The Mamnick Thread

For the sake of keeping things in proportion. That really does appear to be an attempt at the man from Del Monte, with dodgy tan included. If you think that he is "blacking-up" for that, who do you think he is meant to be?

I'm wondering who he thought he was supposed to be. The man from Del Monte was a white guy called Brian.

No idea. The fact that Rutland CC admitted they were offensive images and removed them says it all. The character isn’t important that he was trying to be; it’s the reasoning to yourself that it’s ok to do it in the first place. But given the climate of the club it’s hardly surprising that he may have thought it not offensive in the first place.

No prizes for guessing what The Man from Del Montes response would be to getting invited to a meeting.

From an interview with the guy who played the character:
“they’d spent something like a million dollars on forming psychological outlines or description of the entity they wanted to place between the product and the purchaser. And their research told them that the purchaser, the main purchaser of their particular goods, Del Monte goods, products, were female, the vast majority were female, and they wanted an entity or something to come between the product and the purchaser that could be trusted and looked as though it could be trusted. And the analyses, or the people doing the analysis or project, came up with, well it’s male, he is caucasian, because he had to be accepted in the Orient, in Asia, and America, to all the ethnic minorities, because it was a worldwide campaign. But they came up with white, cosmopolitan. He has to be of a certain age. Over 40, possibly over 50, and have quiet authority, so that a purchaser, ladies in the supermarket, could trust that person, and that was the brief. And apparently I fitted this without even knowing it.“

He'd just been to a friends fancy dress party the night before, jeez, can you guys be anymore virtue signalers?

1 Attachment

Classic Carlton.

The character isn’t important that he was trying to be; it’s the reasoning to yourself that it’s ok to do it in the first place.

But, do what? I'm still trying to work out what you think is wrong with a white guy dressing up as a tanned, white character by using fake tan. Nothing about his costume or his skin tone suggest that he's trying to portray a black character.

I'm a bit confused on that point too. Is it now morally unacceptable to do anything to make your skin darker? Is sunbathing the work of Satan? Am I a bad person for not using more suntan lotion? Admittedly, fake tan is obviously a force for ill in the world, but I think we all knew that.

Do you really need to put fake tan to portray a character?

The issues largely is how it look; straight off the bat, it look like blackfacing without the context.

I disagree, however this seems a little irrelevant to argue when there is also a a guy doing actual blackface, with a massive joint, as a Rasta.

^this thing here. We've got a little sidetracked by the Del Monte thing when the rasta, Guantanamo Bay and Taliban characters are slightly more on point for telling us what these guys are all about.

Also I'm not sure that sending bikes to Nigeria is working to make cycling in the UK more diverse.

At best it's a well-meaning gesture, but it's not really the same as being a diverse and welcoming group of cyclists.

Cycling is still overwhelmingly white, male and middle class, even in London.

Amazing. Highest high-horsing on this thread.
Omg guys, sending bikes to people who are underprivileged is such virtue signalling.

You may be misinterpreting that post somewhat. The argument seems not to be that sending stuff to Nigeria is not a good thing, but that it's not strictly accurate to describe it as increasing cycling diversity within the UK itself. It is, however, beneficial for cycling in Nigeria.

The issues largely is how it look; straight off the bat, it look like blackfacing without the context.

I'm sorry but I really disagree. It looks, to me, like someone with fake tan on.

No one that has jumped on the bandwagon of ripping into the guy has offered any proof that the fake tan was even related to the costume. Maybe the guy just likes fake tan.

I'd like to echo the sentiments that have already been aired that picking on the Del Monte costume wearer is only distracting things away from the guy who definitely is doing blackface plus the other dodgy costume wearers.

I'd even go further and say that it undermines the entire thread as it looks like we are now searching around for the scraps of something to be outraged about.

Nah. Obviously sending garms to Nigeria isn't going to do much for diversity in British cycling, but I assume the KW guy was trying to say that his club is reaching Africa with donations rather than blackface. Tenuous either way, but I don't see how anyone can take KW's actions as a negative thing. Either way, ain't we all meant to be ranting about Rutland CC?

There's a reason there's not a single female cyclist or non-white person in that picture...

Man from Del Monte? Didn't recognize the costume-immediate impression is blackface.

Not relevant though-anyone in that group thought it was a lolathon to hang out with the Taliban/blackface contingent, Rutland literally put their logo on it. Fuck each and every one of them sky high.

Even shithole nightclubs in Glasgow doing Halloween parties openly state that anyone turning up in blackface will be denied entry. It's not an unknown quantity in the old "Is this Racist!?!!" Handbook anymore.

In other news; thought Wiggins was wearing a Mamnick tee and did a double take back flip into tucked lol manoeuvre...

1 Attachment

yep...

this thing here. We've got a little sidetracked by the Del Monte thing when the rasta, Guantanamo Bay and Taliban characters are slightly more on point for telling us what these guys are all about.

Well yeah, that's kind of the point. Just because the general impression of the group is, let's say, not great, it doesn't mean that everything that every single one of them does is beyond the pale. If you want to point out that something's offensive you have to demonstrate that there are some things that you don't find offensive, otherwise it seems like you're just determined to be offended by everything and you become very easy to ignore.

.

I didn't at any point say it was a negative thing.

I just said, as has been pointed out, that sending aid to Africa is not the same as being diverse and welcoming to underrepresented groups.

Which is something you have conceded yourself. So I'm not really sure what you're taking issue with.

Let's not even talk about how the Man from DM is just a classic colonial image.

Solely taking issue with you taking issue with someone else's charity.