Harbhajan reignites racism storm

[Laurrz]

so i was just wondering.. in India is the word 'bastard' considered racist?
and perhaps it is offensive.. but surely offensive language and racism is different

 

[duffer]

so i was just wondering.. in India is the word 'bastard' considered racist?
and perhaps it is offensive.. but surely offensive language and racism is different

Indian people generally tend to be far more offended by personal insults and familial insults than we are here. From my experience anyway. I could see how it could be such a big deal for them especially considering how often it is served up to them by the Aussies.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Harbhajan will learn his lesson and call Symmonds a coconut the next time

Um, would have thought that's just as bad as monkey, ITBT.

Coconut = black on the outside, white on the inside.

 

[duffer]

Um, would have thought that's just as bad as monkey, ITBT.

Coconut = black on the outside, white on the inside.

Yep, thrown around a lot between Aussie-Indians. Not a very well known insult though.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yep, thrown around a lot between Aussie-Indians. Not a very well known insult though.

Huge in Nunga/Koori/Murray communities too.

 

[jeevan]

Um, would have thought that's just as bad as monkey, ITBT.

Coconut = black on the outside, white on the inside.

Brown on the outside, white on the inside. Insulting - for sure. Racist - no, since it is most often , by far, used by a member of a race to refer to a member of the same or similar race acting in an unappreciated way. 'Uncle Tom' would be an equivalent among African Americans.

And going by some of the arguments here, the first user of it can claim a level of ignorance.

 

[Cevno]

Aussie regard monkey as racist indians do not.
so why does mike proctor decide by australian culture and not indian?
this shows how a racist decision this is.
But another thing is that was it appropiate that proctor was talking to ponting in the morning yesterday and that too like mates.
A judge can be removed for talking to a prosecutor casually.

 

[Top_Cat]

Brown on the outside, white on the inside. Insulting - for sure. Racist - no

How is a comment which is used to describe a member of one race to associate them negatively with members of another racist not, by definition, racist?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Aussie regard monkey as racist indians do not.
so why does mike proctor decide by australian culture and not indian?

All of the Indian side would have been aware of the perceived offensiveness of the term after the ODI series in India.

this shows how a racist decision this is.

On this matter, is it actually confirmed that Harbhajan called Symonds a monkey? I don't know if I've actually read it in any papers or anything, either before or after the hearing.

 

[Cevno]

All of the Indian side would have been aware of the perceived offensiveness of the term after the ODI series in India.

On this matter, is it actually confirmed that Harbhajan called Symonds a monkey? I don't know if I've actually read it in any papers or anything, either before or after the hearing.

Who admitted that calling someone a monkey was "racist" after odi tour in India?
and it has been mentioned everywhere that the word was "monkey" .

 

[Cevno]

Indian people generally tend to be far more offended by personal insults and familial insults than we are here. From my experience anyway. I could see how it could be such a big deal for them especially considering how often it is served up to them by the Aussies.

i agree.
Vebkatraghvan used to call "kris srikanth" a monkey when they were playing.
I openly call my little sister a monkey.
But would even aussies use the word "hogg" used for your relatives?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Who admitted that calling someone a monkey was "racist" after odi tour in India?

Anyone who didn't had their head in the sand.

 

[Cevno]

Anyone who didn't had their head in the sand.

Please will you remove your rose tinted glasses ?
And it is time to realise that there are people outside of australia and they have different undestanding of different things.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Please will you remove your rose tinted glasses ?
And it is time to realise that there are people outside of australia and they have different undestanding of different things.

Yes, indeed they do. However, Harbhajan had to have known that calling Symonds a monkey was an offensive term after the ODI series.

Believe it or not, but it's that simple.

 

[duffer]

It's not been conlusively shown that's what has been said, we're only going by Slats and the media insinuations right now.

I do agree that given the recent history with Roy that Bhajji has to be a plank of the highest order to use the monkey slur. If he used it.

 

[GotSpin]

Aussie regard monkey as racist indians do not.
so why does mike proctor decide by australian culture and not indian?
this shows how a racist decision this is.
But another thing is that was it appropiate that proctor was talking to ponting in the morning yesterday and that too like mates.
A judge can be removed for talking to a prosecutor casually.

Its because the whole cricketing world is against india

 

[vic_orthdox]

Its because the whole cricketing world is against india

This will get a bite, I'm sure.

 

[kwigibo]

I'm not going to comment on whether people said what they are reported to have.

One point I want to make is I think efforts like this to combat racism do nothing, and contribute somewhat to the perpetuation of the kind of ideas that lead to racism in the first place.

Specifically in this example, the implication of "monkey" being a racial slur. It has been made very clear that it is considered a slur on the basis of Symond's ethnicity. Leaving aside that no one really knows what Symond's ethnicity is (he was adopted and has no knowledge of his biological parents as far as I know), this is a backwards idea. What they are saying is that this is an insult to Symonds alone. Why shouldn't those with european or indian ancestry be equally offended? Should we not take their being compared to a monkey in the same way? Is this decision implying that Symonds should be offended because he has some relationship to monkeys the rest of the players do not?

In reality, we are all equally related to monkeys. By identifying it as an insult to a particular ethnic group, you are suggesting that there is something different about that group. That's not true of course. Their stated aim is to eliminate racism, but this kind of action only gives the ideas value by recognising them officially, if even by purporting to punish them.

In a game without racism, every player on the field should have an equal right to be offended by the insult in question. This kind of policing does nothing to get us closer to racism free cricket. An aggressive lecture on the intricacies of biology, sociology and anthropology might do something to further the cause through education, but racism usually finds its most comfortable home in a mind equally stubborn and inable/unwilling to grasp such intricacies.

Unfortunately a war on racism appears about as futile as a war on drugs. Criminalising something can inflate its value, whether monetarily or philosophically. It's more effective to fight the idea than the action. The Ku Klux Klan were dealt a more serious blow by exposing how silly their rituals were than by arresting klansmen. If we have any hope it's to discredit racist ideas at every oppurtunity, not to suspend players or ban spectators.

 

[Cevno]

Its because the whole cricketing world is against india

No the whole cricketing world is out to blame ponting for everything without any truth.

 

[GotSpin]

No the whole cricketing world is out to blame ponting for everything without any truth.

That made no sense