@Steele,

No, we did not establish that Aboriginal women were treated by whalers as they were treated by Aboriginal men. That is your claim. What the records reveal is that often the women wanted to remain with the whalers and sealers.

As to instances of the sexual abuse of Aboriginal girls by Europeans, at least the Europeans considered this, when it happened, to be unacceptable although it was a part of Aboriginal life.

Aborigines had child marriage, little girls to old men; they had horrific practices of preparing little girls for sex, i.e. being enlarged by the hands of male and prepared for their husband by group rape; they sold their women to other Aboriginal tribes and the Europeans for sex, indeed, common in primitive cultures, and promiscuity was part and parcel of Aboriginal life and no doubt, on occasion exploited by European men.

As to European women raped by Aborigines, I made the point, that I considered the Aboriginal men to be like all other primitive stone-age humans where rape of females was a norm. Since the European women ended up dead and we did not have the forensic capacity to study what was left of their bodies, such proof would be hard to establish.

However, if Aboriginal men were happy to rape women of other tribes, as they were, it is logical they would rape European women if they could. It has always been the great male form of domination has it not?

Your argument is that Aboriginal men raped Aboriginal women but never European women is ridiculous.

@Steele,

Aboriginal cultures were primitive. There is nothing said here that did not apply to most if not all human cultures at the same level of development. Given their tendency to rape Aboriginal women, I find it laughable that you suggest they did not rape any women.

The tragedy is that today, those Aboriginal communities which are most Aboriginal, still have appalling rates of violence toward women including rape and murder.

Quote: A.W. Howitt, who wrote the influential The Native Tribes of South-East Australia (1904), summarised what he had learned about the marital situation in traditional society as "a man had power of life and death over his wife".

Despite local variations, there is a consistent pattern of traditional Aboriginal men's treatment of women that could be exceedingly harsh and sexually aggressive (gang rape, for instance). Given its pervasive nature across Australia, we can say that it was ancient and long-lasting.

Anthropologist Phyllis Kaberry, author of the seminal Aboriginal Women Sacred and Profane (1939), sums up Aboriginal men's attitude to women: "(The men) generally attribute a series of undesirable qualities to women. They are held to be faithless, untrustworthy, sexually insatiable, and talk too much."

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/culture-of-denial/news-story/3dd28525dc85e34c1fb549813bd4d9f4

Dear mhross,

So no evidence though of Aboriginals systematically raping white women.

You are taking one or two observations about rape and attributing that to all Aboriginals.

We might be disgusted with the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia where they seem to be judged "faithless, untrustworthy, sexually insatiable, and talk too much" as well. But we don't extend that to all middle eastern countries.

And you keep deflecting the horrendous treatment of Aboriginal women at the hands of the settlers. You keep saying they wanted to be there as a relief from the treatment they were universally suffering at the hands of Aboriginal husbands. Why on earth did so many of them need to be chained and why was this allowed to go on so extensively through the colonies without proper censure from the authorities?

I'm sure there were differences in the practices of different tribal groups. Some were hunter gatherers and thus enjoyed good health and less infections. There is strong evidence which shows others were more sedentary and engaged in agriculture. This would have had quite a bearing on the cultures that developed similar to our own society.

You keep making sweeping statements, mainly of opinion, and seek to downplay any transgressions of those who invaded Aboriginal lands. Why is that?

Now how about the evidence I have repeatedly asked for.

Hi Steele,

I can't recall ever reading or hearing about Aboriginal women being chained up in South Australia. Whether it happened anywhere else in Australia, I presume that there would be verifiable accounts. Evidence would be useful :)

It's interesting that, as you say, quite correctly, that however women are treated in some more fascist countries like Saudi Arabia, Trump's best friend, "we don't extend that [characterisation of men's attitudes] to all middle eastern countries."

But, unless I'm overplaying it, you do seem to assume that 'all' settlers were chaining up Aboriginal women to rape at their leisure. Without evidence, I don't think that we can apply that characterisation to all settlers, and by extension, all Australian males in the earlier days.

The truth is surely a foundation for what we can or can't believe, or how much we can believe, and the truth needs evidence, not barfly accounts.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear loudmouth,

"Without evidence, I don't think that we can apply that characterisation to all settlers, and by extension, all Australian males in the earlier days."

Don't you think that was my exact point.

I live in a semi-rural shire of Victoria which is in the bottom 5 percent for crime but has a domestic violence rate over 10 times that of a large city near us.

One suspects that there may well have been differences between the more hunter/gatherer tribes and those who congregated in larger groups engaged in agriculture.

Painting them all with the same brush is foolish but I suspect rhross has a mindset which won't allow this.

Hi rhross,

//We know in 1788 most (Aboriginal tribes) were at war with each other.//
Can you enlighten us as to what wars, give a couple of examples, or some European written account of all these wars that were going on, its called evidence.

//So, it is racist to dismiss a group as black but not racist to dismiss a group as white.// Only if you say so. My brother-in-law, a good mate, liked to call me "Skippy" not that I took offence.

//slaughtered »them if and when they resisted.

There is no evidence for this claim.//

Well there is, The Bathurst Uprising (1824), was a war between the Wiradjuri led by Windradyne and the Colonial government. Following several killings, a detachment of the 40th Regiment under the command of Major J.T.Morisset was sent from Sydney to Bathurst, bringing the British force to 75 soldiers. Together with an armed militia of settlers, they began murdering the native population. As a party of unarmed Wiradjuri were returning to their camp after burying their dead, a party of militia fired on them killing at least sixteen and wounding many more including women and children.