What I've understood from this - that because Balotelli is black - we cannot make the King Kong comparison?

But when pictures of Homer Simpson (a white character) were depicted as King Kong, that's ok?

So one rule for black people and one rule for white people I see.

look, it depends how you look at it.
some may look and see ballotelli being depicted as king kong and straight away think ooh, thats racist.

others may look and see ballotelli depicted as king kong and thing, yeah, they are pretty similar, both come across as angry and agressive indiviuals, but neither were that bad.

its all about perception.

when the film was made it was about an angry gorilla ripping new york to shreds, pretty much the same way ballotelli and italy did to us.

the fact is mario plays in england so was the obvious choice to portray KK.
if De rossi played in england, and it was him depicted on the photo noone would care less

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

King Kong was not a gorilla - what gorilla have you seen that big?

He's as much a gorilla as the loch ness monster is a newt.

Why do you think some people make that link and some people don't?
---------------------------------

anyone who has seen the film will make the link, it doesnt mean they are racist ffs!

if it had been pirlo sat on big ben swatting away balls i would have thought "ooh, pirlo as king kong" not whats pirlo doing there,it should be ballotelli because he is black

Why couldn't he have been a Roman Centurion?
-----------------------------------------
Because they don't have the misunderstood image that Balotelli himself promotes - 'why always me?'. In that respect King Kong is a close fit with Balotelli. Both self confident alpha males, pretty damn good at what they do, capable of displaying a kind, caring side but with a darker side (can I say that without being racist?) sometimes in evidence. Should we be free to rationalise in this way or should we just accept that the only characteristic that we should concern ourselves with is that they are both 'not white' (don't want to be called a racist). Are we only to interpret people by their colour? Isn't that the root of racism?

My view when I first saw the BBC story was the same as TOOR's. The racist allegory fits the King Kong story well but then so does the Beauty and the Beast allegory that TOOR refers to. Which was intended by the makers, if either? Who knows, allegory is in the eye of the beholder.

I understand that this cartoon could be deemed offensive. However, I personally feel that there are other legitimate levels of interpretation that in my view clearly distinguish it from monkey chants and throwing bananas. Maybe the cartoonist fully intended to be racist but maybe we all need to be more open to alternative, rational explanations.

I am sorry if you look at that picture and you do not instantly think of king kong then you either have never seen the film or are a kid who has no real attachment to the film. King Kong is an epic of many generations and the image portrayed is extremely iconic.

------------------------------

I'm probably twice your age, am very familiar with the KK films and still don't see an ape in this cartoon.

I understand the connection of course I do. But I don't see an ape, I see Balotelli. I also see why some would think it racist. I don't.

There's been lots of these images over the years. As mentioned earlier by someone, Homer Simpson. Satire and racism are two different things. Bad taste cartoon, yes. Racist, for me, no. I said before that what matters is that Balotelli is upset and as the picture depicts him then he has every right to be.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

The only differing factor (if you are open minded enough to overlook Homer is a cartoon character) is skin colour

Yet one is seen to be portraying a character consumed by jealousy and rage, the other a racist slur.
_____________________________

Fred, I heard you'd fallen off the face of the earth

However, I personally feel that there are other legitimate levels of interpretation that in my view clearly distinguish it from monkey chants and throwing bananas. Maybe the cartoonist fully intended to be racist but maybe we all need to be more open to alternative, rational explanations.

---------------------

Well said!

when i look at that picture i see Ballotelli depicted as king kong.
I dont see ballotelli as a gorilla, i see him as a character from a film.
i think thats how everyone will probably see it, people have just dug too far into it.

Fred, I heard you'd fallen off the face of the earth
__________________________________

I have hardly any time for ja606 recently - moving countries has taken all my time up recently it sucks.

Don't tell it to me, tell it to all the fans you turned you back on

There was uproar in the other thread

I might lay low for a while...

I think you guys are missing the point re the homer/Balotelli thing.

One was a picture of homer afictional character, drawn by the makers of the simpsons with no 3rd party to offend, only public opinion to deal with.

The other is a drawing of a another living human, who has been offended by the drawing whilst recently having to deal with racist abuse, some of which was monkey orientated, who now has to go and play football in a very racist country.

If you can't see the difference in the two situations and think the only difference is the skin colour I don't know what else to say.

In different circumstances this picture may not have even brought a mention, but in the current state of affairs it is a stupid, insensitive mistake.

In different circumstances this picture may not have even brought a mention, but in the current state of affairs it is a stupid, insensitive mistake.

----------------------------------------


In which case the Italian who drew it has just shot his nation in the foot!

Just out of interest - is there this same uproar in Italy?

yes, yes there is

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

RAP

Brilliant comment.

Rap