Flem274*
123/5
Hmm well its sort of in the "light racism" catagory, its still bad of course but its not the same as other comments which could be used..
I think "Monkey" is more likely to be laughed off than, say, other things...
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Harbhajan reignites racism storm
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
I think "Monkey" is more likely to be laughed off than, say, other things...
Flem274*
123/5
Out of curiosity, what do you brand rules like the one that banned Santas from saying "Ho, ho, ho"? PC or just stupid?
pasag
RTDAS
Would need more information about the case to comment but stuff like that is usually just isolated stupidity.
Dick Rockett
International Vice-Captain
If he was more verbose I'd swear that sirdj is C_C in disguise 
Flem274*
123/5
Straying OT for a post here to explain the case as I understand it. In England (I think) Santas in malls were told to say "Ha, ha, ha" instead of "Ho, ho, ho" because the "ho" is offensive to women. Extreme IMO.
sirdj
State Vice-Captain
I said "try to teach a black person what racism is".
You are of Aboriginal descent................good for you.
My point is that it would be an arrogant for a non-coloured person to assume that he needs to inform a coloured person what racism is, coloured people know what racism is, they dont need a lecture on it, they have faced racism first hand for many generations. But a non-coloured person has rarely ever faced racism so his opinion on what racism is , is moot.
Edit...I'm not scared of black people, what a foolish question.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nope. 5 minute journal search using only one search engine (Blackwell Synergy) yielded the following;
"Beyond the racist/hooligan couplet: race, social theory and football culture"
The British Journal of Sociology, Volume 50, Issue 3, Page 419-442, Sep 1999, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.1999.00419.x
"Verbal abuse experienced by nursing students"
Journal of Advanced Nursing, Volume 61, Issue 4, Page 436-444, Feb 2008, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04504.x
"Red, Brown and Yellow Perils: Images of the American Enemy in the 1940s and 1950s"
The Journal of Popular Culture, Volume 32, Issue 4, Page 59-75, Mar 1999, doi: 10.1111/j.0022-3840.1999.00059.x
...........and around 230 others.
Your rectum, counsellor.
Andrew Pollock
School Boy/Girl Captain
Hansen's judgement appears to me, to praise Hayden and Tendulkar as witness. M Clarke witness statement the judge seems to take with a pinch of salt.
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
You only really have to go to a country where you look different to experience it. It's not exclusive to black people. Granted, you don't suffer the same long-term effects in the above situation. Obviously, culture comes into it as well. In India it may well be ok to call someone a monkey, but if you travel internationally you have to be aware of what the cultural sensitivities are in a certain area. If you're told it's considered racist once, then that should be enough.
If you don't allow a white person to have an opinion on what racism is then I don't think that's going to help the issue.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not moot at all. Less informed perhaps but still, not moot. So a white person hasn't faced racism and can't understand what it's like to be discriminated against? There's plenty in the psyc literature to suggest that discrimination of any kind provokes similar cognitive trauma in duration, intensity, etc. So sure, a white female wouldn't understand what it means to be discriminated against on the basis of race but would on the basis of gender. Different phenomena, same psychological hurt.
Of course it was but not as foolish as what you said. Seriously, maybe you should try approaching a black person and discussing racism in that context before deciding it's too dangerous.
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Flem274*
123/5
What utter rubbish, any person of any race is allowed to have their opinion of racism treated with the same importance as everybody elses opinion.
sirdj
State Vice-Captain
While your responses have been Shakespearean rebuttals. Was that your best argument about the word 'monkey' being racist?? no articles, no studies?? pity you have to resort to tactics such as accusing me of defending racism. It seems you cant even read straight.
sirdj
State Vice-Captain
Yes you can have an opinion............but it does not count.
Rajeev
U19 12th Man
M. Clarke, oh you bump catcher, caught red handed
[16] At about this time Mr Michael Clarke was slowly crossing the pitch from cover to cover. His evidence was that he heard Mr Singh call Mr Clarke a big monkey. He was cross examined by Mr Manohar, counsel for the appellant, as to what he stated in the hearing before Mr Procter. There it was recorded that he stated he heard "something like big monkey". However, his evidence to me was not that this was the use of something similar to "big monkey". Rather he maintained that what he told Mr Procter was that he heard things being said that he did not hear or comprehend which he referred to as "something something something" but then he heard the words "big monkey".
[16] At about this time Mr Michael Clarke was slowly crossing the pitch from cover to cover. His evidence was that he heard Mr Singh call Mr Clarke a big monkey. He was cross examined by Mr Manohar, counsel for the appellant, as to what he stated in the hearing before Mr Procter. There it was recorded that he stated he heard "something like big monkey". However, his evidence to me was not that this was the use of something similar to "big monkey". Rather he maintained that what he told Mr Procter was that he heard things being said that he did not hear or comprehend which he referred to as "something something something" but then he heard the words "big monkey".
pasag
RTDAS
I'm in the process of looking through the uni's journal databases for more detail on this.
But the first two google hits on 'list of ethnic slurs'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs#M
http://www.rsdb.org/
Both have Monkey and various different forms of it. Really it's pretty common knowledge though and only the most bias person blind-sighted by apologist racist crap would try and weasel there way out of it and continue defending it.
But the first two google hits on 'list of ethnic slurs'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs#M
http://www.rsdb.org/
Both have Monkey and various different forms of it. Really it's pretty common knowledge though and only the most bias person blind-sighted by apologist racist crap would try and weasel there way out of it and continue defending it.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
God you're awful. That statement is, believe it or not, discrimmination.Yes you can have an opinion............but it does not count.
are you saying white mans opinion or racism dosnt count ?Yes you can have an opinion............but it does not count.
sirdj
State Vice-Captain
Instead of quoting names of journals why not post the actual link or the text??
LongHopCassidy
International Captain
Good place to start.
Of key interest ('19th century racism' heading):
To be vilified as an evolutionary remnant makes the African reaction nowadays understandable, no? It's a direct implication that they're closer physically and intellectually to our monkey ancestors than we are - in effect, coloured people are made to look inferior in every department.
The term 'monkey' is the modern edition of such. This is the more developed and scientifically 'justified' version - early 20th century - than the American slaveholding Bible-thumpers whom you claim all racism in history is derived from.
Though I really don't know why the burden of proof is on us as to prove Symond's right to take offense. From what I can see, an incredibly ignorant aesthetic judgement made in India was proven to rile Symonds, which Harbhajan (whether in cold or hot blood) chose to replicate for whatever reason.
Now, why don't you rationalise the Indian perception of 'bastard' to us? Or is your sphincter all tired out?