Booing the knee *Mod Note in Post 1232 and OP*

Muahahaha

Muahahaha wrote: »

The players will be behind that FA statement, it is written on their behalf. Players in the PL were asked to vote on taking the knee and they overwhelmingly voted to do so.



So your solution is to still allow players to be racially abused with no real world consequences and so long as they dont see it themselves then the problem goes away. Sorry but thats just the ultimate in sweeping the problem under the carpet, if there are no real life consequences for racist abusers then as sure as night follows day they will continue on racially abusing people.

If Marcus Rashford is getting called the N word on his social media week in week out then the UK police need the power and resources to deal with those racists doing that. Arrest them, charge them and convict them, simple as. It should be no different if you shout the N word at a black person in the street. There is absolutely nothing crazy about that compared to your solution of pretending it doesnt happen and expecting the victms of racial abuse to sweep it under the carpet and pretend it is not happening even though their PR company actually have an inbox full of racist bile towards their client. Putting their head in the sand isnt an option, they are entitled to have a social media presence without being called the N word by racists.

So do you want the "n word" to be made illegal?

If a black person says it to another black person, will that be illegal?

What if a white person says it to a black friend who is ok with it, but another black person overhears and gets offended?

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not as cut and dry as that. As has been demonstrated on here, some people play loose and fast with what define as a racist and therefore racism.

.

So here is a real world example. A Instagram user messages Marcus Rashford and calls him the N word- in your opinion is that a crime or not? It already is in the street so why would it not be online?

Muahahaha

Muahahaha wrote: »

So here is a real world example. A Instagram user messages Marcus Rashford and calls him the N word- in your opinion is that a crime or not? It already is in the street so why would it not be online?

There would be different factors to consider.

Is the Instagram user also black? The n word is often used as a term of endearment between black people.

If that's the case, are we going to make a word illegal for people of certain ethnicities but ok for others?

So I would say that it's offensive, but I would struggle to say it was a crime

What do you think the punishment should be for your example?

MontgomeryClift

Deleted User wrote: »

There would be different factors to consider.

Is the Instagram user also black? The n word is often used as a term of endearment between black people.

If that's the case, are we going to make a word illegal for people of certain ethnicities but ok for others?

So I would say that it's offensive, but I would struggle to say it was a crime

What do you think the punishment should be for your example?

Just don't say it with a hard 'r' and you'll be spared the multiracial gulag.

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

There would be different factors to consider.

Is the Instagram user also black? The n word is often used as a term of endearment between black people.

If that's the case, are we going to make a word illegal for people of certain ethnicities but ok for others?

So I would say that it's offensive, but I would struggle to say it was a crime

What do you think the punishment should be for your example?

So you are in favour of anybody being allowed to racially abuse Marcus Rashford and call him the N word on social media. And in your opinion that is not a crime but it is just "offensive". So in your opinion Marcus Rashford should basically just suck it up and accept that being called the N word day in day out on social media is normal? Like is that your actual stance, you seem to be saying that racially abusing someone is not a crime? Because it actually is already.

As for punishment I dont fully know. I agree with you that every case is different and needs to be judged on its merits. But thats why we pay the high salaries of judges, they hear the case and judge it on its merits.

The lad in Kerry got off lightly for racially abusing Ian Wright imo he walked from the court with no fine, no community service and no criminal record. A fine and community service should have been the minimum for just calling Wright the N word imo. But he didnt just abuse Ian Wright once, he did it 22 times, called him the N word tons, he harrassed him and stalked him. He issued death threats to Wright and his family and said he wished he was dead, it was pure bile. So for that he should have got a fine, community service and a criminal conviction. But instead he walked away with none of them, it was a joke of a sentence and Ian Wright rightly called it out. As Ian Wright said the laws need to change so these racists face some real world consequences to their actions.

Muahahaha

Muahahaha wrote: »

So you are in favour of anybody being allowed to racially abuse Marcus Rashford and call him the N word on social media. And in your opinion that is not a crime but it is just "offensive". So in your opinion Marcus Rashford should basically just suck it up and accept that being called the N word day in day out on social media is normal? Like is that your actual stance, you seem to be saying that racially abusing someone is not a crime? Because it actually is already.

As for punishment I dont fully know. I agree with you that every case is different and needs to be judged on its merits. But thats why we pay the high salaries of judges, they hear the case and judge it on its merits.
.

I think your framing of my position is highly uncharitable.

I'm not in favour of anyone being allowed to racially abuse anyone.

I am against making a word illegal. Especially a word which would be allowed to be used by certain ethnicities.

And yes, words are offensive, not criminal.

Quantum Erasure

Deleted User wrote: »

There would be different factors to consider.

Is the Instagram user also black? The n word is often used as a term of endearment between black people.

If that's the case, are we going to make a word illegal for people of certain ethnicities but ok for others?
...

Theres a whole trend at the moment around calling out people using African American Vernacular English, its seen as 'digital blackface'... and it doesn't just apply to words, its reaction gifs, acronyms, emojis, ...


There was a cyclist, Quin Simmons, suspended for it a while ago

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

I think your framing of my position is highly uncharitable.

I'm not in favour of anyone being allowed to racially abuse anyone.

I am against making a word illegal. Especially a word which would be allowed to be used by certain ethnicities.

And yes, words are offensive, not criminal.

What's highly uncharitable is your blasé dismissal of the history and connotations associated with the word and how it was used to differentiate, denigrate and demean a group of people who were seen and treated by many as subhuman.

It does go some way to communicating your logic for the dislike of protesting against racism when you have apparently taken the position that everything that happened in the past, is in the past and has no relevance today.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

What's highly uncharitable is your blasé dismissal of the history and connotations associated with the word and how it was used to differentiate, denigrate and demean a group of people who were seen and treated by many as subhuman.

It does go some way to communicating your logic for the dislike of protesting against racism when you have apparently taken the position that everything that happened in the past, is in the past and has no relevance today.

That's again not my position.

I'm well aware of the connotations with that word and don't champion its usage. Where have I said otherwise?

I don't think it is realistic to expect to make a word illegal or criminal, especially a word which is used often in a non racist context.

But again, it's at least consistent to be misrepresented as some sort of racist sympathiser

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

That's again not my position.

I'm well aware of the connotations with that word and don't champion its usage. Where have I said otherwise?

I don't think it is realistic to expect to make a word illegal or criminal, especially a word which is used often in a non racist context.

But again, it's at least consistent to be misrepresented as some sort of racist sympathiser

Anyone asking why some people can't use this word is championing it in my book.
If it was someone completely unaware of the history who was asking why was it this way then I could understand that up until the point at which it was explained to them and they acknowledged they now had some understanding of why it was offensive to many.

That doesn't quite apply to someone spending days discussing racism and arguing that a silent display of protest against its ongoing occurrence was a problem. And someone who has said they abhor the BLM movement.

But you're entitled to form an opinion of them based on what you've seen and heard about them and yet you don't think people can or should form an opinion of you based on your comments. I'm quite sure many of us here have had more interaction and engagement with you than you have had with anyone who purports to be a member of a BLM organisation.

Rothko

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Booing an anti racist protest is disgusting.

Accusing someone of being a racist and refusing to back it up is also disgusting.

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

I think your framing of my position is highly uncharitable.

I'm not in favour of anyone being allowed to racially abuse anyone.

I am against making a word illegal. Especially a word which would be allowed to be used by certain ethnicities.

And yes, words are offensive, not criminal.

Words can be both offensive and criminal, again this is what Marcus Rashford and Ian Wright faced, racism because of their skin colour and death threats because of their skin colour. Both are offensive and also criminal, if you dont believe me then I suggest that you should check the laws that have already convicted racists of these crimes.

But you didnt answer my question after I answered yours. namely what is your punishment for someone who calls a black person the N word on social media just like Marcus Rashford and Ian Wright have experienced in the real world
Is it a-
-Fine
-Community Service
-Conviction
-Suspended sentence
-Prison

What combination of the above would you apply if you were the judge? . Or would you just let them walk out free for racially abusing black people?

Muahahaha

Muahahaha wrote: »

So you are in favour of anybody being allowed to racially abuse Marcus Rashford and call him the N word on social media. And in your opinion that is not a crime but it is just "offensive". So in your opinion Marcus Rashford should basically just suck it up and accept that being called the N word day in day out on social media is normal? Like is that your actual stance, you seem to be saying that racially abusing someone is not a crime? Because it actually is already.

As for punishment I dont fully know. I agree with you that every case is different and needs to be judged on its merits. But thats why we pay the high salaries of judges, they hear the case and judge it on its merits.

The lad in Kerry got off lightly for racially abusing Ian Wright imo he walked from the court with no fine, no community service and no criminal record. A fine and community service should have been the minimum for just calling Wright the N word imo. But he didnt just abuse Ian Wright once, he did it 22 times, called him the N word tons, he harrassed him and stalked him. He issued death threats to Wright and his family and said he wished he was dead, it was pure bile. So for that he should have got a fine, community service and a criminal conviction. But instead he walked away with none of them, it was a joke of a sentence and Ian Wright rightly called it out. As Ian Wright said the laws need to change so these racists face some real world consequences to their actions.

The fact that that little scumbag walked out with no criminal record speaks volumes about Ireland's justice system.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

Anyone asking why some people can't use this word is championing it in my book.
If it was someone completely unaware of the history who was asking why was it this way then I could understand that up until the point at which it was explained to them and they acknowledged they now had some understanding of why it was offensive to many.

That doesn't quite apply to someone spending days discussing racism and arguing that a silent display of protest against its ongoing occurrence was a problem. And someone who has said they abhor the BLM movement.

But you're entitled to form an opinion of them based on what you've seen and heard about them and yet you don't think people can or should form an opinion of you based on your comments. I'm quite sure many of us here have had more interaction and engagement with you than you have had with anyone who purports to be a member of a BLM organisation.

So do you want some words made illegal for certain races to say but legal for other races to say?

Maybe we should have different water fountains too.

Your post is exactly why this whole debate is toxic. If you don't think the BLM movement is fantastic you're a racist. If you don't think taking the knee is this great big grand gesture and fully support it, you're a racist. It's the usual trick that we've seen for years emenating from certain elements, primarily on the left now, of trying to frame anyone who disagrees with them as being something awful, whether it be racist, homophobic, transphobic etc. An insidious attempt to shame people in to silence.

This can be seen even on boards across threads on any controversial topic whether it be the multicultural thread (racist, xenphobes), gender identity threads (transphobe) etc.

Oh, and yes, I have of course made a ridiculous initial comment to your post. But it's no different to what you've done to the dunne and, for example, omackrel earlier in the thread. Asking why someone shouldn't be able to say a word and equating that with championing the word is patently ridiculous.

Muahahaha

Muahahaha wrote: »

Words can be both offensive and criminal, again this is what Marcus Rashford and Ian Wright faced, racism because of their skin colour and death threats because of their skin colour. Both are offensive and also criminal, if you dont believe me then I suggest that you should check the laws that have already convicted racists of these crimes.

But you didnt answer my question after I answered yours. namely what is your punishment for someone who calls a black person the N word on social media just like Marcus Rashford and Ian Wright have experienced in the real world
Is it a-
-Fine
-Community Service
-Conviction
-Suspended sentence
-Prison

What combination of the above would you apply if you were the judge? . Or would you just let them walk out free for racially abusing black people?

I didn't answer because I don't have an answer. I can't honestly say. If I was the judge I would have to consider if I would be comfortable with imposing the same sentence to a black person saying it to another black person.

It wouldn't be just or fair to have one rule for one ethnicity and not for the other. That would not do anything but further divide.

I also wouldn't like to send the message that this type of behaviour would be tolerated by doing nothing, so it's a genuine dilemma which is why more thought needs to go into it, and a kneejerk "make it illegal" won't be beneficial

Penn

https://twitter.com/thenewtommitch/status/1403984578331750406?s=19

Penn

Penn wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thenewtommitch/status/1403984578331750406?s=19

Now, I'm not saying it is offensive, but if a white person took offensive about that second tweet and claimed it was making fun of them because of their skin colour, should that be illegal too?

Penn

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Now, I'm not saying it is offensive, but if a white person took offensive about that second tweet and claimed it was making fun of them because of their skin colour, should that be illegal too?

No because its not making fun of white people for their skin colour, but making fun of some white people who think they know best about what black people should do about the actual racism black people are subjected to.

Penn

Penn wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thenewtommitch/status/1403984578331750406?s=19

Great, another **** meme.

Penn

Penn wrote: »

No because its not making fun of white people for their skin colour, but making fun of some white people who think they know best about what black people should do about the actual racism black people are subjected to.

That's fair enough I suppose. I just don't think the same kind of parody and stereotypes would be as roundly accepted if the ethnicities were reversed and white people were making fun of black people who claim white privilege exists.

Omackeral

Is it ok to call white people Whitey as above? Should it be?

DeadHand

Imagine the fury if someone posted an equally terrible meme stereotyping black people and reducing them in the same way the above reduces and stereotypes white people.

Funnily enough, it's the first example of overt racism I've seen in the thread and it doesn't seem to have come from an anti-kneeler.

suicide_circus

Hhhhh wrote: »

Great, another **** meme.

Racial slurs are fun

DeadHand

DeadHand wrote: »

Imagine the fury if someone posted an equally terrible meme stereotyping black people and reducing them in the same way the above reduces and stereotypes white people.

Funnily enough, it's the first example of overt racism I've seen in the thread and it doesn't seem to have come from an anti-kneeler.

I'd be loathe to calling it racism (but I suppose an argument could be made that it is) but it's certainly not on par with torrents of abuse that black people suffer.

But racism is racism and if it's not tolerated from one side, the same standard should apply.

But again, it's be silly to draw a direct comparison of actual racial abuse and this meme

Penn

Jesus, the faux outrage is sickening...

If you can't understand the difference between what I posted and the racist abuses and injustices that black people face and are protesting against, I'm genuinely shocked you know there's a silent k in the word kneel, because that requires about the same level of intelligence to understand.

Penn

Penn wrote: »

Jesus, the faux outrage is sickening...

If you can't understand the difference between what I posted and the racist abuses and injustices that black people face and are protesting against, I'm genuinely shocked you know there's a silent k in the word kneel, because that requires about the same level of intelligence to understand.

Both sides are guilty of faux outrage. I mean, just look at any outrage about cultural appropriation. That's about as severe or honest as people being angry about that meme.

PuddingBreath

extra gravy wrote: »

Lukaku scoring after the Russians booed. Lovely stuff!

They weren't booing the black players, you're missing the point of why they booed.
For many in the USA BLM means
Burning
Looting
Murdering.
People don't want that carry on in their countries
I don't know anyone who wants their small business burnt down to or their neighbourhood declared a no go area for the police in the "fight against racism"
The left wing media can push an agenda, others can push back. That's not racism.
These people are hypocrites. They are the same people who think a black person is actually different to a non black person in that they can figure out how2 get to a drivers licence.
I believe there is an element in policing in the USA that can overreact when dealing with black people, also the USA bombs the crap out of black and brown skinned people across the planet for decades. We could all do with looking at the big picture.

DeadHand

Interesting thread.

Firstly, Hungarians only escaped the soul grinding, anti-human reality of living under Communism a few decades ago. It does not surprise me that they would not celebrate a homage being paid to a group which, if not Marxist first and foremost, certainly has Marxist roots, connotations and associations.

The knee is nonsense. Yet another aspect of the cultist race obsession which permeates the West at the moment. A broader public revolt against this is inevitable as it defies all common sense. Almost everyone I've spoken to on the topic is heartily sick of this performative, narcissistic conformity. I think the chasm between the ordinary public and the media on this is reflected in these conversations, this thread and the poll on this thread which sees the kneelers soundly defeated.

What poisonous movements such as the BLM do is teach people to resent and cause them to be resented. Ideologies built on resentment do no good. Through the dubious glories of social media, this fundamentally American cancer has spread to Europe. Hence, posters here are emboldened to refer to "white privilege" and "systemic racism"; concepts that are arguable in an American context and patently absurd (and, more importantly, dangerous) to transpose into a European context. At its heart, this furore is a symptom of gross Americanisation.

If it was harmless nonsense, all would be well and good if irritating. Sadly, we've seen in the USA where the triumph of this philosophy leads: burning cities.

Finally, I have a book recommendation! Anyone interested in these topics would do well to read The Madness of Crowds by the redoubtable Douglas Murray. He represents a timely voice of calm questioning the prevailing dogmas of the day.

Omackeral

Penn wrote: »

Jesus, the faux outrage is sickening...

If you can't understand the difference between what I posted and the racist abuses and injustices that black people face and are protesting against, I'm genuinely shocked you know there's a silent k in the word kneel, because that requires about the same level of intelligence to understand.

Do you think it’s ok to just call someone Whitey? Simple enough question.

alchemist33

Penn wrote: »

Jesus, the faux outrage is sickening...

If you can't understand the difference between what I posted and the racist abuses and injustices that black people face and are protesting against, I'm genuinely shocked you know there's a silent k in the word kneel, because that requires about the same level of intelligence to understand.

Boards is full of posters telling us what black people should and shouldn't be protesting about, and the same about anyone supporting them, and now some are outraged about a meme calling it out. Jesus wept, this place is gone to the dogs.