Symonds calls Uthappa a Gorilla!!!

[Precambrian]

As appearing in Sydney Morning Herald

"When Andrew Symonds laughingly called me 'a baby gorilla', during a CB series match in Adelaide," the dashing right-hander told The Wisden Cricketer Magazine in an interview. "Even though both teams were involved in some hard exchanges during the course of the tournament, I found that really funny."

A very good thing he found it funny, too. Because if he hadn't, and had decided to report Symonds, it would have blown the Queenslander's moral outrage out of the water.

WTF? It puts Symmo really in a terrible light there. Good that Uthappa laughed it off,

 

[Precambrian]

Should put an end to all debates that argue him being a victim. I dunno whether this will stir a hornet's nest in the media.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Not really sure why this is an issue, TBH. Symonds is pretty much protected from any allegations of racism given that he's half black himself, and the insult wasn't anything specific to Indians or Asians in general. If anything, it's an insult that Symonds himself would probably have been incensed had he received. Seems to me like just your standard sledging, glad Uthappa decided not to make a massive incident out of it.

 

[Precambrian]

WT? Symonds protected by color of skin?? So he can call other colored people monkey but can't take it?

 

[Richard]

It's a stupid comment (for several reasons) - Andrew Symonds is rather given to making stupid comments.

Nothing to see here folks.

 

[Barney Rubble]

WT? Symonds protected by color of skin?? So he can call other colored people monkey but can't take it?

Okay, you clearly have strong feelings about this, but I'll wade in anyway.

The term "gorilla" is not, no matter how much you might want to think it is, a racist term usually directed specifically at Indians or Asians. You have absolutely no proof that Andrew Symonds meant it in a racist way. There is not even the merest suggestion of that, merely the situation that two people of differing racial backgrounds are involved in the incident. If Symonds had racial intent behind the insult, don't you think he would have used an insult that isn't usually reserved for offending people of Caribbean origin like himself?

Not only this, but if Robin Uthappa himself, the recipient of the insult, was not offended by it, then what makes you think you should be? What makes you think you can judge the context and nature of the insult, from your position in front of your computer screen? This is not to suggest that only the recipient of a racist insult should be offended, merely that if the recipient was not, then that suggests there was no hint of racial undertones in the insult.

I am not an Andrew Symonds fan - far from it, I think he's a **** - but this really is a total non-issue unless you're looking for reasons to criticise him.

 

[Precambrian]

Wonder how Symonds find gorrilla non racial but monkey racial?

Uh maybe that Gorrilla belongs to ape category, I am not advocating Symonds intended to be racial here, but the fact that he alluded another player to being a gorrilla, and then crying victim when another guy called him one, is pathetic. It could be argued that Harby also didnt mean it in a racial sense.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Isn't Symonds half-white?

 

[Richard]

Wonder how Symonds find gorrilla non racial but monkey racial?

That isn't the point - the point is that certain terms are racist under certain circumstances and not under others. These could include those using the terms, and those on the receiving-end, and many things besides.

It could be argued that Harby also didnt mean it in a racial sense.

It could - I'd argue it did. I don't think Harbhajan meant "you inferior black (or half-black) man" when he called Symonds "monkey" (if, of course, he did such a thing, which has never been established beyond doubt), I think he simply picked a word he thought would get on Symonds' wick most. While use of racist terminology (even if not used to be racist) is deplorable, so is much of the stuff Australians have said to Harbhajan and unlike some indignant Aussies (sideshowtim, etc.) I don't really see any significant difference between the sort of stuff that's traded between any number of players on any number of occasions. "You ****" to me is no better than "you ******\monkey\pakki". It's all utterly unacceptable IMO and as I said I'd not be at all sorry to see any form of use of nouns directed at other players on-field banned completely from cricket. As defined from "hey Warnie, Hussain plays with a real open face doesn't he?" which there's obviously nothing wrong with.

 

[zaremba]

"You ****" to me is no better than "you ******\monkey\pakki".

I'll guess you're not from an ethnic minority then Richard.

 

[Richard]

Not from round here I'm not - my ethnicity is overwhelmingly in the majority around these parts.

The point I'm making is that offensiveness of a term varies. To me, stuff which would annoy me most would be people saying things about my family, rather than any form of racial or otherwise abuse directed at myself. I know not a few who'd say exactly the same thing. Fortunately it seems the notorious Chris Cairns "train" comments were never actually said, but had they been so, I'd have been surprised if Cairns was not far more bothered by them than by someone calling him a "white ****" or similar.

Yet for some, racial abuse directed at themselves could not be worsened. My best friend, who happens to be gay, tends to despise homophobic abuse more than any, and I quite understand his reasoning for that too.

The upshot is that abuse of any kind, simply over a game of cricket, is just not acceptable. And I'd be very happy indeed to see it removed to the maximum extent possible, same way I'm happy to see chucking, dissent and match-fixing being removed to the maximum extent possible.

 

[Precambrian]

That isn't the point - the point is that certain terms are racist under certain circumstances and not under others. These could include those using the terms, and those on the receiving-end, and many things besides.

It could - I'd argue it did. I don't think Harbhajan meant "you inferior black (or half-black) man" when he called Symonds "monkey" (if, of course, he did such a thing, which has never been established beyond doubt), I think he simply picked a word he thought would get on Symonds' wick most. While use of racist terminology (even if not used to be racist) is deplorable, so is much of the stuff Australians have said to Harbhajan and unlike some indignant Aussies (sideshowtim, etc.) I don't really see any significant difference between the sort of stuff that's traded between any number of players on any number of occasions. "You ****" to me is no better than "you ******\monkey\pakki". It's all utterly unacceptable IMO and as I said I'd not be at all sorry to see any form of use of nouns directed at other players on-field banned completely from cricket. As defined from "hey Warnie, Hussain plays with a real open face doesn't he?" which there's obviously nothing wrong with.

Fair argument and I agree with you on the issue that on-field banter involving literal abuses should be done away with completely, and for that reason alone, Harby's comment was deplorable. I am pissed only because Harby's comments were overtly shown up, and to the extent where Harby was demonised and booed at every ground he played in, while Symonds get away as the victim of the episode, while he's also guilty of what Harby did and possibly more, as Uthappa is no white, "Gorilla" can allude to his appearance and construed racial. Also note that Symonds can be seen as half-white also.

I dont agree to the "circumstances" talk here, as then in Harby's case, he could argue that he was provoked into saying that by Symonds' distasteful remark. I only want to state that Symonds is worse offender than Harby.

 

[zaremba]

Not from round here I'm not - my ethnicity is overwhelmingly in the majority.

The point I'm making is that offensiveness of a term varies. To me, stuff which would annoy me most would be people saying things about my family, rather than any form of racial or otherwise abuse directed at myself. I know not a few who'd say exactly the same thing. Fortunately it seems the notorious Chris Cairns "train" comments were never actually said, but had they been so, I'd have been surprised if Cairns was not far more bothered by them than by someone calling him a "white ****" or similar.

I'm white too, and like you I wouldn't necessarily be overly bothered if I was called a "white ****". But if I were a black person I'd find it profoundly offensive to be called a "******". There are some pretty fundamental differences between the 2 cases which it hopefully isn't necessary to spell out.

 

[Richard]

Fair argument and I agree with you on the issue that on-field banter involving literal abuses should be done away with completely, and for that reason alone, Harby's comment was deplorable. I am pissed only because Harby's comments were overtly shown up, and to the extent where Harby was demonised and booed at every ground he played in, while Symonds get away as the victim of the episode, while he's also guilty of what Harby did and possibly more, as Uthappa is no white, "Gorilla" can allude to his appearance and construed racial. Also note that Symonds can be seen as half-white also.

I dont agree to the "circumstances" talk here, as then in Harby's case, he could argue that he was provoked into saying that by Symonds' distasteful remark. I only want to state that Symonds is worse offender than Harby.

I'm not really saying Symonds' comments\actions are less deplorable than Harbhajan's - as I and many others have said throughout this whole sorry issue, both of them have acted in a shockingly poor manner on more than one occasion. I'm simply explaining why some people (like Matt "Barney Rubble" Pitt) have tried to claim Harbhajan's comment is worse than anything Symonds may have done to him or anything Symonds may have said to Uthappa.

 

[Richard]

I'm white too, and like you I wouldn't necessarily be overly bothered if I was called a "white ****". But if I were a black person I'd find it profoundly offensive to be called a "******". There are some pretty fundamental differences between the 2 cases which it hopefully isn't necessary to spell out.

There's the fact that historically there've been far more white people who've tried to put themselves as superior to black people than the other way around, yeah. I don't, however, think that really means a white person doing such a thing here and now is committing a more deplorable act than a black (or any other colour) person.

Any black person is quite right to be disgusted by the use of the term "******" in their direction. But I don't feel I have any less right to be disgusted by someone saying stuff about my mum\sister\fiancee\whatever. Both things are utterly unacceptable AFAIC, and neither have any place in the game of cricket whatsoever. Nor does calling someone (who you are not on familiar terms with) a "jammy bastard" or whatever - because even if you find the term perfectly everyday, many people don't.

The safest thing is just to avoid directing nouns of any sort at another player on the cricket field. As coming-up with a "blacklist" of banned words would inevitably be a rather tedious and utterly futile (owing to the number of different languages spoken by various cricketers) exercise.

 

[zaremba]

There's the fact that historically there've been far more white people who've tried to put themselves as superior to black people than the other way around, yeah. I don't, however, think that really means a white person doing such a thing here and now is committing a more deplorable act than a black (or any other colour) person.

Any black person is quite right to be disgusted by the use of the term "******" in their direction. But I don't feel I have any less right to be disgusted by someone saying stuff about my mum\sister\fiancee\whatever. Both things are utterly unacceptable AFAIC, and neither have any place in the game of cricket whatsoever. Nor does calling someone (who you are not on familiar terms with) a "jammy bastard" or whatever - because even if you find the term perfectly everyday, many people don't.

The safest thing is just to avoid directing nouns of any sort at another player on the cricket field. As coming-up with a "blacklist" of banned words would inevitably be a rather tedious and utterly futile (owing to the number of different languages spoken by various cricketers) exercise.

I'm not proposing a blacklist. You don't need to do that in order to appreciate that calling someone a ****** is not remotely comparable to calling someone a jammy bastard.

 

[GIMH]

The safest thing is just to avoid directing nouns of any sort at another player on the cricket field. As coming-up with a "blacklist" of banned words would inevitably be a rather tedious and utterly futile (owing to the number of different languages spoken by various cricketers) exercise.

Could make things difficult if players aren't even allowed to say each other's names

 

[Richard]

I'm not proposing a blacklist. You don't need to do that in order to appreciate that calling someone a ****** is not remotely comparable to calling someone a jammy bastard.

To you and me, maybe not. But to some people, it'd certainly be comparable - in fact, it'd be worse.

Offensiveness of an abusive term is not all-encompassing, nor fixed accross all spectra. Different people find different terms offensive to different degrees. Hence they should (IMO) all be treated with equal disdain and outlawed to an equal degree.

You weren't here through the whole wretched, -some thing in January. If you feel you've got the strength of mind to not lose the will to live in doing so, go back through some of the threads of the time, and see how much absurd back-and-forthing there was from "bastard's a much worse term than monkey"; "no it's not, monkey's a much worse term than bastard".

 

[Richard]

Could make things difficult if players aren't even allowed to say each other's names

I think exceptions could be made for names when used isolated from other adjectives TBH.

 

[GIMH]

The names without adjectives approach would have meant the world would never have experienced so many "nice, Shane!" moments!!!