Racism in football Thread.

[theworm2345]

I used to get called white man too on occasion, no big deal.

[Blue]

Yuh cant kick out racist fans if yuh have no fans.

[NYtriniwhiteboy..]

i remember being called a racist in a match against vessigny cuz we were pressing dem and fella fake an injury to kill time and i shouted to roll his ass off de pitch..Hector self said to me "wam  whiteboy we is pple yuh kno, yuh racist blah blah" someting and cuss me. Fellas who were on the team with me still laugh at it.

Get called a white c**nt nuff times in Ptown and in Rio Claro in an U16 match was told "we doh like white pple in Rio", not by de players but by random fans. Funny part was all the pipers in Ptown as soon as they heard i was eligible to play the next year and was deciding if to repeat at pres or ptown bounce me up at a match and telling me how much i go "like myself in ptown"

But never got told shit on de field by players really. Figure cuz i was the only white fella playing in the south zone at the time it wudda jus look like they advantaging me

[kicker]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

[president]

No racism in the Pro League is, as they say, a "no brainer". The players and staff are 99.9% black. To say there is no racism in football is another matter. Old stereotypes die hard, and the ideas that Indians can't play football (only cricket), and "it eh hah no good Chinee" linger. The potential elite players of these groups disappear almost before they are seen. Yes, there are socio-economic reasons for their disappearance - essentially after an SSFL career - but how many talented "non-black" players make it into a national team? Let's think deeper on the issue.

[rastafari]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

I agree with yuh kicker.When i said that people jump on my case. I was writing about the incident between John Terry and Anton Ferdinand.


JAH BLESS
RASTAFARI

[Jah Gol]

No racism in the Pro League is, as they say, a "no brainer". The players and staff are 99.9% black. To say there is no racism in football is another matter. Old stereotypes die hard, and the ideas that Indians can't play football (only cricket), and "it eh hah no good Chinee" linger. The potential elite players of these groups disappear almost before they are seen. Yes, there are socio-economic reasons for their disappearance - essentially after an SSFL career - but how many talented "non-black" players make it into a national team? Let's think deeper on the issue.

We beat up this issue already . Read your own statement 99 percent of our players are black.

[asylumseeker]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

Kicker, yuh on yuh apologist nonsense yet again? You lost me at "technically".

[Bakes]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

Racism is nothing to get "technical" about, racism is about how you treat people, period... and how you address people is a critical component of how you treat them.  To say that the only offensive part of the "black c**t" statement is being called a "c**t" is both silly and disingenuous.  Language is dynamic and meaning changes with context.  For this reason "technical" or literal interpretation isn't always the best or most accurate approach. While it is true that in most contexts the word "black" itself wouldn't be offensive, when it is used as an insult (or component thereof) it absolutely becomes offensive.

[just cool]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

Kicker, yuh on yuh apologist nonsense yet again? You lost me at "technically".

[Observer]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

Racism is nothing to get "technical" about, racism is about how you treat people, period... and how you address people is a critical component of how you treat them.  To say that the only offensive part of the "black c**t" statement is being called a "c**t" is both silly and disingenuous.  Language is dynamic and meaning changes with context.  For this reason "technical" or literal interpretation isn't always the best or most accurate approach. While it is true that in most contexts the word "black" itself wouldn't be offensive, when it is used as an insult (or component thereof) it absolutely becomes offensive.

Well Bakes papa Trinbago people is serious racist. Just how we address & greet people alone 
We as a peoples have always been politically incorrect & to outsiders, jaw dropping racist in terms of what comes out our mouth 

[Bakes]

Well Bakes papa Trinbago people is serious racist. Just how we address & greet people alone 
We as a peoples have always been politically incorrect & to outsiders, jaw dropping racist in terms of what comes out our mouth 

The overarching framework of the conversation is that the communication is taking place between members of different races, white and black in the Terry situation. I can't speak for your experience, but from mine the only time I have heard people calling each other "black" so and so have been Afro Trinis among themselves.  Obviously this isn't racism. If you have examples of Indo-Trinis or members of other races calling Afro-Trinis "black" so and sos, then I'd have to stand corrected.

[Tenorsaw]

Fenwick has supposedly applied for the Colorado Rapids job.  I think the MLS would be a good challenge for him, but considering what he's done in the Pro League with the limited resources and sub-standard facilities and infrastructure, he could do well.

[kicker]

Technically being called a white c*nt (or black c*nt for that matter) is not racist... The offensive part about that is being called a c*nt.

The fact that being called a black c*nt would widely be considered racist tells says alot. 

Racism is alot deeper than mere words or insults involving a skin color reference. 

Racism is nothing to get "technical" about, racism is about how you treat people, period... and how you address people is a critical component of how you treat them.  To say that the only offensive part of the "black c**t" statement is being called a "c**t" is both silly and disingenuous.  Language is dynamic and meaning changes with context.  For this reason "technical" or literal interpretation isn't always the best or most accurate approach. While it is true that in most contexts the word "black" itself wouldn't be offensive, when it is used as an insult (or component thereof) it absolutely becomes offensive.

That's exactly my point. 

Posters before me, in describing their experiences, seemed to be implying that being a called a white c*nt and a black c*nt are comparable.  I was saying technically it is (or should be), but in reality it isn't... at least not in my opinion. 

hence the reason I said racism is more (deeper) than just insults coupled with reference to a skin color. 

[kicker]

Kicker, yuh on yuh apologist nonsense yet again? You lost me at "technically".

apologist? what? I dunno what you even referring to.

If yuh that lost, trying reading more slowly.

[asylumseeker]

Kicker, yuh on yuh apologist nonsense yet again? You lost me at "technically".

apologist? what? I dunno what you even referring to.

If yuh that lost, trying reading more slowly.

Read slowly or quickly it's the same bullshit.

[Bakes]

That's exactly my point. 

Posters before me, in describing their experiences, seemed to be implying that being a called a white c*nt and a black c*nt are comparable.  I was saying technically it is (or should be), but in reality it isn't... at least not in my opinion. 

hence the reason I said racism is more (deeper) than just insults coupled with reference to a skin color. 

With a closer reading I understand (even if I still don't entirely agree with) your point... but things kinda get derailed by the opening sentence.  I think it detracts from your larger point.

[asylumseeker]

Yow, there were only 4 posters before kicker. One was Flex who merely posted the subject article ... the content of which didn't address any differential implications or comparisons related to "being a called a white c*nt and a black c*nt". Similarly, neither did the following posters Worm and Ryan. That leaves NYTWB ...  his contribution expressed his experience ... therein there is also not even remotely a comparative notion in NYTWB's post.

What the heck is Kicker talking about?

[kicker]

Yow, there were only 4 posters before kicker. One was Flex who merely posted the subject article ... the content of which didn't address any differential implications or comparisons related to "being a called a white c*nt and a black c*nt". Similarly, neither did the following posters Worm and Ryan. That leaves NYTWB ...  his contribution expressed his experience ... therein there is also not even remotely a comparative notion in NYTWB's post.

What the heck is Kicker talking about?

Yeah I was talking about NYTWB and to some extent theworm... I know the point of their posts was not to compare the two - I wasn't directly responding to them, hence the reason I didn't quote them... but in my opinion it was somewhat implicit even if unintentional (given the recent events of racism in football - in particular J.Terry's scenario, the point they were making and most importantly if you know what implicit means)...so I put in a 2cents

Either way I think I clarified what I was trying to say, in response to Bakes and it's not "bullsh*t" unless you just looking for talk.  You can agree, you can disagree or you can occupy yourself with whether or not it was an appropriate response to the posters above, and ask "what the heck" and throw irrelevant and inaccurate insults about being "apologist again" to your heart's delight - it adds nothing to the larger discussion about racism in football....again, you just lookin' fuh talk. 

[asylumseeker]

Curiously, on issues invoking race you almost always seem to be misunderstood. Generally, the "misunderstandings" stream from your frequently reductive assessments. What's that the product of? Miscegenated matrimony?

Yeah, implicitly you're an apologist (and that's not an insult ... it is what it is). Explicitly, it would be helpful to recognise it for what it is.

[Bakes]

Curiously, on issues invoking race you almost always seem to be misunderstood. Generally, the "misunderstandings" stream from your frequently reductive assessments. What's that the product of? Miscegenated matrimony?

Yeah, implicitly you're an apologist (and that's not an insult ... it is what it is). Explicitly, it would be helpful to recognise it for what it is.

That is an unnecessary cheap shot... seriously, disagreement on a messageboard is one thing but you way outta line with the personal comments.

[asylumseeker]

I appreciate your position ... and I think it's an understandably enthusiastic and perhaps even duly-considered one. However, let me say ... that condition is not "personal" to Kicker ... and others so conditioned are not nearly as cavalier or reductive in their assessments. Indeed, they may even be less predisposed to say ... having an obscene notion of a hierarchy of acceptability/comparability between being called a white c**t or a black c**t.

There is a vacuous nature to Kicker's treatment of these issues that is surprisingly contemptible, even if benign in intent.

I'll leave it there.

[kicker]

Curiously, on issues invoking race you almost always seem to be misunderstood. Generally, the "misunderstandings" stream from your frequently reductive assessments. What's that the product of? Miscegenated matrimony?

Yeah, implicitly you're an apologist (and that's not an insult ... it is what it is). Explicitly, it would be helpful to recognise it for what it is.

You talking a big load of crap.  First of all I am not "always misunderstood" on topics of race.  This is the first time to my recollection and that's because I tried to summarize in possibly too few words (and with a debatable choice of word in "technically")

reductive statements a result of miscegenated matrimony?  You're asking me if I simplify opinions on race because I'm involved in an interracial marriage? or the product of an interracial marriage?  ....If so, then that deductive reasoning on your part is inherently reductive if you ask me... so question yuhself!

Lastly I'm not any apologist implicitly or explicitly - my post was not meant to justify anything, or apologize for anything.  Like I said, read more slowly. If that doesn't help, just pick yuh battles and leave this one alone. 

[kicker]

With a closer reading I understand (even if I still don't entirely agree with) your point... but things kinda get derailed by the opening sentence.  I think it detracts from your larger point.

Literally would have probably been a better choice of word than technically. 

In my opinion racism only exists controversially because of its ability to offend, adversely affect or cause some kind of harm through discrimination... and that ability is dictated by the dynamic which exists between the alleged racist and the target.  So to me there is a subtle flaw in using an example of racism in a scenario where the recipient wasn't offended (which seemed to be the case with NYTWB and theworm) - and hence potential asymmetry exists between literally comparable insults which reference skin color... It's a complex discussion and I don't have all the answers - just an opinion.   

[asylumseeker]

Curiously, on issues invoking race you almost always seem to be misunderstood. Generally, the "misunderstandings" stream from your frequently reductive assessments. What's that the product of? Miscegenated matrimony?

Yeah, implicitly you're an apologist (and that's not an insult ... it is what it is). Explicitly, it would be helpful to recognise it for what it is.

You talking a big load of crap.  First of all I am not "always misunderstood" on topics of race.  This is the first time to my recollection and that's because I tried to summarize in possibly too few words (and with a debatable choice of word in "technically")

reductive statements a result of miscegenated matrimony?  You're asking me if I simplify opinions on race because I'm involved in an interracial marriage? or the product of an interracial marriage?  ....If so, then that deductive reasoning on your part is inherently reductive if you ask me... so question yuhself!

Lastly I'm not any apologist implicitly or explicitly - my post was not meant to justify anything, or apologize for anything.  Like I said, read more slowly. If that doesn't help, just pick yuh battles and leave this one alone. 

Well, let me refresh your memory with the following. There are other examples elsewhere on the site. I remain grateful for Zandolie's summation on the thread in question. ["Maybe if some black people had to siddung right next to these two ca-caholes during a game and endure the stadium laughing at their 'Golliwog' antics they might change their opinon.."] It makes the world of sense.

Oh ... and incidentally ... I didn't render any deductive reasoning. I was merely deliberately provocative for reasons alluded to in my preceding post.

Anyway, fortunately we don't have you as the arbiter or protector of rights ... whether one is offended (or not) does not provide sufficient guidance as to whether a comment or action is racist ... or indeed whether racism per se exists (Fenwick's comments for example don't necessarily gel with the headline).

Indeed, one could be an African ignoramus or an oblivious c**t .... should one's numbness to the offending event or action blunt otherwise sensible condemnatory societal action or response?

 

Seeker you are misunderstanding and misrepresenting what I'm saying...too much work to respond in kind though...so I'll leave it be. 

As for the airlines thing, I posted that I totally understand Qantas pulling the tweet down to be sensitive to their customer base - again you misrepresent that.
...

Is that what you meant by:

...  I'm ok with Qantas for deleting the tweet to be sensitive to a diverse audience with different experiences, but I can't genuinely call this racist. 

Quite the euphemism there, kicker.

[kicker]

There was no misunderstanding in the quantas scenario - we had differing points of view. And there were equal people on either side of the line, therefore you were as misunderstood as I was lol...

I'm not claiming to be an authority of what is racist and what is not, and I'm not saying that lack of causation of offense is the sole deciding factor of whether or not a statement or action is racist.  I'm saying that racism exists controversially because of it's ability to offend so there's a potential asymmetry (depending on the scenario) between literally comparable statements...not that one is absolutely racist, and one is absolutely not racist but that the statements are not symmetrical in the real world.  In sum, what makes a statement racist is not just the words spoken...in my opinion. 

I'm not saying that it's right - but my observation is that that is how it is...and it varies from society to society - makes it even more complex..
     

[Bakes]

I appreciate your position ... and I think it's an understandably enthusiastic and perhaps even duly-considered one. However, let me say ... that condition is not "personal" to Kicker ... and others so conditioned are not nearly as cavalier or reductive in their assessments. Indeed, they may even be less predisposed to say ... having an obscene notion of a hierarchy of acceptability/comparability between being called a white c**t or a black c**t.

There is a vacuous nature to Kicker's treatment of these issues that is surprisingly contemptible, even if benign in intent.

I'll leave it there.

There is nothing "enthusiastic" about my comment... you statement was simply unnecessary, and you yourself concede as much by your admission that you were being deliberately provocative.  Being in an interracial marriage isn't "personal" to Kicker (silly that you would even feel the need to raise that peripheral point) but your question to him in the context of the conversation was absolutely personal, again, confirmed by your later admission.

There is also no a priori connection to the Quantas situation here, I happened to agree with Kicker then and disagree now.  His consistency, as I see it  hardly indicative of some larger philosophical take, or vacuousness on his part with regards to his treatment of the subject matter.  Like him I share a reticence to instinctively and automatically reach for the race card each time the issue is invoked... I don't see what about that mindset justifies you feeling the need to start bringing the man marriage into the equation.

[asylumseeker]

What would provide immunity to ask that question? One similarly situated?

[Tallman]

He called me a black nigger
By Jethro Wang (The New Paper)

He has encountered racism on the football pitch before.

But trinidad and Tobago defender Fabien Lewis never expected to be exposed to it in Singapore.

Unfortunately, in an S-League match between Balestier Central and Lewis' Woodlands Wellington last night, it happened again.

Speaking to The New Paper after the match, which Balestier won 2-0, the 30-year old Trinidadian said: "I'm shocked that players in this league would use such words, as the S-League is a very reputable league."

The incident in question took place in the dying minutes of the match, with Balestier leading 2-0.

According to Lewis, he had urged a Balestier player to get up and stop play-acting after one of his tackles.

At this point, Lewis said, another Balestier player, forward Zulkiffli Hassim hurled racist abuse at him.

"He used the words 'Get out of here, you black nigger' after I made the challenge," said Lewis, still clearly outraged.

Immediately after that, players from both sides converged, and though no punches were thrown, referee K. Kalimuthu showed Zulkiffli a straight red card.

According to a teammate of Zulkiffli, who could not be reached for comment last night, the referee told him that the red card was for his racist comment.

Lewis - a new signing for Woodlands - added that a similar incident happened to him when he was playing in the United States a few years ago.

According to the Trinidadian, that offender was banned for the rest of the season.

Said the Rams defender: "I hope that necessary action will be taken by authorities (in this instance too)."

Woodlands' assistant coach Clement Teo said that the club would be lodging a complaint with the Football Association of Singapore (FAS) over the incident.

Teo said that he was further incensed by Zulkiffli's actions after the red card.

The forward smiled and clapped at the 1,913 crowd at the Tpa Payoh Stadium as he walked off the pitch.

Said Teo: "He should be ashamed of his actions. He acted as if he did something great."

When The New Paper spoke to Balestier's head coach Darren Stewart, he said that he was unaware of the incident.

Said Stewart: "I had no idea what happened. I thought Zulkiffli was sent off for a scuffle.

"I'll leave it to the authorities to sort it out."

It is understood that the FAS will review the incident once the referee's report is released today.

[vb]

Where did Fabien play his football in Trinidad?

VB