• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Isn't the Maori player of the year award racist?

your trying to say having a maori player of the year award is racist because its catogorising maori players seperately from everyone else, yet you ***** are catogorisng the woman ie YOUR DARK girls eat to much kfc... YOUR WHITE girls love dark skin boys.... i thought you guys would see them as just kiwi girls? *****!
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (K-Pac @ Dec 20 2009, 03:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
your trying to say having a maori player of the year award is racist because its catogorising maori players seperately from everyone else, yet you ***** are catogorisng the woman ie YOUR DARK girls eat to much kfc... YOUR WHITE girls love dark skin boys.... i thought you guys would see them as just kiwi girls? *****![/b]

You, my foolish individual are about to be banned.

Firstly, no-one was speaking in absolutes about the subject. We were really referring to a broader cross-section of the women of varying ethnicities in New Zealand. Neither of us said that it was a race specific trait at all for some maori women to be a bit on the larger side. It's more a cultural thing, similar to Samoa, where a thicker, bigger boned girls has been in the past what was found attractive. Western influences have caused a more negative perception of these body types and for good or bad, thats comon knowledge. It's not a race based thing at all, it's more down to cultural eating habits. Would you deny that maori women are sadly over-represented in smoking related deaths? Or are those health department stats racist?

So, punched holes all over what you said.

As for the statement "YOUR WHITE girls love dark skin boys" or whatever jawmalawm24 said, that could be seen in a bad light, but I never said it . Also, I wasn't offended, as I don't believe the statement. Most women that I've seen in NZ just prefer fitter men in good shape, who look after themselves and have a tidy appearance and young maori guys are as much in with a shot at going out with them as any other ethnic group. Still I never thought jawmalawm24 was meaning it in a racist sense at all, just a cheeky comment and it was pretty obviously a friendly dig. No problems.

As for you not being able to read anything but hate into an obviously light-hearted debate, well I'll wait and see what you say next in case you've just not been reading this all right. If you carry on the same way I'll have to ban you.

This is a sensitive topic and people of different races have discussed things here in a generally pleasant, articulate way, without getting angry with each other. I can't have you ruin that.
 
I don't think anyone ever mentioned anything about dark or white girls I did say Maori or Pakeha but anyway I'm just telling it like it is with my people. I consider anyone born or from New Zealand a Kiwi but most indigenous people like their culture to be recognised that's why they identify themselves as Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian etc.

I'm Maori I was brought up Maori I look like a Maori and I eat, crap, sleep like a Maori but I have English ancestory also. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of this side of me so I don't really have much choice but to consider myself a Maori and even when I joke with people saying I'm actually English I get weird looks so yeah.

Back to Rugby anyway I think Zac Guildford deserves his award but it's kind of too bad that we can't look upon it as just being a reward instead of debating about it based on something he had no choice in. He couldn't exactly tell his parents not to be Maori or to be Maori so whatever the outcome he deserved his reward regardless.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (K-Pac @ Dec 20 2009, 10:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Oh no i used the word twat! someone call the police! tossers![/b]

You obviously haven't got the point, you aren't going to come into a thread and insult people and name call and get away with it. I think you need some time to cool off mate.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jawmalawm24 @ Dec 20 2009, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I don't think anyone ever mentioned anything about dark or white girls I did say Maori or Pakeha but anyway I'm just telling it like it is with my people. I consider anyone born or from New Zealand a Kiwi but most indigenous people like their culture to be recognised that's why they identify themselves as Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian etc.

I'm Maori I was brought up Maori I look like a Maori and I eat, crap, sleep like a Maori but I have English ancestory also. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of this side of me so I don't really have much choice but to consider myself a Maori and even when I joke with people saying I'm actually English I get weird looks so yeah.

Back to Rugby anyway I think Zac Guildford deserves his award but it's kind of too bad that we can't look upon it as just being a reward instead of debating about it based on something he had no choice in. He couldn't exactly tell his parents not to be Maori or to be Maori so whatever the outcome he deserved his reward regardless.[/b]


On top of everything else your a decent tolerant and down to earth guy too. Totally agree with everything you said, so guess I have to rep ya, lol.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jawmalawm24 @ Dec 20 2009, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I don't think anyone ever mentioned anything about dark or white girls I did say Maori or Pakeha but anyway I'm just telling it like it is with my people. I consider anyone born or from New Zealand a Kiwi but most indigenous people like their culture to be recognised that's why they identify themselves as Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian etc.

I'm Maori I was brought up Maori I look like a Maori and I eat, crap, sleep like a Maori but I have English ancestory also. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of this side of me so I don't really have much choice but to consider myself a Maori and even when I joke with people saying I'm actually English I get weird looks so yeah.

Back to Rugby anyway I think Zac Guildford deserves his award but it's kind of too bad that we can't look upon it as just being a reward instead of debating about it based on something he had no choice in. He couldn't exactly tell his parents not to be Maori or to be Maori so whatever the outcome he deserved his reward regardless.[/b]
I'd say Cory Jane deserves the award, he has quickly risen to be considered one of the best wings in the world over a international career not much longer then a year, and he has consistantly proved why he is so good. Zac as looked like a great new player though, and may be a serious long term option for New Zealand.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
You obviously haven't got the point, you aren't going to come into a thread and insult people and name call and get away with it. I think you need some time to cool off mate.[/b]
Yeah, I saw that coming lol.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 20 2009, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jawmalawm24 @ Dec 20 2009, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't think anyone ever mentioned anything about dark or white girls I did say Maori or Pakeha but anyway I'm just telling it like it is with my people. I consider anyone born or from New Zealand a Kiwi but most indigenous people like their culture to be recognised that's why they identify themselves as Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian etc.

I'm Maori I was brought up Maori I look like a Maori and I eat, crap, sleep like a Maori but I have English ancestory also. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of this side of me so I don't really have much choice but to consider myself a Maori and even when I joke with people saying I'm actually English I get weird looks so yeah.

Back to Rugby anyway I think Zac Guildford deserves his award but it's kind of too bad that we can't look upon it as just being a reward instead of debating about it based on something he had no choice in. He couldn't exactly tell his parents not to be Maori or to be Maori so whatever the outcome he deserved his reward regardless.[/b]
I'd say Cory Jane deserves the award, he has quickly risen to be considered one of the best wings in the world over a international career not much longer then a year, and he has consistantly proved why he is so good. Zac as looked like a great new player though, and may be a serious long term option for New Zealand.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
You obviously haven't got the point, you aren't going to come into a thread and insult people and name call and get away with it. I think you need some time to cool off mate.[/b]
Yeah, I saw that coming lol.
[/b][/quote]

Looking forward to seeing a move next year where Jane (from Fullback) and Guildford combine. I'm sure those two would produce something electric on the right day.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jawmalawm24 @ Dec 20 2009, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I don't think anyone ever mentioned anything about dark or white girls I did say Maori or Pakeha but anyway I'm just telling it like it is with my people. I consider anyone born or from New Zealand a Kiwi but most indigenous people like their culture to be recognised that's why they identify themselves as Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian etc.

I'm Maori I was brought up Maori I look like a Maori and I eat, crap, sleep like a Maori but I have English ancestory also. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of this side of me so I don't really have much choice but to consider myself a Maori and even when I joke with people saying I'm actually English I get weird looks so yeah.

Back to Rugby anyway I think Zac Guildford deserves his award but it's kind of too bad that we can't look upon it as just being a reward instead of debating about it based on something he had no choice in. He couldn't exactly tell his parents not to be Maori or to be Maori so whatever the outcome he deserved his reward regardless.[/b]

Actually i would argue he didn't deserve his award, Aaron Cruden was deemed to be the best under 20 player of the year (or something like that) and there various other awards that he qualified for but didn't win. Now don't get me wrong, good player, great year and i'm not blaming him. I just don't believe there should be an award only Maori can win.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (wjd23104 @ Dec 22 2009, 05:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jawmalawm24 @ Dec 20 2009, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't think anyone ever mentioned anything about dark or white girls I did say Maori or Pakeha but anyway I'm just telling it like it is with my people. I consider anyone born or from New Zealand a Kiwi but most indigenous people like their culture to be recognised that's why they identify themselves as Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian etc.

I'm Maori I was brought up Maori I look like a Maori and I eat, crap, sleep like a Maori but I have English ancestory also. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of this side of me so I don't really have much choice but to consider myself a Maori and even when I joke with people saying I'm actually English I get weird looks so yeah.

Back to Rugby anyway I think Zac Guildford deserves his award but it's kind of too bad that we can't look upon it as just being a reward instead of debating about it based on something he had no choice in. He couldn't exactly tell his parents not to be Maori or to be Maori so whatever the outcome he deserved his reward regardless.[/b]

Actually i would argue he didn't deserve his award, Aaron Cruden was deemed to be the best under 20 player of the year (or something like that) and there various other awards that he qualified for but didn't win. Now don't get me wrong, good player, great year and i'm not blaming him. I just don't believe there should be an award only Maori can win.
[/b][/quote]

Agree about the award, but with the player part I still think Guildford deserved it a little more. The gap between the pair of them is incredibly small in my mind though. Cruden just had a little bit of injury and a couple of average games. Both awesome Maori players, but shouldn't be being judged solely on race.
 
I'm hoping Cruden become the closest thing the Hurricanes have ever had to Dan Carter. We've never really had a quality 1st 5. We had Gopperth, Holwell and Fluety (though not really playing 1st 5 often, more fullback) and others inbetween, but we've never has a Darter, Mehrtens, Spencer etc, which I believe is something the Hurricanes have needed in the past, so I'm putting alot of how our season goes, in Cruden's hands.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Dec 22 2009, 04:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Agree about the award, but with the player part I still think Guildford deserved it a little more. The gap between the pair of them is incredibly small in my mind though. Cruden just had a little bit of injury and a couple of average games. Both awesome Maori players, but shouldn't be being judged solely on race.[/b]

I think I've already said this before, but all they have to be is 1/16th Maori. I mean Cory Jane was nominated and he looks like a standard English dude; Ross and Guildford look basically white.

I reckon you might have grounds for complaint if the requirements were a larger portion, but as it is you can't really call an award racist against white people when the people who are involved with it are mainly white...
 
Okay, now I'm just putting on my "I'm a Maori" hat for a minute to see how this works.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C A Iversen @ Dec 18 2009, 09:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Yeah it's hard to bring it up without sounding like you want to take something away from Maori, something I and I'm sure every other New Zealander certainly doesn't want to do.[/b]
Well having already taken their land, identity, and history, as your own why would you stop there. Not you of course, but your British (and Celtic) forefathers.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (K-Pac @ Dec 19 2009, 03:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
maybe in europe they have european player of the year award, maybe in samoa the have samoan player of the year i dont know and dont care they are awards for the people of the land.[/b]
Sounds like a good point to me. You see your assuming that everyone is a New Zealander first, and a Maori second (maybe a kind of hobby). The way I understand it, the Maori are the minority in their own land. They have a different culture and its well within their right to recognise that as being different to standard New Zealand culture. I see it as being two nations sharing the same land.

I'm not being clear here, its hard to articulate when your an inbred, KFC eating, fat, drunk, wife beating coloured bloke whos good for a laugh but not really that intested in being your friend........... or something.

Reading this from an outsiders point of view I think K-Pac had a point. Racial steroetypes were used throughout the thread. The references to THEM, THOSE, and the whole image of Fat Maori girls smoking outside a KFC was pretty clear. He had every right to raise it and he was actually correct. The ban for using the word TWAT (I've heard a lot worse from admins and mods on this board) was amusing, but it distracted from a valid point he raised.

Either way, the intersting thing for me was what Nick said. His Ancestors arrived there in 1840 or something like that. He should have a right to be called a New Zealander now. Does he? I suppose the answer to that is to ask how long do you have to wait before you can persecute the victim again. When do the rights of the invaded people stop counting. When are they no longer allowed to recognise themselves as a unique people? When must they conform before they are called racist for recognising their own talented rugby players?

Its not a big deal really. I mean it happens everywhere. South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, North and South America. Colonial expansion squished the local population. This has happened to the Maori hasnt it?
 
But if I don't have a right to call myself a New Zealander, what am I? Maori culture is preserved in New Zealand, and a pride in culture and heritage is welcomed. However the way New Zealand has gone about it is wrong. I am a New Zealander, and despite where my grand parents lived, where else can I call home? England? Never been there. Through every known society there has been changes on who lives on a certain piece of land, and while the history and culture of those who lived on the land before us, surely to create an award based off race is racist no matter how you look at it. Do the British have the right to exclude people who have lived in England their lives, but can't trace their roots back as far, from equal opportunity? Should a separate set of rules be set up for one race and culture then another?

The issue of a New Zealand Maori award is a small issue, and one not to get too concerned over, however while conserving history and maintaining culture has to be considered important, why does a talent have to be acknowledged seperatly because of race?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 11:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
But if I don't have a right to call myself a New Zealander, what am I?[/b]
Of course you call yourself a New Zealander. Thats the name your forefathers (and mine possibly) gave to the land they conquered.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 11:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
why does a talent have to be acknowledged seperatly because of race?[/b]
Again I'm not an expert here but I'd imagine its not just about race, but about culture, or the Maori nation. Its like the national Maori rugby award. That was my point which you skillfully ignored :).

There is an assumption that you live in New Zealand so everyone else has to live in New Zealand. While the nation that was there before you should just change to suit you, and also because 150 years have passed I mean surely they should either be over it, or dead by now!
 
But as I pointed out, the Maori culture in New Zealand is trying to be preserved. Wether we like it or not, the Maori culture has changed in New Zealand, because New Zealand has advanced as a nation with Maori, the two are not mutually exclusive. My point is that Maori as civilians shaped New Zealand to be New Zealand alongs ide New Zealand Europeans, and that ideas and customs that we as New Zealander's hold value, are a mix of values of both cultures. It isn't a case that Maori have purley had to survive in a European world, but have influenced New Zealand into an assimilated culture. Wether there is a equal balence of Maori influence to New Zealand European influence is debatable, however presumably our culture and modern Maori culture is a blend. Sure it has changed from compliete traditional tribalism, but the move has been mutually exclusive, just as New Zealand Europeans are unique from their British heiritage.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
My point is that Maori as civilians shaped New Zealand to be New Zealand alongs ide New Zealand Europeans, and that ideas and customs that we as New Zealander's hold value, are a mix of values of both cultures. It isn't a case that Maori have purley had to survive in a European world, but have influenced New Zealand into an assimilated culture.[/b]
Sounds like something a politician would come out with. Completely unbelievable but a great soundbite. "Keep telling them we give a f*** and eventually they will believe we give a f***. Either way they will do what we say then eventually just give up fighting us and die off".

You dont really believe that there is a real mix do you. Even in posts here posters have said THEM, and THOSE when referring to Maori. The national language is the one you were given, the national sports are the ones you were given, your political alliegences are the ones you were given, your religion is the one you were given (I think, total guess that). Where exactly did Moari culture get integrated?

I'm not saying you havent done anything, but what has been done is like celebrating someones birthday years after they have died :)
(Nobody mention the J word!). A luvely though, but no one really gives a f*** and as time goes by, less peop remember.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
But as I pointed out, the Maori culture in New Zealand is trying to be preserved. Wether we like it or not, the Maori culture has changed in New Zealand, because New Zealand has advanced as a nation with Maori, the two are not mutually exclusive. My point is that Maori as civilians shaped New Zealand to be New Zealand alongs ide New Zealand Europeans, and that ideas and customs that we as New Zealander's hold value, are a mix of values of both cultures. It isn't a case that Maori have purley had to survive in a European world, but have influenced New Zealand into an assimilated culture. Wether there is a equal balence of Maori influence to New Zealand European influence is debatable, however presumably our culture and modern Maori culture is a blend. Sure it has changed from compliete traditional tribalism, but the move has been mutually exclusive, just as New Zealand Europeans are unique from their British heiritage.[/b]

This is true.

However, the Maori side of NZ culture is unique to NZ. Like it or not, the Pakeha side is derived from British culture and heavily influenced (I presume) by the USA and Australia - in other words it's not as unique.

What's more, there is the question of ratios. I have a lot of respect for NZ compared to other countries governed by white immigrants because the indigenous culture seems to be far more integrated and respected; however I'd still say the fact that Maoris themselves, and their language, are in a considerable minority, means their part in NZ culture will reflect this.

Compare this to a place like Britain - about 90% of the most innovative music we make now is influenced from our Caribbean population; one of our national dishes derives from the South Asian population, and numerous other parts of our mainstream culture have a definite 'non Native' feel. Yet still, everyone who comes to the UK learns English. 60+ million of us speak a native language - whereas in NZ it's less than 5%. And while our culture has, as I explained, taken on parts of others, it remains distinctly British.

Clearly, if you grow up in New Zealand you are just as much a New Zelander as anyone - race doesn't come into it. But it's different when it comes to culture. The Maori culture survives far better than any indigenous culture in other white majority countries in the Americas or Australia. I don't think it's a coincidence that New Zealand is the only place that has had large race-related institutions to preserve the indigenous culture. So if this is how Maori tradition is best preserved, then so be it.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Logorrhea @ Dec 23 2009, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My point is that Maori as civilians shaped New Zealand to be New Zealand alongs ide New Zealand Europeans, and that ideas and customs that we as New Zealander's hold value, are a mix of values of both cultures. It isn't a case that Maori have purley had to survive in a European world, but have influenced New Zealand into an assimilated culture.[/b]
Sounds like something a politician would come out with. Completely unbelievable but a great soundbite. "Keep telling them we give a f*** and eventually they will believe we give a f***. Either way they will do what we say then eventually just give up fighting us and die off".

You dont really believe that there is a real mix do you. Even in posts here posters have said THEM, and THOSE when referring to Maori. The national language is the one you were given, the national sports are the ones you were given, your political alliegences are the ones you were given, your religion is the one you were given (I think, total guess that). Where exactly did Moari culture get integrated?

I'm not saying you havent done anything, but what has been done is like celebrating someones birthday years after they have died :)
(Nobody mention the J word!). A luvely though, but no one really gives a f*** and as time goes by, less peop remember.
[/b][/quote]
I prefered the post of gingergenius.

1. Because while a small percentage considers themselves Maori, many have Maori heritage in some way or another, there is a strong link between most people to Maori culture, and goverment funding in television and schools is representitive of that.

2. The claim that New Zealand European cultures isn't unique as it has essentially been "imported" from over seas is irrelevant as all cultures are ununique in that regard. Maori culture can be linked to the culture of other Pacific Island cultures, and their culture can be linked to South American and Asian cultures, etc etc.

3. The use of the words "them" and "those" has put a very negative context in what was supposed to be harmless banter. Regardless of these comments, I can truely say that this isn't representitive of a divide in race relations, but more just unfortunite wording.

4. Yes it can be argued that New Zealand's culture has been impacted more by traditional European culture and values, as the vast population of New Zealand is New Zealand European. When the settler's arrived there was an attitude of colonising, and to an extent this is true, which is why a vast majority of Maori are Christian, drive cars and speak English. That being said, an effort is made today to preserve the Maori culture, and while Maori attitudes and values have changed from traditional Maori tribalism, Pukeha's attitudes have changed from traditional European colonialism and therefore we have advanced together into, today's culture. And I can't honestly say that there is an equal imput of Maori culture as there is to European, but I believe that it is more then representational in terms of populations of Maori to Pukeha, is a system which shows the maturity of a united New Zealand, in which both traditional cultures are represented, both heritage protected, and a unified Kiwi culture developed.

5. I just want world piece.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I prefered the post of gingergenius.[/b]
I thought you might, but I'm looking for an arguement so I'm asking nastier questions. Hes just soft on colonialism. Dont ever forget though, like a true Englishman he believes hes superior to you, but wishes he was Irish.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
2. The claim that New Zealand European cultures isn't unique as it has essentially been "imported" from over seas is irrelevant as all cultures are ununique in that regard. Maori culture can be linked to the culture of other Pacific Island cultures, and their culture can be linked to South American and Asian cultures, etc etc.[/b]
True but this was colonisation. You couldnt call it war as it was so one sided, but the result was the same. The examples you gave above were as a result of natural migration of the masses. One happened in Months (?) the others over generations.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
That being said, an effort is made today to preserve the Maori culture, and while Maori attitudes and values have changed from traditional Maori tribalism, Pukeha's attitudes have changed from traditional European colonialism and therefore we have advanced together into, today's culture.[/b]
Only after the Maori culture has been completely destroyed and the "advance together" bit doesnt really upset any of the white folks.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nickdnz @ Dec 22 2009, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
And I can't honestly say that there is an equal imput of Maori culture as there is to European, but I believe that it is more then representational in terms of populations of Maori to Pukeha, is a system which shows the maturity of a united New Zealand, in which both traditional cultures are represented, both heritage protected, and a unified Kiwi culture developed.[/b]
I'm tempted to google that to find what speech it came from. Nice sentiment, but its all happening after the damage has been done.

Look I'm doing all this tongue in cheek and I certainly dont want to knock New Zealand as a country. Compared to what has happened on other Colonies you guys are a recipe in how to do it correctly and its not as if its a strategy you are looking to implement. I was mainly defending K-Pacs outrage and raising the question of a nations rights, once its been conquered cause its a damn interesting question. Northern Ireland poses similar questions as a policy of intentional immigration was implemented there too.

What New Zealanders are doing is commendable but remember its all being done AFTER the damage was done (by other people). Thats all I'm saying.
 

Latest posts

Top