I have a question for you...

Say there was a group of people who received Government benefits because of the colour of their skin.

Say they got Centrelink benefits, special grants and awards - got paid by the Government to attend school - because of the colour of their skin.

Now, say they formally excluded people of a different race from their sporting teams, ostracised them from their communities, and attacked politicians for pointing such acts out to the public.

This kind of racism would be unacceptable from the Anglo-European community. But they aren't Anglo-European.

This isn't an attack. Just an observation.

I asked my cultural studies lecturer in class about it the other day, and she says it's perfectly acceptable for a group of people so mistreated to want to keep themselves to themselves. But is it acceptable for them to have all-Aboriginal sporting teams? Aboriginal awards - which are the same as the regular ones, only Aboriginal heritage must be proven to qualify for them.

It's not just Aboriginals who practice formalised exclusion based on something which - if they weren't Aboriginal - would be offensive to the majority of Australians.

There are groups who refuse admittance to people of a certain gender.

They're called 'Women's Groups' - very big during the rise of feminism - and men are not allowed. Is that far? For people to be excluded based on their sex? Is it that women want men to "see how it feels"?

Isn't that a little petty?

I mean, I learnt in kindergarten to treat others the way you want to be treated. I learnt pretty early that exclusion based on difference was a bad thing, something that was likely to get me sent to the Principal's office. But it's celebrated in the minorities.

I just wonder why all these groups of people say they want acceptance and unity - then further segregate themselves. I wonder where the logic is. If you want to be treated the same as everyone else, then why do you keep stressing the fact that you are different?

It just doesn't make sense to me.