hot question. like a hot take but Idk if this shit exists. y'all know what I mean
does every ounce of criticism about any some certain f1 driver has a way to come out bad?
let me elaborate. if you criticise LH, Yuki or Zhou you could get called a racist. same thing with checo, but it can also be related to xenophobia. and I can bet my hat, that if any driver that joined f1 or is already there ever decides to come out as someone of the LGTBIQ+ community the word could be homophobic.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist. sadly, it does, and it should be taken with the seriousness that it requires. but some people jump straight into conclusions when it comes to some of them, and it has nothing with an offensive tone, just because someone decided to critise this person. but I just don't understand why.
Idk if this question might feel as one coming from a "priviledge position" but I was reading some comments about the incidents regarding the chinese gp (holy shit that was chaos) and some people have interesting reactions towards criticism. so I just thought I could ask why is that, to attack this critics, such strong and sensitive arguments are used. when the critic has none to do with it.
an example I saw on a comment section:
x: he is not as a good driver as he was.
y: you're saying that only because he's mexican. what a xenophobic/racist take.
is my question clear or do I sound like a crazy clown?
