Goto Chockstone Home

  Guide
  Gallery
  Tech Tips
  Articles
  Reviews
  Dictionary
  Links
  Forum
  Search
  About

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

  Shop
FREIGHT FREE
in Australia

Black Diamond: SET of 8 "C4" Cams and 8 matching wire gates. Sizes .3 .4 .5 .75 1 2 3 & 4 and 8 anodised "neutrino" - wire gate karabiners.   $625.00
20% Off

Chockstone Photography Australian Landscape Photography by Michael Boniwell
Australian Landscape Prints





Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

 Page 5 of 6. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 119
Author
OT: Human Rights Framework
One Day Hero
3/05/2010
1:33:08 PM
I once went to Bali and discovered that most Australians who go there are absolute fcukwits! I would have a hard time blaming any Balinese person who then came to the perfectly sensible conclusion that Australia must be basically full of fcukwits.

Racism sucks but is quite understandable. Hendo is not longing for a different immigration policy, but for a time which has gone and will never return. I wish it was the 70's (not for rasist reasons but cause I like; flares, fleetwood mac, and roller girls with big hair)........wishing for it won't bring it back though, better to live in the present

Phil Box
3/05/2010
2:02:00 PM
On 3/05/2010 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 3/05/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>>By the way I hate intolerance in any way shape or form, I simply cannot
>tolerate intolerance.
>
>~> and here was I thinking that the above statement was not only alliteration,
>but also tongue in cheek irony/stirring...
>It now seems to me from a later post by PB, that PB is serious about this.
>~> The internet can be a confusing place to have a debate, as much nuance
>is lost in the literal typed word.
>I definitely wouldn't cut it having a debate on this topic in that Pauline
>H- redne- qurank state!
>Heh, heh, heh.

I was being both actually. Having been at the receiving end of much intolerance at school being that I went to about 15 or 16 schools I can definitely empathise with others who have not been dealt with kindly in this regard. Thus my statement. Yep, intolerance is a broad blanket word encompassing much that is unjust in this world. Will it ever be stamped out, no. One has to learn how to get along with others and then intolerance is no longer a problem, water off a ducks back and all that. Same goes for racism. Seems that a lot of academics protesteth too much.

zumojugo
3/05/2010
2:56:24 PM
On 3/05/2010 Eduardo Slabofvic wrote:
>Is that you John Wayne
Is this me?

Hendo
3/05/2010
3:08:21 PM
I think it might help to reveal my rough line of thinking behind some of my posts.

There seem to be people who believe that any form of intolerance, discrimination, racism, etc are wrong with no compromises and they are an example of such a person living in this manner.

It seems to me that such an uncompromising view is untrue. If I can provide a single counterexample in which it is acknowledged there is some blurriness then this proves that point and other examples will follow.

Following this, if we agree there are grey areas and people differ in this regard, everyone should not tolerate everything and every instance of racism or discrimination is not bad, then we do not have fundamentally different positions in this regard, we are only different in where we draw our lines and start to question things.

I think this would be progress and from this point I think people might be able to start to see where I am coming from by consideration of the boundaries, what they are, how they form and so on.

It is strange that I, the discriminator supposedly lacking understanding of others, seem to be taking a more compromising view on this compared to some of those who preach unbridled antidiscrimination messages.
Dave132
3/05/2010
4:33:38 PM
On 3/05/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>On 3/05/2010 Dave132 wrote:
>> But I contend that people are morally equal.
>>Dave.
>
>Rubbish, no way am I equal to that low life scum pedophile Dennis Ferguson.
>
>As for Peter Singer, he preaches one thing then does the completely opposite
>thing.
>
>
>Gaaaahhh, I had intended to hang on to that forty foot barge pole in regards
>to this thread. We've always steered well clear of political threads here
>in good olde friendly chocky. This really is a climbing website and not
>a political website. I'd rather disciminate towards keeping it this way.
>
>By the way I hate intolerance in any way shape or form, I simply cannot
>tolerate intolerance.

When I say that people are morally equal I'm not saying that people are equally moral. Let's get that straight. I was making a claim regarding moral equality not someones preponderance to be moral. So in terms of moral equality in my way you are indeed morally equal to Dennis Ferguson. What I mean is that where you have equal interests they deserve equal consideration.

Peter Singer's behaviour, as bad as you may claim it to be, does not make his argument invalid. For instance if someone in slave times had an argument against having slaves, we would not disregard their argument based on the fact that they own slaves.

Ad hominem attacks like the one above work both ways however. For instance when someone says that a racist bigot is a "good bloke" that doesn't make his argument less fallacious, or pernicious for that matter!

This forum thing doesn't work well for reasoned argument. Please would some of you read my last post and try and understand the difference between moral equality and factual equality. Discrimination based on race is racism! You can't talk yourself out of that. You might want to say that racism isn't wrong but please admit that you are being racist and then we can move on and see how you try to justify your racist position. You will fail but it will be nice to see you try.

D.

Phil Box
3/05/2010
4:53:28 PM
"Of course I'm a racist, I go to the Races every Saturday." Russ Hinze.

Hendo
3/05/2010
5:01:07 PM
On 3/05/2010 Dave132 wrote:
>This forum thing doesn't work well for reasoned argument. Please would
>some of you read my last post and try and understand the difference between
>moral equality and factual equality.

Iím not sure Iíve got it right. Is the difference that your moral code applies to everyone but not everyone abides by it?

>Discrimination based on race is racism!
>You can't talk yourself out of that. You might want to say that racism
>isn't wrong but please admit that you are being racist and then we can
>move on and see how you try to justify your racist position. You will fail
>but it will be nice to see you try.

I think everyone has racist views to some degree, myself included. Care to comment on this: my post:

On 3/05/2010 Hendo wrote:
>Ok I am interested to ask people who see all racism as bad (black and white
>no inbetween) a question. No one seems to made clear statement on my other
>examples so Iíll try another. I donít really want to focus on particular
>groups but it helps to investigate a point so here goes.
>
>The government has all sorts of policies specifically aimed at aboriginal
>people doing all sorts of things giving them extra funding, trying to give
>them extra access to education. There are education scholarships for aboriginal
>people only, aboriginal people are allowed to hunt various animals other
>cannot, go to restricted places others cannot. The list goes on. To me
>this clearly involves racism but I donít necessarily see it is bad. Do
>you see this as racism? Do you see it as bad and should it be stopped?
>Can you recognise that it is plausible to view this as racism and plausible
>to not see it as bad?
>
>I would be interested for people to specifically address the above questions.
martym
3/05/2010
5:25:56 PM
On 3/05/2010 Dave132 wrote:
>This forum thing doesn't work well for reasoned argument.

This is what has replaced the good ol' campfire debate - the problem is everyone is able to edit their comments before they speak and there's no slurring due to substances.
Nor is there a couple snogging obliviously in the corner.
Glad to see Eduardo Slabofvic is providing the sensible camper who knows better than to argue with 15 year olds by throwing in a gag every few minutes.
So I'll be the first from a foreign tent on the otherside of the pines to yell "F*($n shut up and go to bed it's 2am!"
Wendy
3/05/2010
7:31:29 PM
On 3/05/2010 Hendo wrote:
>Ok I am interested to ask people who see all racism as bad (black and white
>no inbetween) a question. No one seems to made clear statement on my other
>examples so Iíll try another. I donít really want to focus on particular
>groups but it helps to investigate a point so here goes.
>
>The government has all sorts of policies specifically aimed at aboriginal
>people doing all sorts of things giving them extra funding, trying to give
>them extra access to education. There are education scholarships for aboriginal
>people only, aboriginal people are allowed to hunt various animals other
>cannot, go to restricted places others cannot. The list goes on. To me
>this clearly involves racism but I donít necessarily see it is bad. Do
>you see this as racism? Do you see it as bad and should it be stopped?
>Can you recognise that it is plausible to view this as racism and plausible
>to not see it as bad?
>
>I would be interested for people to specifically address the above questions.

Ok, you seem to have several problems here. Problem A: your definition of racism. Let me present some definitions of racism:

rac∑ism
   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled[rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA
Ėnoun
1.
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2.
a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3.
hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Nowhere does that suggests that your scenarios would fit the definition of racism.

Problem B: Your reading comprehension skills seem a little lacking, so I will help out by finding the comments I have made relative to your illfitting scenarios.

Hendo wrote:
>Racism is essentially universal. Unless you are blind or have some kind
>of other unusual attribute it is impossible to not distinguish people by
>their physical features. Hence, there are only levels of racism. Also a
>lot of the time racism is not bad and makes perfect sense.

>Wendy wrote:I think you are heading skew whiff here. Sure, we can distinguish people by physical features. Within those of caucasian background, we have people of different heights, builds, hair and eye colour, skin tone, breast size and penis length amongst many others. However, people don't tend to complain about all those bloody red heads, write off all short people or reach some other totally irrelevant conclusion about people with large noses. Except possibly in relation to penis size. Racism is holding certain beliefs and reaching conclusions and judgements about people purely on observation of their race and applying it universally to all people of that race.

>There is also a difference between appropriate and sensitive choices based on certain characteristics and racism. There are good reasons behind employing women in women's refuges, aboriginals in aboriginal coops and people who at least speak the language and have some knowledge of the culture that a population comes from when working with that group. It's like we employ people with medical degrees to be doctors.

Hendo also wrote:
>
>because often associated with it is the idea that ĎI consider myself a
>person tolerant of everything, my greater tolerance of others makes me
>a better personí. Expect maybe some buddihst or hindu monk or similar who
>has reached their enlightenment and dissociation from the world, nobody
>is tolerant of everything and nor should they be. Should we get rid of
>a system of laws because we are going to tolerate people whatever then
>choose to do? Should we release everyone from jail? Should we let anyone
>and everyone into this country, no limits? Are you going to tolerate Mr
>Ferguson? I think it is clear that all people have limits to what they
>will tolerate, intolerance is not by definition bad. Though you might disagree
>with them, you must accept that other people are going to have different
>limits that are conceivably ok. If you are serious about somehow fully
>embracing all people then you must realise this. If you don't then this
>is a form of looking for some homogeneity in your views.

and Wendy then wrote:
>People set limits based on beliefs and values. Everyone has boundaries of what is acceptable and not acceptable, and it is healthy to reflect on where there come from and why you hold them. This is not a reason for accepting everything or cultural relativism. It is about being able to cleary identify what are the problems you have with something, why they are problematic, what evidence supports your concerns with them, where did this information come from, how valid is it, etc etc etc. A good look at context is always helpful as well.

Wendy
3/05/2010
7:31:41 PM
Problem C: a confusion of racism with affirmative action. Another definition or 2:

affirmative action
n.
A policy or a program that seeks to redress past discrimination through active measures to ensure equal opportunity, as in education and employment.

Main Entry: affirmative action
Function: noun
Date: 1965

: an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women; also : a similar effort to promote the rights or progress of other disadvantaged persons

There's nothing new about people from relatively advantaged groups complaining that affirmative action is discrimination against them. It's all been argued before and I honestly can't be stuffed dragging it all up right now. Generally, I ask people to think about if they'd really prefer to be in the position of the target group. For example, do you honestly think you'd be better off being an aboriginal person with all the associated complications so you could use an aboriginal health service? Affirmative action also sets standards for actions in less expected directions - my university was considering affirmative action in order to attract more men into social work studies because at the time they amounted to 8% or so of students. I don't in any way consider that to be sexist either.
Wendy
3/05/2010
7:41:26 PM
oh yeah, and I am still waiting for an explanation of exactly what it is in your culture that is being threatened, something more than general statements about displacement.




I think there might have been this other thread where someone continually repeated their questions and contrived scenarios, ignored responses and failed to answer other questions, I just can't quite place which one it was ....

Hendo
3/05/2010
10:23:12 PM
On 3/05/2010 Wendy wrote:
>Ok, you seem to have several problems here. Problem A: your definition
>of racism.

Ok it is clear we apply these words differently. To me there arenít sharp boundaries between what you may call racial discrimination and racism. There is a gradual blend between them, different people can choose some boundary between these things but it will be fairly arbitrary and open to discussion.

Imagine you had a whole blend of scenarios and you had to put a sticker on each one, racial discrimination or racism. Iím sure there would be some points at which it would not be immediately clear which one(s) to choose. This is due to definitions failing in the face of complexity and close examination.

>Problem B: Your reading comprehension skills seem a little lacking, so
>I will help out by finding the comments I have made relative to your illfitting
>scenarios.

Yes I saw your comments we seem to agree fairly well here. I was trying to draw some comments from others as well.

On 3/05/2010 Wendy wrote:
>Problem C: a confusion of racism with affirmative action. Another definition
>or 2:

Similar comments to above.

>There's nothing new about people from relatively advantaged groups complaining
>that affirmative action is discrimination against them.

I wasnít complaining. I thought I was clear that I was not in disagreement of these policies.

On 3/05/2010 Wendy wrote:
>oh yeah, and I am still waiting for an explanation of exactly what it is
>in your culture that is being threatened, something more than general statements
>about displacement.

I canít give you a complete list of things. Partly because my culture is something I understand intuitively as much as intellectually and partly because it is going to depend on the circumstances.

If you describe to me generally what you want to say about my response then that might help.

dave h.
4/05/2010
12:13:20 AM
On 3/05/2010 Dave132 wrote:
>When I say that people are morally equal I'm not saying that people are
>equally moral. Let's get that straight. I was making a claim regarding
>moral equality not someones preponderance to be moral. So in terms of moral
>equality in my way you are indeed morally equal to Dennis Ferguson. What
>I mean is that where you have equal interests they deserve equal consideration.

Dave, I enjoyed your original post and agree with your point here (I'd use a term like 'intrinsic value', but who cares). I more or less gave up on trying to promote any discussion of human rights after about p3 of the hijack.


>For instance when someone says that a racist bigot is a "good bloke" that doesn't make
>his argument less fallacious, or pernicious for that matter!

Correct. But my personal knowledge of Hendo's character influences my reading of his posts here and my understanding of what his position ultimately is.

Phil Box
4/05/2010
7:04:09 AM
Affirmative action = reverse racism/discrimination.
Wendy
4/05/2010
7:50:44 AM
On 3/05/2010 Hendo wrote:
>
>Ok it is clear we apply these words differently. To me there arenít sharp
>boundaries between what you may call racial discrimination and racism.
>There is a gradual blend between them, different people can choose some
>boundary between these things but it will be fairly arbitrary and open
>to discussion.
>
>Imagine you had a whole blend of scenarios and you had to put a sticker
>on each one, racial discrimination or racism. Iím sure there would be some
>points at which it would not be immediately clear which one(s) to choose.
>This is due to definitions failing in the face of complexity and close
>examination.
>

I'm curious as to why you are so keen to get racism recognised on spectrum of discrimination. In my world, racism is distinguised from other forms of discrimination by the intent and justification behind it. Racism is specifically about lumping a group of people together based on assumptions about their characteristics in a manner that is negative, offensive, stereotypical etc etc. I think it is useful to have a word that specific identifies when making choices that discriminate (as we all do on a regular basis) is unreasonable, unfair, incorrect and offensive.



>
>>There's nothing new about people from relatively advantaged groups complaining
>>that affirmative action is discrimination against them.
>
>I wasnít complaining. I thought I was clear that I was not in disagreement
>of these policies.

Tis true you said something about not disagreeing with them. I do have a bee in my bonnet about people in positions of relative priviledge complaining about initiatives to redress disadvantage.

Hence:
On 4/05/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>Affirmative action = reverse racism/discrimination.

does thoroughly annoy me.

>
>On 3/05/2010 Wendy wrote:
>>oh yeah, and I am still waiting for an explanation of exactly what it
>is
>>in your culture that is being threatened, something more than general
>statements
>>about displacement.
>
>I canít give you a complete list of things. Partly because my culture
>is something I understand intuitively as much as intellectually and partly
>because it is going to depend on the circumstances.
>
>If you describe to me generally what you want to say about my response
>then that might help.
>
What I am specifically wondering is what is "Australian culture" because I think it's not really well defined and if we can't really say what it is, how can we value it and claim it is threatened? So in order to find out what it is, I guess we need to think about what we value and believe, what we appreciate about how we live, what events and celebrations are significant to us and so on. Which then leads to finding out in what way this is threatened.

Now I'm not really that big on "Australian culture" - are we talking about AFL, anzac day, invasion day, advance australia fair?All of which I find either problematic or not meaningful. The christian traditions reflected in our holidays and our legal system? Are we talking about fusion cuisine which has arisen only from our multicultural society? Are we talking about values such as fair go and mateship, which cliche as they are and given token more than genuine use often, seem to support openness and sharing with migrants? What about democracy and free speech, to whatever extent it tends to be possible to have either? Are we talking about the little aussie battler, the 1/4 acre block and the loaded dog?

I'm not at all convinced that we have anything resembling a shared understanding of our culture in australia, and much of what we do have that could be consider our culture in inherited from other countries whilst the one long established culture in australia is barely considered by most australians.

Hendo
4/05/2010
11:30:53 AM
On 4/05/2010 Wendy wrote:
>I'm curious as to why you are so keen to get racism recognised on spectrum
>of discrimination

Because often people seem to view these things as very clear cut and I do not believe they are. See this post for an outline of my argument:

On 3/05/2010 Hendo wrote:
>I think it might help to reveal my rough line of thinking behind some of
>my postsÖ.

I do not believe it is clear for example, that I am a racist and kieranl is not. Things like this are not black and white. People canít claim to be high and mighty, free from racism, discrimination, intolerance. Some limits are acceptable and we all have different limits. There is a tendancy for some people to immediately dismiss anyone who brings up racism, discrimination, intolerance etc as some kind of ignorant fool lost in the past. To some degree I think this is just human nature so get over it, but the reality is these ideas must be dealt with from very directly by those in government and working in immigration to every person living their life and dealing with it as they do. Look how quickly the Gordon Brown, the British PRIME MINISTER was to dismiss that lady as a Ďbigotí and ignore her concerns and point of view (ok you can argue this was playing politics but it would not surprise me that people in government do this kind of thing often). Look how quickly some here developed a HATE for her and myself. This is prejudice, something very related to these ideas. People have different levels of accepting prejudice too. So I think this is all worthy of discussion, hence this one.

>Tis true you said something about not disagreeing with them. I do have
>a bee in my bonnet about people in positions of relative priviledge complaining
>about initiatives to redress disadvantage.

Itís ok, you are forgiven :P I understand people have strong views and get emotional, make mistakes etc.

>What I am specifically wondering is what is "Australian culture" because
>I think it's not really well defined...
>
>Now I'm not really that big on "Australian culture" - are we talking about...
>
>I'm not at all convinced that we have anything resembling a shared understanding
>of our culture in australia, and much of what we do have that could be
>consider our culture in inherited from other countries whilst the one long
>established culture in australia is barely considered by most australians.

Everybody has a culture in some way or form. Would you agree with this? Most of it is just implicit in the person they are and the way they live. When you ask them what their culture is it is very difficult to describe this. You can point to things like types of sports, clothing, music, food because they can be viewed in an uncomplicated manner, but it isnít the full story, there are many subtle things and though I may not be able to describe them at this moment, intuitively I see there are commonalities. Yes there are differences person to person, within cities/regions, within Australia and yes every culture has cultural influences from other cultures. However, it is clear to me for example that my culture is different to that of say the chinese (all cultures are not the same). Whether you can put your finger on Australian culture or not, there is one, it is changing, and like a lot of people, I would like to see it go in a direction I agree with.

If you donít see any meaning in the what you see as Australian culture, but do see it everywhere else that saddens me a little.

Some interesting questions:

If you donít find meaning in the things you see as part of Australian culture, choose another culture, what aspects do you find meaningful in it?

>I'm not at all convinced that we have anything resembling a shared
>understanding of our culture in Australia

Does this mean this is a bad thing? Is having too much diversity in culture so that you donít feel like there is any unity a bad thing? Should past Australians have done better in protecting and giving themselves the opportunity to build one? If you mix up a selection of cultures do you expect meaning and understanding to appear?

Given you seem dismissive of what I and others might view as our culture, Isn't this being disrespectful to that culture? Does this mean you view some cultures (this Australian culture) inferior to others, through lacking meaning or otherwise? Does this fit into your definition of racism? If all these other people who donít recognise this culture werenít here would that fix that problem? Does this mean it is ok to not dismiss another culture on the grounds that you canít distinguish it?

Are people starting to see my point that things are not black and white?

Eduardo Slabofvic
4/05/2010
11:38:28 AM
On 3/05/2010 martym wrote:
>So I'll be the first from a foreign tent on the otherside of the pines
>to yell "F*($n shut up and go to bed it's 2am!"

I am currently passing water onto martym's tent fly

Hendo
4/05/2010
8:09:27 PM
I thought of another example to illustrate my point, much better this time I hope.

Some people in government believe the aboriginal intervention policy is affirmative action. When I was in Brisbane earlier this year I listened to a protest by mostly aboriginal people outside Queensland Parliament House quite angrily stating that various things including the aboriginal intervention policy was racist. Here we have people disagreeing and a blur between racism and affirmative action.

Now which of the following should be considered racist by these protestors? The government people who came up with the ideas. The politicians who believed it to be affirmative action and voted it in. The politicians who thought it was racist or were unsure but voted it in for political reasons. The people who thought the policy was good affirmative action and voted for the government. The people who disagreed or were unsure but still voted for the government for other reasons. The people who are implementing the policy and who believe it is racist or unsure but do it anyway because they are getting paid/it is the law etc. The people who are implementing the policy who believe it is affirmative action.

There is uncertainty here. If all these groups, especially the voters, are considered racist then very, very many Australians are racist including many who would consider themselves against racism, pro-multiculturalism etc.
kieranl
4/05/2010
9:04:04 PM
On 4/05/2010 Hendo wrote:
>I thought of another example to illustrate my point, much better this time
>I hope.
>
>Some people in government believe the aboriginal intervention policy is
>affirmative action. When I was in Brisbane earlier this year I listened
>to a protest by mostly aboriginal people outside Queensland Parliament
>House quite angrily stating that various things including the aboriginal
>intervention policy was racist.
"various things"? Which various things? Details are quite important. Are they protesting against the influence of the Queensland Police Union or the Federal Intervention in the NT or something else altogether.
In fact the Federal Intervention in the NT is openly racist - the Federal government (both previous Liberal and current Labour) have suspended the racial discrimination act in regard to certain aspects of the intervention. And, in my opinion, that is wrong. It reflects what has been a continuing thread through Australian history of making laws and regulations that adversely affect indigenous people in the guise of protecting them from themselves.
The Queensland Police Union, I'll leave that to you to judge.
Look mate, this is a climbing website. Your rubbish is pretty standard one-nation stuff : an anglo protesting about the special deal that aborigines get. Perhaps you need to educate yourself about the special lifespan deal that aborigines get and the special deal they have been getting from society in general for the last couple of hundred years. Maybe watch the SBS series First Australians as a starting point.

russianSpy
4/05/2010
9:04:40 PM
so we've seen a few people that know Hendo personally pipe up about him being a good bloke which was then slammed as it's no excuse for being a racist. I don't know him from a bar of soap other than reading a pretty interesting discussion, but I figured it's worth throwing in my 2 cents worth.

Obviously being a naturalised Australian doesn't not automatically exempt me from potentially being a racist myself, however that may or may not add credibility to the fact that I have seen discrimination and reverse discrimination both from still speaking with an accent and also through being more often than not the only girl in a male dominated industry.

There IS no black and white. You cannot possibly put a line and label everyone and everything as left or right of that line. That's not just in racism, or human rights vs priviledges, that's in life.
Good on you Hendo for not backing away from an argument- we all have different views and may disagree based on our experience or understanding of a concept. I disagree with a few points that you've raised, but I lack the time/effort/imagination/will to argue those, besides Wendy's been raising a lot of interesting points for continuous debate (some of which I also disagree with, but see above)

I hope that your way of approaching a topic from a number of viewpoints has convinced at least a few readers/posters to reconsider their admirable, but narrow sighted views. or at least concede that slightly left of arc is not necessarily equivalent to Hitler.

oh, and I'm not a racist, I hate everyone equally =))

 Page 5 of 6. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 119
There are 119 messages in this topic.

 

Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography

Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.



Australian Panoramic | Australian Coast | Australian Mountains | Australian Countryside | Australian Waterfalls | Australian Lakes | Australian Cities | Australian Macro | Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo | Landscape Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Fine Art Photography | Wilderness Photography | Nature Photo | Australian Landscape Photo | Stock Photography Australia | Landscape Photos | Panoramic Photos | Panoramic Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Mothers Day Gifts | Gifts for Mothers Day | Mothers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Mothers Day | Wedding Gift Ideas | Christmas Gift Ideas | Fathers Day Gifts | Gifts for Fathers Day | Fathers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Fathers Day | Landscape Prints | Landscape Poster | Limited Edition Prints | Panoramic Photo | Buy Posters | Poster Prints