[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by arista

Ammi
Today
Now on BBC2HD Politics Live

Asks is taking the Knee
"Political"

Only if equality is viewed as a political issue, which it isn't.

[Stu]

Football has also - of course - been frequently political in the best possible way. It's a melting pot of high athleticism, dodgy hairstyles, and cultural zeitgeist cathartic release. This isn't anything new. If you want to have a discussion about your beautiful game being destroyed, there's this other thing that's fertile ground for debate. BAR? CAR? Something like that .

Taking the vocal initiative to actually boo your own team for performing an overtly respectful gesture before the game even starts is the remit of yob contrarians, those on varying rungs of the racism spectrum and the kind of disenfranchised Carling breath babies who get that tiny dick energy when they see someone with better clothes than them on the news or talking about charity.

[The Slim Reaper]

[Tom4784]

The whole 'keep politics out of the game' reminds me of gamers who fall to pieces whenever there's a gay character in a game, or there's spotlight on a non-white character or if there is a female character that doesn't have tits bigger than the northern hemisphere and isn't dressed in a string bikini. They always describe it as 'politics' which often means 'I want my game to be filled with straight white dudes and women who only exist to be ogled at.' They'll claim that politics have no place in their games while playing Metal Gear Solid, Call of Duty: Cold War, or pretty much any JRPG in which you have to overthrow a government, unearth corruption in religion or just simply fight god, sometimes all three. That kind of political content is a-okay just as long as there isn't a gay in sight!

People who say keep politics out of football are very that, they don't mind players wearing poppies or supporting causes but as soon as a player takes a knee against racism, these people lose their racist minds.

[Alf]

Nail on head!

[arista]

Originally Posted by Alf

Nail on head!

Yes good Point Brendon
on Australia's SkyNews

[Tom4784]

Breaking news! Racists are tired of being called racist!

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Breaking news! Racists are tired of being called racist!

No...true and honest fans are fed up being labelled the same as a stupid minority..like you did..

Which incidently is just like people saying all blacks eat takeaway chicken and stuff like that...

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by parmnion

No...true and honest fans are fed up being labelled the same as a stupid minority..like you did..

Which incidently is just like people saying all blacks eat takeaway chicken and stuff like that...

Wait..... Are you trying to make out that calling someone out on their racism is akin to racism itself?

Youtube video

It's grim how some people are desperate to be oppressed.

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Wait..... Are you trying to make out that calling someone out on their racism is akin to racism itself?

Youtube video

It's grim how some people are desperate to be oppressed.

You described all millwall fans being the same...that's the way a racist would think about different people.. they would put them all in the same bracket..

[Stu]

Brendan O’Neill is the charmer who called Greta Thunberg a weirdo with a monotone voice, for those keeping the score at home. He's also defended overtly racist taunting at football matches as being displays of passion, and famously penned a now redacted Huffington Post article entitled "If You Were Abused By Jimmy Savile, Maybe You Should Keep It to Yourself".

[arista]

Originally Posted by Stu

Brendan O’Neill is the charmer who called Greta Thunberg a weirdo with a monotone voice, for those keeping the score at home. He's also defended overtly racist taunting at football matches as being displays of passion, and famously penned a now redacted Huffington Post article entitled "If You Were Abused By Jimmy Savile, Maybe You Should Keep It to Yourself".

Yes Stu
he does not like her.

Also Trump hates her.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes Stu
he does not like her.

Also Trump hates her.

Imagine hating a teenage girl when you're the President of the USA

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Imagine hating a teenage girl when you're the President of the USA

Imagine being a grown ass man, defending and excusing the president hating a teenage girl.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes Stu
he does not like her.

Also Trump hates her.

Have you ever stopped to question why?

Because she has the power to cut through a solid block of spin like a hot knife through butter.

A bit like the act of taking a knee, it is not a statement that can be politicised... there are no words, it is just a action that shows awareness, the need for equality and justice.

Isn't that what we all want?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Have you ever stopped to question why?

Because she has the power to cut through a solid block of spin like a hot knife through butter.

A bit like the act of taking a knee, it is not a statement that can be politicised... there are no words, it is just a action that shows awareness, the need for equality and justice.

Isn't that what we all want?

I do not need that Young Lady
to tell me anything.

All the Data is already around us
Via SkyNewsHD for example.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by arista

I do not need that Young Lady
to tell me anything.

All the Data is already around us
Via SkyNewsHD for example.

The media only parrot what they are told to Arista, they are not environmentalists are they?

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Stu

Brendan O’Neill is the charmer who called Greta Thunberg a weirdo with a monotone voice, for those keeping the score at home. He's also defended overtly racist taunting at football matches as being displays of passion, and famously penned a now redacted Huffington Post article entitled "If You Were Abused By Jimmy Savile, Maybe You Should Keep It to Yourself".

The guy sounds like a charmer.

[jet]

Interesting article which addresses the divisive overuse of the word 'racist'.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...he-word-racist

It's time to put a moratorium on the word 'racist'
Reniqua Allen


In the late nineties, conservative John Bunzel, a former member of the US Commission on Civil Rights, wrote that President Clinton's Advisory Board on Race should call for an end of the "corrupted usage" of the word "racist" especially when used as an "accusation" or "smear word" because:

[It] breeds bitterness and polarization, not a spirit of pragmatic reasonableness in confronting our difficult problems.

While I agree with little else that he said in that article, 15 years later, the sentiment is hitting home. It's time to put a moratorium on the word "racist".
It's not that the word racist – meaning a belief that one's race is superior to another – doesn't adequately define the feelings of certain people in the world. Racial prejudice and racism, is certainly alive and often thought to be rising in America and Europe. But I refuse to believe the word "racist" is an adequate characterization of everyone and everything that it has been attributed to as of late.

n the past week alone the word "racist" has been used in reference to Halloween costumes, gun owners, Russian soccer fans, the upscale store Barney's, alleged text messages sent by an NFL player to his colleague, sunglasses, and reportedly angry fans after YouTube's first music awards. Looking back over the past few years, the word has described teens that called President Obama the "N word" online, the President himself, people mad at the new Miss America, Lena Dunham's show Girls, Lena Dunham herself, Jamie Foxx on Saturday Night Live, dogs, and folks that like white turkey meat over dark.
Were many of these stories reprehensible? Yes. Others were borderline ridiculous – dogs, seriously? But there's some kind of racial line that we are starting to blur and I'm less convinced that every racial misstep is the action of a "racist."

Sure, the Hollywood actress absolutely deserved to be called on her ill-advised blackface Halloween costume, the NFL player should have faced repercussions for his alleged use of racial slurs and the lack of diversity on Girls is a valid concern. But it doesn't mean that all of these folk should be cast off as "bad guys" and lumped in with the camp of people that thinks their sole race is superior.

Let me make it clear, I am not, and will not, defend any of these people and their actions. Many reveal very deep rooted bigotry, prejudice and problematic ideas about racial and ethnic groups; but the constant use of such incendiary and dramatic language often takes us away from the root of the problem, and takes us away from the fight for racial justice. I'm not advocating we take the racist moniker from those that truly deserve it, like Adolf Hitler and white supremacist David Duke. But the word racist has gone from being used to describe the harsh discrimination of the Jews, to a sort of catch all phrase for anything that is racially negative, stereotypical or just deviates from what we have deemed to be the "politically correct " racial transcript.

Joe Feagin a sociologist at the University of Florida says that today when we talk about race, we aren't really talking about "racism", that our conversations are "racist light" because we're ultimately alluding to a deficient character trait. He says:
Whites don't want to be called racist because it threatens our virtue. Since the 1950s whites learned that it's not a good thing. They know now that being called a racist is now connected with not being virtuous…it's just saying you're a nasty person.
"A lot of times when we talk about racism, we're talking about racial prejudice", says Lecia Brooks, a director at the Southern Poverty Law Center. She adds, "folks don't have the language to talk about racism. Language is important". Jennifer Roth-Gordon, a linguist at Arizona State agrees that the idea that one is a "racist" today is associated with an ignorance. But she says the word means a little more than just a simple prejudice. "Prejudice is a bias. Racism is a bias with prejudice and is institutional. Prejudice is a far more general term since there are people of color who are biased."

Roth-Gordon says a particular problem with the word is that it's often attributed to individual actions rather than a systematic deficiency. "Talking about individual racists or racism, lets us whites off the hook. We can go around and say 'tsk tsk', I would never do that." She says we have to stop focusing on the accusation and instead focus on the action. She points to video by hip-hop commentator, Jay Smooth (watch it here), on how to tell someone they sound racist. In it, he says you have to separate between "what they did" and "what they are", while keeping the conversation on what they said. It's an interesting strategy and one that many in the media and blogosphere (including myself) should take note of.

Still, I think we would all benefit from a moratorium on the word. Maybe if we stop the superfluous use of the "R" word we can all pause for a minute and admit to certain biases and prejudices without feeling like we're the lowest of the low and begin to work towards achieving real racial justice.
Paula Deen's very public shaming this summer is a prime example of jumping on the liberal feel-good bandwagon, without saying much about race. I will admit, it was refreshing to have a multiracial coalition angered by Deen's behavior; and it sparked an interesting debate. But have those same people, outraged at Deen's use of the N word, started calling more people with "black-sounding" names as much as whites when their company has a job open? Have they begun to pay Hispanic workers as much as everyone else? Have they clutched their purses any less when a black man walks down the street towards them?
Walmart, one of the companies that said they were dropping Deen's products, is the largest employer of blacks and Hispanics in America. Yet according to the union-sponsored Making Change at Walmart, a full time Walmart associate earns less than 70% of the federal poverty line for a family of four. People of color disproportionately make up their low wage jobs, with the average hourly associate making about $8.81 an hour, well below the amount experts say the average american family needs to live.
But no one is calling any of these folk racist.
Today the word racist, and the shaming that goes along with it, has turned too political. It is also too much about individual prejudice, when in reality, racial justice is something that we all should be fighting for together.
It's fine to reproach individuals like Paula Deen or point out racially charged tweets, but I wish people would act as equally as outraged over New York's Stop and Frisk policies, or the dismantling of the Voter Rights Act, or opposition to comprehensive immigration reform. Being a "racist" certainly can start with bias and ignorance, but it's more than just using the "N word", "twerking" or dressing up in a distasteful costume. It's time we all begin to understand that.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Interesting article which addresses the divisive overuse of the word 'racist'.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...he-word-racist

It's time to put a moratorium on the word 'racist'
Reniqua Allen


In the late nineties, conservative John Bunzel, a former member of the US Commission on Civil Rights, wrote that President Clinton's Advisory Board on Race should call for an end of the "corrupted usage" of the word "racist" especially when used as an "accusation" or "smear word" because:

[It] breeds bitterness and polarization, not a spirit of pragmatic reasonableness in confronting our difficult problems.

While I agree with little else that he said in that article, 15 years later, the sentiment is hitting home. It's time to put a moratorium on the word "racist".
It's not that the word racist – meaning a belief that one's race is superior to another – doesn't adequately define the feelings of certain people in the world. Racial prejudice and racism, is certainly alive and often thought to be rising in America and Europe. But I refuse to believe the word "racist" is an adequate characterization of everyone and everything that it has been attributed to as of late.

n the past week alone the word "racist" has been used in reference to Halloween costumes, gun owners, Russian soccer fans, the upscale store Barney's, alleged text messages sent by an NFL player to his colleague, sunglasses, and reportedly angry fans after YouTube's first music awards. Looking back over the past few years, the word has described teens that called President Obama the "N word" online, the President himself, people mad at the new Miss America, Lena Dunham's show Girls, Lena Dunham herself, Jamie Foxx on Saturday Night Live, dogs, and folks that like white turkey meat over dark.
Were many of these stories reprehensible? Yes. Others were borderline ridiculous – dogs, seriously? But there's some kind of racial line that we are starting to blur and I'm less convinced that every racial misstep is the action of a "racist."

Sure, the Hollywood actress absolutely deserved to be called on her ill-advised blackface Halloween costume, the NFL player should have faced repercussions for his alleged use of racial slurs and the lack of diversity on Girls is a valid concern. But it doesn't mean that all of these folk should be cast off as "bad guys" and lumped in with the camp of people that thinks their sole race is superior.

Let me make it clear, I am not, and will not, defend any of these people and their actions. Many reveal very deep rooted bigotry, prejudice and problematic ideas about racial and ethnic groups; but the constant use of such incendiary and dramatic language often takes us away from the root of the problem, and takes us away from the fight for racial justice. I'm not advocating we take the racist moniker from those that truly deserve it, like Adolf Hitler and white supremacist David Duke. But the word racist has gone from being used to describe the harsh discrimination of the Jews, to a sort of catch all phrase for anything that is racially negative, stereotypical or just deviates from what we have deemed to be the "politically correct " racial transcript.

Joe Feagin a sociologist at the University of Florida says that today when we talk about race, we aren't really talking about "racism", that our conversations are "racist light" because we're ultimately alluding to a deficient character trait. He says:
Whites don't want to be called racist because it threatens our virtue. Since the 1950s whites learned that it's not a good thing. They know now that being called a racist is now connected with not being virtuous…it's just saying you're a nasty person.
"A lot of times when we talk about racism, we're talking about racial prejudice", says Lecia Brooks, a director at the Southern Poverty Law Center. She adds, "folks don't have the language to talk about racism. Language is important". Jennifer Roth-Gordon, a linguist at Arizona State agrees that the idea that one is a "racist" today is associated with an ignorance. But she says the word means a little more than just a simple prejudice. "Prejudice is a bias. Racism is a bias with prejudice and is institutional. Prejudice is a far more general term since there are people of color who are biased."

Roth-Gordon says a particular problem with the word is that it's often attributed to individual actions rather than a systematic deficiency. "Talking about individual racists or racism, lets us whites off the hook. We can go around and say 'tsk tsk', I would never do that." She says we have to stop focusing on the accusation and instead focus on the action. She points to video by hip-hop commentator, Jay Smooth (watch it here), on how to tell someone they sound racist. In it, he says you have to separate between "what they did" and "what they are", while keeping the conversation on what they said. It's an interesting strategy and one that many in the media and blogosphere (including myself) should take note of.

Still, I think we would all benefit from a moratorium on the word. Maybe if we stop the superfluous use of the "R" word we can all pause for a minute and admit to certain biases and prejudices without feeling like we're the lowest of the low and begin to work towards achieving real racial justice.
Paula Deen's very public shaming this summer is a prime example of jumping on the liberal feel-good bandwagon, without saying much about race. I will admit, it was refreshing to have a multiracial coalition angered by Deen's behavior; and it sparked an interesting debate. But have those same people, outraged at Deen's use of the N word, started calling more people with "black-sounding" names as much as whites when their company has a job open? Have they begun to pay Hispanic workers as much as everyone else? Have they clutched their purses any less when a black man walks down the street towards them?
Walmart, one of the companies that said they were dropping Deen's products, is the largest employer of blacks and Hispanics in America. Yet according to the union-sponsored Making Change at Walmart, a full time Walmart associate earns less than 70% of the federal poverty line for a family of four. People of color disproportionately make up their low wage jobs, with the average hourly associate making about $8.81 an hour, well below the amount experts say the average american family needs to live.
But no one is calling any of these folk racist.
Today the word racist, and the shaming that goes along with it, has turned too political. It is also too much about individual prejudice, when in reality, racial justice is something that we all should be fighting for together.
It's fine to reproach individuals like Paula Deen or point out racially charged tweets, but I wish people would act as equally as outraged over New York's Stop and Frisk policies, or the dismantling of the Voter Rights Act, or opposition to comprehensive immigration reform. Being a "racist" certainly can start with bias and ignorance, but it's more than just using the "N word", "twerking" or dressing up in a distasteful costume. It's time we all begin to understand that.

It takes a... special kind of thought process to get irate over the word racist rather than, you know, racist football fans.

[Tom4784]

Ah, a guy that attacks kids just trying to save the planet, finds racism acceptable and thinks abuse victims should be silent?

His words should obviously be taken to heart and trusted!

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Alf

Nail on head!

Again, what does any of this have to do with taking the knee? I'm still yet to see any argument that the gesture is provocative, or kicking the hornets' nest.

The number of incidents involving fans (and indeed players, John Terry Luis Suarez ) is astronomical, and clearly more needs to be done before we stamp racism out in football culture. Is taking the knee before the game really that jarring to you, arista/Alf?

You can argue about how unnecessary and ineffective it is, and complain that it's virtue-signalling or whatever, but if it gets conversations started and means that racists are banned from attending grounds and playing games, then it's a win/win.

To even go around thinking that the FA and Premier League want to directly influence the funding that police in the UK receive, or whatever other anti-BLM rhetoric you've picked up from Ben Shapiro and his scaremongering posse, is just insane.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Alf

Chairpersons, Management, staff and players come and go from football clubs, but the fans are there forever, because it's their club, in their community.

They pay to watch a game of football, they dont pay to watch activists push their agendas. Do it on their own time, not on the time of paying spectators at their local football club.

I hate to break it to you but fans do not own the club. You don't have a god-given right to dictate what your club deems acceptable just because your dad forced you to support them from the time you were in nappies. What's more, you don't represent all football fans either, so to try and speak for everyone is just daft.

[Glenn.]

You have to take a hard look at yourself if you oppose this in any way.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

You have to take a hard look at yourself if you oppose this in any way.

It is a Political Move.

Discussed today on BBC2HD Politics Live