Women’sStudicsInt. Forum, Vol. 14. No. 2, pp. 505-513, 1991 0277-5395/91 13.00 + .OO Printed in the USA. 0 1991 Pergamon Flrss plc

LETTERS To THE EDITORS Editorial

Since its inception in 1978, WSIF has been was her second language. This culminated in very concerned about systemic male violence a paper given by Anna Yeatman at the Na- against women which knows neither class, tional Women’s Studies Conference in Mel- race nor cultural boundaries and in that time bourne, October 1990, which rendered Topsy we have published many articles on this top- Napurrula Nelson invisible and further im- ic. We therefore welcomed Diane Bell’s and pugned Diane Bell’s work. Meanwhile, male Topsy Napurrula Nelson’s important article violence against Aboriginal women contin- on intra-racial violence against women in ues. Australia: “Speaking about rape is everyone’s What follows is the correspondence WSIF business” (WSIF2(4), 1989). Reactions to received by Jackie Huggins et al., Topsy Na- the article were many, mainly positive: grate- purrula Nelson and Diane Bell. Contrary to ful for the authors’ courage to discuss a ta- rumours circulating in Australia, we never re- boo subject. A group of Australian Abori- fused to publish the letter by the Aboriginal ginal women, however, took issue with Bell’s women. But we felt that the debate deserved and Napurrula Nelson’s article: not with the more than an unsigned letter with typed reality of rape- this fact, as with rape of names, and no return address( Robyn women globally, remains uncontested-but Rowland wrote twice asking for a more de- with the question of authorship. They chal- tailed response that debated the points in lenged Diane Bell (a white anthropologist) Bell’s and Napurrula Nelson’s article with and Topsy Napurrula Nelson (an Australian which the urban Aboriginal women took is- Aboriginal woman from the Northern Terri- sue. When this did not eventuate our Manag- tory) about the “right” to speak out about ing Editor wrote twice to Jackie Huggins the distressing evidence of intra-racial rape. asking her to sign and fill out a copyright Specifically, they accused Diane Bell of “us- form with all the signatures as is standard ing” Topsy Napurrula Nelson, thereby practice. Neither response nor signatures misrepresenting the nature of the long-stand- were forthcoming. Consequently, we had to ing relationship between the two women and ask our publisher to seek legal advice in or- patronizing Napurrula Nelson as a “tradi- der to protect the 12 writers as well as the tional” Aboriginal woman from their stand- journal in case of legal action. point as “urban” Aboriginal women. We think that both the problem of intra- For those of us in Australia (Robyn racial violence and the question of who is Rowland and Renate Klein) it has been dis- allowed to speak out about male violence heartening to see, since the publication of against women are crucial topics. We still Bell and Napurrula Nelson’s article, white hope that we will receive (an) article(s) on feminists organizing panels at conferences, these topics from Aboriginal women. We but not thinking it proper to share the ensu- greatly appreciate that despite the way Diane ing “dialogue” with Diane Bell or Topsy Na- Bell has been misrepresented-in her ab- purrula Nelson. Importantly, it was not the sence-in white feminists’ fora in Australia, issue of steadily increasing intra-racial vio- she has taken the time to further develop her lence against Aboriginal women that was at analysis of these issues in “Intra-Racial Rape issue, but a condemnation of Diane Bell as Revisited: On Forging a Feminist Future be- exploitative and Topsy Napurrula Nelson as yond Factions and Frightening Politics” incompetent to speak on this topic as she was which we are publishing in this issue of “merely” a traditional woman and English u(sIF. We find it deplorable that speaking

505 506 Letters to the Editors out about rape still means paying a price- and still are, part of that colonising force. even in feminist circles. Our country was colonised on both a racially We are deeply distressed about these hap- and sexually imperialistic base. In many penings but more than ever determined to cases our women considered white women continue publishing radical analyses of the worse than men in their treatment of Abori- grim realities women continue to face global- ginal women, particularly in the domestic ly. We urge our readers to send us papers on service field. violence against women: we must continue to Which brings us to the point of Topsy Na- speak out in order to devise strategies to stop purrula Nelson as Bell’s co-author. We find it the abuse of women. amazing and unethical that her name has RENATE KLEIN (On behalf of the Editors) been placed as an author rather than that of chief informant. With all due respect, Topsy is an older traditional Aboriginal woman who speaks English as a second language [nd.] and the analysis of the type in Bell’s article is highly academic. Further, Topsy’s quotations Dear Editors, in the paper have little relevance to the chap- We wish to respond in order to make an ter and nothing to do with rape at all. objection to a recent article “Speaking About Bell also states she met Topsy “during an Rape Is Everyone’s Business” appearing in eighteen month stint of participant observa- Women’s Studies International Forum, Vol. tion” (p. 405) and like so many anthropolo- 12 No. 4, 1989 by Dianne [sic] Bell. gists this provides the nexus whereby they Although some choose to call us “hostile become the experts at documenting and black urban Aboriginal women” (p. 405) let transposing an alien culture into western pa- us say we have the undisputable right to triarchal and feminist interpretations. This is speak as Aboriginal women also. We have not acceptable to us and is highly dangerous been aware for a long time that non-Abori- if cultural sensitivity to all Aboriginal Au- ginal researchers and workers in Aboriginal stralians irrespective of where they come communities have attempted to create “geo- from does not prevail. graphical and blood-line” divisions between It is our business how we deal with rape traditional and urban Aboriginals. Being ur- and have done so for the last 202 years quite ban does not imply we are any less Abori- well. We don’t need white anthropologists re- ginal than our traditional counterparts. porting business which can be abused and As the majority of us have University de- misinterpreted by racists in the wider com- grees we are able to analyse the article more munity. They feed like parasites to this type closely and we find it totally abhorrent and of thing. disagree with many of the assumptions Bell Another point we would like to address is makes-the largest being the title of her arti- that, yes, we find more cohesion with social- cle. We dispute the central proposition that ist feminists than radical feminists (p. 410) as rape is “everyone’s business.” What this re- our fight is against the state, the system, so- flects is white imperialism of others’ cultures cial injustices, and primarily racism, far in which are theirs to appropriate, criticise and excess of patriarchy. We continually find we castigate. One may well see rape as being ev- are being jockeyed into the position of fight- eryone’s business from a privileged white, ing and separating from our men and we will middle-class perspective, however, when you not. We are women and men together who are black and powerless it is a different story. have suffered grave injustices by the white Blacks have to face the individual, commu- invaders. We have all suffered. nal and societal consequences that whites Some of us were present at the 1984 Wom- don’t have to endure. en and Labour Conference in Brisbane (p. We realise that our internal conflicts have 415) where we were set up by radical femi- been exacerbated by colonisation and white nists who opportuned an old traditional lady women have always been a part of that pro- to give consent to a paper which we had cess. So just because you are women doesn’t agreed on earlier with the presenter not to be mean you are necessarily innocent. You were, made public. At no stage did we agree that a Lettersto theEditors 507 senior Aboriginal woman be present during Dear Editors, the address. We do not forget these incidents, How I might best deal with the controver- for we know the games whites play in setting sy (at least as far as I understand it) currently blacks against blacks and we feel that this swirling around publication of “Speaking article creates those divisions even further. about Rape is Everyone’s Business” (Bell & Bell’s paper makes us not want to work Nelson, 1989) has consumed my time and with white women, thus destroying some of energy for some time. Emotions have been the already good work that has gone before. running high and the mode of disputation We don’t need any further intrusions which since the letter of Jackie Huggins et al. (Feb- make life more difficult for us than it is now. ruary, 1990) began circulating, has been You must listen to us also for we are Abori- largely counter-productive (see Larbalestier, ginals who have felt the effects of colonisa- 1990; Bell, 1990). Thus, after careful consid- tion far worse than our traditional sisters and eration of counsel offered by colleagues, law- brothers. Don’t let white stereotypes contin- yers and the persons most intimately affected ue to reign supreme about Aboriginals. Sex- by this matter-the women who continue to ism does not and will never prevail over racial be abused, battered, and raped-I have cho- domination in this country. sen to write a letter and an article. JACKIEHUGGINS Here I deal with aspects of the letter of Jo WILLM~~ Huggins et al. and in the accompanying arti- ISABELTARRAOO cle “Intra-racial Rape Revisited: On Forging KATHY WILLETTS a Future Beyond Factions and Frightening LIZ BOND Politics,” I return to themes of our original LILLIANHOLT article, discuss newly available material, and ELEANORBOURKE revisit one of our case studies (all references MARYANN BIN-SAL.IK in the letter are included in reference list of PAT FOWELL article). My hope is that attention may again JOANNSCHMIDER be focussed on the substantive issues; that VALERIECRAIGIE the merit of collaborative cross-cultural en- LINDA MCBRIDE-LEVI deavours be appreciated; and that the deep hurts expressed in and inflicted by the letter Dear Editors, of Jackie Huggins et al. be given a context. I have been given a letter to you dated 14 The questions are complex, requiring a cri- February 1990 about an article Diane Bell tique of theory and practice, and I ask that and I wrote called “Speaking About Rape is my letter and article be read jointly and that Everybody’s Business.” readers refer back to our original article. Since 1975 Diane and I have been working Before the letter of Huggins et al. sur- together. I didn’t have anybody to write my faced, I was engaged in active correspon- stories, I asked Diane to. She really close to dence with researchers (Aboriginal and me. white) working on the issue of violence and A lot of Aboriginal girls I asked to write women in Aboriginal communities. I had re- down our stories; young people they didn’t sponded to some 60 requests for copies of listen to us. our article. It had found its way onto reading I had no Aborigine to write this. Diane is lists in various courses. Work in progress like a sister; best friend. She wrote this all (Atkinson, 1989; Bolger, 1990; O’Shane, down for me. That’s OK - women to women; 1988) indicated that our portrait of increased it doesn’t matter black or white. violence against women in the Northern Ter- I want these things written down, for peo- ritory applied to other areas of Australia. In- ple to hand down and read again later. I was formation on the dimensions of the crisis telling Diane to write this story for me. was coming from a number of sources: the TOPSYNAPURRULA NELSON Australian Institute of Criminology, work on

All citationsin this letter can be found in the refer- 14 February 1990 ence list of Bell’s article in this issue. 508 Letters to the Editors the Inquiry into Violence, police reports, and This reluctance to engage with certain Health Department records. I thought, at questions is becoming routine in the Abori- last, the extent of damage being done to ginal field and is having an adverse effect on women (and hence to families and communi- the quality of research, the candour of re- ties) could no longer be denied. Establishing porting, and the range of researchers availa- the high incidence of intra-racial rape was no ble to undertake work. This, as I demon- longer the threshold issue, and it seemed that strate below, impacts on the quality of our speaking out had made available a dis- cross-cultural justice dispensed to women in cursive space in which productive debate a particularly dramatic fashion. I argue that could occur and where hitherto muted voices a woman-centred analysis of gender in- might be heard. On reading our article, one equalities at the level of inter-personal, com- Aboriginal woman researcher had written munity and State relations is indicated. I am that she was relieved that “people like your- not advocating that researchers have an un- self are speaking out.” The issue of intra- vetted right to expose the sexual politics and racial rape has long had a profile with Abori- practices of the peoples with whom they ginal women I know, but it has been a private work-1 am only too aware of the delicate face, one of deep shame and anguish at the line feminists walk in being sensitive to cul- violation, of anger and despair at the inade- tural differences while not ignoring the ex- quacies of remedies. I was beginning to think ploitation of women (see Bell, n.d.). But bru- that the climate was conducive to work on tal rape, gang rape, rape of young girls, rape collaborative strategies to empower Abori- so common it is a daily occurrence, so perva- ginal women. sive that when asked what he wanted to be Then, in late February, the letter of Hug- when he grew up, a lo-year-old boy an- gins et al. began circulating and the climate swered, “a rapist,” is not an abstraction (see changed dramatically. A session at the Wom- O’Shane, 1988, p. 99; Atkinson, 1989, p. en and Australian Anthropology conference 12). It maims real women, young and old, (Adelaide) was organised to discuss “the poli- and existing procedures are proving to be tics and propriety of work by women anthro- grossly inadequate, and in some cases are pologists amongst Aboriginal women” (April contributory factors to situations in which 19, 1990); the women’s unit of the Australian women are routinely the victims of violence. Broadcasting Corporation (A.B.C.) took up In this context, silence kills women. our article in a most hostile fashion (“Com- One of the main challenges from Huggins ing Out Show,” May 19, 1990); there was an et al. and from the participants in scholarly unseemly scramble on the part of certain ac- fora which have taken up their letter appears ademic women to position themselves as to focus on a cluster of issues around co- sympathetic to the Huggins et al. position. authorship: I am accused of unethical prac- Demands that the letter be published gained tice in co-authoring; my relationship with momentum. Those who argued for the right Topsy Napurrula Nelson is characterised as and responsibility of feminists to speak on exploitative; and her language and cognitive the issue of rape were quickly “white listed.” skills are disparaged. I had alluded to my The race card had been played and the actual relationship, professional and personal, with abuse of women had been decentred. Persons Topsy Napurrula” in our article and, contrary who had been engaged in research in this to the assertion of Huggins et al., it is a fraught area, either withdrew from ex- friendship and scholarly collaboration of changes with me or wrote expressing great some standing (Bell, 1983; Bell & Nelson, trepidation regarding their future work. A 1985; Nelson, 1990). We met in 1975 and for number of qualified, dedicated researchers the next 18 months I saw Topsy Nelson every and potential researchers, intimidatediap- day: sometimes it was when we went hunting; palled/tired by the tenor and raw emotions of sometimes in ceremonial contexts or when exchanges such as these, are tempering their visiting sacred sites; sometimes we travelled reporting and withholding information for to another community to see relatives; other fear of an attack on their personal and pro- times we just sat at home or in a bush camp, fessional integrity. enjoying a cup of tea and chatting, about our Letters to the Editors 509 children, families, work, tastes in music, I am concerned that the attack on this col- film, art, our hopes, fears, and affairs. Over laboration will deter others. Without the the next decade I saw Topsy Napurrula often: possibility of such collaboration, we have in- I returned to the Northern Territory for ex- deed reacheN sorry pass. tended periods; she spent holidays with my Those whtiave heard Topsy Napurrula children and me; we made a number of pre- Nelson speak at various conferences are well sentations at conferences; we spoke on the acquainted with her intelligence, insight to phone; and wrote letters. Topsy Napurrula cross-cultural communication and ability to Nelson is a friend and colleague. find the narrative which illuminates the prob- In the accompanying article I trace the lem under consideration. To suggest that be- way in which a fieldwork relationship be- cause English is her second language, she came one of scholarly collaboration and ex- somehow can’t comprehend complex ideas is plore examples of cases of cross-cultural col- at once matronising and false. Like many of laboration. Such occasions, I argue, her colleagues, Napurrula is multilingual. empower Aboriginal women and the experi- She speaks Warlpiri, Kaytej, and Waru- ences impact positively on their families and mungu with ease and I have heard her mak- communities. I am concerned that we (i.e., ing herself understood in several other lan- concerned persons: feminists, Aboriginal guages. She speaks a creole, but now, when women, lawyers, bureaucrats, activists, etc.) speaking to non-Aborigines, prefers stan- move beyond the glib denunciation of “wick- dard English. Her English is constantly being ed whites” exploiting “defenceless indigenes” expanded and her meaning is always clear to (this is demeaning of all parties) and the anti- audiences. At Deakin University (Victoria, feminist, anti-woman rhetoric which has Australia) in 1986, she delivered a half-hour come to characterise much discourse on address without notes or interpreters (see questions of race and sex because it consti- Nelson, 1990). The attack on her integrity, tutes a deflection from the substantive issues. knowledge and capacity to be involved in any I am also concerned that we not have to rein- real partnership in the production of a schol- vent the wheel with each inquiry. We do not arly article I take as deeply offensive and need millions of dollars spent on a Royal smacking of exactly the racism that many Commission to establish that Aborigines protagonists in this dispute would root out were dying in custody at disproportionate and expose. Her voice is not an afterthought rates. We do not need millions spent on in- and her reflections are central to understand- quiries into so called “domestic violence.” ing the current situation, one in which she What is needed is analysis grounded in these lives on a day to day basis. experiences which generates policy initia- The title “Speaking about Rape is Every- tives, social reflection, and a climate wherein one’s Business,” which Huggins et al. find so “the statistics” are transformed; we need dia- offensive, draws on a Central Australian idi- logue which will allow women to be partners omatic formulation. The following are exam- in the process, not victims. ples: Although Topsy Nelson’s narrative contri- butions, which are italicised in our article, do Question: “Who speaks for that one [per- not constitute 50% of the total wordage, her son or thing]?” imprint is firmly on the ideas and structure Answer: “I’m [or a specified individual/ of the piece. The issues are ones we have group] boss for that.” spent long days discussing and are topics to Question: “Who speaks for this one which we return again and again. I owe her [place, ceremony, knowledge]?” an enormous debt both intellectually and in Answer: “That’s man’s business,” or terms of who I am now. To list her as an “That’s woman’s business.” “informant,” would demean that aspect of her contribution. Finding ways of presenting Notions of what is whose business are pre- in a written text for a scholarly journal, the cise, and to violate knowledge boundaries is oral narratives of Topsy Napurrula and an to court sure disaster. In an oral culture to explicitly feminist analysis was experimental. appropriate the word of another is tanta- 510 Letters to the Editors mount to theft: knowledge is wealth and lines.” There is a profound difference in the ideas are owned. In negotiating publication experience of women from the Tennant of material over the years I have always con- Creek community (discussed in our article) sulted with the persons who we& my teachers and that of educated urban women. To say and asked about who may properly hear the this is not to demean one or the other, but stories. When Topsy Napurrula talked about simply to state a fact. It is Huggins et al. who the topic of rape and our article, she said, wish to establish hierarchies of oppression “It’s important to show that story. Put it in and locate themselves as the most disadvan- one story, not only for Aboriginal woman taged. Given the daily reality of Napurrula’s but for everyone. It’s O.K. to tell that story life, this is hard to countenance. Topsy Na- for Tennant Creek and old generation one purrula Nelson and her families live without too. Start from the old one and come to the running water, electricity, sanitation, decent trouble now” (work tape, 1 l/88). health care, education, or shelter, and endure In the code followed by Napurrula, one high levels of infant mortality and unemploy- speaks only on those matters on which one ment. But Napurrula has authority in her has a right to speak and those rights are spe- community, continuity with her land, exten- cified in a context-dependent fashion. In my sive ceremonial knowledge and standing in code I state my credentials and I am account- the wider community. Topsy Nelson is one of able to the people upon whose stories I draw. the few women members of the Central Land These bases were spelled out in our article. I Council and is often cited in Aboriginal pub- am not denying the right of Jackie Huggins lications such as the Lund Rights News (see et al. to speak -their anger and pain is legiti- February issue, 1990, p. 2). She has given mate- but I am suggesting that their letter critical expert evidence in land claim hear- does not constitute considered criticism. On ings and now speaks at international confer- the one hand, they assert their education as- ences. sists their analysis, but on the other Jackie Not so long ago, distinctions with decid- Huggins has made clear her disdain for “for- edly pejorative overtones were routinely mal white rules” and stated the urgency of drawn between persons categorised as full- their struggles is such that “we act largely on bloods, half-castes, mixed race, tribal, tribal instincts and emotions then face the conse- remnants, assimilated, traditional, non-tra- quences later” (Huggins, 4/4/1990). It seems ditional, remote, settled, bush blacks, and to me Huggins et al. are conflicted regarding civilised blacks. Government polices fos- the basis and authority from which they tered, nay were founded on, such distinctions speak. None of the letter writers makes men- and divisions, and that language is still used tion of any specific field work in the area, by some Aborigines and non-Aborigines, al- nor do they appear to think that such experi- though the impact of the words differs ac- ence may be a relevant consideration. They cording to speaker and audience. With the privilege understanding of the issues on the emergence of articulate Aboriginal spokes- basis of their Aboriginality but then dismiss persons at the national level, and lobbying in Topsy Napurrula’s voice, claiming that she is the international arena, the assertion of com- being exploited. When she writes to them, mon identity based on Aboriginality has quite independent of me, endorsing her con- sought to expose the divisions as colonial tribution (April, 1990), she is dismissed as artefacts and to develop inclusive categories. only one voice, whereas they are twelve. I This political forging of Aboriginal solidari- have heard this repeated by members of the ty is critical in pressuring the state to exercise academy and media. In my view Social Sci- its constitutional responsibility to legislate ence is not subject to popular referendum. for the benefits of Aborigines, but it is a Notwithstanding I doubt that even if there political identity, it does not entail sameness were a hundred signatures, it would have any of situation or experience. effect on what is known to be so in Tennant When the basis of claim to knowing is Creek. Aboriginality, a common reflex of non-Abo- Huggins et al. introduce the divisiveness rigines is to retreat to avoid being called rac- of what they term “geographic and blood ist. Too often different standards apply to the Letters to the Editors 511 work of Aboriginal writers: documentation Try to follow-up correspondence: no one an- or citation of sources is not asked for, and swers, no one wants to work on planning inconsistencies are not dwelt upon. I am committees, and papers do not materialise; holding Huggins et al. responsible for their one faces accusations of tokenism. All this words. To do otherwise is racist and to invite can be understood; there is much to do; the intellectual corruption. In our article we fora are alienating; writing is seen as a waste drew on the writings of many Aboriginal of time. But, unless there is some continuing women: clearly there is no one position re- dialogue, not mere skirmishes, then attitudes garding violence, feminism, and strategy. harden and people begin to take evasive ac- Aboriginal women do not speak with one tion. voice any more than do feminists, white men, In Adelaide, July 1989, Jo Willmot of the or lawyers. To acknowledge this is not to cre- Aboriginal Women’s Working Party was in- ate divisions, nor is it to deny the validity of strumental in organising an international different positions. It is simply to acknowl- conference of indigenous women. Non-in- edge reality; it is dogmatism and demands digenous women were excluded from certain for “ideological purity” that are dangerous. discussions, there were walk-outs, but there Guilt may be a helpful lever on the liberal was also some progress (see Huggins, 1990: conscience: anger may generate action, but it 113-l 14). Perhaps from meetings such as is not to be confused with analysis. I accept these, where Aboriginal women may develop that Huggins et al. are hurt and angry, but positions on gender and race with women their anger should more properly be directed from other countries, we will see a shift in elsewhere. Their quarrel is with the academy, the climate of cross-cultural exchanges with- the politics of the nation state, not with Top- in Australia. Maybe feminist concerns with sy Napurrula Nelson and myself. Of course, issues of violence against indigenous women it is easier to be angry with us and attacks on will have to be imported. In the context of anthropologists, especially feminist anthro- the politics of the dialogues around feminism pologists, are music to the ears of those who and Aboriginal women, it is interesting to prefer to ignore inequalities, especially where note that it was the meetings in 1985 in a case can be made that women are particu- Nairobi at the end of the Decade for Women, larly disadvantaged. that had inspired Willmot (ibid; Age, July Although not always acknowledged (an 14, 1989). interesting erasure in itself), this is not the Having broken the taboo on speaking out first time issues such as those raised by Hug- about intra-racial rape, I now am going to gins et al. have been aired. They have a histo- continue on my iconoclastic ways and speak ry (albeit a contested one as their interpreta- out also on the “racial cringe,” a condition tion of the Brisbane 1984 incident as a which afflicts anthropologists, feminists in radical feminist plot illustrates) and I offer a particular. For those who care about their reclamation of one strand of that history in work, who want to make a difference, who the article I have written for this issue. My believe we have a responsibility to act on our various attempts to find ways of negotiating knowledge, it is often easier to bite one’s around the outbursts which have become tongue than to speak out. I am engaging now part of the research landscape, have always not because I need to build my curriculum been in the hope that we might move from vitae, and not because I need this pain, but name calling to co-operation. But that does because women I care about are being hurt. I not appear to be a shared goal. The pattern am doing so because the violence continues of the last decade of interventions at confer- and the two most obvious advocacy ences by certain vocal Aboriginal activists groups-feminists and Aboriginal legal aid has been as follows: there is a virulent attack services-have been reluctant, unable to, or on white academics either as anthropologists conflicted in addressing the issue of intra- or feminists and demands that the speaker racial rape, and have been strangely absent and sometimes his/her/their group be in- from any strategising, policy formation, and volved in future planning and then a dramat- public awareness campaigns. I am en- ic exit, a boycott, or a closed session ensues. couraged in my endeavour by a Malaysian 512 Letters to the Editors

friend and colleague who, when I told her Here I merely note that privileging race over about the correspondence said I should, sex is not providing relief, but refuges are, “Ask them: Is it wrong for a white woman to and more are desperately needed. O’Shane’s care? Is it wrong for a white woman to love?” (1989: 114-188,122-124) account of the suc- Initially I thought that Topsy Napurrula’s cess of the Cawarra refuge in New South letter adequately answered the grossest of the Wales and the stress on its services consti- challenges of the letter of Huggins et al. tutes a serious plea for resources for women. However, the civil status accorded the latter The Royal Commission into Deaths in by a select group of women in the academy Custody (Muirhead, 1988) has addressed and media in Australia, and the vehemence what is primarily a male problem. Women with which the letter writers have pursued experience the tragedy of custodial deaths as their platform, have caused me to reflect on wives, mothers and daughters of the impris- the nerves such a letter touches. It seems our oned males. That the number of custodial article has been a catalyst for a series of sim- deaths is dwarfed by the statistics of women mering debates to surface, but we are sad- dying at the hands of their husbands, lovers, dened by the direction of the debates. It sons, is not yet on the agenda. Asking that seems that the personal abuse and profes- violence against women be given a priority is sional careers currently being generated by not to diminish the abuse of men at the various protagonists have little to do with the hands of law enforcement agencies, but rath- substantive issues raised in our article. In all er to argue for sex-specific conceptualisa- the furore following the publication of the tions of violence; to ask that one scrutinises article, our main points regarding rape, con- power between Aboriginal men and women flicted feminism and Aboriginal politics have as well as between black and white men. This been confirmed. The letter by its very exist- reluctance to focus on gender is not peculiar ence confirms our contention that this a con- to Australia. In the U.S.A., the pack rape of tested ground; that there are differences in a woman jogger in Central Park, New York, how to characterise and deal with the issues. and the murder of Carol Stuart in Boston by In none of the responses do I see consider- her husband generated analyses by feminists ation of practical ways of ameliorating the of the reduced visibility of gender as a cate- situation of the women of whom we wrote, gory of analysis in violent crimes where race or of empowering women at the local level, is concerned (see my article in this issue). The or of building alliances at the national level. feminist attention to questions of power and In fact quite the opposite is happening: the dynamics of culturally masked violence Aboriginal voices are being stilled; divisions against women is receiving more reflective amongst women- black and white, urban coverage in mainstream magazines (see Hein- and rural - are simultaneously being masked, zerling, 1990). mystified and manipulated; Aboriginal Those who have been keen do discuss our women’s experiences are providing fodder work in scholarly fora have been less keen to for deconstructionists’ mill; and a rather share their deliberations with Topsy Nelson hasty and poorly argued attack on profes- and me. This rather parochial “closed shop” sional and personal integrity is being granted approach may be therapeutic for those a civil status far beyond that which is war- present, but it does little to generate a re- ranted. Meanwhile, the abuse of Aboriginal search politic, more particularly, a feminist, women continues. We argued for woman- woman-affirming politic, in which we might specific, woman-affirming strategies, ones all work for a safer society. I would welcome like refuges, which we know work, and ones, obtaining copies, or reports of the various we note that Aboriginal women working in addresses delivered and sessions conducted this area are advocating (see Atkinson, 1989; thus far, and as those who have shared their O’Shane, 1988). Huggins et al. declare soli- work with me know, I answer correspon- darity with socialist feminists; identify col- dence addressed to me. Had this attack on onisation as the root of their troubles; and my professional integrity occurred when I assert white women were worse oppressors was in Australia, I am sure the discussion than white men. I return to the matter of would by now have assumed a quite different how best to frame the violence in my article. shape. I would have been able to respond Letters to the Editors 513 from the floor, engage in direct exchanges, rape, sexual abuse and incest in our society; and organise panels. But, at another level, I that named the phenomenon of marital rape; am glad I am overseas because, at this dis- that offered a critique of the blaming the vic- tance, the incursion on academic freedom tim; and that argued for services for abused represented by the letter of Huggins et al. women. appears less as a personal attack and more as I thank those who have remained in com- misdirected political positioning fuelled by munication and offered their reflections on powerful emotions. the issues. They know who they are and I Aboriginal issues have been politicised, shall not name them individually as there is polarised and in the process, rather like nega- some serious “white listing” occurring. I also tive campaigning, have been reduced to eight thank the journal editors for their willing- second sound bites and cryptic bumper stick- ness to address issues as fraught as the ones ers. This may be a successful tactic for gain- raised here. Within Australia it is almost im- ing political office or leverage, but it can not possible to speak frankly on issues involving be the say in which scholarly discourse pro- Aboriginal politics if one wishes to stay in ceeds. Academics have an important role to work. In our article we asked: who speaks of play in creating, sustaining, and nurturing the anguish, shame and risk for Aboriginal the principles of a just society and that in- women? The question is still floating out cludes one in which women, black and white, there. may live as sexual beings without fear of sex- DIANE BELL ual abuse. Feminists have a special voice in WORCESTER,MA. U.S.A. these debates: it was after all the feminist strategy of according women’s experiences and narratives a centrality in social analysis that brought into the open the high level of [n.d.]