You've literally posted a copy+paste comment in response to both responders, and you've included cases/references that don't support your claims nor refute mine

You've literally posted a copy+paste comment in response to both responders, and you've included cases/references that don't support your claims nor refute mine (or my sibling commenter's for that matter). You seem much more interested in grandstanding and stereotyping than engaging fair-mindedly with what is a difficult and important issue. The HN guidelines specifically state that "comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive" and ask us to "eschew flamebait" and "avoid generic tangents". With that in mind I don't want to perpetuate the flamewar but will try only to correct the record: > Even at the ABC, hardly a workplace where you'd intuitively expect the kind of behavior I'm referring to, it's rampant https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-63699881 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-63699881 The article you linked makes absolutely no mention of the kind of behaviour you described in your earlier comment as being "rampant" at the ABC; it's about reactions from some audience members to Stan Grant's (and other presenters') comments during the introductory coverage of King Charles' coronation; it's a complex topic and one worthy of contemplation and earnest discussion, but it has no relevance to your original claims. > Another famous example would be AFL ... It would not be tolerated ... But Australia and Australians get a pass because "it's Australia" In no sense are any occurrences of racism "tolerated" or is anyone getting "a pass" for anything; the whole reason you know about them is they attract widespread condemnation and meaningful action. All of these cases date back a significant amount of time, pertain to a small segment of the population, have attracted widespread condemnation, have led to major investigations, sanctions, reforms and broad progress in the way these issues are understood and handled, and instigated ongoing discussions and programs to continue to improve the way issues for indigenous/PoC players are recognised and accommodated. Issues like this are not isolated to Australia, and these occurrences in Australia have somewhat mirrored the way issues of race in sport and politics have become prominent in the U.S. and many other parts of the world in recent years. None of this is to say that occurrences like those you originally described never happen, nor that "maybe [our] country has some work to do". I didn't and don't dispute that, but the work is being done (going as far as a planned referendum for a constitutional amendment to give the indigenous population a formal voice to parliament, which has strong popular support) and meaningful progress is being made, just as it is in many places in the world that still have "work to do". Anyway, I literally had to check the title of this article to remind myself that the topic is Are you a late bloomer in work or love? Maybe you’re right on time - i.e., nothing to do with this nationalistic flamewar. So I'm certainly out of this discussion. But if your ultimate point is "your country has some work to do", well, sure, of course.