• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
 
Re: Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1#msg1 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]

Which no one is denying

What is your point? He's allowed to be offended by suarez, that's fine, yet it's also acceptable to persecute someone because of their foreign language?
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47188.msg1448794#msg1448794 date=1324468665]
[quote author=robinhood link=topic=47188.msg1448691#msg1448691 date=1324462540]
Of course referring to anybody's colour is a racial comment.


It doesn't make you immediately a racist, but it doesn't help.
[/quote]


In your country yes. In other countries, no.


If I called you, "Hey white man" in England, would I be called racist? or could you charge me with anything?


I was also thinking - if Suarez says he 'only called Evra what others on his team call him,' should they be banned for 8 games too? Or is this only applicable to other teams?


Ross - any comment on the beer drinker in the emirates response?
[/quote]


You do know that "racial" is not a synonym for "racist", right?
 
Gustavo Poyet has branded the eight-match ban handed out to Luis Suarez as "incredible" and says he backs his fellow Uruguayan "to the death".

The Liverpool striker has been banned for racially abusing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra.

Poyet, manager of Brighton, said Suarez had suffered from cultural differences between England and Uruguay - and that in the South American country people were referred to as 'blacks' in an affectionate way.

He also attacked Evra, saying the French player was "no saint".

Poyet told Ultimas Noticias newspaper in Uruguay: "The ban is incredible, shocking, it's disproportionate. I back Luis to death.

"Things have happened before with Evra. He is not a saint. He is a controversial player.

"I don't know in which world we are going to live in from now on people. People will accuse each other of anything.

"Suarez just arrived [in the Premier League] and there are things that he has to learn when you are in another country because they might be normal in your country but perhaps they are not considered that way in other parts of the world.


"I have tried to explain that we live with coloured people in Uruguay. We share different experiences with them. We play football, we share parties. We are born, we grow up and we die with them. We call them 'blacks' in a natural way, even in an affectionate way. That is the way we were brought up. We are integrated and there are no problems from either side.

"I've explained how the Uruguay people and the South Americans experience these situations with coloured people. I've been many years in England and I understand them. I know how to deal with it, but Luis has only recently arrived here."

Uruguay's national director of sports, Ernesto Irurueta, called the ban "exaggerated, absurd and out of place."


Uruguay's head coach Oscar Tabarez said he would continue to support Suarez.

Tabarez said: "He has out full support and solidarity because seen from a distance this seems like an excessive punishment."
 
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448994#msg1448994 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]


And I said different where exactly? What did I say wrong?

This guy was saying foreigners need to leave all their cultural values at the airport when they move to England. Sound like multiculturalism to you? Sounds like xenophobia to me.
 
Pearcesport James Pearce
Breaking - John Terry WILL face criminal charges

cpsuk CPS
CPS authorises John Terry prosecution #johnterry
 
[quote author=robinhood link=topic=47188.msg1448997#msg1448997 date=1324476943]
You do know that "racial" is not a synonym for "racist", right?
[/quote]

Yes - we already discussed my examples like 10 pages ago. Catch up mate.
 
@DocMac

KK's got the wrong end of the stick here. He thinks you're talking about the dude on the phone with all that 'our' business, when you are, in fact, quoting him.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47188.msg1449005#msg1449005 date=1324477235]
[quote author=robinhood link=topic=47188.msg1448997#msg1448997 date=1324476943]
You do know that "racial" is not a synonym for "racist", right?
[/quote]

Yes - we already discussed my examples like 10 pages ago. Catch up mate.
[/quote]


Well then your post doesn't make sense.
 
When it come to race, things are never clear cut. Whether or not Suarez is 'racist', I dunno, I'd obviously hope not. But what we understand to be racist of course would vary from person to person. If someone has argument with another and uses their race as one of the insults; I consider that to be racist act. Do I think that person is innately racist whereby they measure status and value of a human by race in all contexts; not necessarily. Point is we can never see what's in another's heart, what we can do is judge by what the say and do.
I also don't think it's fair to assume that there are universal understandings on what is and isn't acceptable, it's nothing short of Imperial arrogance to assume that everyone will adopt 'our' position on what is and isn't acceptable. That said, we shouldn't be willing to brush aside rightly identified lines of unacceptance when it comes to racism.

I do feel bad for Suarez in the sense I genuinely believe that he didn't realise the implications of what he was saying; although I might have convinced myself of this as it's what I want to believe.
 
[quote author=Tinto link=topic=47188.msg1449007#msg1449007 date=1324477294]
@DocMac

KK's got the wrong end of the stick here. He thinks you're talking about the dude on the phone with all that 'our' business, when you are, in fact, quoting him.
[/quote]

I'm not sure. He certainly seems confused by something.
 
Re: Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47188.msg1448996#msg1448996 date=1324476932]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1#msg1 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]

Which no one is denying

What is your point? He's allowed to be offended by suarez, that's fine, yet it's also acceptable to persecute someone because of their foreign language?
[/quote]

My point, which is quite clear, is that black an minority ethnic peoples are entitled to consider this their country too if born here. Emboldening the word 'our' in such an ironic way, can imply otherwise and to further liken it to the English Defence League who believe that to the contrary is ill-conceived.
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47188.msg1448971#msg1448971 date=1324475607]
[quote author=themn link=topic=47188.msg1448969#msg1448969 date=1324475512]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47188.msg1448901#msg1448901 date=1324472296]
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=47188.msg1448886#msg1448886 date=1324471809]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47188.msg1448841#msg1448841 date=1324470344]
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=47188.msg1448827#msg1448827 date=1324469703]
I actual factual love this thread.
I really think some people are slightly mental.

Brilliant.
He said it. He admitted saying it. The end.

Theres some utter bollocks being spouted about everything else.

Each individual has to decide if they think he is a racist, or if they think the punishment is harsh or if they think *snigger* Fergie is behind it all and controls the FA etc etc
But he admitted using a word that caused offence and has been done for it.
The end.
[/quote]

... and you wonder why some people have exploded on this thread ...

Since you aren't one of the mental folk (thankfully as you are 6CM man of the year, and we don't want a mentalist winning that prestigious award):

1) if the term is used by Manure teammates on Evra too, should they be done for it?
2) why wasn't Evra done in for using an offensive term to Suarez?
[/quote]Aaah youre lovely.
Im not scm man of the year Wiz, Im barely registering a vote these days.
I cant really see the point in answering your questions, i think you already know the answers to be honest.

And no I dont see why people are exploding. Its retarded.
[/quote]



I think it's time to quit footy and move on to ballet. At least everyone there is nice and gentle.
[/quote]

^^^hasn't seen 'Black Swan'.
[/quote]

Guilty as charged. Will try choreographed swimming.
[/quote]

^^^hasn't seen 'Sinister Synchro'
 
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=47188.msg1449014#msg1449014 date=1324477453]
When it come to race, things are never clear cut. Whether or not Suarez is 'racist', I dunno, I'd obviously hope not. But what we understand to be racist of course would vary from person to person. If someone has argument with another and uses their race as one of the insults; I consider that to be racist act. Do I think that person is innately racist whereby they measure status and value of a human by race in all contexts; not necessarily. Point is we can never see what's in another's heart, what we can do is judge by what the say and do.
I also don't think it's fair to assume that there are universal understandings on what is and isn't acceptable, it's nothing short of Imperial arrogance to assume that everyone will adopt 'our' position on what is and isn't acceptable. That said, we shouldn't be willing to brush aside rightly identified lines of unacceptance when it comes to racism.

I do feel bad for Suarez in the sense I genuinely believe that he didn't realise the implications of what he was saying; although I might have convinced myself of this as it's what I want to believe.
[/quote]

The fact that he is himself mixed race, with a grandfather of African origin would tend to suggest he's not a racist. Surely?
 
Thanks Robinho - that's your usual response with me, so please carry on! 🙂

My mate's wife just walked in (Venezuelan). I asked her what she felt about 'Negrito'/'Negra' - "You mean coffee?" she asked. "No, I meant referring to a person." "Oh no, it's not a bad thing. In fact, xxxx (her husband, my mate, from London) was shocked when I called my friend in Caracas Negra."

Thanks for explanation for Anita. I admire your honesty, and based on the above, I think you're right when you say 'Suarez didn't realize the implications.' I also would love to know if Evra said the words to him in Spanish, and hence his response ... Oh well, let's wait for the FA.

Themn - you're killing me ... I'm just going to focus on being a good daddy, and forget sports. **waits for next movie** 😉
 
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449022#msg1449022 date=1324477742]
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=47188.msg1449014#msg1449014 date=1324477453]
When it come to race, things are never clear cut. Whether or not Suarez is 'racist', I dunno, I'd obviously hope not. But what we understand to be racist of course would vary from person to person. If someone has argument with another and uses their race as one of the insults; I consider that to be racist act. Do I think that person is innately racist whereby they measure status and value of a human by race in all contexts; not necessarily. Point is we can never see what's in another's heart, what we can do is judge by what the say and do.
I also don't think it's fair to assume that there are universal understandings on what is and isn't acceptable, it's nothing short of Imperial arrogance to assume that everyone will adopt 'our' position on what is and isn't acceptable. That said, we shouldn't be willing to brush aside rightly identified lines of unacceptance when it comes to racism.

I do feel bad for Suarez in the sense I genuinely believe that he didn't realise the implications of what he was saying; although I might have convinced myself of this as it's what I want to believe.
[/quote]

The fact that he is himself mixed race, with a grandfather of African origin would tend to suggest he's not a racist. Surely?
[/quote]

Don't let common sense get in the way of a good witch hunt, Doc......
 
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47188.msg1449025#msg1449025 date=1324477811]
Thanks Robinho - that's your usual response with me, so please carry on! 🙂

My mate's wife just walked in (Venezuelan). I asked her what she felt about 'Negrito'/'Negra' - "You mean coffee?" she asked. "No, I meant referring to a person." "Oh no, it's not a bad thing. In fact, xxxx (her husband, my mate, from London) was shocked when I called my friend in Caracas Negra."[/quote]


It is still a reference to race.
 
I have come to the conclusion ( especially after all those Uruguayan quotes) that the interview Luis gave to the the press when he was home, is in fact the thing that proves he is not racist.

There have been arguaments about his stupidity, honesty, naivety, call it what you will in giving the interview, but to me it is clear that he gave it because he genuinely believed that the infamous word, whatever the fuck it was, had no racial connotations.

It would appear that the FA and Evra agree that he is not racist, and indeed did not charge him as such, but the way they worded their statement and the length of the ban has fuelled the media into a witch hunt.

The ban is not so much what annoys me, it is the stain on his character, which I fully believe he does not deserve.

Incidentally it seems that all the Terry conspiracy theories are out the window as well.
 
Re: Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1449019#msg1449019 date=1324477585]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47188.msg1448996#msg1448996 date=1324476932]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1#msg1 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]

Which no one is denying

What is your point? He's allowed to be offended by suarez, that's fine, yet it's also acceptable to persecute someone because of their foreign language?
[/quote]

My point, which is quite clear, is that black an minority ethnic peoples are entitled to consider this their country too if born here. Emboldening the word 'our' in such an ironic way, can imply otherwise and to further liken it to the English Defence League who believe that to the contrary is ill-conceived.
[/quote]

I *obviously* also share the belief that people of any creed can be British. Emboldening 'our' was to demonstrate the xenophobic tendencies of the opinions being expressed by this member of an 'ethnic minority'. It was also to actually represent the actual timbre of his voice- he stressed 'our'. It was not to suggest that this person couldn't consider himself English. You've clearly taken that up completely wrongly.
 
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449022#msg1449022 date=1324477742]The fact that he is himself mixed race, with a grandfather of African origin would tend to suggest he's not a racist. Surely?
[/quote]


Que?


He looks mestizo.
 
This thread is amazing, are you saying that blacks should just get out now doc mac?
All that shit about cultural nuances well we can all see your true colours now.
*hands rosco his spoon back*





#nothelping
 
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449022#msg1449022 date=1324477742]
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=47188.msg1449014#msg1449014 date=1324477453]
When it come to race, things are never clear cut. Whether or not Suarez is 'racist', I dunno, I'd obviously hope not. But what we understand to be racist of course would vary from person to person. If someone has argument with another and uses their race as one of the insults; I consider that to be racist act. Do I think that person is innately racist whereby they measure status and value of a human by race in all contexts; not necessarily. Point is we can never see what's in another's heart, what we can do is judge by what the say and do.
I also don't think it's fair to assume that there are universal understandings on what is and isn't acceptable, it's nothing short of Imperial arrogance to assume that everyone will adopt 'our' position on what is and isn't acceptable. That said, we shouldn't be willing to brush aside rightly identified lines of unacceptance when it comes to racism.

I do feel bad for Suarez in the sense I genuinely believe that he didn't realise the implications of what he was saying; although I might have convinced myself of this as it's what I want to believe.
[/quote]

The fact that he is himself mixed race, with a grandfather of African origin would tend to suggest he's not a racist. Surely?
[/quote]Classic self loather.
 
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=47188.msg1449031#msg1449031 date=1324478029]
I have come to the conclusion ( especially after all those Uruguayan quotes) that the interview Luis gave to the the press when he was home, is in fact the thing that proves he is not racist.

There have been arguaments about his stupidity, honesty, naivety, call it what you will in giving the interview, but to me it is clear that he gave it because he genuinely believed that the infamous word, whatever the fuck it was, had no racial connotations.

It would appear that the FA and Evra agree that he is not racist, and indeed did not charge him as such, but the way they worded their statement and the length of the ban has fuelled the media into a witch hunt.

The ban is not so much what annoys me, it is the stain on his character, which I fully believe he does not deserve.

Incidentally it seems that all the Terry conspiracy theories are out the window as well.
[/quote]

JT has not be convicted yet. The courts may just fine him and then the FA may not do anything!
 
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449033#msg1449033 date=1324478060]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1449019#msg1449019 date=1324477585]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47188.msg1448996#msg1448996 date=1324476932]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1#msg1 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]

Which no one is denying

What is your point? He's allowed to be offended by suarez, that's fine, yet it's also acceptable to persecute someone because of their foreign language?
[/quote]

My point, which is quite clear, is that black an minority ethnic peoples are entitled to consider this their country too if born here. Emboldening the word 'our' in such an ironic way, can imply otherwise and to further liken it to the English Defence League who believe that to the contrary is ill-conceived.
[/quote]

I *obviously* also share the belief that people of any creed can be British. Emboldening 'our' was to demonstrate the xenophobic tendencies of the opinions being expressed by this member of an 'ethnic minority'. It was also to actually represent the actual timbre of his voice- he stressed 'our'. It was not to suggest that this person couldn't consider himself English. You've clearly taken that up completely wrongly.
[/quote]

It's fine mate. He thinks I'm a racist because I called Sterling small, black and lightweight. I think KK might be David Davies.
 
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=47188.msg1449038#msg1449038 date=1324478209]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449022#msg1449022 date=1324477742]
[quote author=LadyRed link=topic=47188.msg1449014#msg1449014 date=1324477453]
When it come to race, things are never clear cut. Whether or not Suarez is 'racist', I dunno, I'd obviously hope not. But what we understand to be racist of course would vary from person to person. If someone has argument with another and uses their race as one of the insults; I consider that to be racist act. Do I think that person is innately racist whereby they measure status and value of a human by race in all contexts; not necessarily. Point is we can never see what's in another's heart, what we can do is judge by what the say and do.
I also don't think it's fair to assume that there are universal understandings on what is and isn't acceptable, it's nothing short of Imperial arrogance to assume that everyone will adopt 'our' position on what is and isn't acceptable. That said, we shouldn't be willing to brush aside rightly identified lines of unacceptance when it comes to racism.

I do feel bad for Suarez in the sense I genuinely believe that he didn't realise the implications of what he was saying; although I might have convinced myself of this as it's what I want to believe.
[/quote]

The fact that he is himself mixed race, with a grandfather of African origin would tend to suggest he's not a racist. Surely?
[/quote]Classic self loather.
[/quote]
Ha ha Good One.
 
There were theories doing the rounds that the FA passed it to the police so that the police would not charge and then the FA couldnt charge him 🙂
 
[quote author=25_05_05 link=topic=47188.msg1449050#msg1449050 date=1324478550]
David Davies on sky sticking up for John Terry.
[/quote]

Are you serious?
 
Re: Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449033#msg1449033 date=1324478060]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1449019#msg1449019 date=1324477585]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47188.msg1448996#msg1448996 date=1324476932]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1#msg1 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]

Which no one is denying

What is your point? He's allowed to be offended by suarez, that's fine, yet it's also acceptable to persecute someone because of their foreign language?
[/quote]

My point, which is quite clear, is that black an minority ethnic peoples are entitled to consider this their country too if born here. Emboldening the word 'our' in such an ironic way, can imply otherwise and to further liken it to the English Defence League who believe that to the contrary is ill-conceived.
[/quote]

I *obviously* also share the belief that people of any creed can be British. Emboldening 'our' was to demonstrate the xenophobic tendencies of the opinions being expressed by this member of an 'ethnic minority'. It was also to actually represent the actual timbre of his voice- he stressed 'our'. It was not to suggest that this person couldn't consider himself English. You've clearly taken that up completely wrongly.
[/quote]

OK, my bad then. It read differently to me hence why I questioned it. Apologies.
 
[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=47188.msg1449043#msg1449043 date=1324478350]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1449033#msg1449033 date=1324478060]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1449019#msg1449019 date=1324477585]
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47188.msg1448996#msg1448996 date=1324476932]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1#msg1 date=1324476727]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448989#msg1448989 date=1324476447]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=47188.msg1448985#msg1448985 date=1324476176]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47188.msg1448979#msg1448979 date=1324475999]
[quote author=ElMalarkey link=topic=47188.msg1448962#msg1448962 date=1324475162]
There IS a need to present more evidence than the "evidence" we all know.

If it is just the "por que negro" incident, then my interpretation as a Uruguayan is it is not used as a slur. And to say that in that context "negro" refers to race is absurd. The word is colloquial. People throw it around, and certainly without considering England's historical role in the slave-trade and abolition. Just as when one says "pal": you're not considering the etymological Sanskrit meaning "brother."... I know its more loaded in this situation, all I'm saying is that the FA can't legislate a foreign word. A foreign word is NOT to be judged entirely by its English reductionist, literal interpretation. Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe in England the rules of language change. Words don't mean what they mean, only what they sound like to an English ear... Coqs.

Well I'm sure by now we're all tired of this debate. It doesn't matter what you or I think. The FA has decided. I'm sure they're loving being portrayed as the only moral pillars in the footballing world, defenders of decency, etc etc. The more I read about it, the more unfair I believe this ban to be. I think the kid is being used as a whipping boy (English royal custom 15th + 16th century).

Fuck. It's not about semantics or history. The kid is being dragged through the mud on a fucking mere pretext. I hope the appeal can be presented to a reasonable panel.
[/quote]

Great post. Yes, this has finally given the FA the grandstand they needed to stick it up the foreigners. It is amazing how xenophobia is informing the press and FA's response to this case.

And this has certainly percolated down. I heard a (self identifying) black guy from London on the phone this morning, talking about the case, and getting angrier as he talked.

"I'm not having it that it is OK to say it in south America. He's in England now, [size=14pt]he's happy enough to take our money[/size]-[size=18pt] he's living in our country[/size], [size=18pt]and he needs to leave it at the airport when he's getting on the plane to England..[/size].etc. etc."

You could have taken the words changed the context and put them in the mouth of someone from the English defence league, no fucking problem.
[/quote]

Interesting that you have emboldened the 'our', it's his country too is it not? That's where he would differ from the English Defence League and its a shame you don't see it.
[/quote]

Don't be a tit. I emboldened the 'our' exactly because all this 'our country' bollocks is EDL territory- it is antithetical to the idea of multiculturalism- cosmopolitanism. It is precisely multiculturalism that is meant to dilute the 'our country' shite.
[/quote]

You're wrong and be careful with name calling. Multi-culturalism is about being inclusive, in short, its everyone's country who are born here and entitled to a UK passport.
[/quote]

Which no one is denying

What is your point? He's allowed to be offended by suarez, that's fine, yet it's also acceptable to persecute someone because of their foreign language?
[/quote]

My point, which is quite clear, is that black an minority ethnic peoples are entitled to consider this their country too if born here. Emboldening the word 'our' in such an ironic way, can imply otherwise and to further liken it to the English Defence League who believe that to the contrary is ill-conceived.
[/quote]

I *obviously* also share the belief that people of any creed can be British. Emboldening 'our' was to demonstrate the xenophobic tendencies of the opinions being expressed by this member of an 'ethnic minority'. It was also to actually represent the actual timbre of his voice- he stressed 'our'. It was not to suggest that this person couldn't consider himself English. You've clearly taken that up completely wrongly.
[/quote]

It's fine mate. He thinks I'm a racist because I called Sterling small, black and lightweight. I think KK might be David Davies.
[/quote]
Edit: KK doesn't think I'm racist anymore. Just you.
 
Back
Top Bottom