Jump to content
IGNORED

Racism


Esmond Million's Bung

Recommended Posts

So to re-iterate my point, you're saying - by extension - that calling someone a p-ki, isn't racist, because Pakistan is a nation, not a racial group?

If you did, I think you'd (rightly) find yourself charged with racially aggravated disturbance of the peace.

It isn't really racists by definition, but you are right it is by law.

The sad thing is that these are merely words, people choose to be offended by them. Calling someone something (especially if they are that thing, Welsh, Paki, fat, Black, thick, Gay) should not mean you get your collar felt. People choose to go through life being offended by what they are, it is rather sad really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the artificial splitting of racist from xenophobic excuse doesn't really make much sense. If it did, you'd have to say that calling someone who came from Pakistan a "P**i barsteward" wasn't racist.

It's not artificial: race and nationality are two quite dfferent things. However, both can be offensive and, as you suggest in your example, they can sometimes come together. The most significance between racism and xenophobia is that racism is more likely to be on the basis of appearance. Someone's racial origins are likely to be more apparent from their appearance than their nationality, and therefore racism is more fundamentally offensive than xenophobia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at that clip it appears to me he says blind. At the start of the clip it shows the referee , and then Terry starts to shout. Is it not possible tht he ref has just made a poor decision and Terry is saying "Blind C..." to the ref ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at that clip it appears to me he says blind. At the start of the clip it shows the referee , and then Terry starts to shout. Is it not possible tht he ref has just made a poor decision and Terry is saying "Blind C..." to the ref ??

Obviously not or he would of said so, far worse to be accused of racism than to be accused of calling the referee that. He has said he was responding to being accused of saying 'black ****' by saying he didn't say 'black ****' obviously he is talking complete shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So to re-iterate my point, you're saying - by extension - that calling someone a p-ki, isn't racist, because Pakistan is a nation, not a racial group?

If you did, I think you'd (rightly) find yourself charged with racially aggravated disturbance of the peace.

The difference is that the term 'p**i' is more often than not used as an insult to someone from the Indian Subcontinent; i'd bet money that you couldn't determine someone from Pakistan from someone from Bangladesh from someone from Nepal from someone from India. Infact, thats a rhetorical question as the national boundaries of these countries (Nepal and Bhutan aside) are less than 60 years old and so there are ethnic groups in northern India who are genetically similar to those in southern Pakistan, southern Nepal, etc. Calling someone a 'P**i' s making a judgement against them based on a vague notion of the colour of their skin. To call someone a 'Welsh ****' you must already know what their nationality is, so by definition you are commenting on their nationality (and specifically a national stereotype) and so its xenophobia. At the end of the day though itcomes down to what people find acceptable. A Ghanian friend of mind often refers to himself as a 'n***er', but if a white person calls him that, he goes mental; its offensive to him because he knows what the inference is in the use of the word. The same goes for 'p**i'

At the end of the day i agree that the racism 'card' is overplayed, but you have to remember that this lack of tolerance of racism which has resulted in it being mostly booted out of British society; much more succesfully than any other European country i've visited. Lets not forget that you only have to g back 25 years to have seen John Barnes having bananas thrown at him by his own fans. If that means that sometimes a storm develops in a tea cup, then i think thats a price worth paying. I think we should also remember that if any of us were in a meeting with another company at work and we refered to one of our colleagues or another delegate as a '******* black ****', we'd be on the dole faster than you can say 'political correctness gone mad'; regardless of whether the person we aimed the comment at forgave us or not. The proffesional football field is different from the Downs because its a place of work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not artificial: race and nationality are two quite dfferent things. However, both can be offensive and, as you suggest in your example, they can sometimes come together. The most significance between racism and xenophobia is that racism is more likely to be on the basis of appearance. Someone's racial origins are likely to be more apparent from their appearance than their nationality, and therefore racism is more fundamentally offensive than xenophobia.

Hmmmm. I reckon Robbie Savage would be more offended at being called a "Welsh c-" than a "white c-".

My point is that whenever the world "black" is used, some people get all white liberal guilt and social worker about things.

Calling someone a c- is the offensive bit. The adjective attached to it - within reason - shouldn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is that the term 'p**i' is more often than not used as an insult to someone from the Indian Subcontinent; i'd bet money that you couldn't determine someone from Pakistan from someone from Bangladesh from someone from Nepal from someone from India. Infact, thats a rhetorical question as the national boundaries of these countries (Nepal and Bhutan aside) are less than 60 years old and so there are ethnic groups in northern India who are genetically similar to those in southern Pakistan, southern Nepal, etc. Calling someone a 'P**i' s making a judgement against them based on a vague notion of the colour of their skin. To call someone a 'Welsh ****' you must already know what their nationality is, so by definition you are commenting on their nationality (and specifically a national stereotype) and so its xenophobia. At the end of the day though itcomes down to what people find acceptable. A Ghanian friend of mind often refers to himself as a 'n***er', but if a white person calls him that, he goes mental; its offensive to him because he knows what the inference is in the use of the word. The same goes for 'p**i'

At the end of the day i agree that the racism 'card' is overplayed, but you have to remember that this lack of tolerance of racism which has resulted in it being mostly booted out of British society; much more succesfully than any other European country i've visited. Lets not forget that you only have to g back 25 years to have seen John Barnes having bananas thrown at him by his own fans. If that means that sometimes a storm develops in a tea cup, then i think thats a price worth paying. I think we should also remember that if any of us were in a meeting with another company at work and we refered to one of our colleagues or another delegate as a '******* black ****', we'd be on the dole faster than you can say 'political correctness gone mad'; regardless of whether the person we aimed the comment at forgave us or not. The proffesional football field is different from the Downs because its a place of work

Fair points, but I think I'd be out of work if I called someone else a c- at work, regardless of their colour!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is that the term 'p**i' is more often than not used as an insult to someone from the Indian Subcontinent; i'd bet money that you couldn't determine someone from Pakistan from someone from Bangladesh from someone from Nepal from someone from India. Infact, thats a rhetorical question as the national boundaries of these countries (Nepal and Bhutan aside) are less than 60 years old and so there are ethnic groups in northern India who are genetically similar to those in southern Pakistan, southern Nepal, etc. Calling someone a 'P**i' s making a judgement against them based on a vague notion of the colour of their skin. To call someone a 'Welsh ****' you must already know what their nationality is, so by definition you are commenting on their nationality (and specifically a national stereotype) and so its xenophobia. At the end of the day though itcomes down to what people find acceptable. A Ghanian friend of mind often refers to himself as a 'n***er', but if a white person calls him that, he goes mental; its offensive to him because he knows what the inference is in the use of the word. The same goes for 'p**i'

At the end of the day i agree that the racism 'card' is overplayed, but you have to remember that this lack of tolerance of racism which has resulted in it being mostly booted out of British society; much more succesfully than any other European country i've visited. Lets not forget that you only have to g back 25 years to have seen John Barnes having bananas thrown at him by his own fans. If that means that sometimes a storm develops in a tea cup, then i think thats a price worth paying. I think we should also remember that if any of us were in a meeting with another company at work and we refered to one of our colleagues or another delegate as a '******* black ****', we'd be on the dole faster than you can say 'political correctness gone mad'; regardless of whether the person we aimed the comment at forgave us or not. The proffesional football field is different from the Downs because its a place of work

Agree with every word, concistentcy needs to be done though Terry will be hung out to dry know but when Evra accused Suraz of it there was a few columns in papers and a minor story on TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with every word, concistentcy needs to be done though Terry will be hung out to dry know but when Evra accused Suraz of it there was a few columns in papers and a minor story on TV.

There is definitely a media agenda against John Terry (though part of that is he gives them so much ammo by being such a horrible human being), but part of that is because there is actual video evidence (debateable as it is) of his 'crime'. To be honest, i wouldn't give two hoots if Terry was banned for life; he's over-rated and a prime example of all that is wrong with the modern footballer, but i agree that there has to be a level of consistency with the Evra incident and past examples

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is definitely a media agenda against John Terry (though part of that is he gives them so much ammo by being such a horrible human being), but part of that is because there is actual video evidence (debateable as it is) of his 'crime'. To be honest, i wouldn't give two hoots if Terry was banned for life; he's over-rated and a prime example of all that is wrong with the modern footballer, but i agree that there has to be a level of consistency with the Evra incident and past examples

and Evra had cried wolf I believe 3 times before, which makes it less of a story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and Evra had cried wolf I believe 3 times before, which makes it less of a story.

I am no expert Esmond but i think an editor with the many camera's at football grounds now could look back and see if they can see what he is saying or maybe Suraz done it in his ear who knows the two players, Ashley Cole heard what John Terry said he was walking past him and several players around heard it, but none of these reacted is it common thing or he did say blind?, Drogba challenge all there players ran at the ref to say send him off, players react to things they don't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and Evra had cried wolf I believe 3 times before, which makes it less of a story.

I am no expert Esmond but i think an editor with the many camera's at football grounds now could look back and see if they can see what he is saying or maybe Suraz done it in his ear who knows the two players, Ashley Cole heard what John Terry said he was walking past him and several players around heard it, but none of these reacted is it common thing or he did say blind?, Drogba challenge all there players ran at the ref to say send him off, players react to things they don't like.

Sorry double post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dispute has been settled as lip readers have verified it, and John Terry confirms that he did indeed call Ferdinand a ******* black c***.

Ferdinand was repoerted as being delighted with the news and that the matter could be put to rest. He added that during the match he had been certain that Terry had called him a ******* Bristol City defender, and had this been the case it would have constituted serious personal abuse and could have ruined his career.

John Terry commented that he was disappointed that anyone could think that he would stoop so low as to use such a derogatory expression to a fellow professional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Anton Ferdinand has to do is say yes or no if it was said. I think either media have hyped this up and he is now embaressed to say anything, by the way qpr have said we want it looked into to, but not saying yes or no. His cousin is rio ferdinand who lost England captaincy and there's a hidden agenda from his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Anton Ferdinand has to do is say yes or no if it was said. I think either media have hyped this up and he is now embaressed to say anything, by the way qpr have said we want it looked into to, but not saying yes or no. His cousin is rio ferdinand who lost England captaincy and there's a hidden agenda from his family.

He his actually his brother, ones a good centre back the other not so good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...