Serani Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Taking offence to stuff seems to be an Indian/pakistani hobby. Followed by the words "shame on ...." Classic.
vvvslaxman Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 I hate hussain more than any other commie. But in this case it is a figurative speech. Didn't mean literally.
Pioneer Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Taking offence to stuff seems to be an Indian/pakistani hobby. Followed by the words "shame on ...." Classic. Hahaha thats so true, especially the " shame on "
Mariyam Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 People over reacting here, IMO. This is not a racist jibe in any way. Yeah, the SPCA could sue Nasser however. :nervous: :P If a Hindi commentator had said something to the tune of " Raina/Munaf itni gadha majdoori kyu kar raha hai. Smartly kyun nahi khelta? " We wouldn't take any offense, IMO. Nasser apparently just ticks us off the wrong way, that the image he's created over the years.
ganeshran Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Just to add, Why did Symonds take offence when bhajji (Supposedly) called him a monkey. In India, the word monkey is used as light hearted banter to make fun of people, its not a racist jibe. Whose cultural context should we take into account? The person who makes the remark, or the person whom it is aimed at?
Alchemist Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Just to add, Why did Symonds take offence when bhajji (Supposedly) called him a monkey. In India, the word monkey is used as light hearted banter to make fun of people, its not a racist jibe. Whose cultural context should we take into account? The person who makes the remark, or the person whom it is aimed at? Good point. From my experience, it is always the person whom it is aimed at. Because it is his feelings that are hurt.
Serani Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Anybody knows that calling a black brah a monkey is pretty much as offensive as it gets.
Laaloo Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Anybody knows that calling a black brah a monkey is pretty much as offensive as it gets. No offense but you're a monkey brah
Mariyam Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Just to add, Why did Symonds take offence when bhajji (Supposedly) called him a monkey. In India, the word monkey is used as light hearted banter to make fun of people, its not a racist jibe. Whose cultural context should we take into account? The person who makes the remark, or the person whom it is aimed at? Thats not a good analogy. 1) It isn't Harbhajan's job to comment on Symonds actions. It was Nasser's when he passed that comment. 2) Harbhajan was *abusing* Symonds, no two ways about it. Was it racist or not, is debatable. The 'monkey' in that context was an abuse and not used as an adjective used to describe Symond's game. Nasser wasn't abusing our players. He was using the word 'donkey' ( bad choice I agree) to describe their fielding/ movement. More than the animal in question, its the intent that differed. 3) Harbhajan directly said it to Symonds. That can have implications on Symonds game. And Symonds complained.What Nasser said was not heard by the players, and they haven't complained. At least yet.
ganeshran Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Anybody knows that calling a black brah a monkey is pretty much as offensive as it gets. But here you are viewing the remark from the context of the person it is used at, not the person using it. Whereas in Hussain's case you want us to consider the meaning as one used in English cricketing circles. Monkey is a harmless comment in India - we use it to call anyone who is mischevious and has no racist connotations whatsoever. So if an Indian calls a person of African descent a monkey, is it offensive?
Number Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 No offense but you're a monkey brah :hysterical:
Serani Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 But here you are viewing the remark from the context of the person it is used at, not the person using it. Whereas in Hussain's case you want us to consider the meaning as one used in English cricketing circles. Monkey is a harmless comment in India - we use it to call anyone who is mischevious and has no racist connotations whatsoever. So if an Indian calls a person of African descent a monkey, is it offensive? Hows that there can of worms you have opened brah?
ganeshran Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Thats not a good analogy. 1) It isn't Harbhajan's job to comment on Symonds actions. It was Nasser's. 2) Harbhajan was *abusing* Symonds. Was it racist or not, is debatable. The 'monkey' in that context was an abuse and not used as an adjective. Nasser wasn't abusing our players. He was using the word 'donkey' ( bad choice I agree) to describe their fielding/ movement. More than the animal in question, its the intent that differed. 3) Harbhajan directly said it to Symonds. That can have implications on Symonds game. And Symonds complained.What Nasser said was not heard by the players, and they haven't complained. At least yet. All three points you raised weren't the issue in Symonds-Bhajji incident (abuse, affecting the game or his job). Cricketers abuse each other a lot on the field and no one raises a hoopla about it. Gauti's incident with Afridi - Mc Grath with Sarwan, The Eddo Brandes incident etc The reason for that particular flare up was solely the racist connotations of the term "monkey" which Symonds found offensive, which doesnt exist in India at all. I am not blaming Nas here or exonerating Bhajji (if he used those words) - just playing the devil's advocate.
mrinalmech Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 It wasn't monkey. It was 'maa ki' as in 'ma ki aankh' or 'ma ka bhosda' referring to your mother's private parts. You think Harbhajan even knows that calling non white people monkey is racial and derogatory? He prolly doesn't even know that Symonds is non white.
vvvslaxman Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Anybody knows that calling a black brah a monkey is pretty much as offensive as it gets. It is offensive.. not acceptable. To be honest i didn't know he was black until that incident.
mrinalmech Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 It is offensive.. not acceptable. To be honest i didn't know he was black until that incident. See. The avg Indian has no idea that Symonds is black. Anyone with gori chamri is white. So unless Harby went to Symond's wikipedia page to check if he was of black ancestry and decided to use the word monkey he did not say monkey. Maa ki is equally bad but since the rest of the world doesn't know the meaning of maa ki they are fixated by the belief that the word uttered was monkey.
SachDan Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Anybody knows that calling a black brah a monkey is pretty much as offensive as it gets. No offense but you're a monkey brah :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
vvvslaxman Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 See. The avg Indian has no idea that Symonds is black. Anyone with gori chamri is white. So unless Harby went to Symond's wikipedia page to check if he was of black ancestry and decided to use the word monkey he did not say monkey. Maa ki is equally bad but since the rest of the world doesn't know the meaning of maa ki they are fixated by the belief that the word uttered was monkey. If at all he called appearance based ..purely This guy is fondly called as "karadi" (bear)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now