Jason, we need to talk about your apology.

rape laugh


I’m writing this as a letter to you, very probably you’ll not read it, but I have recently been through the spectrum of emotions over your comments to do with rape – and I feel like the most healing approach I can take to this hurt, is to step it out – and call upon you to step it out with me. It’s gonna help me (as a one time fan who has struggled with the decision to watch GOT), hopefully it’s also gonna help you, and I’m also hoping it’s gonna help a few others who seemingly can’t make the connection between the use of language and rape culture.

I’ve watched the #MeToo campaign play out over social media. I applaud all of the women and men who have come forward with their stories, and those who have admitted to instances where they have perpetuated rape culture – most especially those who have admitted that this is not just a historical problem, but a pervasive way of thinking – that we all have our blindspots and that they are committed to addressing theirs. I’m thankful for the dialogue that we, as a community, are undertaking and I hope it can continue.

I also saw the twitter post about your rape joke go viral….

… and I read your apology. I get that you are sorry but, like I said… there are a few things we need to walk through. Let’s look at your apology:

jason apology

It’s a good apology – really. I mean – you’re right – it doesn’t take away from the damage of your original comments but I need to share with you what I have seen happening around social media. Women are asking why it took you so long to apologise (and I think that’s a fair question). Why, if you have been severely disappointed for six years, have you only apologised for it now. And in return, we are being revictimised by the men who are telling us to get over it, to stop being so hard, to just accept the apology. Most are instinctively leaping to your defence and not realising that this very instinct IS rape culture, and it HURTS – all over again. The instinct of those who laughed when you made that joke – that’s rape culture. The fact that it can go so long unchecked is also rape culture. The many people who want to tell us, as women and as survivors of sexual assault, how to respond to your apology – that, too, is rape culture. The very fact that I have to expend emotional and mental energy explaining this all to them, and that I even have to write this letter to you – is rape culture. What really hurts my heart is that it is also some of our own who are doing this, our own Pacific men who are defaulting to your defence, who are sighing and shaking their heads at our questions, who are telling us we aren’t being fair, because we have further questions. I am glad you have apologised, but I hope you can see the hurt it is still causing.

And just like an argument when someone apologises but you’re not sure they get what they’re apologising for – you wanna check, right? Well we do… we wanna talk a bit more about it because there were other clues to us – to women who have to put up with rape culture every damn tiring day of our lives. Clues that suggested you weren’t quite clear about the problem. Like when you proudly referred to your character as “the biggest pimp”:



Yeah you know… those violent abusive  sex industry parasites? Them.

Or that interview you did just two years ago (presumably while you were still very distressed at the previous rape joke you’d made), where you referred to your use of the Ngāti Toa haka, “Ka mate” in your audition for Game of Thrones:


So this is painful on numerous levels. I think it’s wonderful that our traditions can be used to inspire awe in others – but I am damn near heartbroken that you have associated haka with rape and pillage.

And I feel I need to make this clear:

Rape is not a touchstone for masculinity. 

It’s troubling enough that you went there again, as some kind of measure of primal power – but that you associated it with the haka “Ka Mate” – which actually speaks to the mana of wāhine – just adds another level to the hurt. Don’t talk about our tīpuna like that.

Now I know you made “Road to Paloma” to contribute to the discussion about unreported rape on reservations – and while it’s great that you wanted to address it as an issue – I need to point a few things out about your film:

  1. I can count the amount of speaking roles for women on one hand
  2. Being male centered is ok if it delves into how men carry out, contribute to, and are affected by, the rape of women… but this was a different kind of male centered – The majority of the scenes are of your character and his friend on their motorbikes, with various scenic backdrops.
  3. Your character’s friend casually calls his motorbike “Dirty fucking whore – after my ex-wife”  (did you write that into the script?)
  4. The same character also leads the viewer into seedy stripclubs where he rips off a dancer before getting into another fight. In short – the lead supporting male role is a misogynistic, violent creep but gets offered acceptance and friendship by the male lead. That’s pretty much rape culture in a nutshell.
  5. Women are largely portrayed as in need of saving, or naked, or stripping.

To be honest – watching your movie offered me a fair bit of clarity. You wouldn’t have gone to such lengths to try and comment on the issue if you didn’t care about it. Yet still – the language you chose, and formative decisions you made were extremely problematic.

I came to the conclusion that you may well actually mean your apology –  but what appears to be missing here is the link between being aware of the issue itself – and being aware of how your language is contributing to it.

How your six year late apology is forcing us to engage in debates with men all over again – and sometimes those debates have tipped over into abuse.

How your pimp joke adds to the idea that sexual violence is somehow cool.

How your association of haka and rape perpetuates the colonial construct of our tipuna Māori as primitive thugs when that couldn’t be further from the truth.

Can you see, Jason, why those of us who were aware of these instances might want to probe a little further before we simply accept your apology and move on? It seems perfectly understandable to me, and I hope to you, too – that we would like to extend the conversation a bit more, to make sure that sorry means it won’t happen again (as it has).

So all I’m asking is that you really take a moment to consider that you are STILL susceptible to contributing to rape culture – that this was not an isolated incident, but that it is something that you have, wittingly or not, contributed to many times, and make the commitment to STOP. To not just say “sorry I ballsed up all those years ago that’s not me”…. but admit that actually it IS you from time to time (and it’s not just you, believe me, sadly it’s most men including those who jump to your defence) – and that you are reflecting on it, and working on it – so that it won’t be you in the future.

Ok that’s all. I’ve really tried to handle this with aroha – which hasn’t been easy because to be honest – I’m tired, and pissed off at the amount of re-victimising I’m seeing over this. I’ve also seen some wonderful, nurturing, balanced kāne in the past few weeks that have honoured mana wāhine and affirmed my faith, and it’s because of them that I’m reaching past the hurt.



Sorryboutit, but Pākeha MIGHT just mean what you fear it means.


Ok so let’s say from the outset – I’m pākeha, myself. That doesn’t negate me also being Māori, because I don’t view my heritage as being mutually exclusive. I’m not a walking pie-chart, I don’t believe in fractions of people, I am Māori at the same time as I am Pākeha and neither are threatened by the other.

I wish I could say the same for our people. If you’ve lived in Aotearoa or New Zealand (which I consider two completely different worlds) for very long, you’ll have come across the term for white New Zealanders – “Pākeha/Pākehā” – and the debate about what it really means. Mākereti contested it meant “buggerya”, and just like the term “white” it can be applied to describe a system, or to refer to the Crown, or it might just be a descriptor of someone’s apparent ethnicity. Some refer to the idea that it descends down from the term “Pakehakeha” – referring to mythical pale skinned beings.

From certain sectors of Pākeha society, some pretty strange notions arose about it’s meaning including: “white pig” (no idea where that came from), “white flea”, “dirty flea, or that it’s a general insult – likened to the word “nigger” (sorry Mā) but for white people.

And more recently – another term has arisen – that it means “those of a different breath” or “those that changed the essence of what they touched”. This refers to the words “pā” (Touch or affect), kē (rather, instead, or an indication of reversal), hā (essence or breath). Problem is nobody spells it “Pākēhā”. Still – it’s caught on and more than a few times I’ve heard this translation offered to assauge a belligerant Pākeha who doesn’t like being called that. In fact it’s fast becoming the default interpretation of the word and admittedly there was a time, at first, when I thought well that’s nice isn’t it. Let’s run with that.

If we’re being completely honest – I’m pretty sure it’s not that though.

Why? Well it’s a very recent development. As I mentioned we never say “Pākēhā” and even if we did – the words would not lay in that order to express such a concept. I think it’s taken off because 1. It’s a nice romantic notion that refers to mystical life essence and Pākeha love that stuff. And 2. It provides a sanitised version for Pākeha and plays down any negativity about initial encounters and what that might have meant to our Māori ancestors.

Essentially – it’s what we call “patipati Pākeha” – it’s there to make Pākeha feel better.

It may well be rooted in the term “Pakehakeha” – but this wouldn’t be the only time Pākeha explorers have been cast, or cast themselves, as mystical supernatural beings, and sometimes Gods, in the eyes of Natives. It’s a thing – and it’s got a lot more to do with ego than history.

(Watch all of that if you can, it’s mint)

What we shouldn’t automatically ignore though is that it may well also be rooted in the parasites and venereal diseases being carried by sailors, whalers and sealers of these times, after being at sea for months. There are considerable Indigenous sources that refer to the fact that these crew carried “kehā” – crabs, lice, and viruses. Furthermore, it’s an accepted fact that they infected Pacific peoples with these diseases and drove populations down in their wake.

Thing is, I don’t see why it should be interpreted that way now. Gay originally referred to prostitution. Then it meant happy, and nowadays it means samesex attraction. Doesn’t mean all gay people are prostitutes, or necessarily joyous. Words shift in their application over time, and meaning is applied in that social context. I don’t have a problem with being Pākeha and having that word be rooted in a history that may relate to the diseases and parasites some, of the same heritage, brought over with them. In fact I think it’s important to remember that part of our history. I especially don’t consider it appropriate to erase and replace that option simply because it might help Pākeha feel better about the term, and feel better about how history played out (particularly when it is related to current systems of privilege). Nobody needs to feel bad, but it’s important that we are honest in what we do, and not just pandering to fragility.
Most importantly, I will not, ever, change my Reo to apply a word like “European” because someone has decided to inject a perjorative intention where there is none. I will not be forced to use anyone else’s language in lieu of a kupu Māori simply to make them feel better. My Reo has been subjected to more than enough force across history.

So I will continue to utilise the word Pākeha – and it may well be rooted in the unfortunate, harsh truth of our history but that does not mean it needs to be that, today. Unless you want it to be. But that is your journey, cuzzy, not mine.

Tēnā kotou aku cuzzies Pākeha!

Oi, you got a booger on your lip.


And other political reflections….

I know I depart from a good many peeps I care a lot about in the shape of my anger over this. I’m not gonna slate anyone for their opinion in fact I’m pretty proud that, for the most part (bar a few), the points of difference amongst my friends and relations have been held respectfully and up front with each other.

Kinda like when a good mate tells you up front that you got a booger on your lip. Or when they smack you upside the head for making them worry.

I was once a paid Green member and that was the FIRST time I paid for any political membership but that feels like a long time ago now. Still – even though I cancelled my Green membership over a year ago, for the most part I considered them political mates.

So I yelled at the screen when I saw Metiria’s admission. What pissed me off the most was that, at 12%, (at the time) they seemed to genuinely be doing well. I really thought this was the year for them. I was seeing Greens, Mana, Māori reining in a Labour government and was genuinely optimistic about what we could achieve for the next few years, maybe even push for Treaty based constitutional reform that could eventuate in long term, sustainable justice (rather than 4-8 year bouts of policy that gets undone when the swing and roundabout cycles around).

I yelled at the screen the same way I do when I see someone I have expectations of do something damn honourable and damn reckless not just for themselves but for many. And even though I saw our peeps in droves saying “yes, I’m in poverty and THANKYOU for what you’ve said” what I still wanted even more was for Greens to be IN POWER for them.

(And before anyone even thinks to utter privilege stfu I’ve slept in a skate ramp, by the side of the road, on a bus bench, on public transport, had $2 to my name and no job and no roof over my head enough times to know that reality).

I also yelled at the screen cause I remembered all the studies done on representations of Maori in media and how we are hounded and the feeling inside my tummy was foreboding. I hoped that they knew what they were doing and had some ace up their sleeve – but I feared they didn’t, and with every media attack that foreboding turned to anger.

There were elements of white saviourism and indigenous risk that I couldn’t get past with the Greens, so my vote was leaning more towards those that could help them more in that area. For that same reason didn’t care much about two less OWM on the green waka but when they left I was angry again because I knew what that meant for the baying media hounds.

And I was angry not just for the diminishing opportunity to provide better care for those in poverty – but because Greens have always had the most robust environmental policies and we so need them… We bloody need Denise Roche and her waste policies. We need Marama Davidson and her baby gooeyness and messy couch realness. After so many years of swimming against a right wing tide our arms are TIRED (I should be a bloody size 10) and I think, with Greens, Mana and Māori in govt we could have had some real gains for Papatuanuku in exciting ways. I was angry that this was slipping away. Angry that it was even placed at risk.

And when it clicked that Greens had betrayed their MOU… I felt weirdly gutted. “Weirdly” because it was Labour they betrayed and Labour has betrayed us so often. But still – gutted. Because integrity matters and when you enter into a partnership you honour it, not use it to bleed your partner (regardless of who it is).  That triggered memories of every time a well-intentioned green organisation screwed indigenous people over – and it actually got me to the point where I didn’t even feel like voting. I’m going to vote, and then I’m going to get straight back to working on reducing whanau vulnerability to this system. We have survived a lot, we will survive even the worst outcome (and can still pray/vote for the best).

But for now… I’m STILL angry. I’m feeling for those who have had hopes dashed tonight. I’m angry that the media won. I can’t possibly blame you for putting your whanau first now that it’s come to this, Metiria.

But someone in the Green camp is giving shit campaign advice. If we ain’t gonna call that then we ain’t good mates.

Dear NZ Human Rights Commission and Maori Television – You’re Failing Us.

1 Comment

I’m writing this as an open letter to NZHRC and Maori Television in relation to Maori TVs  decision to air the series “Jonah From Tonga”. It will also be submitted to the Human Rights Commission as a formal complaint.


Even the damn font is offensive.

Dear Human Rights Commission,

I’m writing to formally complain about Maori Television’s decision to broadcast the program “Jonah from Tonga”. It is my position that the programme discriminates on the grounds of race. I also wish to express my disappointment at your own current response to this issue, and call upon you to reconsider this issue, and take a stronger public position on racist forms of humour.

The programme “Jonah From Tonga” is no stranger to controversy. It has been widely criticised by Tongan, and international, communities for its racism.

The Tonga Herald has covered the problems with this show extensively:

Chris Lilley on Causing Harm: “That’s the fun bit for me”

“I just thought, it’s going to provoke people, it’s going to be headlined — and certainly everyone in Australia fell into that trap. It was all over the place, like, ‘Blackface! He’s doing it!’ … I think I wanted to do it because I thought it was a challenging, new, interesting idea, and mostly I just thought it was a really funny character.”


Air New Zealand Pulls Jonah from Tonga from In-Flight Entertainment


Major US Civil Rights Organizations Slam ABC/HBO’s Jonah From Tonga

“As ABC’s show Jonah from Tonga airs on HBO in the US and Canada, enormous support has been voiced for Tonga and Tongans. A range of major American civil rights organizations, including the NAACP, National Hispanic Media Coalition, American Indians in Film/TV, Empowering Pacific Islander Communities and The Asian Pacific American Media Coalition (which itself includes the Asian American Justice Center, Asian Pacific American Advocates, Japanese American Citizens League, Media Action Network for Asian Americans, National Federation of Filipino American Associations, and more) have written to HBO expressing their “deep concern” about the show.
This groundbreaking show of solidarity with Tonga and Tongans has been an important counter to the show’s racism.”


Japanese Americans urge HBO to pull “racist” ‘Jonah from Tonga’


As mentioned by the Tonga Herald, the show has also been decried as racist from a raft of minority organisations, and Tongan communities overseas. Air New Zealand received so many complaints that they were forced to pull it from their entertainment system. Tongan communities began a an online campaign headed by the hashtag #IAmNotJonah. A petition to HBO calling for the programme to be taken down gathered over eleven thousand signatures. A simple internet search on the controversy this programme has caused outlines its clear problems. The racism has been repeatedly, and articulately, identified.

So it therefore came as some surprise that your position on this was to call upon Maori Television to simply consult Tongan communities on this. Of course the Tongan community should be consulted on all matters that impact upon them – but to leave it at this rests your position upon the dangerous logic that racism is a matter of opinion. Painting your face brown and mocking races is racist, and it is your job to take a position on racism, not abdicate that decision to the community at hand. That is problematic for a number of reasons:

1. This type of humour, if permitted, sends the wrong message to NZers about accepting racist stereotypes. This is completely at odds with your own campaign to “Give nothing to racism” that urges us to take racism seriously and, specifically, to challenge racist humour. This does not just impact upon the Tongan community but all marginalised communities who have to deal with bigoted humour.

2. The racism is also directed at other groups. During this series racial slurs feature as humour devices including “fobs” “wogs” “curries” and “ching chongs”. I cannot believe that I am even having to write to you to ask you to call this type of humour out, given your current campaign.

3. These discussions, if they are to be fully informed, should not just be held with the communities at hand, but should be held within the context of racist humour, its history, and its impacts. To not do that is to expect communities to be experts on the impacts of racism simply by virtue of being of a particular race themselves – which is, in and of itself, a problematic and racist assumption.

4. Furthermore, given the earlier points about the broader impacts upon marginalised communities, the opinions of marginalised communities should also be taken into account.

5. This recommendation clearly overlooks the already significant history of opposition to this program, both from Tongan communities and marginalised groups at large.

I expect so much more of you than to simply recommend that the Tongan community be consulted. If we cannot rely upon you to demonstrate leadership in identifying racist humour then what is the POINT of your “Give Nothing To Racism” campaign? If we cannot look to yourselves, and Maori Television, for racial acuity, then how can you possibly expect it from others?

Already, even as those of us who model the behaviour you encourage in your campaign, refuse to laugh at this humour, we are being told we simply don’t get the joke, and lack humour, and need to “lighten up”. Well I think Maori Television have “lightened up” plenty enough for all of us…. And ironically I would also say that your own lack of action on this issue has compounded the problem for us who choose to take the issue of race seriously.

I therefore ask that you reconsider your position on this, and formally request that Maori Television reconsider their decision to continue airing this program.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


Appropriation, Volcano Bay, and Us.


So a little while ago – some of our very best, and brightest, stars from Aotearoa gathered with other relations from across Te Moananui a Kiwa, and together, in a visual, musical extravaganza, launched a new tourism venture at Universal Studios, Orlando, Florida.https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/662V4GRhf04Exciting. Entrancing. And for some of us… concerning.

I struggled, over that week, to figure out why this was not an issue for so many other people. At times I wondered if WAI262 was actually a thing, or maybe it was a figment of my imagination. At one point I pondered at what point appropriation wasn’t an issue any more, and why I missed that memo.

I think before we go any further, it’s helpful to unpack this issue a bit – not least because some of the media exposure around it has been unhelpfully confusing. At least one media source edited my comments to make it seem as though I was focusing upon the performers who supported the opening. Some seemed to assume that I was accusing our own of appropriation. Editorials like this one missed the point entirely and were unhelpfully misleading.

By far and away – the issue is the park, itself. That’s not to say that having our own perform at the park is not problematic – but in order to determine that, you first need to consider whether there was any appropriation going on in the first place. So let’s unpack.

What is cultural appropriation?
Well as even the experts note, it’s not easily summed up in one sentence – it’s much more than simply using someone else’s cultural property, and definitely involves a relative power relationship. Usually it involves one group, who exerts dominance over another, taking from that culture and using as they see fit. More often than not it is a one-sided (or at least severely imbalanced) transaction. It is often defended as being “a homage”; “honoring”; “paying tribute” and “a cultural exchange”. It is, of course none of these things. It is a colonial exercise in entitlement and privilege. It is an act of colonial violence, an extension of the theft of land, brutalizing of bodies, and generations of legislation and policies of cultural erasure and replacement. Appropriation sometimes occurs when people are trying to look like a specific culture, and sometimes occurs when people blend cultures for a particular exotic look. Probably the most comprehensive collection of essays, blogposts and research on cultural appropriation can be found at http://nativeappropriations.com/

Is it a problem?
Short answer: Yes.
Which is why indigenous leaders all over the world are gathered right now searching for ways to halt cultural appropriation.

appropriation article
More often than not, appropriation is borne out of one of two drivers (sometimes both): Fetish or Profit. This is largely because non-white culture is seen as exotic – by virtue of its other-ness. In being the “other”, the non-white culture is conceptualised as edgy, unusual and different. This is what makes it marketable, and desirable. The two, together, is what leads to hypersexualised, eroticised depictions of indigenous women that contributes, in no small part, to the sad statistics about the frighteningly high rates of abuse, abduction and murder for indigenous women around the world.
As a part of the “packaging” process, it’s not uncommon for the colonizing culture to take bits and pieces from one, or a number, of indigenous cultures, and meld them together. Cultural distinctiveness doesn’t really matter, what matters is achieving the right amount of otherness, in order to achieve peak exoticism. The removing, and displacing, of cultural markers is a problem because it forms a part of a larger process of assimilation – and because the very act of one group defining another, reaffirms who is the alpha, and bolsters the power relationship.

Straight up, it’s theft. We can go on further with all of the damage it does – you can also google studies or get books out on it, there is a wealth of information out on the issue.

Is Volcano Bay appropriative?

What we see for sale in Orlando is classic “tiki lounge” culture.


Tiki lounge was borne out of the post-war era, where US servicemen returned from their time in the Pacific wanting to recreate some of what they experienced during wartime. Tiki lounge is a deliberate blend of real cultural markers to create a false culture – it looks something like Hawai’i, something like Tahiti, something like Rapa Nui, but isn’t quite. It even blends in Caribbean, African and Asian culture – ‘cause hell all non-whites are the same right? In tiki lounge you may find yourself drinking out of a mō’ai (mōkai in Māori – let’s all think for a moment on what that references). Or you may find yourself drinking out of a Tiki head. Poor old Tiki – one of the most important cultural symbols of our ocean and at the same time one of the most belittled. From plastic pendants to boozy vessels, Tiki has been dragged through the mud and back again by western capitalism.


Volcano Bay merchandise and bars

Importantly – Tiki lounge culture was borne directly out of militarised settler colonialism in the Pacific. It was an example of white men, taking what they wanted from our region, and using it how they saw fit – in this case it was to create an exotic drinking culture, which eventually became a pop-culture subset.

It is not just appropriation, it is an entire genre borne out of appropriation by military settler colonialism in the Pacific.

What impacts does that have?
There’s a word for when one culture imposes itself upon another, occupying its space and taking what it wants, in a onesided transaction. It’s called Colonization. I think we can all agree it has impacts.

In particular, appropriation feeds a mentality that is not helpful. Not when you have daughters who will eventually have to untangle who loves them, and who loves the idea of an exotic brown girl. Not when you’re too embarrassed by your “otherness” to maintain your own cultural practices. It’s not helpful with the young boy with fetishized ideas of brown girls grows up to be the policeman across the desk when your niece has to report a sexual assault.

So what about our own supporting it?

So having established what cultural appropriation is, that it does do damage, and that YES this theme park is appropriative, we’re in a much better position to consider the worth of involvement. Like they say – context is everything. Do I think the performers deliberately set out to support appropriative industry? No, I don’t. This is a group of people who dedicate their lives to celebrating indigenous culture and peoples. Either they don’t agree that it’s appropriative, or they are unaware of the appropriation. Perhaps they haven’t even seen the park in its entirety. This doesn’t change the value of the discussion.

At one point in the ceremony, there was the gifting of a mauri stone. I have seen it mentioned a number of times that the indigenous community from Orlando were invited to receive it – although the only reference to this that I’ve found is a Māori Television interview where Puerto Ricans were invited as an indigenous people to receive the stone (Puerto Rico is 2000 km away in the Dominican Republic, and the indigenous people there are the Taino).

This is nearly a whole nother article. My head filled with questions about this. Mauri wai in an area with so many water burdens (both in terms of chemical additives and allocation), mauri whenua when it is placed in a context of thieved lands and culture, alongside appropriative plastic merchandise, and when that land is built on the bones of indigenous slaughter and oppression. Anyway – all of that to the side – yet still many, many others have asked – where are the indigenous people that were supposed to receive it?

And this last part needs to be said because it is a formative part of First Nations history. In 1830 Andrew Jackson passed the Indian Removal Act – and it resulted in the mass displacement of thousands upon thousands of First Nations peoples from the South East of Turtle Island, across toward Oklahoma. In Orlando – they resisted, and were hunted down and slaughtered.

Survivors were force marched for over 1000 miles – nearly 4000 of them died. It became known as the Trail of Tears – and it is one of the most well known genocidal acts in the world. This is important so I’m going to paste a screengrab for those that don’t like to follow article links (from website History.com).


The Seminole today are resilient,  awe inspiring, and still, (like many of our indigenous brothers and sisters of Turtle Island) marginalized in their own lands. And while much has happened between 1830 and now, you know what hasn’t happened? They haven’t been given their land back. It’s still occupied. In this case, by Universal.

Now to place this in the context of appropriation – all of our cousins in Turtle Island face huge challenges with appropriation. After being forced off their own lands, stripped of their own culture, denied their language, their cultural practices criminalized – they are consistently mocked, mimicked and belittled, by the very people who stole, and continue to occupy their land.


They are turned into mascots, and costumes. The Florida Seminoles are one such example.



To expect a people to participate in a ceremony that positions Universal Studios as culturally sensitive – when they are clearly so given to rampant appropriative behaviour – is, probably, a bit much.

So there you have some of the reasons the opening ceremony were concerning. Was it beautiful? Without a doubt. Breathtakingly so. As always, our stunning culture, in the hands of the very best, captured the hearts of multitudes around the world. But what was missed (for whatever reason) was an opportunity for solidarity, and to confront and address one of the key challenges that face all indigenous peoples. One thing’s for sure – appropriation isn’t going away. It won’t fade into yesterday. The only question left is how will we choose to respond to it.