News Cyril and Shannyn Rioli speak to Caro - link to club statement in page 8

Remove this Banner Ad

t has similarities to Sam Mitchell and Adam Goodes and how we dealt with aspects of their time as players. Sam Mitchell was getting booed by opposition supporters for going into contests with his knees and unintentionally hurting players. He came out and said that he was receiving feedback that he needed to change how he played. he did so, and everyone moved on. Adam Goodes was getting booed in the middle of his diving/sliding into contests with his knees phase, he claimed it was a racial thing and it blew up to be bigger than Ben Hur when it probably didn't need to be.
This is just an awful awful take. To state it as fact is even worse.
 
What a heartbreaking, but important, read.

Jeff needs to go and hawthorn (and society) needs to be much better. Positive change won’t happen overnight and, tragically, it might be too late for Cyril and Shannyn to ever reconcile with the hawks but we owe it to the current and future indigenous players.

I hope Mitchell is serious about progress. I don’t want talk, though. I’d like to see something tangible and meaningful come out of this. He was a senior player and would have been present in the lockeroom when a lot of this was going on - he needs to address this also.

Also, reading this thread, some of you are racists.
I think Mitchell is , well confident he is anyway

But the club needs to do him a favour asap and unburden him of this though.

JK gone asap , hopefully the club today has been working on a removal/resignation statergy for him/with him.
Reviews and appropriate programs put in place asap with full transparency to members and supporters.

And sort it out with Cyril and Shannyn , this cant happen I feel without the above first .

And yes , your last sentence is correct.
 
Not really, the definition is that it causes offence. For something to be a cause then it has to be the primary reason, rather than someone taking offence for other reasons.
So I say I had sex with your mother last night and it turns out your mother is dead (and I didn’t know this), is the only bit that can be considered offensive the bit where I said I had sex with your mother and not the connotation I desecrated her corpse? 🤔
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So I say I had sex with your mother last night and it turns out your mother is dead (and I didn’t know this), is the only bit that can be considered offensive is the bit where I said I had sex with your mother and not the connotation I desecrated her corpse? 🤔
Yes.
 
Any jokes that don’t take personal circumstances into account or cultural sensitivities open themselves up to be taken as racist jokes by those who are targeted.

That’s not a new thing.
Holding people to different standards in the name of social justice is not a sign of equality either.

This is also not a new thing.
 
Kennet has a big mouth and his comment was probably condescending and inappropriate but racist I very much doubt. Those who try to twist it into a racism issue twisting facts to support there own agendas. Racism is wrong and there are plenty of white idiots out there, but there are also plenty of black idiots out there and I am pretty sure Cyril doesn’t hold them to the same standards. Cyril Was one of the most loved Hawthorn players of all time and it is sad he turned his back on tens of thousands due to the comments of a few.
 
The player who made that racist slur should come forward, and also the players who were there and said nothing should apologise.

I don't get the big deal about the jeans, sounds like a dad joke. Rude, sure. Racist? Idk.
According to Caro on the radio today, he’s still playing, and so is the player the comment was directed to.
 
If that's your definition then anything can be offensive, and the word loses meaning.
are we purely discussing grammar/the english language here?

because that's a stupid argument to make re: anything in the English language because the only meaning any word actually has is whatever we, as society or personally, apply to it. you could say that about literally any word.

as i understand it, offensiveness is based on the reaction to the original statement, action, whatever. it's got nothing to do with the intention of the action but how it is perceived. it is very 'black and white' to suggest that any word can be objective when meanings and interpretations are constantly changing over time. you can intend to offend say, your mate, and get a laugh from him and a ribbing right back. even if it was more offensive than what Jeff said, 'objectively', it obviously hasn't caused offense, so would you really call it offensive?

i don't want to argue in bad faith so basically what I'm getting is you think that causing offense should be based on intention, and not reaction – is that correct?
 
i don't want to argue in bad faith so basically what I'm getting is you think that causing offense should be based on intention, and not reaction – is that correct?

It can't just be reaction.

A statement is offensive because of bigotry, thoughtlessness, as well as how much damage it has done.

If it's purely on perception, then we really need to rethink what an 'offensive' statement is, where it no longer necessarily becomes a black mark against someone.
 
Holding people to different standards in the name of social justice is not a sign of equality either.

This is also not a new thing.
It’s a little thing called empathy. Accepting that people have lived different lives to you. We constantly take this into account when talking to people.

Just as you don’t treat everyone like your partner or friends. You can’t just ignore a person’s experiences.

Treating everyone the same is not equality. Equality comes from accepting and embracing that everyone is different.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It can't just be reaction.

A statement is offensive because of bigotry, thoughtlessness, as well as how much damage it has done.

If it's purely on perception, then we really need to rethink what an 'offensive' statement is, where it no longer necessarily becomes a black mark against someone.

i agree with the bolded part, yeah.

but you can't objectively measure bigotry and thoughtlessness. people here are claiming Jeff's comments were an example of bigotry – and i agree – but there are others who are arguing otherwise which suggests that it's not something you can really adjudicate objectively

and if we're talking specifically about this scenario, then there's the reaction from the offending party. if someone tells you they have felt belittled by something, even if it wasn't 'offensive', how you react to that is very telling. I am wholly unsatisfied with Jeff's response to what has happened and his clear attempts to absolve responsibility. I didn't mean to offend, therefore it's all okay – this is the talk of someone who doesn't give a s**t

it's one thing to stand by your beliefs, but its another to completely ignore what someone else is telling you about how they feel. an unwillingness to change and to empathise, and i think that's in particular one of the many very disappointing things that have come to light with this news
 
Any jokes that don’t take personal circumstances into account or cultural sensitivities open themselves up to be taken as racist jokes by those who are targeted.

That’s not a new thing.

By that definition Chris Rock's joke was racist because he didn't take Jada's personal circumstances into account. I wouldn't even call it 'baldist'. Sometimes people just aren't aware of other's circumstances or sensitivities and it's nothing more than that.

With something like jeans where the rip is a fashion choice, its a stretch to say that this would be obviously offensive to someone of indigenous background, or a person with a poor background. It sounds like an argument made purely in hindsight.
 
This is just an awful awful take. To state it as fact is even worse.
The absolute facts are these:

Adam Goodes was booed by Hawthorn fans for a couple of years because of his actions against Hawthorn. He dived and cheated, but the one moment that was never forgotten or forgiven was the sliding of his knees into Josh Gibson's shins, which was extremely close to breaking his legs.

The year after when the booing continued, Caroline Wilson wrote an article that manipulated these events into the idea that he was being booed because of his race, which was an outrageous lie. However there was definitely an AFL-pushed agenda behind this one: get Hawthorn's fans off his back at all costs. So they went the race card.

How did that play out? Everyone else started booing him because they could see it as that.

At that point some racists definitely jumped on board and muddied all of that up.

I was at those games when those earlier moments happened. I laughed when the article was written. I still cannot believe how those events have been manipulated to this day.

I feel for Adam Goodes. He only deserved the boos of Hawthorn fans. The AFL and its media partners tried to quell those, but instead turned the whole competition's fan base onto him.

Tell yourself whatever you like about what actually happened back then. If it's not in the order as above, you're lying.
 
The absolute facts are these:

Adam Goodes was booed by Hawthorn fans for a couple of years because of his actions against Hawthorn. He dived and cheated, but the one moment that was never forgotten or forgiven was the sliding of his knees into Josh Gibson's shins, which was extremely close to breaking his legs.

The year after when the booing continued, Caroline Wilson wrote an article that manipulated these events into the idea that he was being booed because of his race, which was an outrageous lie. However there was definitely an AFL-pushed agenda behind this one: get Hawthorn's fans off his back at all costs. So they went the race card.

How did that play out? Everyone else started booing him because they could see it as that.

At that point some racists definitely jumped on board and muddied all of that up.

I was at those games when those earlier moments happened. I laughed when the article was written. I still cannot believe how those events have been manipulated to this day.

I feel for Adam Goodes. He only deserved the boos of Hawthorn fans. The AFL and its media partners tried to quell those, but instead turned the whole competition's fan base onto him.

Tell yourself whatever you like about what actually happened back then. If it's not in the order as above, you're lying.
There was certainly a lot of manipuating of the truth. The kind of distortion that often happens in AFL media with reporting on trvial football games, was applied to a much more serious issue. That's why fans were pissed.
 
And FWIW, whatever player made a racist comment about Cyril should have been clipped when it happened. Why Cyril didn't say something I can't know. I wish he had. That stuff in 2013 was well and truly not on.

It's annoying that it's a thing now. Even if the player is at the club now, what would be the point? The moment is well and truly gone.

But the idea that the entire club needs to be flipped upside down because of a single cretin's comment 8 years ago is absolute Twitter-grade rubbish. It's ludicrous.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top