But the white guy compared the reaction of the institution to racism and then a teammate of the perp then compared the reaction of society to this type of incident and that of racism. We are literally following the story and discussing the talking points as they emerge in public. I don't see what the issue is. maybe in your neck of the woods you are uncomfortable with addressing these talking points because you "don't see colour." I'm not saying I agree I just feel your reaction is over the top
Kurt Zouma / 180 hours community service + banned from keeping cats for 5 years
- Thread starter MyOnlySolskjaer
- Start date
West Ham should have done the right thing in the first place instead of trying to fudge it with tone deaf Moyes showing that he is not actually that nice. Very few would be calling for him to lose his livelihood but it says a lot when Dagenham & Redbridge have handled this better then West Ham.
Cheap shot that
Haven't they handled it after seeing the Zouma @ West Ham situation though?
If a man who killed a human is allowed to play football in England, would that not be the case for Zouma? I'm just throwing questions here for those who think he should be banned from competing.
sorry
Oh goodie, pronoun humour. The height of wit.
Well personally I don't think he should be banned from competing. I personally do believe in redemption in many cases and that he should be allowed to make amends. I hope that there are no further signs of abuse of his cats and that he can show the RSPCA a will to change. I don't think the horse slapper should've lost her job either.
I'm not convinced about a lot of this whataboutism that's going around though. I don't really see any neat comparison with other cases that happened a decade or longer ago, sometimes in other countries and for different crimes. The cat bin lady and the horse slapper are the closest and they faced tougher consequences than Zouma has so far.
Are people still bleating on about racism?
This discussion is about animal cruelty and the fact Zouma is a horrific individual. Stop trying to deflect.
This discussion is about animal cruelty and the fact Zouma is a horrific individual. Stop trying to deflect.
The reason why it turned into a debate was that the mod decision was questioned. So that's hardly an irrelevant factor.
Put it like this, then: if the same comment was made in the Greenwood thread, would the same posters defend his right to say it?
make no mistake he is a sadistic cnut. I have 2 cats and had 2 previously before and have never laid a hand on them aggressively even when they scratched me. that said I think the punishment is appropriate and hopefully those cats get a good owner. Heck I'd take them if they are free
I'm not telling anyone when and where they can discuss racism. I'm asking, though, whether it should always be legitimate to bring up potential racism (as an explanation for something like this, i.e. a reaction to something an individual did under certain circumstances).
We should rename this thread as it's more about racism than Kurt Zouma kicking a cat.
Sorry if you misunderstood, I was in no way suggesting you were telling people when and where to discuss racism, but there are people in this thread doing that exactly, though I repeat not you!
I think in response to the bolded bit I think, yes, it is always legitimate to look for potential racism when there is a public furor around a PoC as you said earlier our knowledge of the UK (tabloid/right wing) media means that we should always be on the look out for their direct or indirect racism.
But I don't think anyone has suggested that racism is the explanation for this reaction apart from that one poster in just one post.
And as for the Greenwood thread, firstly these are two very different stories and I wouldn't want to conflate or compare them in anway. But I think it's fine to examine the reactions for potential racism. Doing that in no way condones or belittles the actions of the individual, I think alot of people here can't understand that though Zouma has done something terrible and we can all agree it is horrendous behaviour, the response can still have racist overtones and as such that is worth discussing whether you believe it or not. I would say exactly the same for Greenwood.
Good post and completely agree. I’m going to find that post and report it too.
I miss the vegan debate 
Antionio can say that he feels the reaction is over the top, it's an opinion and can be disagreed with.
His whataboutism is embarrassing. I look at it as diluting the conversation and distraction technique to protect his teammate.
A conversation about racism against black people should not be diluted by talking about racism against white people and how in your opinion it doesn't get enough attention. By the same token, a conversation about animal abuse should absolutely not be diluted by talking about how, in your opinion, some other cause is not getting attention.
Children dying is war torn countries isn't getting enough attention, in my opinion, dictators committing genocide in countries isn't getting enough attention.
It's a fallacy and Antionio deserves criticism for it.
His whataboutism is embarrassing. I look at it as diluting the conversation and distraction technique to protect his teammate.
A conversation about racism against black people should not be diluted by talking about racism against white people and how in your opinion it doesn't get enough attention. By the same token, a conversation about animal abuse should absolutely not be diluted by talking about how, in your opinion, some other cause is not getting attention.
Children dying is war torn countries isn't getting enough attention, in my opinion, dictators committing genocide in countries isn't getting enough attention.
It's a fallacy and Antionio deserves criticism for it.
Where did the racism card come into play and how? What?
It's a case of a person abusing his pet and that only, the deed and the audacity to post it to social media needs to have consequences.
It's a case of a person abusing his pet and that only, the deed and the audacity to post it to social media needs to have consequences.
What a twat of a response. He's asking you, you just don't have an answer.
You see this is where I disagree for sure. Had the video shown a player being racist in anyway there is simply no way he would have played for West Ham again and the reaction online would have been massive and global as it would have crossed over to racism hotspots like the US and gone viral. There would be no coming back for a player found to be being racist and rightly so. The situation with the cat is bad and has severe consequences but West Ham clearly think there is a way back for the player. A racism incident and there would be no way back.
Of course the reaction is bigger for a well known high profile footballer who reaches a huge audience abusing a cat and posting the video like it's ok to be such a cnut compared to silly internet trolls or random nobodies in the crowd doing monkey chants, if it was a high profile person being racist the coverage would easily be just big.
Well, it started out with people claiming we wouldn’t care about the cat being kicked if Zouma was white because we care about animals more than black people, and then Chris Kirkland, whatever the feck he’s doing chiming in on this, claimed that animal abuse is worse than racism, and then Antonio asked if this was worse than racism to say that it was absurd to clamour for Zouma being sacked while racism is going on.
I think that’s where we are. And that’s without even mentioning the shitshow where some vegans came in and said we can’t condemn punting a cat if we eat meat because we’re just as bad as Zouma (which is untrue regardless because Zouma presumably eats meat AND punts cats).
I felt stronger about the vegan debate. Not to dismiss Antonio's thoughts but I did find the moral aspect of animal abuse and when we decide its a problem for us in society, an interesting discussion.I miss the vegan debate
Oh, that's so bad, that people haven't been quick enough to shut it down. That whole discussion kind of misses the point.
It's also more relevant to the discussion of animal abuse. Antonio just whatbouted it
If there is a joke or something in here then I have missed it completely
Don’t believe this is a serous comment
Think it's a joke based on a suggestion of consensual non-consent in the Greenwood thread.
Tell us you’re not very bright and a bit racist without telling us you’re not very bright and a bit racist…
Yeah, not particularly enjoying this one, but I'm glad that is over, felt like a proper cnut complaining about animal abuse and eating them at the same time.
To state that people who get tired of politics and racism being brought into every thread do not understand the issues is a very daft statement from you. Get off your high horse and stop acting like you know better than others. You know, to ask people to stay on topic doesn't make you a racist right? Or not being able to understand it's a problem?
I honestly wouldn't say so. The joke is that a fully grown man is phycially abusing his pets in company with his kids and also recording it. That's the sick joke. I say if someone is that big of a cretin he deserves to get sacked. What message is this jackass sending to the younger fans and most importantly his own kids?
People in his position should use their power to act like role models, not cnuts.
They get away with far too much just because they are footballers.
Quite abit of nonsensical strawman to unpack here. Does my post not say ‘I don’t think it’s about race’; yet asserting that for some it may or may not be seems to have drawn your ire. I’m not sure why you feel the need to tell me ‘This is Britain’ in some tub thumping manner either, I’m quite aware of where I was born & reside. Also did you not actually read my post where I say I’m an animal lover, oh no you jumped on the keyboard to Whitesplain racism to me. ‘There’s no perhaps about it’, to you. I haven’t even said it is to me but why so aggressive at the thought it may be to someone else.
Who said the forum didn’t react to Terry &/or Suarez? Not me but let’s unpack this, are you saying because the forum did this it can have no problem with race? Have you checked the Elanga thread, the multiple Rashford threads or the General Chat forum in the last year or so.
You’ve just hurled a bunch of white characters at the issue & said they get criticised so racism can’t exist. What a strange take for a non-issue.
No one has said it does lad but that sentence alone lets me know you’ve obviously got some things you could do with getting over before pounding away at your keyboard next time. I enjoy posters like yourself immensely, you’ve done exactly what the post you got upset about asserts. Dismissed race completely when it’s only mentioned, despite the post saying I don’t believe it do be the issue. Well done.
I’d suggest taking the issue up with Chris Kirkland in the future.
Not really. Animal abuse is a rampant problem that needs to be curbed and rescue organisations are struggling to do it alone.
I mean, like many things, it's not fecking hard to just not hurt the animal. It's not hard to not kick them, shoot them, beat them, burn them or even rape them. Nevermind that it's an apparently funny trend to many to videotape putting a cat in a microwave. Just being a foster parent for dogs and cats, I have learnt how vile people can be towards animals.
A precedent needs to be set, else it just goes on and on. The amount of people condoning what he did on social media is evident of that.
Maybe not sacking him, but a no earnings ban for an extended period of time(maybe have him run on all fours on the touch line, and everytime the ball goes out of play, he gets a full running kick to the ribs, but that's just me) should be sufficient.
While we are here . Is horse racing considered animal abuse ? Is a jockey smacking a horse with a whip to go faster considered ok in the UK ? Or is this like when a poster brought up veganism.
This is a clever and sly way of trying to insinuate something then claim that you're not insinuating that very same thing.
As another "PoC", I'm finding it deeply irritating when the topic of race is brought up with regards to Zouma. He has done something incredibly wrong, and any suggestion that race played a part in the criticism he is facing is disingeuous to the fight against racism in itself.
Zouma abusing a cat and the colour of his skin are unrelated. There is no correlation. Stop trying to assume there is one.
I’ve been on this forum long enough to say what I mean. I was in this thread days ago & never mentioned race, I simply chimed in when yet again this forum got precious when another forum member uttered the potential for it.
I’ve even gone as far as to say I don’t believe it has to do with race so I’d suggest reading further into my posts before insinuating.
I reassert that it is discouraging how this forum handles the discussion of race, feel free to discuss/disagree but don’t tell me what I’m writing unless I write it. I’m more than happy to call ‘a spade a spade’ as I have done in numerous threads.
‘stop trying to assume there is one’, I haven’t but thanks for the input.
No, it's not. Yes it is. I don't know the last answer.
It is considered abusive and cruel by animal rights activists, at least in the UK.
https://www.animalaid.org.uk/the-issues/our-campaigns/horse-racing/
If we are all honest, exploiting animals for our own personal gain can be considered abuse of animals, so to a greater extent eating animals, using them for sport, having them as pets, breeding them for specific activities, neutering them etc., is all 'abuse', it's just different types. It's obviously easier to sympathise with this case because it's embedded into the moral code we live by (in western society/the UK) - that if you have a pet it's not okay to hit them for your pleasure. There are arguments to say that the other aspects should also be embedded into that moral code. I think what is key in this case is that difference, but it's hard not to be hypocritical.
Last edited: