More Roy Bashing, this time from New Zealand
Everyone seems to be lining up to sink the boot into Andrew Symonds. Indian spectators, Mark Waugh, the Indian media, Mahesh... and now from across the Tasman, Kiwi website Sportsfreak weighs in with a New Zealand perspective on the whole Andrew Symonds monkey taunting incident:
While Sportsfreak does not condone racial discrimination in any form, it is only right to look at this from the boundary. And lets get one thing straight: Symonds did not get taunted with monkey calls because he is black. Countless West Indian teams have passed through India without hint of abuse. And black members of South African and England teams have never been singled out.So as Roy wears white sun cream, racist taunts are inevitable, nay, expected. Hmm, interesting perspective from our neighbours. Really looking forward to kicking some Kiwi tail during the Chappell Hadlee Trophy this summer!
Symonds was abused because he is a knob. Take your pick for the specific reason: he had an on-filed run-in with Sreesanth in the first game, he has a ridiculous hair-do, everything he has ever done in the field is over-theatric, and then there’s the outrageous lip gloss clown make-up mask. Where do you start?
It is pathetic lip paint that probably leads to the racial abuse. Being English, Symonds should realise that the white monkey lips is straight out of the Black and White Minstrel show. So a monkey call, while unpleasant, has some inevitability about it.
| Posted by JC on Fri 26 Oct |  20 comments |
So a funny haircuts and wearing sunscreen are grounds for justified racial abuse??
Remind me never to go to the beach again. :)
Posted by Timbo on 2007-10-26 09:06:20
Remind me never to go to the beach again. :)
Posted by Timbo on 2007-10-26 09:06:20
What an idiot.
South Africa just had the same problem in Pakistan with their black members being racially abused. The key difference is Pakistan didn't deny it happened. No one dares accuse a black South African of being a knob for reporting racism.
----------
The incident mirrors the monkey chants directed at Australia's allrounder Andrew Symonds during the fifth ODI at Vadodara, but South Africa, like Australia, will not be lodging any complaints. Michael Owen-Smith, the team's media manager, said: "The matter was swiftly handled and we are not going to lodge an official complaint.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/pakvrsa/content/story/315031.html
--------
Of course I think Australia should be submitting a complaint about the BCCI denying the racist abuse happened.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-10-26 11:28:10
South Africa just had the same problem in Pakistan with their black members being racially abused. The key difference is Pakistan didn't deny it happened. No one dares accuse a black South African of being a knob for reporting racism.
----------
The incident mirrors the monkey chants directed at Australia's allrounder Andrew Symonds during the fifth ODI at Vadodara, but South Africa, like Australia, will not be lodging any complaints. Michael Owen-Smith, the team's media manager, said: "The matter was swiftly handled and we are not going to lodge an official complaint.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/pakvrsa/content/story/315031.html
--------
Of course I think Australia should be submitting a complaint about the BCCI denying the racist abuse happened.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-10-26 11:28:10
Agreed JC. I'm looking forward to seeing Symo have his way with Vettori this summer.
Re the issue of West Indian players not being the butt of racism on the subcontinent. Doesn't sound even remotely possible. I'd love to hear Lara and co's opinion on this debacle.
While we're on it, find some cricket for Manesh to talk about. Surely there must be some Indian proverb equivalent to pouring oil on flames?
Posted by TA on 2007-10-26 13:19:20
Re the issue of West Indian players not being the butt of racism on the subcontinent. Doesn't sound even remotely possible. I'd love to hear Lara and co's opinion on this debacle.
While we're on it, find some cricket for Manesh to talk about. Surely there must be some Indian proverb equivalent to pouring oil on flames?
Posted by TA on 2007-10-26 13:19:20
mate why would the indians (who have players who really do look like monkeys *couch*sreesantha*cough) have a go at Symo for being black?
he's not even black to begin with, all of my indian mates are darker than Symo.
They were just trying to irritate him as all crowds do. These arent neo-nazi european soccer crowds with a supreme belief in aryan supremacy, their indian ffs - they probably did not even know that the monkey chant could hold racist thoughts. As ive said before, itt all comes down to indian fans being pissed off at symonds for stating that the indians are not humble enough when they win, and for having a go at sreesanth (who has like a cult following in India just because he is the only one with enough balls and stupidity to challenge players like Nel, Symo etc).
He also said some things to Pathan during that 6th game , which was playe dover and over again.
I'm a big supporter of Australian cricket, so dont get me wrong, i think all that sledging and chitchat is good for the game - and thats all these monkey chants were (albeit from the crowd).
I study stuff like this in Uni majoring in Asian studies, it's a culture clash - indians are mindful of thier economic position now becuase of recent financial success so they dont want to be messed with anymore. And some of you may think that this has nothing to do wtih cricket, but it is mainly this booming middle class that comes to see these cricket games and imo it has everything to do with this new 'agressive' india.
So i know that as Australians, it feels good to be on the right side of a supposed 'racist' accusation, but seriously.. it's not.
I'm aware what i'm about to say next could call upon serious criticism, but if i was Black i wouldn't find a monkey call racist, but hey thats just me. I understand if symo thinks the crowds were being racist, but in my opinion they did not have that racist intent, just to simply try and put him off his game. Obviously they failed.
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 14:20:55
he's not even black to begin with, all of my indian mates are darker than Symo.
They were just trying to irritate him as all crowds do. These arent neo-nazi european soccer crowds with a supreme belief in aryan supremacy, their indian ffs - they probably did not even know that the monkey chant could hold racist thoughts. As ive said before, itt all comes down to indian fans being pissed off at symonds for stating that the indians are not humble enough when they win, and for having a go at sreesanth (who has like a cult following in India just because he is the only one with enough balls and stupidity to challenge players like Nel, Symo etc).
He also said some things to Pathan during that 6th game , which was playe dover and over again.
I'm a big supporter of Australian cricket, so dont get me wrong, i think all that sledging and chitchat is good for the game - and thats all these monkey chants were (albeit from the crowd).
I study stuff like this in Uni majoring in Asian studies, it's a culture clash - indians are mindful of thier economic position now becuase of recent financial success so they dont want to be messed with anymore. And some of you may think that this has nothing to do wtih cricket, but it is mainly this booming middle class that comes to see these cricket games and imo it has everything to do with this new 'agressive' india.
So i know that as Australians, it feels good to be on the right side of a supposed 'racist' accusation, but seriously.. it's not.
I'm aware what i'm about to say next could call upon serious criticism, but if i was Black i wouldn't find a monkey call racist, but hey thats just me. I understand if symo thinks the crowds were being racist, but in my opinion they did not have that racist intent, just to simply try and put him off his game. Obviously they failed.
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 14:20:55
Johan you might want to actually look at what racism is. Its not solely based on skin colour.
An example is racial discrimination against different European groups. Also if you go through Asia you can look at discrimination against the Chinese. Or Japanese and Korean, there are plenty of examples of racial problems where skin colour has no bearing on the abuse.
Also try reading the above post where in Pakistan the South Africans black members were abused. Racism is not a colour issue.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-10-26 14:35:05
An example is racial discrimination against different European groups. Also if you go through Asia you can look at discrimination against the Chinese. Or Japanese and Korean, there are plenty of examples of racial problems where skin colour has no bearing on the abuse.
Also try reading the above post where in Pakistan the South Africans black members were abused. Racism is not a colour issue.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-10-26 14:35:05
I know it's not a color issue, but if your saying that the indians were picking on Symo cos he was "australian"... why didnt they have a go when gilly came out to bat? or any other player? I remember reading an article on cricinfo, that symo thought he was being picked on because he was black or his 'west indian' heritage.
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 14:39:44
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 14:39:44
oh and on the south african racism issue - what did the 4 evictees say to philander and the security manager? that may have been racism.. i dunno what exactly happened, does anybody have a link? i read the cricinfo article, it didnt say what was said or done to the players.
there's a difference between monkey chants and calling someone a "black c***"
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 14:50:36
there's a difference between monkey chants and calling someone a "black c***"
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 14:50:36
"mate why would the indians (who have players who really do look like monkeys *couch*sreesantha*cough) have a go at Symo for being black?
he's not even black to begin with, all of my indian mates are darker than Symo."
That's because a lot of Indians look down upon African races. Ask your lecturer about India's caste system. It will give you some insight.
Perhaps the recent economic boom can also explain 3,000 years of ingrained cultural racism/casteism.
Maybe you should start calling your Indian pals monkeys and see if they think it's not racist.
Just what is the difference between a monkey chant which infers you are less evolved or sub human and invoking someone's colour and adding a vulgar term?
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-26 18:28:54
he's not even black to begin with, all of my indian mates are darker than Symo."
That's because a lot of Indians look down upon African races. Ask your lecturer about India's caste system. It will give you some insight.
Perhaps the recent economic boom can also explain 3,000 years of ingrained cultural racism/casteism.
Maybe you should start calling your Indian pals monkeys and see if they think it's not racist.
Just what is the difference between a monkey chant which infers you are less evolved or sub human and invoking someone's colour and adding a vulgar term?
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-26 18:28:54
@ JC & the gang: I dont know if you deliberately left out the last portion of the article - "the bullies hate being on the receiving end". After all roy & co. is getting a taste of their own medicine - they started it with their pompous slighting of the indian celebrations, the run of with sreesanth, and even a tiff with sachin. He had been downright mean to the hosts, and he just got it back in kind.
Posted by steve on 2007-10-26 22:16:12
Posted by steve on 2007-10-26 22:16:12
Dear hanuman,
most of my indian friends agree with me, and none of my indian friends actually look like monkeys, so i wouldnt call them one.
and yes i do know about the caste system - it has nothing to do wiht african races. Going back thousands of years, the brahmins were considered 'higher' because they were priests, and many considered them as gods becuase only they could perform all the godly ceremonies, and only they were allowed into the little room where teh deity is kept.
If you want to fast forward to the British Raj, british capitalised on this existing system so they could develop a stronger rule over india by giving certain indians (brahmins) some preference and feeding bs that they were from an aryan background and they had common ancestors and all that crap, hence creating an actual rift (there was no major problems pre colonial india) between the 'upper castes' brahmins and the 'lower castes'.
and as for this - "Perhaps the recent economic boom can also explain 3,000 years of ingrained cultural racism/casteism."
yeah maybe there has been 3000 years of ingrained cultural racism, but it has always been on social status. And before you jump at me about the preference of white skin in India - yes i've read that indians really want to have white skin and they have all these skin whitening products - if this is the angle your using to claim that they were being racist - this is not racist in anyway, this is just how they want to look, its no different from pasty people wanting to tan their skin...
just face it mate, they werent picking on him because he was black or whateve,r he just pissed them off by making comments before the series begun and having a go at sreesanth. I don't have a problem with symo having a go at sreesanth or anybody on the field to try and get under their nerve, but saying that India are not humble in their celebrations??? sounds like sour grapes to me.. and anyway, i'd be stripping naked across the cbd if i was part of a team that won any world cup, even if it is just the t20.
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 23:27:42
most of my indian friends agree with me, and none of my indian friends actually look like monkeys, so i wouldnt call them one.
and yes i do know about the caste system - it has nothing to do wiht african races. Going back thousands of years, the brahmins were considered 'higher' because they were priests, and many considered them as gods becuase only they could perform all the godly ceremonies, and only they were allowed into the little room where teh deity is kept.
If you want to fast forward to the British Raj, british capitalised on this existing system so they could develop a stronger rule over india by giving certain indians (brahmins) some preference and feeding bs that they were from an aryan background and they had common ancestors and all that crap, hence creating an actual rift (there was no major problems pre colonial india) between the 'upper castes' brahmins and the 'lower castes'.
and as for this - "Perhaps the recent economic boom can also explain 3,000 years of ingrained cultural racism/casteism."
yeah maybe there has been 3000 years of ingrained cultural racism, but it has always been on social status. And before you jump at me about the preference of white skin in India - yes i've read that indians really want to have white skin and they have all these skin whitening products - if this is the angle your using to claim that they were being racist - this is not racist in anyway, this is just how they want to look, its no different from pasty people wanting to tan their skin...
just face it mate, they werent picking on him because he was black or whateve,r he just pissed them off by making comments before the series begun and having a go at sreesanth. I don't have a problem with symo having a go at sreesanth or anybody on the field to try and get under their nerve, but saying that India are not humble in their celebrations??? sounds like sour grapes to me.. and anyway, i'd be stripping naked across the cbd if i was part of a team that won any world cup, even if it is just the t20.
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-26 23:27:42
Yes they were picking on him because he had a go at the over the top celebrations and stood up to Sree. The issue is that they went over the line and were racist.
I have no doubt your Indian friends agree with you, most Indians are in denial and refuse to even believe they can be racist.
My reference to the caste system is proof of the existence of racism in India. Overwhelming non refutable proof. I wasn\'t saying Africans were part of the caste system but that it shows racism exists in India. As an extension of that racism is the racist behaviour experienced by Africans (most visibly African students) in India.
\"... (there was no major problems pre colonial india) between the \'upper castes\' brahmins and the \'lower castes\'.\" Not only are you an apologist for the recent racist behaviour you are an apologist for the caste system. By saying there were no major problems in pre colonial times is another way of saying it was OK. Discrimination against another person based on religion, colour, race etc is just wrong. It was wrong then, it\'s wrong now.
\"...yeah maybe there has been 3000 years of ingrained cultural racism, but it has always been on social status.\" There is a vast difference between wanting to be a lighter shade and being racist against darker skins.
Can you see the difference?
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-27 14:09:31
I have no doubt your Indian friends agree with you, most Indians are in denial and refuse to even believe they can be racist.
My reference to the caste system is proof of the existence of racism in India. Overwhelming non refutable proof. I wasn\'t saying Africans were part of the caste system but that it shows racism exists in India. As an extension of that racism is the racist behaviour experienced by Africans (most visibly African students) in India.
\"... (there was no major problems pre colonial india) between the \'upper castes\' brahmins and the \'lower castes\'.\" Not only are you an apologist for the recent racist behaviour you are an apologist for the caste system. By saying there were no major problems in pre colonial times is another way of saying it was OK. Discrimination against another person based on religion, colour, race etc is just wrong. It was wrong then, it\'s wrong now.
\"...yeah maybe there has been 3000 years of ingrained cultural racism, but it has always been on social status.\" There is a vast difference between wanting to be a lighter shade and being racist against darker skins.
Can you see the difference?
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-27 14:09:31
Hanuman,
firstly - I clearly stand by my point that there were no major problems in pre colonial india (sorry this post is going to turn out like a history lesson, but clearly Hanuman needs one).
It was just a social heirarchy, it was in every culture, not just indias. The caste system was just based on the line of work your family was in. Brahmins were priests, Gounders agriculturalists and so on, and in pre colonial india people COULD switch from caste to caste, there was none of this 'oh your dad was a carpenter so u have to be one and u cant get an education'. The British introduced that.. if you dont believe me read ANY book writtne by both INDIAN and ENGLISH authors on the caste system. The English stagnated this process, and used it to their advantage. It was because of them there was actual fights between castes and all (obviously when people wanted to shift, but weren't allowed to since the poms came and told hte brahmins that they were naturally higher than everyone else and the brahmins tot heir stupidity bought this and didn't allow any other caste perform ceremonies etc). Before the poms came round, everyone was living relatively harmoniously. And this wasn't just around in India, it was in any ancient civilization - infact Indus civilization was one of the few ancient communities that actually allowed this transfer between social status'. So it is my belief (along with the majority of respected historians in the world on the issue) that the discriminatory section of the caste system (which you will see in British India) was introduced and promoted in sense by the Poms to gain support to rule the country.
My issue is that there was no discrimination in pre colonial India, everyone did their thing and nobody complained. So i am not supporting discriminatoin in anyway - and I also feel that word is overused these days.
If anything, the English social heirarchy is even more 'discriminatory' or watever u say because once u were born into a family, that would be your profession forever, you cant move up or down, hence limiting growth of one whole portion of society.
I presume your of Indian origin by your name (sorry in advance if i'm mistaken) - and yeah this may seem rich coming from an anglo Australian - you should do some clear research on your culture before making rash assumptions, or ask your parents or grandparents - they might shed some light.
you said "There is a vast difference between wanting to be a lighter shade and being racist against darker skins."
That is exactly what i'm saying mate :), your not racist just because you want white skin...it's clearly an image issue BUT lots of journalists have been using this as an excuse to say that the indians have racist intent. So if you don't hold this view, in my books your already smarter than those douchebags.
And i still stand by the fact he wasn't picked on becuase he was 'black'. The Indians are one of the most passive bunch of people as history shows, they won't pick a fight without a reason... and they had plenty of reason with Symonds 'showponying' (if i could steal sportsfreaks description) on and off the field. This is not to say that i don't understand Symo's hurt - obviously in the western world the monkey call has been labelled racist, but in India i don't think it is. To them, it's just like calling the fine leg fielder a wanker or a d***head. There was no racist intent.
and here's one for ya - in 02/03 England came over and I went to watch the Sydney Test where Vaughn carved Australia (scored a 180 odd), and there was a section of the crowd yelling "Vaughney takes it up the arse" repetitively. Do you find this discriminatory? because they are trying to belittle him by saying that he is homosexual... if so, why wasn't there a big uproar? And this happens regularly, to whoever is demonising Australia's bowlers, i remember Sachin was getting it when he scored that 200 in 03/04. If you are so passionate about getting rid of discrimination, you should look at the bigger picture mate - it's in everything if you are so politically correct and look close enough. Do you not agree with Affirmative Action then?
political correctness sucks balls. where has common sense gone?
ps sorry if the post got a bit sidetracked lol.
cheers
Johan
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-27 17:29:04
firstly - I clearly stand by my point that there were no major problems in pre colonial india (sorry this post is going to turn out like a history lesson, but clearly Hanuman needs one).
It was just a social heirarchy, it was in every culture, not just indias. The caste system was just based on the line of work your family was in. Brahmins were priests, Gounders agriculturalists and so on, and in pre colonial india people COULD switch from caste to caste, there was none of this 'oh your dad was a carpenter so u have to be one and u cant get an education'. The British introduced that.. if you dont believe me read ANY book writtne by both INDIAN and ENGLISH authors on the caste system. The English stagnated this process, and used it to their advantage. It was because of them there was actual fights between castes and all (obviously when people wanted to shift, but weren't allowed to since the poms came and told hte brahmins that they were naturally higher than everyone else and the brahmins tot heir stupidity bought this and didn't allow any other caste perform ceremonies etc). Before the poms came round, everyone was living relatively harmoniously. And this wasn't just around in India, it was in any ancient civilization - infact Indus civilization was one of the few ancient communities that actually allowed this transfer between social status'. So it is my belief (along with the majority of respected historians in the world on the issue) that the discriminatory section of the caste system (which you will see in British India) was introduced and promoted in sense by the Poms to gain support to rule the country.
My issue is that there was no discrimination in pre colonial India, everyone did their thing and nobody complained. So i am not supporting discriminatoin in anyway - and I also feel that word is overused these days.
If anything, the English social heirarchy is even more 'discriminatory' or watever u say because once u were born into a family, that would be your profession forever, you cant move up or down, hence limiting growth of one whole portion of society.
I presume your of Indian origin by your name (sorry in advance if i'm mistaken) - and yeah this may seem rich coming from an anglo Australian - you should do some clear research on your culture before making rash assumptions, or ask your parents or grandparents - they might shed some light.
you said "There is a vast difference between wanting to be a lighter shade and being racist against darker skins."
That is exactly what i'm saying mate :), your not racist just because you want white skin...it's clearly an image issue BUT lots of journalists have been using this as an excuse to say that the indians have racist intent. So if you don't hold this view, in my books your already smarter than those douchebags.
And i still stand by the fact he wasn't picked on becuase he was 'black'. The Indians are one of the most passive bunch of people as history shows, they won't pick a fight without a reason... and they had plenty of reason with Symonds 'showponying' (if i could steal sportsfreaks description) on and off the field. This is not to say that i don't understand Symo's hurt - obviously in the western world the monkey call has been labelled racist, but in India i don't think it is. To them, it's just like calling the fine leg fielder a wanker or a d***head. There was no racist intent.
and here's one for ya - in 02/03 England came over and I went to watch the Sydney Test where Vaughn carved Australia (scored a 180 odd), and there was a section of the crowd yelling "Vaughney takes it up the arse" repetitively. Do you find this discriminatory? because they are trying to belittle him by saying that he is homosexual... if so, why wasn't there a big uproar? And this happens regularly, to whoever is demonising Australia's bowlers, i remember Sachin was getting it when he scored that 200 in 03/04. If you are so passionate about getting rid of discrimination, you should look at the bigger picture mate - it's in everything if you are so politically correct and look close enough. Do you not agree with Affirmative Action then?
political correctness sucks balls. where has common sense gone?
ps sorry if the post got a bit sidetracked lol.
cheers
Johan
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-27 17:29:04
Yes, Indians are racist. I am not saying this to get brownie points from the likes of Hanuman or Andrew. I have always said that the monkey chants from the crowd smacked of racism; only somehow, Hanuman and Andrew suddenly go blind on the mind when they read those lines.
To this day, clashes and killings prevail in India over caste, race, community and religion. Dalits, upperclass, etc are all fighting and killing each other probably from the vedic days when Manu's evil laws institutionalised casteism and racism.
So, Indian crowds dont even need any foreigners to taunt at. All they need to poke fun or hurl abuse at, is to see a rolly-polly Romesh Powar fall clumsily yet again on the boundary line, totally missing the ball.
Indian crowds dont need Fosters or XXXX to get angry and maim an opponent. Just a small pre-match insinuation by a player in the opposition camp will do. And on the rare occasions when they are fresh from a victory of the magnitute of a 20-20 world cup, their expressions know no boundaries. It's a cultural thing. Symo accused India of going overboard and had a run-in with Irfan Pathan during the series. That was enough for the crowd. The stove was on the boil, waiting to explode.. Explode, it did and how!
Not everybody these days is a Jesus Christ to show the other cheek and say, 'please smite me again'. Both the perpetrator and the smitten are culprits here, indulging in things other than pure cricket, and both need to be punished.
All that I have to do now is just wait for Hanuman and Andrew to retaliate that I am still racist and support crowd behaviour. Hmmm...
Cheers
Mahesh
Posted by Mahesh on 2007-10-27 21:18:45
To this day, clashes and killings prevail in India over caste, race, community and religion. Dalits, upperclass, etc are all fighting and killing each other probably from the vedic days when Manu's evil laws institutionalised casteism and racism.
So, Indian crowds dont even need any foreigners to taunt at. All they need to poke fun or hurl abuse at, is to see a rolly-polly Romesh Powar fall clumsily yet again on the boundary line, totally missing the ball.
Indian crowds dont need Fosters or XXXX to get angry and maim an opponent. Just a small pre-match insinuation by a player in the opposition camp will do. And on the rare occasions when they are fresh from a victory of the magnitute of a 20-20 world cup, their expressions know no boundaries. It's a cultural thing. Symo accused India of going overboard and had a run-in with Irfan Pathan during the series. That was enough for the crowd. The stove was on the boil, waiting to explode.. Explode, it did and how!
Not everybody these days is a Jesus Christ to show the other cheek and say, 'please smite me again'. Both the perpetrator and the smitten are culprits here, indulging in things other than pure cricket, and both need to be punished.
All that I have to do now is just wait for Hanuman and Andrew to retaliate that I am still racist and support crowd behaviour. Hmmm...
Cheers
Mahesh
Posted by Mahesh on 2007-10-27 21:18:45
Johan - "...obviously in the western world the monkey call has been labelled racist, but in India i don't think it is."
Mahesh - "I have always said that the monkey chants from the crowd smacked of racism"
Thank you come again.
Sorry Johan I'd address the rest of your lecture but I fell asleep half way through the second paragraph.
Mahesh I'd give your post top marks - well done.
It took a while but a true description of the Indian crowds and social situation has finally come out.
Now how about that Sanath, yeah it was a 3rd string bowling attack but that guy is pure class. I hope he keeps playing into his 40's. It's a shame Kalu didn't keep playing.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-28 13:35:19
Mahesh - "I have always said that the monkey chants from the crowd smacked of racism"
Thank you come again.
Sorry Johan I'd address the rest of your lecture but I fell asleep half way through the second paragraph.
Mahesh I'd give your post top marks - well done.
It took a while but a true description of the Indian crowds and social situation has finally come out.
Now how about that Sanath, yeah it was a 3rd string bowling attack but that guy is pure class. I hope he keeps playing into his 40's. It's a shame Kalu didn't keep playing.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-28 13:35:19
Hanuman - Johan - "...obviously in the western world the monkey call has been labelled racist, but in India i don't think it is."
Mahesh - "I have always said that the monkey chants from the crowd smacked of racism"
Thank you come again. "
what was the point you were trying to make? I was never agreeing with Mahesh on that point anyway?? Just because he thinks it is racist, doesnt mean that i do??
and no mate don't use a dog cop out - i reckon if you really could refute my admittedly boring post, you would. but because you know donkeyballs about the caste system, and because you are one of these people who have simply just jumped on this discrimination bandwagon, you ignored it... but its ok. The symbolic god of strength can't know it all now can he?
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-28 16:29:35
Mahesh - "I have always said that the monkey chants from the crowd smacked of racism"
Thank you come again. "
what was the point you were trying to make? I was never agreeing with Mahesh on that point anyway?? Just because he thinks it is racist, doesnt mean that i do??
and no mate don't use a dog cop out - i reckon if you really could refute my admittedly boring post, you would. but because you know donkeyballs about the caste system, and because you are one of these people who have simply just jumped on this discrimination bandwagon, you ignored it... but its ok. The symbolic god of strength can't know it all now can he?
Posted by Johan on 2007-10-28 16:29:35
The point I was making is that Mahesh is Indian and has lived in India, you are not and have not so would know f'all about what Indian's would call racist.
As for the rest of your post you make a whole lot of claims for which I could debate but actually have better things to do. If that is a cop out so be it.
I am not an expert on the caste system but your description of Brahmins did make me laugh;
'...the brahmins were considered 'higher' because ... and only they were allowed into the little room where teh deity is kept.'
Obviously written in your own words Kudos to you for that.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-28 20:30:34
As for the rest of your post you make a whole lot of claims for which I could debate but actually have better things to do. If that is a cop out so be it.
I am not an expert on the caste system but your description of Brahmins did make me laugh;
'...the brahmins were considered 'higher' because ... and only they were allowed into the little room where teh deity is kept.'
Obviously written in your own words Kudos to you for that.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-28 20:30:34
Guys - In India, North Indians look down upon South Indians. It is a racist thing.
When a Delhi-ite or Bombay-ite call a South Indian 'Madrasi', you know what they mean.
For Indians to express racist tendencies, they dont need a Symo, all they need is an Indian who doesnt speak Hindi.
Having said this, there are inherent reasons why Indians are racist. India is probably the only country in the world with many, many races, religions, castes, creeds etc etc managing to live together under the umbrella of democracy for 60 long years.
I am an Indian, but I dont speak Hindi.... something a guy from Bombay or Delhi can never fathom.
There are still areas in India where the upper class don't physically touch or go anywhere near a lower class Indian.
Cricket is the only thing that brings all Indians together. They are divided on almost every other thing. Bollywood (Hindi filmdom) ranks a distant second, because it doesnt have a broad following in the South.
Viewed from a philosophical angle, this diversity is India's pride. It is no matter of pride though, when the racist trait is trained on foreign visitors.
Cheers
Mahesh
Posted by Mahesh on 2007-10-30 05:09:56
When a Delhi-ite or Bombay-ite call a South Indian 'Madrasi', you know what they mean.
For Indians to express racist tendencies, they dont need a Symo, all they need is an Indian who doesnt speak Hindi.
Having said this, there are inherent reasons why Indians are racist. India is probably the only country in the world with many, many races, religions, castes, creeds etc etc managing to live together under the umbrella of democracy for 60 long years.
I am an Indian, but I dont speak Hindi.... something a guy from Bombay or Delhi can never fathom.
There are still areas in India where the upper class don't physically touch or go anywhere near a lower class Indian.
Cricket is the only thing that brings all Indians together. They are divided on almost every other thing. Bollywood (Hindi filmdom) ranks a distant second, because it doesnt have a broad following in the South.
Viewed from a philosophical angle, this diversity is India's pride. It is no matter of pride though, when the racist trait is trained on foreign visitors.
Cheers
Mahesh
Posted by Mahesh on 2007-10-30 05:09:56
Mahesh you sound so civilised when you are not having a go at Roy or Punter.
Your description of India could easily be overlayed on Australia by changing Delhi-ite etc for Queenslander etc.
Heaven knows I wouldn't touch a Tasmanian either (too many years of inbreeding).
And Melbourneites just can't understand how I can't speak AFL.
The only thing that interrupts our aggro against each other is the chance to inflict it on some other country. We aren't limited to cricket though.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-30 13:19:51
Your description of India could easily be overlayed on Australia by changing Delhi-ite etc for Queenslander etc.
Heaven knows I wouldn't touch a Tasmanian either (too many years of inbreeding).
And Melbourneites just can't understand how I can't speak AFL.
The only thing that interrupts our aggro against each other is the chance to inflict it on some other country. We aren't limited to cricket though.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-10-30 13:19:51
Hanuman - I always try to call a spade, 'a spade'. Whilst it means at times I have to point fingers at my own country, I should be man enough to do so, rather than hypocritically and foolishly being patriotic about everything.
I have the same adrenalin surge all Indians have when India wins in anything... and am at my vocal best while watching cricket over the bubbly! But, I also love the game of cricket, and enjoy a good coverdrive, whomsoever bat it came off (Sachin or Michael Clarke or Mohd Yousuf or Kallis).
Cheers
Mahesh
Posted by Mahesh on 2007-10-30 14:42:50
I have the same adrenalin surge all Indians have when India wins in anything... and am at my vocal best while watching cricket over the bubbly! But, I also love the game of cricket, and enjoy a good coverdrive, whomsoever bat it came off (Sachin or Michael Clarke or Mohd Yousuf or Kallis).
Cheers
Mahesh
Posted by Mahesh on 2007-10-30 14:42:50
Everyone no matter what culture we come from or how enlightened we may think we are have fears, reactions toward others that are different from that which is our norm.
It is understanding these reactions and making the choice on how we act that defines us.
Denial of these basic truths leads us enacted prejudice.
Defending such prejudice will only empower it.
Denounce it no matter how benign it may seem.
Posted by KenOath on 2007-10-31 18:30:59
It is understanding these reactions and making the choice on how we act that defines us.
Denial of these basic truths leads us enacted prejudice.
Defending such prejudice will only empower it.
Denounce it no matter how benign it may seem.
Posted by KenOath on 2007-10-31 18:30:59
Post New Comment
You need to be logged in to post a comment. If you're new, register here. Existing users, login via the right margin.
