I am going to try my best to articulate this to the best of my ability.
If you are still being salty over what Roman said in that Vanity Fair interview, you’re opening your mouth about “why does he have to be so attractive” when he’s on your TV, you’re celebrating a curb stomp when it completely comes from a place of believing he deserves violence for what he said, you’re chastising others for supporting him, and you’re continuing to miss the point of what he said…
…then you are the problem. Not Roman.
You need to develop critical thinking skills and really think about what it was he said there. But if you’re still missing it, let me break it down.
Roman was unnecessarily asked his opinion on the political climate in America. The journalist included that there was a pause before the answer.
That pause is important.
Because it’s an indication that he was about to tread on the topic lightly. And he did.
He did not give a political answer. He gave a politically correct answer, wherein he stayed pretty neutral because that was what was going to protect him the most.
He said he supports the presidency, the institution, as opposed to Trump specifically.
He said supports a successful future for the country, which is not the equivalent of saying he thinks Trump is going to provide that. It does not automatically mean he thinks in all these extreme ways that you’re brainwashed into believing it does.
He said he definitely does not agree with everything the current president does.
Then, and this is important, he started talking about the celebrity aspect of Donald Trump. That’s the part Roman is more comfortable talking about. The business of PR, of creating adversaries.
He avoided the political talk completely. He never confirmed who he actually voted for. And his answer was intelligent, wary, and was the best one he could have given in the position he was put in.
Not everything is black and white, and it seems like most of you need to understand that.
You can say you’re disappointed, but I’d argue it’s more disappointing to see people online, people you thought highly of, explicitly reduce this situation to him being ‘just a man’ or just ‘someone with money.’ And then go on to bring race into it, specifically his wife and children, when that has ZERO relevance to anything he said in the article.
And then… to bring up that he is mixed race. To bring up the white in him. Which… never mattered before, in fact y’all never addressed it before, you actually kind of “put up” with it.
But all of a sudden, it matters that he’s half white? Because it’s convenient? Make that shit make sense.
If anyone is perpetuating stereotypes, compartmentalising how people of different races and backgrounds should believe (and that anything different is groundbreaking and unheard of), it’s you.
Roman Reigns—Joe Anoa’i is not a bad person. It is unfair to judge that based on a small paragraph in one interview, when you’ve dedicated much more of your time to other media that you enjoyed him on when he’s been himself and not the character. You already knew him, and he’s the same fucking guy he was this time last week.
Also remember that Punk is fine working with him, and Sami Zayn is essentially family. If he was what he’s being called, I don’t think that would be the case.
Critical thinking will open all sorts of doors for you, I assure you.
