I don’t know, I’m not getting a racist vibe from posters here (although I like to think the best of people in general). But I do think there’s an attitude from some that the Aboriginals are “primitive” and therefore their beliefs and desires aren’t as important.
And I don’t get this idea that because they didn’t build the rock, they can’t own it or their ownership is somehow not significant. People can own land in our society. They got there first, so they own it. They don’t have to build something on it for it to have cultural significance.
Is this actually the case, that it’s forbidden? I was under the impression (from the link in my OP) that:
The climbing route is a sacred path of spiritual significance that is only taken by few Aboriginal men on special occasions.
So would assume that it is occasionally climbed during certain men’s *walkabout *as a rite of passage - is this not correct?
[QUOTE=Penfeather]
I think the none-too-hidden subtext to a lot of the responses in this thread is “Who cares what a bunch of dumb blacks want?”
[/QUOTE]
Really, you’re seeing that in the comments here? Look to me like pure projection on your part. It’s the idea of inanimate, natural rocks being held to be sacred and thus untouchable that people are questioning, it’s not at all related to who it is who holds that belief. And most people have clearly stated they are willing to respect that belief, regardless of whether they deem it plausible or not.
Wildlife crap it coped with for millions of years. It is not completely open to the skies, and immeasurably deep. (Literally. Nobody knows how deep it is.) So yeah, let’s just shit in it anyway - we’re tourists!
I can live without climbing on it, though I’d not be respecting their beliefs so much as their wishes. Their beliefs are just as much meaningless fairy tale as any other culture’s traditions or religions. (I will respect a church building, as it can be great architecture; I will respect a ‘Person of the Cloth’ because they are someone in authority; I will not respect a mythical being or its arbitrary rules)
I would like to visit Uluru one day, just because that’s the kind of thing you do, but I’d prefer to climb somewhere there’s something to look at, like in the Blue Mountains or Kakadu.
Me my ex climbed it years ago. It was her idea and to be honest I felt a little weird doing it, at least at the start. My girlfriend wasn’t bothered in the least though, she was just like: ‘I’m better than you Uluru! I’m going to conquer you Uluru!’ This really should have been a warning sign. :smack: She powered to the top but I actually ended up passing out about a third of the way up. She returned to me a couple of hours later and half carried me down to the bottom. Traditional belief were far form my thoughts at that point. I managed to crawl down to our memory foam mattresses back at home from this site here and lay they for the next twenty hours or so. Spiritual beliefs of not, i wouldn’t recommend climbing Uluru. Atleast not with my ex-girlfriend.
Walkabout is not a rite of passage exactly, it just means to go off somewhere, travelling around, for any number of reasons.
Initiation ceremonies are performed in caves at the base of Uluru, not at the top.
As for your follow-up question, I wouldn’t climb the Devil’s Marbles either. I think it’s cool having different cultures in this country and I’m happy to respect them.
as anything else but “haw haw, lookit them dumb darkies an their idjit notions”.
Now pardon me while I have to gesture ritually to a decorated piece of cloth hanging on a stick. But don’t let me stop you climbing the stick to blow your nose on the cloth; maybe if there was a law against it I wouldn’t, but it’s not like general disapprobation can tell me not to.
I respectfully suggest that a site where where geography and culture collide in a particularly sensitive way and where the rights of the local indigenous population that has had the shit kicked out of them for the last 250 odd years are at issue may not be the best place to espouse your undergraduate atheism. Particularly if you’re a/ privileged and b/ not from round there. Just a thought.
So, these Uluru Aboriginal religious sensibilities should be treated like the religious sensibilities of any other group except that Uluru Aboriginal religious sensibilities are special?
I’m in the “don’t climb it out of respect for the owners” camp.
Why doesn’t the lease specifically prohibit climbing? Is climbing simply not addressed in it? Do both parties have different interpretations of the lease? Or was the lease forced on the owners, like certain “treaties” the US government made with native Americans?
More importantly, how long until the lease expires? Once it’s time to renew, it can be rewritten to conform to the owners wishes and if the Parks department doesn’t like it, they can go pound sand.
So, are you now retracting your claim of racism and replacing it with one of ‘general cultural disregard’? If so, then that would certainly be a much closer synopsis of some of the previous comments, I’ll admit.
But what follows on then is, where do we draw a line on what cultural behaviours and thoughts are worthy of our ongoing respect, and which aren’t? Do you, by way of example, consider female genital mutilation to be a practice worthy of our respect and reverence? Many cultures practice it. What would you think of Incan child sacrifice, if it still continued today? We are all entitled to form our own opinions on these beliefs and act accordingly with regard to how esteemed (or not) we choose to hold them.
Not that this situation is remotely comparable to the former examples, but they are easy extremes to help highlight how automatic reverence to specific cultural sensitivities is not necessarily a positive thing in all instances. I agree that it certainly doesn’t hurt anyone in this case, so why not be generally respectful? But I wouldn’t tar those who disagree with me to such an adverse degree as you’re willing to.
It sounds from the article that the first time many tourists (especially foreign tourists) hear about the “Please don’t climb” request is when they arrive at Uluru. I’d be pissed as shit if I paid an extra $1k to add Uluru to my Australian vacation, planning on a climb, and only when I arrived found out climbing it would be offensive to the owners. You’d think if they really didn’t want people to climb it, they’d make sure tourists find out about their request when they make reservations to visit. Cynically I’d say they’re happy to keep getting the cash from tourists, and don’t want to scare them off.
To be fair, you could make the claim that it is up to visitors to educate themselves about the places they visit before they get there, if for no other reason than it’ll make their trip more interesting and enjoyable if they first understand what they’re seeing.
Also, I may be wrong, but I imagine the majority of people are going are there to experience a sunrise / sunset over Uluru rather than to climb; that is an optional add-on trek that, I gather, less and less people are now undertaking. Simply being there would be enough, I reckon. (And I doubt the tourist numbers will start dwindling any time soon).
