GORILLAS AND THE FITZ

Sydney Morning Herald columnist Peter FitzSimons finally defends himself after describing a black man as a “gorilla”.

After further thought, FitzSimons decides to make himself seem even more ridiculous

Sydney Morning Herald columnist Peter FitzSimons finally defends himself after describing a black man as a “gorilla”.

FitzSimons claims criticism of his abuse is the beat-up to beat all beat-ups:

In the face of the aggressive security guard with the South African cricket team shoving the Australian TV reporter into the glass wall at the airport, I referred to the aggressor, as a "gorilla", using the well-known Australian parlance for, "an aggressive security guard", not dissimilar to the Oxford dictionary definition, "1.informal, A heavily built aggressive-looking man".

It isn’t “well-known Australian parlance”. Great punctuation, by the way. Pete’s comma assistants have abandoned him.

Still, the instant I said it, a very small alarm bell rang, as I noted that the security guard in question had dark skin, and "gorilla" can also be used as an appalling and unforgivable racial epithet, as it was with Adam Goodes last year, so I instantly followed up, saying "and I use the term in the Australian sense, which refers to security guards".

It doesn’t. This claim is absurd.

Better idiot-proof it, I thought. Just to be doubly sure, I laboured the point and said, "just to avoid an international incident, I want to make clear, that 'gorilla' is Australian terminology for security".

So someone calling Goodes a gorilla was in fact calling him a security guard. You know, “in the Australian sense”.

My co-panelists, James Bracey, Jim Wilson and Richard Freedman, didn't blink. Familiar with the Australian vernacular, they knew exactly the sense I meant it in, telling me off-camera they thought my addendums unnecessary.

They were either covering for a mate, unaware of Fitzy’s previous shrieking moralism or just wanted to move on with a sports program.

Twitter felt the same. Not a tweet. No one who saw it had any confusion.

You’re a stupid leftist, Pete. Twitter will always shield stupid leftists.

By Wednesday I had forgotten it. Then, Thursday evening, I gather Bolt had a go at me on what I think must be his blog, and then ... just about nothing.

So why today’s response? Why so many words refuting “just about nothing”?

A few half-hearted digs, true, but when the attack was too ludicrous and lacking in credibility even for the trolls, you know there is still some sanity in the world.

Peter FitzSimons in 2014: "If calling a black man a ‘gorilla’ and an ‘ape’ is not racial abuse, what the hell does it take?”