Rant and rave as they will, the thing that Crappler and his ilk will never understand is that they have the privilege of screening the plight of First Nation peoples as a historic and cultural curiosity. They sit very much on the outside looking in.

And they look in through the eyes of their limited mis-education through multiple generations of calculated lies, most not challenged since long after they gave education away.

They are wrong ... provably wrong ... in almost everything they say. But just try telling them that.

But remember, all reasonable folk who venture here, they only view First Australians as historical curiosities. This is consistent with the colonial perspective.

Be just like us or .....

It continues to sadden and amaze me that people give themselves permission to hold such beliefs. Especially in light of all we know.

Alas, all this lot do is discredit everything that doesn't fit with their primary school in the '50s idea of what First Nations people are. And with so much vehemence!

It all points to a sad old, lonely bunch of ingrates dissatisfied with not having their noses blown enough.

No way anyone's had it worse than you, right Crappler? Where's your mountain?

mothra wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:09am:

See! There you go again! Shallow thinking.

How would colonial influence have anything to do with forced child marriages to Aboriginal elder men? A practise that still occurs to this day and has not been refuted by any Aboriginal senior.

If Aboriginal seniors do not dispute the practice within traditional Aboriginal cultures' communities, why do you presume it would not be a probable outcome for a 13-year-old girl born into and living within a traditional Aboriginal culture?

Price's point on the matter was that it was only the enforcement of the modern Western prohibition of child marriage that it has been expunged within urbanised, non-traditional Aboriginal communities.

mothra wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 7:08am:


You shoot your whole bleeding heart leftoid post down when you refer to Aboriginal peoples as "First Nations".

They never were and never will be. That's an untruth.

And no one here responds with anymore vehemence than you do yourself.

Still consistently a hypocrite.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:21am:


How indeed?

Look no further than European history.

Behold! We have arrived at square 1.

And at no point along the line has what i initially stated been successfully refuted.

it's really all just Ecky having another wank.

mothra wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:28am:

It is the evolving of European culture, expressed through enforced law, that is expunging child marriage within Aboriginal communities.

If you accept Price's reference (to the likelihood she would have been married off at 13 to an old Aboriginal man under traditional Aboriginal law) has not been disputed, then you are accepting that it would have been a likely outcome and not just a one-off story.

You need to understand that you are not currently capable of expressing a cogent argument. What you are expressing is unthinking, vicarious outrage.

mothra wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 10:23am:

That would be from your knee-jerk reactionism or, trait (volatile) neuroticism.

Vicarious outrage is the coward's way of expressing their inner anger at their own life.

In your case, it's made worse without a mind capable of expressing a coherent and cogent argument.