Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Brisbane41

Members
  • Content Count

    1,495
  • Joined

About Brisbane41

  • Rank
    Cool Cruiser

About Me

  • Location
    Yulara, NT Australia
  • Favorite Cruise Line(s)
    Princess, Celebrity, P&O, Royal Caribbean
  • Favorite Cruise Destination Or Port of Call
    World-Wide

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I do not see it like that. Picture this scenario. Would you go to a brothel to find true love? Now it is a rhetorical question of course. Or why go to a park when you can just pop a pill? Its the authenticity of it. The cruise lines will line passengers up in a port of call in a revenue raising exercise to take photos of passengers of people with something unique to that country. Then it turns out that the people they are using as props in the photos to make money are "fake" its not real. Now if they were real Maori in New Zealand lining up for photos with passengers it would be a big difference. It is authentic. They know the traditional attire and are the real deal. In Princess Cruise lines case they got Filipino crew members to pose as Maori. It is totally fake. It is just the same as going to a brothel to find the love of your life. You will still find love in a brothel but it won't be real love. It will only ever be fake. The issues I have with is I have outlined before, but I think everyone is entitled to call this out whether they are a member of that race or culture or not.
  2. There is already an airport and container port on Botany Bay already. A cruise terminal wont make one bit of difference. It is a great idea in my opinion and I would love to see it happen. Sydney desperately needs it. With all international flights going into Sydney opposed to Wollongong or Newcastle and the lack of a super fast rail network to either of those port cities, it makes more sense for Sydney to have it. I am sure there would be plenty of people living in the area that would love to have it. Generally with protests you only get like 0.01% of the local population turning up and even then the protesters are not local. I would bet that there are a lot of people living around Botany Bay that go on cruises and would love to have the terminal near them.
  3. Its a touchy subject that one. If they are doing it for business or to make money off the culture then it is definitely offensive. However take Japan for example. They have traditional hotels where a Yukata is left in the room for guests to wear around the hotel and to dinner and within the grounds. Now clearly foreigners are welcome to wear this and it is their traditional dress. Then there are the countries in the middle east where women are invited or encouraged to wear headscarves or a head covering, yet having them reciprocate and wear western traditional clothes in western countries is another story. The middle east is definitely an area where women are encouraged to wear the traditional and cultural head coverings. I think if invited to and welcome to wear a countries traditional form of clothing then you are free to do so. If there is some sort of rank order, culture or ritual that only certain people can wear the clothing then it is best not to. In the case of what happened in New Zealand it was clearly a case of people doing crude drawings on their face with strange non traditional straw skirts. That was clearly wrong.
  4. There is not a problem with the medical evidence at all. The problem is the extreme fringe groups, who are often uneducated fools, and a detriment to the good order of society. If as above you say that the church is facilitating these loonie extremist nuts then the church and various religions aiding them need to be sanctioned and face criminal penalties and fines as well. For example if a church minister is allowing an anti-vaxer to spread a message to their congregation then it should be made a criminal offence with a mandatory 10 year prison sentence for the church minister who allowed the message to continue. As for the likes of facebook and zukerburg, if the likes of him allow anti-vaxer messages on his platform then he should face fines that seize up to 75% of his wealth as well as 50 years in prison. If I were writing the laws then that is how it would be. The problem is that so called "free speech" laws are being used in an extreme way that allow these extremist fringe groups to damage a society worst than communism and authoritarian dictatorships. Anyone abusing free speech in order to destroy and counter the good order of society needs to be denied free speech and severely punished to deter others. Large amounts of people around the world are actually dying because of diseases that were once eradicated all because extremist fringe groups are allowed to publish and push anti-vaccination messages. This is not right. On a parallel note there are also people called flat-earthers who are also challenging long held scientific proven facts and making society dumber and less trusting as a result. All these extremist groups need to be outlawed, silenced, locked up. I believe China has some good camps to reeducate them and I would fully support those sorts of camps in Australia to deal with such people.
  5. What I find frustrating about this is that governments around the world will not ban and exclude the extremist fringe groups that promote anti-vaccinations and link it to medical problems without any evidence. In my opinion these groups should be banned from all forms of social media, denied access to media and people and just cut off from society. More people have died from measles than a wild gunmen yet after that incident in New Zealand this year there is a push to ban extremist political groups but where is the push to ban these other movements that cause more damage to society over social media by false and misleading information. If I were running various countries then anti-vaxers, flat-earthers and all related extremist fringe groups would be banned from social media, web and print advertising, it would be a criminal offence to have public and private gatherings and a criminal offence to circulate their material. It should by multi-million dollar fines for media platforms that aid and support them and jail terms for individuals that push that sort of message.
  6. I have actually always hated it. At every port they create bottle-necks at the gangway and disrupt the flow of passengers. With such precious little time in port holding up as many passengers at the gangway and forcing them to queue up for a childish photo is not going to win them any fans. When they try to bail me up on the gangway exiting the ship I just say loud enough "not interested I am not in kindergarten anymore" and move on. In regards to the New Zealand situation it appears that the offence was taken not by the fact that they did the dress up but the way they did it by just drawing nonsense lines on their faces implying that the face art was not intricate but something primitive and mindless. That I can understand causes offence. All of this disruption and time wasting of passengers is all in pursuit of profits.
  7. Its funny because I was exactly thinking the same thing this morning when I saw the news had made it to the ABC. I just thought how do American's view "blackface" these days. You are right it is happening in a secure area and the people working there would have strict conditions regarding their employment and may not get another contract if they upset a visiting cruise ship so it probably was hard to call it out.
  8. If anything I see it as more exploitation of "cheap foreign labour". I am not a fan of it. It is unprofessional and sloppy photography that no photographer worth their salt would even attempt. What I find bad about it is that it is treating us all like little kindergarten children lining up for photos with story book characters. It is just condescending and a lack of respect. Not only that it creates massive bottlenecks disembarking the ship slowing down the process and wasting the precious little time that passengers have in a port. Now is it racist? That is a debatable topic. They may not have intended it to be but the New Zealanders took offence and it appears from the photos that the crew members were Filipino. I do feel for the Maori in this case as those body markings and the way they dress and perform is something that is unique to them. Having people imitate it for a cheap photo may be an insult to them. It could definitely be insulting. Racist maybe not as they are not intending to insult the race. But definitely culturally insensitive is probably the better word.
  9. Totally agree. They are treating us like little children in a kindergarten school or pre-school to line up with the special fuzzy characters. Its ever so condescending and childish to treat grown adults like that.
  10. I just saw it there. I had expected it would have been posted in the Australia and New Zealand cruisers section. I think in general America is taking a step back from political correctness as some political groups over there are taking it to an extreme and what is happening is that you can be racist/rude and offensive to people and it is no longer going to be offensive to some as a form of rebellion against the political correctness brigade. My personal views are that this was racist, but not only against the New Zealanders and Maori, they are also exploiting those crew members from countries like the Philippines by forcing them to get dressed up and pose for photos with passengers. I have never liked what cruise lines do in regards to photos of this nature in port.
  11. I am going to be 100% honest here. I have never been a fan of this cheap and tacky way to get childish and mindless photos with passengers who are purportedly adults with crew members forced into indignity and disgrace themselves by dressing up in childish costumes. It really is disgraceful that the crew are forced to do this. If it is not stupid furry animals then it is some sort of gnarly pirate or some character you would expect to find at a 2 year old's birthday party, yet Princess sees fit to demand their crew gets dressed up as these silly things to pose for photos with adults, middle aged adults and retirees. It is nothing short of disgraceful. I have to agree with New Zealand here. It is racist and it is a slap in the face to their culture and historic background.
  12. I read this news article today and not sure if anyone has seen it. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12290113 I would have to say from the start that I have never been a fan of the cruise lines cheap and tacky ways that they take photos of passengers and have the crew dress up in silly costumes to pose for photos with purportedly adult passengers in a childish manner. Now it appears they have stooped to the level of having their crew impersonate tribal/ethnic/cultural groups for the sake of a photo.
  13. That is a totally ridiculous and silly comparison to make. During WWII the attack on Pearl Harbour was targeting the Battleships and Aircraft carriers. Not the docks. The Hawaiian Islands were in a strategic position to defend and attack other areas of interest so anything based there would have been a target. By attacking ships there it delayed any American response to action. The difference with Sydney is that it is not in a strategic location to attack or defend any area of influence in the Pacific. It would be a waste of resources to even attack it when the ammunition for an attack could be better utilised elsewhere. Besides Australia does not have any offensive armed ships. All our Naval ships are primarily defensive in nature. We are not capable of launching an offensive attack against another country. Politicians have never been intelligent people to take notice of. What their concerns may be are nothing but imaginative to further their political career. When you are an attacking force and Australia having distance as our main defence, no attacking force is going to be stupid enough to waste missiles and ammunition on low priority targets. A naval wharf would not be a target. They would be looking to keep it intact. Considering there is a massive dry dock there that could also be a vital piece of infrastructure to an attacking force to repair their ships on arrival.
  14. Actually that is not a logical target in a time of war. It would be foolish and stupid for any enemy to attack the wharf or docks where you can land ships. The reason is the infrastructure can be used to invade and set up and maintain control of an invasion. The real targets Australia would face in time of war would be our power stations, dam walls, trade shipping with a goal to surrounding the Capital and taking out the government. Thinking of a wharf as a target at a time of war is a rather childish and immature way of thinking particularly not the thinking of anyone in a military background. A wharf is an asset to both enemy and defender. Shut down the power and water and cut off the fuel and food supply and you cannot control the population and the government falls. The enemy only needs to set up generators for themselves and supply fuel and water for themselves to take control.
  15. It is not just the Navy at Garden Island. It is Maritime Head Quarters Australia and the signals building next to it that is providing vital defence to the nation that cannot be moved just at a whim. That infrastructure needs a secure location that is well connected and can be protected. It is that building that is off limits and even then if it were to be moved the whole area would still be off limits as there is equipment there that once decommissioned cannot be accessed by the public due to its nature. The whole area will remain off limits to the general public and that means the road alongside it leading to Garden Island on the base. Even decommissioned warships that have been sunk off our coast still have compartments that are sealed permanently shut that cannot be accessed due to equipment that could not be offloaded. They are still monitored today to prevent access into the area. It is a security risk and will never happen. It has nothing to do with the grey ships. Once there is equipment, computers and military hardware that can command our ships at sea and have access to our satellite information and control the entire nation then the public is not going to get anywhere near it.
×
×
  • Create New...