Is racism a problem at City games?

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 minutes ago, AshtonGreat said:

Is there a door? 

Well alright then- the turnstile.

[EmissionImpossible]

16 minutes ago, swanker said:

Living in Easton doesn’t prove anything you’re right. As for as I know the people who did this were never caught. If they would have been, I can assure you they would not have been classed as racist. That’s the way it works!

That’s because you’ve said nothing about the attack that’s racist. 

[swanker]

1 hour ago, Notbarrymanc said:

 

 

Racism is bad? Agreed. 

Fin.

That hits the nail on the head. Racism is bad and it’s savage. Why anyone would want to dislike and hate anyone because of the colour of their skin or nationality is a strange one. 

It’s been around for a long time though and I can’t see it going away. Like the tour guide who showed me around Auschwitz said. “ This shows you what can happen when circumstances allow”  

[BTRFTG]

2 hours ago, EmissionImpossible said:

That is not racism. That is put in place, rightly or wrongly to address racism. 

So you address racism by being racist? That makes sense......

[AppyDAZE]

2 hours ago, RonWalker said:

Everyone’s entitled to the people but I’m interested how you can go along with this narrative of poor misunderstood Stephen’s “younger days”, when he was convicted of assault, abusive behaviour, common assault, owning false identity documents or mortgage fraud, the last when he was only a young 29-year-old.

People think that because some things are taboo which shouldn’t be, like the way Rotherham was dealt with, that they’re willing to turn a blind eye to Stephen because he “tells it like it is”.

Don’t judge him on what he says to a load of middle-class white students, when he’s presenting himself as the moderate face of anti-extremism. How is that ever going to give you a true picture?

This is him on his own terms, and if this is moderate then I don’t know what moderate means - 

@SX227 - You are very angry for someone complaining about everyone else being offended. You sure you’re ok?

What a ******* vile, despicable piece of crap this Tommy Robinson bloke is. Please, no one sing his name at a City match again and admit you made a mistake on Saturday. Shall we try to move on now?

 

[EmissionImpossible]

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

So you address racism by being racist? That makes sense......

That wasn’t the intention I’m sure , it was an easy way of trying to address the lack of equality in the workplace. Rather than educate people, the government opted to take the easy way out.

[BTRFTG]

3 hours ago, EmissionImpossible said:

That was a serious assault. Just because an attack is white on black or black on white doesn’t mean it’s racist 

Except that's how virtue signalling Police guidance now has them record many such crimes, hence why when the guidance changed there was an escalation in racist crime reported. Where victim and perpetrator are of differing ethnicities its often initially recorded as a bias crime if only to cover the possibility it might be. Issue being when it's discovered not to be, or where the prosecution attempts to introduce a bias angle, it remains as such on the record. The exception of course is where there are bias crimes where ethnic classification has lumped victim and perpetrator together. London is rife with them such they are deserving of their own crime units.....

[REDOXO]

Watched @Dudek123 video. I would suggest 90% on here would be delighted to have the ability to speak so eloquently at The Oxford Union.

A couple of things to note. The chanting of Tommy Robinson's name needs to be taken in the context he is from Luton I would suggest.

The issue of racism and social stratification is now endemic in our society and is pushed underground by a number of factors as the bloke suggests and I am afraid to say is alive and well in all religions. You only have to take a look at the various systems that exist within religions to maintain hierarchy within themselves and then the rules that alienate gentiles (or whatever term you would like to use for other religions)

The fact is I do find it offensive when people burn poppies or want police and soldiers to burn in hell! To trot out the same old tired freedom off speech stuff, which I always take as a thinly veiled 'if you don't shut up I will imply you are a racist' gets a bit old. Problem is freedom of speech works both ways despite the covert suppression.

Within the next few days The UK will have left the EU is a very likely scenario, much of the vote to leave appears to have been on the grounds of we can not take any more (INSERT NATIONALITY HERE) In some areas people are overwhelmed by differing cultures and their rapid increase, Luton is an example and there are many many many more.

Either way this football club has no bigger issue with racism than any other club IMO and to be frank almost certainly less than many!

 

[Ron W]

36 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

So you address racism by being racist? That makes sense......

Things like positive discrimination in working roles exist to encourage people who have historically been discriminated against to believe they have a chance in those roles.

The mantra that the best person gets the job is great if it works, but it’s been proven time and time again to be untrue, both due to unconscious bias, social factors and people just feeling disenfranchised.

It happens in football coaching for instance, because organisations like the PFA have spoken to so many people who have credible examples of jobs for the boys and a lack of people of colour in existing roles to inspire young people. So there are now roles set aside on the PL elite coaching programme, and neither clubs nor white managers seem too put out.

It might not be perfect and it might stop a few white people having the monopoly, but to paint it with the same language as people chanting “small town in Asia” and about a well-known far right figure? Really?

[NOTBLUE]

Only a very small percentage of people,of what ever colour or religion,are racist,most just get on with their lives not giving a second thought about it.I personally don’t listen to  any of  the crap they spout,they can all **** off and leave the rest of us to get on with our lives.

[Mr Popodopolous]

56 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Watched @Dudek123 video. I would suggest 90% on here would be delighted to have the ability to speak so eloquently at The Oxford Union.

A couple of things to note. The chanting of Tommy Robinson's name needs to be taken in the context he is from Luton I would suggest.

The issue of racism and social stratification is now endemic in our society and is pushed underground by a number of factors as the bloke suggests and I am afraid to say is alive and well in all religions. You only have to take a look at the various systems that exist within religions to maintain hierarchy within themselves and then the rules that alienate gentiles (or whatever term you would like to use for other religions)

The fact is I do find it offensive when people burn poppies or want police and soldiers to burn in hell! To trot out the same old tired freedom off speech stuff, which I always take as a thinly veiled 'if you don't shut up I will imply you are a racist' gets a bit old. Problem is freedom of speech works both ways despite the covert suppression.

Within the next few days The UK will have left the EU is a very likely scenario, much of the vote to leave appears to have been on the grounds of we can not take any more (INSERT NATIONALITY HERE) In some areas people are overwhelmed by differing cultures and their rapid increase, Luton is an example and there are many many many more.

Either way this football club has no bigger issue with racism than any other club IMO and to be frank almost certainly less than many!

 

What's that (the bolded bit) got to do with it exactly?

Only, last time I looked, Luton had asked their fans to stop chanting his name- if you're suggesting it's due to some kind of pisstake, red herring IMO.

Certainly agree with your last line- the rest, well it has little to do with this thread subject, so I don't see the relevance.

[BTRFTG]

5 hours ago, RonWalker said:

but to paint it with the same language as people chanting “small town in Asia” and about a well-known far right figure? Really?

I didn't. You and others did.

[BTRFTG]

5 hours ago, EmissionImpossible said:

That wasn’t the intention I’m sure , it was an easy way of trying to address the lack of equality in the workplace. Rather than educate people, the government opted to take the easy way out.

Home Office continue to actively promote these policies. As required they were last year obliged to conduct an audit. At all grades (save Senior Civil Service, owned and run by Cabinet Office) the outcome buried was in all protected characteristics they significantly exceed representation when compared with the background populous. And did it change their policies? What do you think?

[Mr Popodopolous]

A quick point on Tommy Robinson.

For all the claims of support he has- perhaps it's dispersed- he stood as an MEP in North West this summer.  Area that voted Brexit, he clearly is and would be, didn't do well at all. 

Wonder what the pro Tommy Robinson posters make of this.

Just looked again- 2.2%! Worse than I thought! 

Not that popular is he @REDOXO as that result says a certain amount.

[REDOXO]

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

What's that (the bolded bit) got to do with it exactly?

Only, last time I looked, Luton had asked their fans to stop chanting his name- if you're suggesting it's due to some kind of pisstake, red herring IMO.

Certainly agree with your last line- the rest, well it has little to do with this thread subject, so I don't see the relevance.

We have no history of chanting Tommy Robinson’s name until we were in Luton. Why would we have. The fella is from Luton. You think it’s random? 
 

I was expressing a view. Which is common on a forum. The Tommy Robinson At the Oxford Union You tube above showed video of burning poppies and chanting of British soldiers/police burn in hell. It was posted so perfectly normal and relevant to mention it. Did you watch the video it was rather good as I said earlier. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

We have no history of chanting Tommy Robinson’s name until we were in Luton. Why would we have. The fella is from Luton. You think it’s random? 
 

I was expressing a view. Which is common on a forum. The Tommy Robinson At the Oxford Union You tube above showed video of burning poppies and chanting of British soldiers/police burn in hell. It was posted so perfectly normal and relevant to mention it. Did you watch the video it was rather good as I said earlier. 

No this is true, but it's more of a political message- or possibly for some a case of bandwagon jumping or simply drunken chanting to make some noise, than taunting of Luton IMO. Possibly for some- a few mainly- bona fide far right views.

Fine. Maybe I will have a watch- not at work though, dunno if watching that on YouTube search history at work is such a good thing.

[REDOXO]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

No this is true, but it's more of a political message- or possibly for some a case of bandwagon jumping or simply drunken chanting to make some noise, than taunting of Luton IMO. Possibly for some- a few mainly- bona fide far right views.

Fine. Maybe I will have a watch- not at work though, dunno if watching that on YouTube search history at work is such a good thing.

He is quite a good speaker in the Oxford setting nine o levels not a numpty. You should watch. A very good insight. 
 

My thought is one or two knew the connection between Robinson and Luton started singing and the rest joined in. But as we agree we have no history of Tommy Robinson chants so I just see it as geographical and isolated by and large with maybe one or two with a little more knowledge!

[Ron W]

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

I didn't. You and others did.

“You address racism by being racist?”

A racist is someone who practices racism. Your language can’t get much more similar.

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 hours ago, RonWalker said:

“You address racism by being racist?”

A racist is someone who practices racism. Your language can’t get much more similar.

Dunno about "racist", but that poster strikes me as someone who is not particularly fussed, concerned or disappointed by the subject or the issue.

[BTRFTG]

21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Dunno about "racist", but that poster strikes me as someone who is not particularly fussed, concerned or disappointed by the subject or the issue.

That I do not virtue signal makes me a 'racist' ....

Oh the irony.....

[Mr Popodopolous]

43 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

That I do not virtue signal makes me a 'racist' ....

Oh the irony.....

Nope, I didn't suggest you are a racist- merely that you don't appear to be terribly bothered by it. Indifferent if you like?

The one who intimated that you could be one was Ron Walker.

For the record, do I consider you to be a racist? No.

[EnderMB]

22 hours ago, Riaz said:

"postive" discrimination is still discrimination.

I am totally against it.

Out of interest - why?

I see it as a good thing, because it's largely a proven fact that a diverse workforce is better equipped to solve workplace problems and to better empathise with customers and other businesses.

A key example is in automatic hand washers in bathrooms. A company was recently under fire for releasing hundreds of those automatic soap/water/dryer things, only to find that the sensors they had used didn't work for people with dark skin. They had spent tons of money on testing, but discovered that everyone involved in the testing phase was white. This company only hired top engineering talent, and as it turned out, the top engineers from the top universities in the UK were all white.

I work in tech, another industry dominated by men, and while a lot of people aren't happy at the preferential treatment that women get, I see it as a good thing when you consider the barriers to entry for a career in tech, and the undeniable fact that I am building applications and services for the general public - and the general public is diverse in background, ability, race, gender, etc.

Again, I go back to empathy. While positive discrimination is still discrimination, it is hard to argue that people from a disadvantaged minority have had to work harder to get where they are, and while it is absolutely illegal to hire someone because they are of a minority, it's very easy to argue that their background is a competitive advantage to a well-functioning workforce - otherwise you hire people that are so similar that you cannot solve the problems of people that are different.

[Riaz]

22 minutes ago, EnderMB said:

Out of interest - why?

I see it as a good thing, because it's largely a proven fact that a diverse workforce is better equipped to solve workplace problems and to better empathise with customers and other businesses.

A key example is in automatic hand washers in bathrooms. A company was recently under fire for releasing hundreds of those automatic soap/water/dryer things, only to find that the sensors they had used didn't work for people with dark skin. They had spent tons of money on testing, but discovered that everyone involved in the testing phase was white. This company only hired top engineering talent, and as it turned out, the top engineers from the top universities in the UK were all white.

I work in tech, another industry dominated by men, and while a lot of people aren't happy at the preferential treatment that women get, I see it as a good thing when you consider the barriers to entry for a career in tech, and the undeniable fact that I am building applications and services for the general public - and the general public is diverse in background, ability, race, gender, etc.

Again, I go back to empathy. While positive discrimination is still discrimination, it is hard to argue that people from a disadvantaged minority have had to work harder to get where they are, and while it is absolutely illegal to hire someone because they are of a minority, it's very easy to argue that their background is a competitive advantage to a well-functioning workforce - otherwise you hire people that are so similar that you cannot solve the problems of people that are different.

Your key example. Thats not discrimination, they clealy need black people for testing.

I'm against so called positive discrimination, because, a white man should never get an opportunity because the the colour of their skin, but then again, neither should non white people!

If i get a job for example, i want to get it because i am the best man for the job, not because i am brown and i tick a box. Its just as bad as when a non white person does not get a job because of the colour of their skin.

 

[Numero Uno]

15 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Your key example. Thats not discrimination, they clealy need black people for testing.

I'm against so called positive discrimination, because, a white man should never get an opportunity because the the colour of their skin, but then again, neither should non white people!

If i get a job for example, i want to get it because i am the best man for the job, not because i am brown and i tick a box. Its just as bad as when a non white person does not get a job because of the colour of their skin.

 

I know a (British) Indian girl who went to a job interview and was told she would be an ideal recruit  for the company BECAUSE she ticked TWO boxes!!!! The state of that. Needless to say she told them to eff off.......

People of all backgrounds have PRIDE and like to think they have achieved something through WHO they are not WHAT they are.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Don't know if this has been mentioned yet- but. Will bold what I feel are some key bits- taken the section specific to us.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11726/11842029/police-to-meet-bristol-city-over-alleged-supporter-racism-versus-luton

Quote

 

Avon & Somerset Police will meet with Bristol City on Wednesday to discuss possible new measures for fans to report racist abuse.

Both the Championship club and local force are assisting Bedfordshire police with their investigation into alleged racist chanting from the away end at Kenilworth Road during the Robins' 3-0 defeat Luton on Saturday.

Ahead of Wednesday's game at home to Charlton, officers will discuss the incident with the club and how to improve ways to flag abuse, after Bristol City fans first reported what was going on around them at the weekend.

Those reports were made on social media and picked up by various officials at the club including the owner Steve Lansdown, who promised to ban the culprits from Ashton Gate and from purchasing future away tickets.

In tandem with police, the Robins' safety officer is understood to be compiling those reports along with CCTV footage, and the club intend to action and "deal harshly" if the perpetrators are identified.

 

Bristol City have also already been looking at future processes for purchasing away tickets from next season, including a priority scheme to ensure "genuine" fans fill up their away allocations.

City owner Steve Lansdown (right) said he was "shocked and disappointed" about the alleged events away at Luton

On Tuesday, Bedfordshire Police confirmed to Sky Sports News that they are: "Currently investigating two allegations of racist and indecent chanting coming from the away section at the Luton Town v Bristol City match at Kenilworth Road on Saturday.

"Officers are following lines of inquiry to establish events surrounding the incidents.

"We work in close partnership with Luton Town Football Club and allegations such as this will be investigated appropriately to ensure the sport is family-friendly and accessible to all.

"Racism has absolutely no place in society, and football is no exception to that."

Plus.

Mix of education and punishment, maybe tailored to the offender and their circs?

 

I wonder what those measures might be though.

[red panda]

1 hour ago, Riaz said:

Your key example. Thats not discrimination, they clealy need black people for testing.

I'm against so called positive discrimination, because, a white man should never get an opportunity because the the colour of their skin, but then again, neither should non white people!

If i get a job for example, i want to get it because i am the best man for the job, not because i am brown and i tick a box. Its just as bad as when a non white person does not get a job because of the colour of their skin.

 

Another justification for positive discrimination is that it helps to overcome unconscious bias, which can easily affect the decisions of people who think they are being fair. There is a lot of training available these days (I've done some myself, as everyone at my level had to) but most of the evidence suggests that such training doesn't really change behaviour and can even backfire. 

[AshtonGreat]

41 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Don't know if this has been mentioned yet- but. Will bold what I feel are some key bits- taken the section specific to us.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11726/11842029/police-to-meet-bristol-city-over-alleged-supporter-racism-versus-luton

Plus.

Mix of education and punishment, maybe tailored to the offender and their circs?

 

I wonder what those measures might be though.

I don't really see how strong it could be, beyond a ban from AG. Even then, a ban for life seems extreme

[Mr Popodopolous]

38 minutes ago, AshtonGreat said:

I don't really see how strong it could be, beyond a ban from AG. Even then, a ban for life seems extreme

A life ban could be extreme, depending on the circs and the nature of the individual IMO- some can be changed through education or a mix of education and say medium term bans- some probably cannot so what we do then I'm not sure.

The talk of banning from buying away tickets- well that's laudable if legally questionable- the club cannot impose this AFAIK, a court though with an FBO quite likely can. That's a legal angle- data sharing perhaps a question...?

Measures beyond the individual fans, I'm struggling to think of any.

Perhaps @JulieH could post a bit on this story, ie the police meeting City one?

"Indecent" chanting is the one that intrigues me though- putting aside the debates about what is or isn't racist. In this context? I'd guess possibly the one aimed at the Asian family in the box, not least as there were kids in the away end, home end and the box of course.

[Sixtyseconds]

Indecent chanting swell..

I'm in love with a girl next door ..

[Bristol Oil Services]

22 hours ago, swanker said:

Why anyone would want to dislike and hate anyone because of the colour of their skin or nationality is a strange one. 

 

Fear would be one obvious and simplistic answer. There will be a multitude of answers to "why" I'm sure. They don't always "want" to though, necessarily. 

To start with, we - us humans, all of us on this planet - are all prejudiced. Even white, liberal progressives and guardian readers. We are hard-wired, we come into this world, with a brain that perceives and processes information in categories. 

Categories is a nicer, more neutral word than stereotypes. 

Very early on, we learn to sort people into us and them. Us is the most fundamental social category in the brain's organising system, it is hard-wired.

So, this is where we all start from: preferring this over that, us over them. And using stereotyping to form these preferences. From there, depending on our environment and experiences as we grow up, we will lean towards this political stance or that. 

Bearing this in mind, that we are all prejudiced, and prone to stereotypical thinking, it is perhaps possible to see that hating people not like us is a relatively short leap away, given certain experiences and circumstances.

I certainly have the opinion that it takes more conscious effort to not go down the hate road, to not generalise or stereotype based on the actions of some people. Based on my own experience. 

The Manchester bombing would be an example of this. That was a huge challenge to all of our tendencies to prejudice and stereotyping, and to fear and hate. Some will give in, some will not, many will waiver between the two. I would put myself down as a waiverer after that atrocity.

We are all prejudiced, and we are all fearful. Fear, and anxiety, govern our lives. Hating different people, or "them," can help some to feel bonded with and closer to their group, to "us," to feel safer. Getting angry and violent can feel like doing something about the fear and anxiety, feel like taking some control.

 

On the separate point of positive discrimination, this is necessary if we are to move towards a more equal society (I appreciate not everyone wishes to move towards this) because 1. We are all innately prejudiced, and prone to stereotypical thinking (black/Asian people are this, they cannot do that, they are not ..., they always, they never ... etc) and 2. We all have psychological blind-spots preventing us from seeing this, and 3. Because of the power imbalance in our society, the hierarchy that I referred to on the previous page. Most people hiring or interviewing in this country will be white/ "us," and they will be prone to conscious, and unconscious prejudice when interviewing people who are not "us."

Positive discrimination is an attempt to  over ride this  innate bias. 

 

Finally, football is the greatest "us and them" sport on the planet, no wonder it is so popular. And no surprise when some at football matches resort to "us and them" chanting. It is fundamental to who we are.