what did john terry say?

K-9

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but do you think black **** is on the same level as n!gger.

Well if he thinks a ****, whether he's black or not doesn't really matter!

monkey9

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but do you think black **** is on the same level as n!gger.

Yes, i do!! The word n!gger has a more sudden impact to it, but you're still pulling in the colour of their skin. A skin that has history.

niallo27

monkey9 wrote: »

Yes, i do!! The word n!gger has a more sudden impact to it, but you're still pulling in the colour of their skin. A skin that has history.

Right fair enough I find the word n!gger a lot worse myself. I wonder does Ferdinand actually give a **** he called him a black ****.

tommyhaas

K-9 wrote: »

Well if he thinks a ****, whether he's black or not doesn't really matter!

I've called people of various different races cnuts, but I've never felt the need to precede the insult with reference to their skin colour

SickBoy

tommyhaas wrote: »

I've called people of various different races cnuts, but I've never felt the need to precede the insult with reference to their skin colour

Did you ever precede the insult with reference to them being fat, bald or thick? Perhaps they were and you just appended the word c**t to that. You labelled them as you saw them. Calling someone a black c**t without having a genuine racist sentiment behind it might just be the same thing...
I'm not defending racism, I'm not saying John Terry is or isn't a racist. I'm just putting a point across.

PARlance

monkey9 wrote: »

Yes, i do!! The word n!gger has a more sudden impact to it, but you're still pulling in the colour of their skin. A skin that has history.

Is it racist to call a man that who's skin has history a black man?

I personally don't think it's racist to use the term "black man", leading on from this, black c*nt should not be categorised as racist.

I think JTerry was a complete idiot to say that phrase, but I don't class it as racism.

Again, like others, I feel the need to state that I despise racism but I honestly don't think it falls into this bracket

Dodd

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Is it racist to call a man that who's skin has history a black man?

I personally don't think it's racist to use the term "black man", leading on from this, black c*nt should not be categorised as racist.

I think JTerry was a complete idiot to say that phrase, but I don't class it as racism.

Again, like others, I feel the need to state that I despise racism but I honestly don't think it falls into this bracket

I don't think we know yet that he used the phase other than in a reply to "did you call me a........."

UnitedIrishman

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but do you think black **** is on the same level as n!gger.

Jesus wept.

You do realise that when you call someone a 'bald c*nt', a 'black c*nt' or a 'short-arsed c*nt' you're implying that being bald, black or short-arsed is a negative thing. Otherwise you'd just call them a c*nt.

The reason we don't feel as sensitive to being called a 'white c*nt' is mainly because we live in a largely white populated society where it's the norm and black people are a minority.

If I was called an 'Irish c*nt' whilst in Spain/US/Australia or somewhere, my first thought (apart from being annoyed) would be 'what does me being Irish have anything to do with it?'

You might see it as just an adjective but it's more of a slight on someones character/attributes.

monkey9

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Is it racist to call a man that who's skin has history a black man?

I personally don't think it's racist to use the term "black man", leading on from this, black c*nt should not be categorised as racist.

I think JTerry was a complete idiot to say that phrase, but I don't class it as racism.

Again, like others, I feel the need to state that I despise racism but I honestly don't think it falls into this bracket

If you shout "black man, black c*nt", whatever, you know exactly what you're shouting. I think you should f*ck right off!

niallo27

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

Jesus wept.

You do realise that when you call someone a 'bald c*nt', a 'black c*nt' or a 'short-arsed c*nt' you're implying that being bald, black or short-arsed is a negative thing. Otherwise you'd just call them a c*nt.

The reason we don't feel as sensitive to being called a 'white c*nt' is mainly because we live in a largely white populated society where it's the norm and black people are a minority.

If I was called an 'Irish c*nt' whilst in Spain/US/Australia or somewhere, my first thought (apart from being annoyed) would be 'what does me being Irish have anything to do with it?'

You might see it as just an adjective but it's more of a slight on someones character/attributes.

Leave Jesus out of this, well would you be more offended if someone called you a Fenian **** or an Irish ****, I think calling someone a n!gger is worse than a calling someone a black ****, I didn't say it was alright to call someone a black ****.

PARlance

monkey9 wrote: »

If you shout "black man, black c*nt", whatever, you know exactly what you're shouting. I think you should f*ck right off!

I should f*ck right off?????

Good lad, glad you are engaging in a decent debate here.

First, I would never shout "black man, black c*nt" at anyone.
Secondly, If I heard someone say that, I'd let it be know that person they should shut it.

I struggle to see how black man is acceptable but black c*nt is racist.

UnitedIrishman

niallo27 wrote: »

Leave Jesus out of this, well would you be more offended if someone called you a Fenian **** or an Irish ****, I think calling someone a n!gger is worse than a calling someone a black ****, I didn't say it was alright to call someone a black ****.

Well considering not all Irish were/are 'Fenian's' that's not a great comparison.

Does it matter which is worse? Racism is racism. There isn't a determinant scale of racism ranging from calling someone a n*gger to calling someone a black c*nt. It's not like the FA are going to bring someone in and say "considering you ONLY said this, then we'll let you off with a 3 game ban".

When you say 'black' c*nt, you're pointing out that their skin colour is a fault.

Right fair enough I find the word n!gger a lot worse myself. I wonder does Ferdinand actually give a **** he called him a black ****.

Well considering he retweeted a lot of his followers on Twitter's stuff about Terry and racism, probably does?

monkey9

ajcurry123 wrote: »

I should f*ck right off?????

Good lad, glad you are engaging in a decent debate here.

First, I would never shout "black man, black c*nt" at anyone.
Secondly, If I heard someone say that, I'd let it be know that person they should shut it.

I struggle to see how black man is acceptable but black c*nt is racist.

Em....i think we concur??

PARlance

monkey9 wrote: »

Em....i think we concur??

Em... If by concurring you mean not concurring, then yes.
Have a look back at recent posts,
I'm pretty sure you've told me to f*ck right off as I struggle to see how "black c*nt" is racist rather than being just downright stupid and irresponsible.

monkey9

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Em... If by concurring you mean not concurring, then yes.
Have a look back at recent posts,
I'm pretty sure you've told me to f*ck right off as I struggle to see how "black c*nt" is racist rather than being just downright stupid and irresponsible.

Calling someone a 'black ****' is racist!! It really is! Why are you struggling with this?? If you're not being racist, why are you commenting on their dark skin?

Pro. F

ajcurry123 wrote: »

I struggle to see how black man is acceptable but black c*nt is racist.

This is so simple it's amazing that you are having so much difficulty with it.

''Black man'' implies nothing beyond the description of the man's skin, with no implication that the skin colour is an unfavourable attribute.

''Black cnut'' implies that the skin colour is something unfavourable and something the user of the term is taking issue with.

People get called fat, bald, stupid, Irish etc -cnuts and all the terms imply that the adjective is unfavorable. Irish people don't call other Irish people ''Irish cnuts'' because being Irish isn't an issue amongst Irish people. People who aren't racist don't call people ''black cnuts'' because being black isn't an issue to them.

J. Marston

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Is John Terry a racist?
Probably not (I think it would have come out sooner in his career if so)

Is John Terry a prick?
Yes

*whistles innocently*

amiable

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/columnists/darren-lewis/Why-I-m-delighted-by-the-chanting-by-those-Chelsea-fans-Darren-Lewis-column-article826357.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Over here in Kazan you get a real sense of what it feels like to be different.
Stares in Moscow airport as if you have two heads.
Children making as if they want to touch your hand to see what black skin feels like.
Welcome to eastern Russia in 2011. I feel a bit like Doctor Who.

To be fair, I haven't seen a single, other black person in the flesh for 36 hours myself so I can kind of understand the fascination.
It will be interesting to see what they do around these parts in 2018 when the Centralni stadium, which houses tonight's Rubin Kazan Europa League tie against Spurs, turns into a World Cup venue.
That's not to say that because we have come a long way in our own country we can be complacent.
And there does appear to be a complacency within our own shores about racism.

We are at a stage where, if a top Premier League manager says it no longer exists in football any more well, that's alright then.
Because x or y manager says so.
People get sick of talking about it. They don't like to accept it is still there. That it is still an issue.
You only have to look at the bile my colleague Oliver Holt received via Twitter and on this site when he pushed the merits of a version of the Rooney Rule over here.

And people don't like it when you retweet abuse that labels you a w**, a n*****r or other stuff along those lines.
Let's get on with the game they say. Don't let them win.
Stan Collymore got as much when he highlighted the treatment of David Silva at the hands of Villareal fans last night.
"Oh let's spend another night talking about racism" said one tweeter sarcastically.

But yes, let's. Because otherwise the people who claim it has gone from our game would be right. And they are not.
It may not be as base as it is out here in eastern Europe, where bonehead fans take to monkey chanting and making idiots of themselves.
These days it is disguised as banter.
So you get fans thinking it is funny to tell Adebayor that his dad washes elephants and his mum is a *****.
Or it takes the form of pure, unadulterated hate. So, again, you have fans wishing Adebayor - again - was killed in that Togo terrorist bus ambush at the African Cup of Nations.
Which is why this debate does need to continue being had. And why it does need to stay in the public consciousness.
And personally I was delighted by the Chelsea fans' chanting on Tuesday night.

I hope there is more on Saturday at Blackburn.
Not because I think Anton Ferdinand deserves it. Or because I support in any way the unrepentant Blues fans shaming the image of their club's decent supporters.
But because it put the onus onto the need for a solution to the problem of widespread offensive chanting in English football grounds full stop.
As has been said so eloquently by the superb Annie Eaves on these pages, we are the first - when our players are subjected to it abroad - to go running to UEFA or FIFA.
But some of our football grounds in this country are cesspits of vile taunts and offensive ditties from fans who should know far better.
We've heard them all, from Hillsborough to Munich to the ones about Arsene Wenger and of course the ones that target the Spurs striker Adebayor.
We may have been stunned by the songs being aimed in Belgium by the travelling Blues fans at Ferdinand.
But there were smatterings of chants at the Spurs game against QPR from the away fans that were directed at Terry last Sunday.
What were they singing? Well let's just say they made clear their verdict on the Chelsea captain over that YouTube footage being investigated by both the FA and the police.
Journalists around me wondered what Spurs as a club would do mid-game if the chants grew louder. After all it was a live TV match and so they would have gone on to be heard by millions.
Thankfully the majority of the Rangers fans thought better of it and let it go.
But that too would have posed a big problem for the TV broadcasters. To have the name of a man - who remains innocent until proven guilty, remember - libelled on national TV by thousands.
The argument insisting nothing can be done goes along the lines of 'You can't eject 500 people from a football ground'.
But if those people publicly besmirch the name of a man who is ultimately found innocent, what then?

Whatever anybody may say or think, Terry denies racism and until anybody can prove it we have to be fair to him.
The people hurling abuse at Ferdinand, however - be it on Twitter or in football grounds - are vindicating the belief among some players that racism in football has never really gone away.
I don't for one second believe that the travelling few on Tuesday are representative of all Chelsea fans.
Just as I don't think all Stoke fans are racist because one of them abused Jason Euell two years ago.
Or Newcastle fans just because a section of them targeted Mido in 2008.
Or Rotherham fans just because one fan was banned by the Millers for racially abusing the Gillingham keeper Kelvin Jack in 2007.
But I'm not surprised by what I heard out in Belgium.
Condemnation is all very well but action is needed too.
It has been argued that if the player at the centre of the Terry row was not the England captain, or if there was a sexier programme of fixtures last week than the Carling Cup ties, would it be such a big issue.
But the England captain is the highest profile player in the country. By definition he is the highest profile on-pitch ambassador for the Football Association's campaign to kick racism out of football.
It is entirely right that if there is footage that exists showing him to be using the words "f****** black ****" then he should be made to explain why he used them.

It is for others to judge whether he should be selected for the England squad for the upcoming games against Spain and Sweden.
But as all we know Terry is not a man to hide away. We saw as much last year over the Wayne Bridge affair.
He is a proud, mentally strong man who responded to the firestorm last week by scoring on the Saturday against Arsenal.
Set against that, however, is the fact that captain of England means captain of a cosmopolitan, multi-national country, half of which are not having his explanation for that YouTube video.
Include within those numbers too, a large number of players - some within the England camp - who have already made up their own minds.
Many people are unhappy at even the prospect of Terry in an England shirt let alone as the nation's ambassador.
And yet - it is important to say again - he is innocent until proven guilty. And yet, as has already been pointed out, it is a man's livelihood at stake here.

Ron Atkinson remains in the outer darkness because of those comments he directed at Marcel Desailly.
But the difference is, there was no context for which Big Ron could have justifiable called the French defender "a f****** think, lazy n*****".
Terry says there is in his case. So we wait and see. And the media circus around this will dominate the build up to the friendly against Spain.
How the people over there must be enjoying this.
In the meantime the debate must continue because social media and radio phone-ins are showing up just how much some people to not like confronting the thorny issue of race.
When our players suffer racism in places such as Spain and Bulgaria we talk about educating people because actually, it stems from ignorance.
And yet I joined a phone-in on BBC Radio London the other night where people came on citing stick they get for being ginger, fat, thin, bald, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, etc, etc - not realising they are highlighting xenophobia and not racism.
There are some people who really do believe that, because Ferdinand did not hear Terry's comments - if they were intended as an insult - there is no harm done. Yes, really.
We still do not have a culture within the English game within which players can complain about racism without being branded a troublemaker or being vilified by the fans of the opposing player's club.
We want to kick racism Out of football but if we actually hear it, or see it, or experience it, its better to keep schtum. Less aggravation that way.
So it would appear education is as necessary in England as it is elsewhere around Europe.

And all this spares us the spectacle of taking the moral high ground against the Spanish when they come to town.
Because although their record on race is shocking, we've got a way to go before our house is in order.
Time now for me to make my way to the stadium out here in eastern Russia. Wish me luck