Racism - Mod Note on 1st Post - Read before posting.

Mr Alan · 15-12-2011 11:02AM

Des wrote: »

answer my questions, you wriggler.

Sorry Des, had to walk up to work.

Des wrote: »

Actually, I'll answer yours. I don't differentiate, or use any "word" when I'm talking to my black work colleagues, friends or people I meet twice a year. I don't use any "word", same as I don't for white people.

I'm the same. However, if someone refered to me as "irish man" and I referred to them back as "black man", I certainly wouldn't expect to be labelled a racist. Nor would I expect to face any charges by the professional body who govern my chosen field. No more so than I would expect the other person to be labelled a xenophobe and/or but be hit with a charge.

Des wrote:

Now, answer my question, would you say the word "Negro" to a black man?

No, but I wouldn't. But I wouldn't refer to a South American as a South American either in the middle of an argument. However, neither is racial/xenophobic abuse.

Des wrote:

An angry black man?

Totally irrelevant.

Des wrote:

I know you won't answer me, you'll wriggle again, as usual.

niallo27 wrote: »

Its not politically correct to use it i suppose

Genuine question, but is it not?
What's the politically correct term for a black man?

Martin Luther King seems to think that "negro" is a totally fine term.

I Have A Dream wrote:

But one hundred years later, we must face the tragic fact that the Negro is still not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. So we have come here today to dramatize an appalling condition.

Is it not the same as the word caucasian for example?

Caucasian definition wrote:

Of or being a human racial classification distinguished especially by very light to brown skin pigmentation and straight to wavy or curly hair, and including peoples indigenous to Europe, northern Africa, western Asia, and India.

Negro wrote:

Of or being a human racial classification distinguished especially by very brown to black pigmentation and tightly curled hair. A person with dark skin who comes from Africa or whose ancestors came from Africa

MaceFace · 15-12-2011 11:05AM

Des wrote: »

Why would you do those things in those countries, if you knew it was going to cause offence?

I know it may cause offense, and others also, but what if you did not know? Are the ignorant as guilty as those who willfully disregard what is tolerated?

Giggsy11 wrote: »

No. That's not true at all :pac:

If found guilty what is the min/max ban he will be getting?

You would most certainly offend many people in many parts of India if you ate Beef as it is sacred.

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:05AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

post

You are using a 50 year old speech by MLK as context? I think that's wrong, and the world has moved on since then, Negro is no longer an acceptable term.

The fact that your, or your good friend Niall, wouldn't use the term, but are defending Suarez' use of it is bizarre.

WHY would you not use it?

Does this reason not also apply to Suarez?

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:06AM

MaceFace wrote: »

I know it may cause offense, and others also, but what if you did not know? Are the ignorant as guilty as those who willfully disregard what is tolerated?

Ignorance is not a defence, in my opinion.

It never is.

Giggsy11 · 15-12-2011 11:09AM

MaceFace wrote: »

You would most certainly offend many people in many parts of India if you ate Beef as it is sacred.

Not really. It is Sacred for Hindus but that doesn't mean they will be offended. They will just ignore it. They don't create havoc when they see someone asking for beef or kiiling animals. They just get on with their beliefs without interrupting other religion beliefs.

In my place there is a temple and around 200-300 mts there is a mosque too. Area is full with Muslims and they do eat beef, imagine that too nearby temple. But people just get on with their jobs.

SlickRic · 15-12-2011 11:09AM

niallo27 wrote: »

Could evra get banned for accusing the Ref of acting in a racist way, what kind of ban could he expect.

nobody has a clue.

i can't fúcking wait for this verdict tomorrow, so all this bollocks can be put to rest.

if Suarez said it, he deserves a ban. end of.

if Evra has lied about being racially abused, then i'd hope he gets a ban. it'd hopefully stop people making frivolous accusations.

for the record, i do think there's a good chance Suarez called him something, in the heat of rivalry, that could at the very least be construed as a racial insult. i don't think Evra chose to hear things or make things up wildly. he'd have to be all kinds of stupid to do that. and before someone brings it up, that's quite different to what happened the other couple of times.

this, IMO, (and i hope!) is all just a misunderstanding between the two.

i just hope Suarez wasn't stupid enough to call him "negro". we can argue the semantics of it all day, but that is far too close to home on being a racist slur.

JimsAlterEgo · 15-12-2011 11:09AM

Evra has not been charge with anything. Suarez is.

Nalz · 15-12-2011 11:13AM

What has Suarez stated he has said?

Evra won't be banned its ridiculous to say he would be.

JimsAlterEgo · 15-12-2011 11:14AM

If Suarez said what is now been reported, there is no defence to it nad he faces a long ban.

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:14AM

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

Evra has not been charge with anything. Suarez is.

There's this as well.

Evra is not the one "on trial" here, so he doesn't have a charge to answer.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of that, he won't be punished at this time, because he is not facing punishable charges.

killwill · 15-12-2011 11:16AM

SlickRic wrote: »

nobody has a clue.

i can't fúcking wait for this verdict tomorrow, so all this bollocks can be put to rest.

if Suarez said it, he deserves a ban. end of.

if Evra has lied about being racially abused, then i'd hope he gets a ban. it'd hopefully stop people making frivolous accusations.

for the record, i do think there's a good chance Suarez called him something, in the heat of rivalry, that could at the very least be construed as a racial insult. i don't think Evra chose to hear things or make things up wildly. he'd have to be all kinds of stupid to do that. and before someone brings it up, that's quite different to what happened the other couple of times.

this, IMO, (and i hope!) is all just a misunderstanding between the two.

i just hope Suarez wasn't stupid enough to call him "negro". we can argue the semantics of it all day, but that is far too close to home on being a racist slur.

Why can't all football fans be objective like this?

I think myself nothing is gonna happen. Nothing will be proven one way or the other. This will end up with this thread causing WW3 with a select few Liverpool fans claiming Evra was lying all along and also a select few Utd fans claiming Suarez to be a low life racist.
I hope whatever the outcome Suarez and Evra come out and BOTH accept it and we can all move on.

Mr Alan · 15-12-2011 11:19AM

Des wrote: »

Negro is no longer an acceptable term.

Is it not?

What's the politically correct term for a black man then? Genuine question.

Des wrote:

The fact that your, or your good friend Niall, wouldn't use the term, but are defending Suarez' use of it is bizarre.

That's nonsense. I'm sure Suarez/Evra use loads of terms that Irish men between the ages of 25-35 would not use. Doesn't make them racist

Des wrote:

WHY would you not use it?

I simply don't speak like that.

Same reason that if Suarez put his hands on me, I wouldn't say "don't touch me South American", I'd say, "get your ****ing hands off me"....I'm Irish, we have a different vernacular.

Des wrote:

Does this reason not also apply to Suarez?

No.

JimsAlterEgo · 15-12-2011 11:21AM

Trilla wrote: »

What has Suarez stated he has said?

Evra won't be banned its ridiculous to say he would be.

agreed, he has not even been charged. Typical pool fans trying to blame Evra again.

JimsAlterEgo · 15-12-2011 11:22AM

killwill wrote: »

Why can't all football fans be objective like this?

I think myself nothing is gonna happen. Nothing will be proven one way or the other. This will end up with this thread causing WW3 with a select few Liverpool fans claiming Evra was lying all along and also a select few Utd fans claiming Suarez to be a low life racist.
I hope whatever the outcome Suarez and Evra come out and BOTH accept it and we can all move on.

I thought this initially but the fact hes been charged changed my opinion on the outcome and if the new reports are accurate on what he said he has to be banned

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:22AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

Is it not?

What's the politically correct term for a black man then? Genuine question.

Man

killwill · 15-12-2011 11:24AM

Lads,
There is potential for this to be debated fairly, especially considering we will know the outcome tomorrow.
Can we stop the tit for tat just for 24hrs?
Lord knows it will be a free for all here then!!!

15-12-2011 11:24AM

Chocolate's in the US

http://guanabee.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/negrito-bimbo-450x600.jpg

Leiva · 15-12-2011 11:29AM

rarnes1 wrote: »

Chocolate's in the US

http://guanabee.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/negrito-bimbo-450x600.jpg

Chocolates ???? ...more like a dump ! :pac:

niallo27 · 15-12-2011 11:29AM

Evras comments about the ref could do a lot of damage to the racism campaign if true, playing the racism card falsely is a very serious offence and could affect future racism cases.

Mr Alan · 15-12-2011 11:31AM

Des wrote: »

Man

No. That's not correct.

That's to do with someones gender.

Not their ethnic background.

Or are you saying that its ok for white people to be called white, but it's racist to say black people are black?

Oh & just to clarify, those taking this latest version of events as being what happened must also then recognise that Evra accused the ref of booking him cause he's black. Pretty hilarious!

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:31AM

niallo27 wrote: »

Evras alleged comments about the ref could do a lot of damage to the racism campaign if true, playing the racism card falsely is a very serious offence and could affect future racism cases.

fyp

15-12-2011 11:32AM

When Suarez said it, whether it was negro or a more sinister term and Evra reacted he definitely shouldn't have kept going with it. Negro is a word that I haven't heard any white person ever call a black person and unless they were extremely comfortable with each other then I doubt it would be accepted. Negro may mean black in Spanish but since it began to be used by slavers in America the word changed meaning.

MLK may have said it but that was to refer to the group and same as if Jim Larkin or something said that 'they think we're all paddys'. Wouldn't be the same as if an American came over now and started calling people Paddy or Mick as a friendly term.

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:33AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

No. That's not correct.

That's to do with someones gender.

Not their ethnic background.

Or are you saying that its ok for white people to be called white, but it's racist to say black people are black?

Why do you have the need to even differentiate people based on skin colour?

What difference does it make?

I'd say "black man" if pressed

Mr Alan wrote: »

Oh & just to clarify, those taking this latest version of events as being what happened must also then recognise that Evra accused the ref of booking him cause he's black. Pretty hilarious!

And I've already addressed that

Mr Alan · 15-12-2011 11:38AM

Des wrote: »

Why do you have the need to even differentiate people based on skin colour?

Because people have different genetic make ups. There's nothing wrong with saying that.

Des wrote:

What difference does it make?

None what so ever.

Whether he says it makes no difference.

Whether he doesn't makes no difference.

Yet here we are. Suarez with a very serious serious charge, after referring to a black man as black. Despite Evra also referring to a South American man as South American.

Des wrote:

I'd say "black man" if pressed

What does negro mean in spanish?

Crazy Horse 6 · 15-12-2011 11:40AM

So we are'nt allowed call a black man a black man now?

_blank_ · 15-12-2011 11:41AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

What does negro mean in spanish?

Black.

But you are proving my point.

"The black man walked through the door"

is different to

"The black walked through the door"

I would NOT say the second example there.

Would you?

Benimar · 15-12-2011 11:41AM

killwill wrote: »

Why can't all football fans be objective like this?

I think myself nothing is gonna happen. Nothing will be proven one way or the other. This will end up with this thread causing WW3 with a select few Liverpool fans claiming Evra was lying all along and also a select few Utd fans claiming Suarez to be a low life racist.
I hope whatever the outcome Suarez and Evra come out and BOTH accept it and we can all move on.

Thats my feeling too. I reckon the panel won't have enough to come down heavily on either side. There are too many 'nuances' and the FA aren't known for decisive decisions.

I can see Suarez getting warned as to his future conduct/a suspended ban/a fine. I'd be surprised if he's actually banned.

Before some of the more 'volatile' posters go off on one, I'm saying what I think the outcome will be, not making a judgement on either player.

Nalz · 15-12-2011 11:41AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

What does negro mean in spanish?

Would you whip your cock out in country A if you were allowed do it from your homeland Country B?

Mr Alan · 15-12-2011 11:42AM

Liam O wrote: »

When Suarez said it, whether it was negro or a more sinister term and Evra reacted he definitely shouldn't have kept going with it.

The latest version of events is that is was said the once is it not?

Liam O wrote:

Negro may mean black in Spanish but since it began to be used by slavers in America the word changed meaning.

I thought ****** was the derogative term used by Slavers to abuse slaves.

Negro is the official racial classification?

Liam O wrote:

MLK may have said it but that was to refer to the group and same as if Jim Larkin or something said that 'they think we're all paddys'.

You've got that totally wrong mate.

****** is racially abusive. Negro is the correct term for a person of that ethnicity.

Mr Alan · 15-12-2011 11:46AM

Des wrote: »

Black.

But you are proving my point.

"The black man walked through the door"

is different to

"The black walked through the door"

I would NOT say the second example there.

Would you?

Would you say "get your hands off me South American"?

I know you wouldn't. You know you wouldn't. However, that doesn't mean that Evra should face a charge for saying it.

I'm really not proving your point at all I'm afraid Des.

By the latest version of events, Evra brought ethnicity into the fold, Suarez responded in kind with the correct term (which is not, nor has it ever been "abusive" which is the charge levelled at him). One is facing a charge of racism, the other, nothing. You wanna talk about "racism", that's the only think racist about this case tbh.

Racism - Mod Note on 1st Post - Read before posting.

Comments