TMDaines
Fun sponge.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2014
- Messages
- 14,030
The fact he grew up in Spain with all the racist shit in stadia there has completely wiped any benefit of the doubt I had for him.
He could have chosen a lion or a bear. If that were De Gea, he would not have chosen a gorillaYikes. Unnecessary commas, spelled gorillas wrong, capital letter in mid-sentence, apparently. Gorillas because they are tough. Would you prefer a sheep emoji?
De Gea's built like an earthworm compared to Onana, the beast.He could have chosen a lion or a bear. If that were De Gea, he would not have chosen a gorilla
That's what this sect of people would have you believe, yes.So there’s probably black people out there offended, which means this white kid needs to be brought down a peg or two to show how progressive us white folk are?
This idea that when something is said that could offend somebody , it needs to be punished is such a uniquely nutty online concept.
You know this how?He could have chosen a lion or a bear. If that were De Gea, he would not have chosen a gorilla
Because he already decided that's the narrative he's going with. Like some sort of mundane version of the Minority Report psychics that live in the milkYou know this how?
G
Brilliant tweet, if he gets a ban because of that, it would be idiotic beyond belief.
Yup, that's it. Like the FA he's choosing to draw a comparison between a gorilla and Onana.Because he already decided that's the narrative he's going with. Like some sort of mundane version of the Minority Report psychics that live in the milk
As he's said himself, you don't really get to choose what he is offended by.Have no issue with Onana's response but I also don't think we should be dismissive of the tweet. Garnacho has to be more aware of the connotations of the things he posts publicly. I might not be fuming but personally wouldn't be too pleased or comfortable if I was in Onana's shoes.
Who is batting for Gorillas? I mean they have feelings too.If he gets a ban for this, it's a joke.
professional in emojis and metaphorYou know this how?
Just because he's not offended doesn't make it okay by default though, nor does it mean no one can feel uncomfortable by it.As he's said himself, you don't really get to choose what he is offended by.
I could understand if the context was different but its just completely beyond obvious that Garnacho has not meant any offence. Trying to pretend otherwise and be offended on behalf of someone as if you have authority over them is not a comfortable position in itself. At all. Espcially not when the subject is racism. Its not up to you to tell someone when they're allowed to feel or not feel racially abused.
One of those two gorillas was for Harry Maguire.He could have chosen a lion or a bear. If that were De Gea, he would not have chosen a gorilla
People are free to feel uncomfortable or offended by whatever nonsense they want to. Its up to each individual to choose which demons they want to invite inside their own mind. Thats responsibility of the individual though.Just because he's not offended doesn't make it okay by default though, nor does it mean no one can feel uncomfortable by it.
Yeah! Glad you said it because I'm lost for words. These guys really are dumb, their lifestyles must insulate them from the real world so much that it's unreal. After everything that's been happening, you would think...There is seemingly no end to the idiocy of these guys.
If it was a bear some people might still have found offence.He could have chosen a lion or a bear. If that were De Gea, he would not have chosen a gorilla
And I'd have just thought these guys have PR people doing this for them and there's a double-check on how anything could be perceived and so on. While I've winced at a couple of Onana's moments, I've been impressed by his willingness to be accountable and someone with that attitude right at the base of our 'spine' has got to be a good thing.Just because he's not offended doesn't make it okay by default though, nor does it mean no one can feel uncomfortable by it.
I didn't say that.So there’s probably black people out there offended, which means this white kid needs to be brought down a peg or two to show how progressive us white folk are?
This idea that when something is said that could offend somebody , it needs to be punished is such a uniquely nutty online concept.
What kind of bear?He could have chosen a lion or a bear. If that were De Gea, he would not have chosen a gorilla
Yeah the animal itself is an amazing creature, intelligent, protective, like you say and Russians would be proud of a bear or wolf analogy. It's just that for guys my age, when games were a lot more sinister back in the 80s it carries connotations but hey, Onana definitely doesn't need my vicarious outrage!If it was a bear some people might still have found offence.
A gorilla can clearly be used as a racist insult. But on the flip side, it could also be a positive analogy eg Mark Henry calling himself the Silverback or Koby Byron the Black Mamba, or simply just an analogy without thinking about race.
It really is one where I think the intent is what matters. It’s not like a racial slur word.
In this case the intent was not to insult. The Gorilla might have been a positive attribute about race and maybe also country, we forget Onana is from a country that has wild gorillas so might have himself made reference to that just like people in Russia often reference wolves etc or it might have had nothing to do with race and just the fact that Onana is big and defends his territory which is what gorillas do
It's got a very long and well known history with being racist towards black people, you would need to be ignorant not to notice it.Because it’s an image of two huge dudes captioned with two emojis of muscular animals.
If you single out one of the individuals and say the emojis are both aimed at him and your reasoning for doing so is the colour of that individual’s skin, then there’s something going on in your thought process that recognises race above all other attributes.
Can see where the post is going when it starts out like thisPeople are free to feel uncomfortable or offended by whatever nonsense they want to. Its up to each individual to choose which demons they want to invite inside their own mind. Thats responsibility of the individual though.
I categorically disagree with that. I'd call Allison a beast of a goalkeeper. I call Haaland a beast. I call Hojlund a beast in terms of his physique. And Onana was a beast to win us that game on Tuesday.That word is also frowned upon by the way.
No. Because the FA don't require Onana to say he was offended to take action, for very good reason. And the pertinent question now is whether he will be charged or not.If Onana is not offended, can we close the case already?
Besides, a gorilla is a very majestic animal. Strong, intelligent, protective.
I don’t think Garnacho had Ill intentions, but I think Onanas opinion isn’t the be all and end all either, there are Black people who have suffered clear racist abuse which they haven’t felt offended by, yet other black people have, it’s not just a matter of what one individual thinks when you’re looking at something that has affected a large group of people(racism).As he's said himself, you don't really get to choose what he is offended by.
I could understand if the context was different but its just completely beyond obvious that Garnacho has not meant any offence. Trying to pretend otherwise and be offended on behalf of someone as if you have authority over them is not a comfortable position in itself. At all. Espcially not when the subject is racism. Its not up to you to tell someone when they're allowed to feel or not feel racially abused.
Great response and insight, thank you.Can see where the post is going when it starts out like this
No, it's not. It's common sense. They can't base their disciplinary system on players' willingness to hurt their own teams by calling out or refusing to back their own teammates.That's utterly retarded by the FA.
This has to be a wind up. Good lord.That word is also frowned upon by the way.