Essay on Ethnicity
This research essay addresses the intersections between ethnicity, religion and gender. Specifically I am focusing on my ethnicity, which is Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Australian as I see it. I am also focusing on my religion, which is Anglican. I will be arguing that Anglo-Australian ethnicity, Anglican religion and gender still form the dominant, underlying notions and ideas about Australian national identity. I will argue this in two ways: Firstly, I will argue that the Anglican religion is still the dominant religion with regard to Anglo-Saxons and Australia's identity in general. Secondly, I will argue that Anglo-Saxons and Australians still think of heterosexuality as the dominant gender identity. These arguments can be linked to the post-colonial theory, which refers to western cultures and how they colonized together. In colonizing, the western world then became an oppressor for other cultures. This framework can assist in understanding my standpoint regarding heterosexual couples being thought of as dominant over homosexual couples in Anglo-Saxon thinking, which is still very evident today.
My understanding of the term Anglo-Saxon, or Anglo-Australian, is someone who identifies as coming from British or English descent, and who believes in things like mateship, and a fair go for all. Anglo-Saxons in Australia are usually white, but don't have to be, they are laid back, English speaking, relaxed people, and they can often have ties to Anglican, or Christian religion as being part of their ethnicity. Anglican religion to me, is the belief in God and Jesus as higher beings and the belief in the teachings of the Bible. Love and marriage are also important aspects. Of course there are varying degrees to these definitions and these are my beliefs. I am defining gender for the purpose of this essay in terms of identities such as, heterosexuality, homosexuality and transsexuality. It is an individual understanding of one's own sexuality, which is inherent in an individual as a human and cannot be denied.
Literature Review
The resources I have chosen are based around three concepts. The first is explaining ethnicity as a general term. This was to give me a better understanding of ethnicity, so I could apply my own ethnicity to this. The second is to justify my argument, to explain how Anglo-Saxon ethnicity in Australia, which is my ethnicity, still identifies with Christianity as being its dominant religion. The third concept is to explain that heterosexuality is still the dominant gender identity among the majority of Australians, but specifically Anglo-Saxons. Although there are many other beliefs when it comes to Anglo-Saxon ethnicity, religion and heterosexuality, which I acknowledge, I have chosen these specific resources because they can validate my argument.
I have chosen to research two resources in depth as evidence for my arguments. The first resource by Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart (1995) outlines that Australian national identity still has strong links with our British and English heritage as this is where the first Australian settlers migrated from. Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart do this by outlining certain aspects of the Australian law that favor the Anglo-Saxon ethnicity and explain how this is followed through in government policies and consequently into the general public attitudes. As Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart write, “little if any modification of customs, laws and practices has taken place to accept this diversity [of ethnicities] on equal terms.” (1995:159). They also argue that Anglo-Saxon ethnicity is the dominant ethnicity in Australia even though Australia has introduced other diverse ethnicities and is viewed as one of the most multicultural countries in the world. As they argue, “Referring to people of the Australian cultural mainstream we speak of Anglo-Australians, and in the historical perspective we refer to the Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, British or English inheritance.” (1995:12).
As for multiculturalism and explaining it in Australia Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart argue that although Australia has come a long way since the 1940s when multicultural policies were introduced, there is still a division between what they call the “Australians” and the “Multiculturals” (1995:64). The `Australians' being people from English or British descent, and the `Multiculturals' being everyone else in Australia. They believe there is this general unspoken feeling of being unable to completely accept other ethnicity's as Australian. Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart argue that this idea of the `pure Australians' can also be seen with reference to religion, and that Christianity is still the dominant religion in Australia. They do not deny that there are countless religions in Australia, but argue that these are seen as much more privately practiced that Christianity. As Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart say, “These new religions are seen by many people as a threat to what has been seen and continues to be seen as a Christian country.” (1995:140). This is not to say that they do not accept other religions in Australia, however, they argue that Anglo-Australian Christianity is an integral part of the Australian national identity. This is something that my participant and I agree with, which will be addressed in the discussion section of the report.
The second resource that I have chosen to use as evidence for my argument is by Carol Johnson (2002). This article is based around the argument that heterosexuality is still very much considered the `norm' in Australian society. As Johnson says, “this article intends to focus on… analyzing continuing heteronormative discourses.” (2002:318). Johnson uses the word `heteronormative' throughout the article to explain that heterosexuality, as opposed to same-sex sexuality, is considered to be normal in Australian society. This idea of heterosexuality being `normal' in Australia according to Johnson comes from our strong connection to our Anglo-Saxon heritage. She illustrates that although Australians and specifically Anglo-Saxons have come a long way in the acceptance of gay and lesbian couples, it is seen as a normal that men and women are seen in public hand in hand, but it is very rare to see same-sex couples doing this.
Johnson argues that one of the reasons why heterosexual Anglo-Saxon Australians do not like to see `other' sexualitys being `played out' in the public domain, and more importantly why same-sex couples feel they should not display public affection has a lot to do with Australian politics and laws. She argues that Australian laws have still not come to accept same-sex couples as equal to heterosexual couples. “The Australian Conservative Prime Minister John Howard strong[ly] oppos[es] any form of legal recognition of same-sex relationships.” (Johnson, 2000:45-6 in: Johnson, 2002: 325). Johnson believes it is only when these laws change to include same-sex couples that these ways of thinking can be changed and same-sex couples can truly be equal to heterosexual couples.
Methodology
I conducted my interview with a friend who is of Anglo-Saxon ethnicity, like me, and is also an Anglican like me. She has had a similar upbringing to mine and values many of the things I find important such as the family and education. I knew she had studied religion as part of her teaching course at university so I assumed she would understand the concepts well. However, I found quite the opposite. Although she understood the meaning of religion and gender she had a lot of trouble with ethnicity. I had forgotten that before I began this subject at university I had no idea that I even had an ethnicity, and she was rather confused as to what `white' was and especially how it came into her everyday life. Once I gave her a definition of ethnicity she understood, but I constantly had to remind her that in fact she does belong to an ethnicity, and I think this made my role harder.
I assumed that she agreed with my arguments, even though they were not heavily imposed on her in the interview, and I was correct in this assumption. She even talked about how her brother was homosexual, which I didn't actually know. I did stop the interview at that point and said that she didn't have to comment on that issue if she didn't feel comfortable, but she said she thought it was relevant and that she wanted to go on.
I think I influenced the interview because of the wording of some of my questions. For example I asked if she thought our ethnicity was the majority in Australia instead of saying do you think there is an ethnicity in Australia that is a majority, which could have influenced her to say yes. However overall I would not have done anything differently. I think my questions were quite broad and open to her to state her beliefs on the topics.
Discussion
I believe that Anglo-Saxon ethnicity is still the dominant ethnicity in Australia today. The post-colonial theory helps me to understand this because it explains that it is possible for groups to be oppressed by other more dominant groups. As Song says, “[Post-colonial theory relates to] superiority and inferiority of particular groups, with white people considered the superior race.” Anglo-Saxon ethnicity is thought of by my participant as “pure”, and as dominant in Australia. She said a number of times that she thought she was a “pure” Australian because she was from an English background. As she said, “I consider myself one of the pure Australians if that is not being racist. Only because I have come from English heritage.” Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart also explain this by saying, “What it is to be Australian is still determined by the British or English connection.” (1995:40). According to Castles Australians were British citizens up until 1948 and he believes Anglo-Saxons and all Australians still hold dear this notion (2000:146).
The article by Phillips and Smith also explains this. They conducted a study about what it is to be Australian by interviewing in 1997, six diverse groups of Queensland people. They found that the majority of the participants identified and associated with the “traditional, older, past-oriented symbols and images of Australia.” (2000:203). My participant also said she thought Anglo-Saxons were still dominant in Australia because it was Anglo-Saxons who decided to admit other ethnicities into the country. She says, “Anglo-Saxons are leading Australia still and have organized this idea of multiculturalism”, and “it was our ethnicity that introduced all these other cultures”. To her it was the notion of ownership over these other ethnicities that still made Anglo-Saxons dominant.
My participant defined Anglo-Saxon ethnicity exactly how many of the interviewees in the article by Phillips and Smith defined what it is to be Australian (2000:213). Things that were important to her as an Anglo-Australian were the beaches, the sun, the open land and barbecues. She identified Anglo-Saxon people as being “laid-back and relaxed”, which was something that stood out in the Phillips and Smith article (2000:219). This was also something Clancy agreed with. He said “Australians…grew up independent, self-sufficient with a love of freedom and…an attachment to the harsh land they worked.” (2004:36). She also thought Anglo-Saxon ethnicity was closely linked with Christianity and considered that it was still the dominant religion in Australia. She didn't agree that Australians have a lack of religious feeling and said “the fact that they [Anglicans] practice Christmas and Easter is evident.” Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart agree with my participant and myself and argue that no matter how many religions Australia has, it still and will always be a Christian country. They say, “The Christian character of the country is maintained in the public image and public consciousness.” (1995:140). They validate this by saying that politicians still say a Christian prayer at the beginning of a day in Parliament (1995:148). “In everyday life, Christian religious instruction is still provided in schools, most marriages and burials.” (Jamrozik, Boland & Urquhart, 1995:144).
The main reason my participant used to argue the importance of Christian religion to Anglo-Australians was that they teach the meaning of Christ and Christian religion to children at a very young age at primary schools. She is studying primary teaching and said, “The government wants children to grow up knowing what all these things [Christian values and norms] mean and knowing what the Bible symbolizes.” Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart agree with this and argue that “Resistance to cultural change is particularly evident in the professions, such as medicine, teaching, social work and the law.” (1995:180). Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart say that Anglo-Saxon children grow up knowing the meanings behind Christmas and Easter for example and don't understand other religions' important days and festivals (1995:159).
My participant also addressed the common idea that Australians are not religious people when compared with the people of other countries. She said “most Australian's although they don't go to church every week … in themselves are very spiritual.” Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart say that most Australian's are as religious as those in any other country (1995:150). They explain that although there are many Anglican Australians that do not attend church or services they still try to live a Christian life as they know it (1995:150). “A member of an ethnic community may not be necessarily religious but will…maintain the tradition and… manifestation of identity.” (1995:150). Jamrozik, Boland and Urquhart also bring up the argument that Anglo-Saxons consider religion to be a personal, private matter, that can be practiced anywhere according to the meaning it holds for the individual (1995:150). “For Anglo-Australians religion is rather a private affair.” (Pittarello, 1990:6-10 in Jamrozik & Boland, 1995:150). My participant highlighted this when she answered how she `does' her religion, and says; “I don't feel the need to go to church. I do pray, but I don't get on my knees and do it in the traditional way. It can be done… wherever you want.”
One other intersection I want to explore is the idea that heterosexuality is seen as the `norm' in Australia and any other gender identity is unacceptable (Dunphy, 2000:3, Gamson, 1996:395, Jagnose, 1996:11). I want to argue that this strongly ties with Anglo-Saxon ethnicity and Christianity. As Yang argues “[Australians] define and enforce heterosexuality as the only normal… form of sexual relationship. Heterosexuality pervades in society, and homophobia is fostered.” (2000:229). I believe this quote summarizes many Australians feelings whether they be strong or weak and this is because our Anglo-Saxon, Christian ways of thinking are still evident and are ingrained in the institutions of our society. As Drummond describes, “[Australian] Society has a perception of how a man should be.” (2005:9). This is strong, to be the breadwinner and to be heterosexual (Drummond, 2005:9). Consequently, homosexuality is seen as “inferior, abnormal, unequal, and subordinate to normative heterosexuality.” (Richardson, 2004:3).
My participant particularly identified and agreed with this argument. She explained that her brother recently `came out' as being homosexual, and explained the problems that came with that. She said “they [her brother and his boyfriend] are not openly gay… they kept it quiet among… business colleagues.” Johnson highlights that “gays… intentionally pass as heterosexual in the workplace… to focus on political discourse.” (2002:318). My participant went into some detail about this and explained how her mother was upset because he would never have children, which is something that is very important in the Anglican Church. “Heterosexuality… and having a family is favored, and you literally can't have children if you are homosexual… two men [can not] …get married in a church and are seen as not being fit parents.” Here my participant highlighted the law as a reason why homosexuality is not accepted. Johnson reiterates this by saying “[gays and lesbians can be excluded] from issues involving welfare… adoption, fostering and medical access… which heterosexuals have.” (2002:320). Although politicians may say people of all sexualitys are equal, these laws are still in place which are there to divide the sexualitys into the `good' and the `bad' (Dunphy, 2000:3, Gamson, 1996:395, Jagnose, 1996:11,Weeks, 1995:95). As my participant said “It isn't really acceptable, although they try and make it seem that way, its not… when so many people are oppressed…can't expose [who] they are.”
Overall, my findings in the interview have supported my research and my arguments regarding how Anglo-Saxon ethnicity, Christianity and heterosexuality intersect. My research and interview suggest that Anglo-Saxon ethnicity is seen as the dominant ethnicity in Australia and that Christianity is the dominant religion among Anglo-Saxons and all Australian's as a whole. It also suggests that heterosexuality is the preferred gender identity among Anglo-Saxons, Christians and also Australians in general, and this is seen in our Australian laws, and the Christian values and `norms' that most Australians hold dear.