of a call to the legislator to take responsibility for a reality that has not only occurred at the national level, differs in some aspects at all microscopic with marriage, such as solemnities and formalities in its celebration and dissolution, as well as legislative residues of a discriminatory nature as we could previously appreciate (Watson,and Geist, 2015). The Executive undertook to send a bill of equal marriage for 2017, with the purpose of correcting the subsistence inequality germ in the AUC, and Recognize civil rights fully and not only of a patrimonial nature. However, it is necessary to ask whether discrimination in forms of coexistence only occurs towards persons with a specific sexual orientation or, even though, other subjects in unequal conditions still persist in the legal system (Williams, J.P. and Vannini, P., 2016). 

It should be noted that the Australian Civil Code entered into force in 1857, and many provisions of the time, as well as its spirit in those reformed, remain in force. It is there that it seems that the debate on marriage is emphasized in Article 102 of the Code, which identifies as “contract” a “man and a woman”, discarding the possibility that can be contracted by two men or two women (Paradies, Y., 2016). The last statement is a justified questioning and evidences an absurd anachronism in the matter of family, but focusing the problem of the marriage institution only there, has caused it to fall into myopia. Holding this last assertion in the displacement that makes the norm not only of homosexuals, but also of married women under conjugal society for historical reasons that to this day are nothing more than anachronisms derived from the lack of political will. 

The Role of New Technologies in Empowering Indigenous Peoples

It becomes evident gender discrimination for no reason throughout the legal body with regard to the regime of property, provisions such as that by the mere fact of marrying in a conjugal partnership the man is who has the administration of property of society and of women; in case the man cannot administer the goods, he will be granted the one of his own to the woman, but only by judicial mandate; the obligation of women to render an account of the origin of their own existence; and, the most absurd, the one that appears in that “authorizes” women to freely exercise a profession or trade (Katz, E.D., 2015). That is why then the Code considers women as a passive subject only because they are women, without their own decision-making power, beyond what the laws or the judge authorize in a specific context. 

At first glance it seems a fact that the future equal marriage bill will break with these arbitrarily unequal gender positions, by expecting a treatment of the parties’ “spouses” without other semantic differentiation, thus repairing the debt that has had the regulations with women and homosexuals. However, we must be alert, because it would not be surprising if the legislator passed on hare keeping institutions differentiated since, and the legislative experience of recent years has shown, the mentality of that does not seem to have changed much of what it was 161 years. 

References

Bristow, J.T., 2014. What Paul really said about women: The apostle’s liberating views on equality in marriage, leadership, and love. HarperOne.

Ghosh, C., 2018. Marriage Equality and the Injunction to Assimilate: Romantic Love, Children, Monogamy, and Parenting in Obergefell v. Hodges. Polity, 50(2), pp.275-299.

Hunter, N.D., 2017. Varieties of Constitutional Experience: Democracy and the Marriage Equality Campaign. UCLA L. Rev., 64, p.1662.

Katz, E.D., 2015. What the Marriage Equality Cases Tell Us About Voter ID. U. Chi. Legal F., p.211.

Lewthwaite, B., 2017. From school in community to a community-based school: The influence of an Aboriginal principal on culture-based school development. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (64).

Liebenberg, L., Ikeda, J. and Wood, M., 2015. “It’s just part of my culture”: Understanding language and land in the resilience processes of Aboriginal youth. In Youth resilience and culture (pp. 105-116). Springer, Dordrecht.

Paradies, Y., 2016. Beyond black and white: Essentialism, hybridity and indigeneity. In Handbook of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights (pp. 44-54). Routledge.

Sandall, R., 2018. The culture cult: designer tribalism and other essays. Routledge.

Watson, K.J. and Geist, C., 2015. CHANGING TIMES AND ITS EFFECT ON MARRIAGE FORMATION: GENDER EQUALITY AND MARRIAGE IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE. Undergraduate Research Journal.

Williams, J.P. and Vannini, P., 2016. Authenticity in culture, self, and society. In Authenticity in culture, self, and society(pp. 17-34). Routledge.