Racism in ireland

Arbiter of Good Taste

So it's no longer a case of sticks and stones etc etc, names will never hurt me? Is that correct? Doesn't matter whether you batter that black guy to death or make a stupid comment. It's jail time for you my friend. Good to know. Where do we stand on sexism, homophobia, ageism, etc?

crazygeryy

cletus van damme wrote: »

you called the cops cos somebody called somebody a "black monkey"

I'm not saying our taxi driver friend was right by any means but don't you think the cops in the o'connell street area late at night have more pressing and more worthy crimes to rush too.

Like FFS - get off your moral high horse and get a bit of persceptive.

racism is wrong but name calling like this is not really worthy of police involvement or the accompanying hand wringing.

Are you serious?
If you throw a banana onto a pitch at a premiere or league soccer game in England they would put you in jail. And you won't have to shout a single thing.

Czarcasm

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

So it's no longer a case of sticks and stones etc etc, names will never hurt me? Is that correct? Doesn't matter whether you batter that black guy to death or make a stupid comment. It's jail time for you my friend. Good to know. Where do we stand on sexism, homophobia, ageism, etc?

And we're screwed if the person making the racist remarks is any shade other than white, presents all sorts of conundrums, or not -

Czarcasm wrote: »

Sure I was at a party last week the only white guy among a crowd of about 100 black people (my friend is black and it was her son's communion, but tbf what I consider a "small get together of family and friends" and what she considers a small get together of family and friends, are vastly different concepts! ), but a couple of the lads were gathered around the barbecue and the chap was turning the lamb chunks with his fingers, then dipping his fingers in water to cool them.

I goes to him "Jesus man have you no tongs?"

I nearly pissed myself laughing when he replied "Tongs are for white people!"

Racist bastard! :pac:

Czarcasm

crazygeryy wrote: »

Are you serious?
If you throw a banana onto a pitch at a premiere or league soccer game in England they would put you in jail. And you won't have to shout a single thing.

But this incident didn't happen in England. It happened in Ireland, where there are no laws specifically to deal with racism. Thankfully we haven't gone as far as other countries when it comes to passing ridiculous legislation to police people calling each other names.

Legs.Eleven

Super-Rush wrote: »

So what should i call him then?

The guy clearly stated, that in his opinion, being called a black monkey was not worthy of police time because calling someone a black monkey was only a little bit racist.

People have tried to explain to him that there is no such thing as levels of racism and he refused to listen and continued to say that even though the guy was insulted because of his skin colour, which breaks the law, that the police should have been kept out of it.

So this makes him racist? As in he hates other people based on their race or thinks his own race is superior? He acknowledged it WAS racist though and out of line.

I believe police should've been called in this incident but from what I gather from his posts, he meant that we can't call the police on every incident that happens and name-calling is not as serious as the threat of physical violence, for example (remember: his opinion). That view might or might not be racist but you can't categorically state that without knowing.

Telling him to go wash his KKK gear was uncalled for too. Calling someone a racist is a serious accusation and you want to be absolutely sure they are before you say something like that. You can't just bandy that word about like it has no potency or meaning.

There's been very obvious racists here on Boards in the past and I would call them out on it but I don't think this fella Pundy is one of them or at least it's not conclusive going the few things he posted up 'till your accusation.

ANXIOUS

So just to get some people views on racism. Czarcasm you don't think that it should be against the law to shout racist taints at a man working?

Czarcasm

ANXIOUS wrote: »

So just to get some people views on racism. Czarcasm you don't think that it should be against the law to shout racist taints at a man working?

I've stated numerous times already Anxious that I don't think it should be against the law to call people names. The motivation for calling them names can be a multitude of reasons, and while you can legislate for each reason, providing resources to police it would be economically unjustifiable.

Stretch The Pussy

I don't think racism in Ireland is that bad relatively speaking.

Grand Moff Tarkin

suicide_circus wrote: »

On a recent thread, loads of people said they would never want to live next to a traveller halting site. This, while not happy clappy, was largely accepted and no bans resulted. If a someone posted that they would object to living next to a black person, they would be torn asunder but would they be banned?

As long as my property and land stay at the same price I am not pushed if Darth Vader moves in next door. But at the first sigh of a drop in money I would want them gone.

Arbiter of Good Taste

Czarcasm wrote: »

I've stated numerous times already Anxious that I don't think it should be against the law to call people names. The motivation for calling them names can be a multitude of reasons, and while you can legislate for each reason, providing resources to police it would be economically unjustifiable.

Or to put it another way, assuming Abxious' motivation is to have a truly egalitarian society rather than a "white people bad, non white people good" position, then it should also be illegal to insult women, homosexuals, old people, handicapped people etc etc. Sure while we are at it let's include Gingers and left handed people.

Apart from being completely ludicrous, how does one propose the legal system deal with the deluge of cases?

ANXIOUS

Czarcasm wrote: »

I've stated numerous times already Anxious that I don't think it should be against the law to call people names. The motivation for calling them names can be a multitude of reasons, and while you can legislate for each reason, providing resources to police it would be economically unjustifiable.

So where do you draw the line? Hate mail is just words but gets investigated.

Too Tough To Die

That's it, let's preserve that space in which racist abuse can thrive unchecked.

Hande hoche!

doolox wrote: »

The Russians once classified the Japanese as "yellow monkeys" in 1905 and then went to war with them over land in the Far East.

The Russians got the crap kicked out of them in Naval battles in Port Arthur and the Straits of Tsushima.

The Japanese went on to propose and build a new class of warship which had all big guns and long range and high speed. The Brits went onto reply hastily with a new class of battleship.

The Dreadnought was born and went on to dominate sea warfare for the next 50 years.

Not bad going for "Monkeys".........

People may generalise and refer to other people as "dogs", "monkeys" etc but they can get a nasty surprise when they end up being destroyed by hatred and fear left unchecked.

Then those "hairy barbarians" went on to slap several shades of ****e out of the Japanese forty years later.

Arbiter of Good Taste

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

That's it, let's preserve that space in which racist abuse can thrive unchecked.

Ridiculous hyperbole.

No one is claiming that racist abuses go unchecked. Can you understand that?

What people are saying is that calling someone a name is not a criminal offence and shouldn't be dealt with as such. The way to deal with stupid people who make stupid comments is peer pressure. Stand up to them, call them out.

cletus van damme

crazygeryy wrote: »

Are you serious?
If you throw a banana onto a pitch at a premiere or league soccer game in England they would put you in jail. And you won't have to shout a single thing.

yeah , I didn't spend most of the day defending myself against the hordes of self righteous for nothing.

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

So this makes him racist? As in he hates other people based on their race or thinks his own race is superior? He acknowledged it WAS racist though and out of line.

I believe police should've been called in this incident but from what I gather from his posts, he meant that we can't call the police on every incident that happens and name-calling is not as serious as the threat of physical violence, for example (remember: his opinion). That view might or might not be racist but you can't categorically state that without knowing.

Telling him to go wash his KKK gear was uncalled for too. Calling someone a racist is a serious accusation and you want to be absolutely sure they are before you say something like that. You can't just bandy that word about like it has no potency or meaning.

There's been very obvious racists here on Boards in the past and I would call them out on it but I don't think this fella Pundy is one of them or at least it's not conclusive going the few things he posted up 'till your accusation.

well said.

It was decent of Pundy to hop in on my side , cos I know there are others that agree with me and didn't for fear of the very backlash he recieved.

There is that climate on boards where if you question anything about the the anti racism brigade. you become a target. Seen as anything less than Gung Ho or fanatical on the topic you become a target.
It's kinda worrying cos that trend does exist in society too.

What worrying also is that somebody in mine (and Pundy I'm assuming) has to be so careful what to say in case anything is picked up wrong.

Yet others like Super Rush (and his likers - those who like but don't post any comment) can lash out with any langauge they wanted without censor.

Too Tough To Die

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

Ridiculous hyperbole.

No one is claiming that racist abuses go unchecked. Can you understand that?

What people are saying is that calling someone a name is not a criminal offence and shouldn't be dealt with as such. The way to deal with stupid people who make stupid comments is peer pressure. Stand up to them, call them out.

Ridiculous hyberbole is equating racist abuse to the plight of the ginger and left handed man, as you did.

Legs.Eleven

cletus van damme wrote: »

well said.

It was decent of Pundy to hop in on my side , cos I know there are others that agree with me and didn't for fear of the very backlash he recieved.

There is that climate on boards where if you question anything about the the anti racism brigade. you become a target. Seen as anything less than Gung Ho or fanatical on the topic you become a target.
It's kinda worrying cos that trend does exist in society too.

What worrying also is that somebody in mine (and Pundy I'm assuming) has to be so careful what to say in case anything is picked up wrong.

Yet others like Super Rush (and his likers - those who like but don't post any comment) can lash out with any langauge they wanted without censor.

There has been genuine racists on Boards in the past and people have made a stand against them and rightly so. I've rarely seen a person being called a racist on here without good reason. The ones with the most blatant bigoted views on Boards are usually the ones who bandy around the stupid label of "PC Brigade" and they've rightfully been banned in the past. There should be zero tolerance of that crap on here.

At the end of the day, Boards is a business and they can run it any way they like. I've never complained about their policies or rules on here because I don't believe I have a right to. If I don't like it, I can move on. None of us are here under duress.


Did you report Super Rush's post btw?

Legs.Eleven

cletus van damme wrote: »

yeah , I didn't spend most of the day defending myself against the hordes of self righteous for nothing.

Hordes? Really? Most posters on here have been reasonable. Bandying around, "Hordes of Self Righteous" and "PC Brigade" or "Anti Racism Brigade" also shuts down debate btw. Not as serious as labelling someone a racist but just as unhelpful.

Czarcasm

ANXIOUS wrote: »

So where do you draw the line? Hate mail is just words but gets investigated.

Ahh, see I don't draw lines, because the issue isn't as black and white as you'd like it to be. With hate mail, there's a recorded, traceable paper trail so to speak, and that's why harassment is investigated, to determine the motivation. The harassment may well be racially motivated, or, it may not. The taxi driver in your incident committed no crime.

Czarcasm

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

Ridiculous hyberbole is equating racist abuse to the plight of the ginger and left handed man, as you did.

Harassment is harassment, the motivation for the harassment is a secondary factor, and that's why calling someone a big black ape is the same as calling someone a ginger haired prick, or a ciotog, or any number of traits a person observes about another person that they see as different from them.

cletus van damme

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

There has been genuine racists on Boards in the past and people have made a stand against them and rightly so. I've rarely seen a person being called a racist on here without good reason. The ones with the most blatant bigoted views on Boards are usually the ones who bandy around the stupid label of "PC Brigade" and they've rightfully been banned in the past. There should be zero tolerance of that crap on here.

At the end of the day, Boards is a business and they can run it any way they like. I've never complained about their policies or rules on here because I don't believe I have a right to. If I don't like it, I can move on. None of us are here under duress.


Did you report Super Rush's post btw?

no i didn't.
I'll be honest (for no reason I can ascertain) i don't report on anybody.
I try to sort out my own issues.

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

Hordes? Really? Most posters on here have been reasonable. Bandying around, "Hordes of Self Righteous" and "PC Brigade" or "Anti Racism Brigade" also shuts down debate btw. Not as serious as labelling someone a racist but just as unhelpful.

I was having a laugh and exaggerating for affect. sorry i thought we were all friends now. :pac:

But the point about the brigade is on purpose - I'm taking about how when anybody questions how anti racism is applied they are met with agression. Its' more a dig at the ideal than an attack on the person.

However point taken.

Too Tough To Die

Czarcasm wrote: »

Harassment is harassment, the motivation for the harassment is a secondary factor, and that's why calling someone a big black ape is the same as calling someone a ginger haired prick, or a ciotog, or any number of traits a person observes about another person that they see as different from them.

Calling someone a big black monkey, a term used for centuries to dehumanize a race of people, the ramifications of which are felt today and will be felt beyond both of our lives, is the same as calling someone a ginger haired prick? One is the language of racial hatred and intolerance, has been for a long time. The other is an idiotic insult.

FTA69

Czarcasm wrote: »

Harassment is harassment, the motivation for the harassment is a secondary factor, and that's why calling someone a big black ape is the same as calling someone a ginger haired prick, or a ciotog, or any number of traits a person observes about another person that they see as different from them.

It isn't though. Not at all. The context is entirely different.

Calling someone a "n*gger" is not the equivalent to calling someone a "big nosed arsehole" or whatever. Considering there isn't a long history of enslaving or socially excluding people with a big arse or blonde hair, the historical and social context is completely different. Racist abuse feeds into a wider systematic discrimination, laughing at someone's jeans doesn't.

FTA69

But the point about the brigade is on purpose - I'm taking about how when anybody questions how anti racism is applied they are met with agression. Its' more a dig at the ideal than an attack on the person.

However point taken

Most of what I see here is people making dopey generalised statements that aren't true and then getting pulled up on it. That isn't the "PC Brigade" shutting things down. If you're going to come out with silly statements expect them to be challenged, stop pretending you're somehow oppressed because you aren't allowed to stereotype others.

Czarcasm

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

Calling someone a big black monkey, a term used for centuries to dehumanize a race of people, the ramifications of which are felt today and will be felt beyond both of our lives, is the same as calling someone a ginger haired prick? One is the language of racial hatred and intolerance, has been for a long time. The other is an idiotic insult.

They're both idiotic insults. There's absolutely no reason why a ginger haired person wouldn't be affected as badly by someone calling them a ginger haired prick as someone who is called a big black monkey. You're doing the same as Anxious, trying to draw arbitrary lines. If I were to engage in such silliness, I'd be asking where do you stand on a black man calling a fat white girl "a big white elephant"?

Is that racist? Because in order for you to consider it racist, you must acknowledge that the two parties involved are not of the same race, so your colour blindness is actually a subjective hindrance rather than an objective help.

KTRIC

Czarcasm wrote: »

They're both idiotic insults. There's absolutely no reason why a ginger haired person wouldn't be affected as badly by someone calling them a ginger haired prick as someone who is called a big black monkey. You're doing the same as Anxious, trying to draw arbitrary lines. If I were to engage in such silliness, I'd be asking where do you stand on a black man calling a fat white girl "a big white elephant"?

Is that racist? Because in order for you to consider it racist, you must acknowledge that the two parties involved are not of the same race, so your colour blindness is actually a subjective hindrance rather than an objective help.

What if some Brit called you a ginger haired Paddy ? Would you be ok with that ??

cletus van damme

FTA69 wrote: »

Most of what I see here is people making dopey generalised statements that aren't true and then getting pulled up on it. That isn't the "PC Brigade" shutting things down. If you're going to come out with silly statements expect them to be challenged, stop pretending you're somehow oppressed because you aren't allowed to stereotype others.

I'm not oppressed. I never said I was oppressed.
I don't mind opposition to my views - it's called debate which i like
I never used the term "PC Brigade".

However we could move on

FTA69

Czarcasm wrote: »

There's absolutely no reason why a ginger haired person wouldn't be affected as badly by someone calling them a ginger haired prick as someone who is called a big black monkey. You're doing the same as Anxious, trying to draw arbitrary lines.

I'm not drawing arbitrary lines, I'm acknowledging that the context is very different between the two, which it is. In a country like America black people were slaves and were systematically excluded; the same cannot be said for people with red hair or silly shoes or the bald. Words like "chink" and "n*gger" etc were used as tools to dehumanise these respective groups, they were an active aid in maintaining their status as second-class people. Calling some a baldy bastard never was.

What you're trying to do is ignore the above fact and pretend there is no added significance to racial abuse (or homophobic abuse) than there is to plain eejitry. The two situations are very, very different. I had a woman call me an "ignorant Irish pig" yesterday and to be honest, it's a whole different ball game to the standard arguments you sometimes get into in London.

You yourself are not a member of a minority group so to be honest, your 'sure eejits will be eejits' line of argument rings a bit hollow.

If I were to engage in such silliness, I'd be asking where do you stand on a black man calling a fat white girl "a big white elephant"?

Is that racist?

Yes, of course it is. It's abuse based on her race.

Because in order for you to consider it racist, you must acknowledge that the two parties involved are not of the same race, so your colour blindness is actually a subjective hindrance rather than an objective help.

Right so acknowledging there is racial difference in our society and that some people are treated differently because of it makes me a hindrance to anti-racism? B*llocks. What hinders anti-racism is people like you trying to pretend racial hate is akin to dopey insults and that's it.

Czarcasm

FTA69 wrote: »

It isn't though. Not at all. The context is entirely different.

Calling someone a "n*gger" is not the equivalent to calling someone a "big nosed arsehole" or whatever. Considering there isn't a long history of enslaving or socially excluding people with a big arse or blonde hair, the historical and social context is completely different. Racist abuse feeds into a wider systematic discrimination, laughing at someone's jeans doesn't.

I agree FTA that context is everything, otherwise I'd be left with an awful conundrum when I hear black people refer to each other as n*ggers, homosexual people referring to each other as queers, and women who tell me to call them a slut, bitch, whore, etc.

As for your assertion that there isn't a long history of discrimination against blonde haired people, we'd be here all day if we were to start reeling off blonde jokes which denigrate blonde haired women as being of lesser intelligence. Is that ideology based on sexism, or disablism?

All of it still feeds into the wider idea of discrimination, but that's why I'm saying that perspective is important, because it allows us to determine context, rather than an imaginary arbitrary line where nobody can say boo for fear of being arrested and charged with a criminal offence. The prisons are overcrowded enough as it is without an Asian man (a detail the OP conveniently omitted!) being thrown in prison with murderers and rapists for calling someone a big black monkey.

Too Tough To Die

Czarcasm wrote: »

They're both idiotic insults. There's absolutely no reason why a ginger haired person wouldn't be affected as badly by someone calling them a ginger haired prick as someone who is called a big black monkey. You're doing the same as Anxious, trying to draw arbitrary lines. If I were to engage in such silliness, I'd be asking where do you stand on a black man calling a fat white girl "a big white elephant"?

Is that racist? Because in order for you to consider it racist, you must acknowledge that the two parties involved are not of the same race, so your colour blindness is actually a subjective hindrance rather than an objective help.

Again, you completely ignore the historical context and wider implications of an insult such as "big black monkey". It's a little more racially charged and insiduous than "big white elephant"...