The horrible horrible world of sports

[Toni]

I really think that it depends on the person. Ideally, someone saying grossly intolerant things would be called out in no uncertain terms and unfollowed/whatever that platform does. For those in forward facing positions, public figures, etc. need to be made to understand that making public statements promoting racist, sexist, intolerant views is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Depending on the person and offense, that could be enough or it could mean actual suspension/loss of position, public apologies, lots of things.

As with most medications, the smallest effective dose is preferred.

Let's say someone on this forum was repeatedly using racial slurs, intended in a demeaning, condescending manner. What the should the consequences be for this person?

That would be up to the team of moderators. And also, in a different way, and to a different extent, to the other posters. One could be shunned or others could retaliate or some could even try to convince the offender that their use of such terms is wrong and/or not in their best interests, or in the best interests of the discussion. For some serious breaches, I would imagine that the mods would ban. But I'm not a mod and I haven't read the TOUs for a while.

This forum is not the real world. In the real world, using dehumanizing or negative words to describe other groups of people or even a person ultimately can and does lead to treating that person badly.


When women ae allowed to be called girls and are expected to dress provocatively or to accept being stared at or touched by coworkers or bosses, it is not difficult to see how it becomes more acceptable for the women to be overlooked for promotion, underpaid, even sexually assaulted. These are all things I have seen and some of which I have experienced.

When we are allowed to refer to people of other races or religions or nationalities or genders or sexes or sexual preferences by stereotypical or ugly names, it dehumanizes them, and makes it much easier to create an atmosphere where other, worse, treatment is acceptable---being passed over for promotion, being paid less, being given worse shifts, and so on. And worse than that, it becomes much more acceptable to treat anyone in the out group as though they simply do not count as much as those in the in group. Why shouldn't everything be structured in order to best accommodate the 'in' group? Everything from where you can sit in a cafeteria to where you can work to when and where you can vote, go to church or school gets seen through a different lens.


What people can and do think in their private life is different than how we expect them to behave in public. Tweets and posts are public.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But who cares what idiots think?

Sponsors care. And their money is pretty much the entire foundation of professional sports.

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

Sponsors are supporting the athletes. They do not want to be seen supporting positions that many of their customers will disagree with as the customers are likely to turn to an alternative when that happens.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

Sponsors are supporting the athletes. They do not want to be seen supporting positions that many of their customers will disagree with as the customers are likely to turn to an alternative when that happens.

Exactly. It's not 'Ideological Purity,' it's Marketability.
It's why OJ lost so many endorsements when he was up for Murder One. No one wants the commercial that lets SNL say, "He's a killer, but he really, really likes our gloves. You will, too, even if you don't leave them at a murder scene..."

NASCAR is not typically associated with the most progressive demographics in the country, but if they ever hope to draw much of a non-white audience, they could not turn a blind eye to anyone, on any team, suggesting a lynching of the black driver.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

I don't think it's a matter of ideological purity, I think it's a matter of decency. Pretty basic decency, really. I think it's a good thing that our culture demands that. We've placed a burden on ignorant people to filter their language so that we can collectively enjoy some peace and harmony. As far as I know that's a constant across all cultures.

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

 

[DrZoidberg]

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

Sponsors are supporting the athletes. They do not want to be seen supporting positions that many of their customers will disagree with as the customers are likely to turn to an alternative when that happens.

I understand that. I just don't like it.

 

[bilby]

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

I don't think it's a matter of ideological purity, I think it's a matter of decency. Pretty basic decency, really. I think it's a good thing that our culture demands that. We've placed a burden on ignorant people to filter their language so that we can collectively enjoy some peace and harmony. As far as I know that's a constant across all cultures.

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

It's entertainment. And it's all about making money from the performances of the entertainers.

The whole business is based on providing heroes. Sports rarely (but sometimes) have villains too - people the crowds hate and come to see in the hope that they will lose - but by far the majority of elite sport is about creating and profiting from heroes.

Running fast, jumping high, passing a ball accurately, etc. are just ways to achieve that objective. Just as giving a convincing portrayal of a character is a way to become a movie or TV star. And things that take away from that image of athletes as heroes are bad for business.

Your error here is to look at the sporting ability as though it were the sole criterion for success. But it's not, and it never was.

An athlete who unexpectedly destroys value for promoters, sponsors, and venues will not be welcome to participate. An athlete can make a career as a 'heel', but not if he just springs it on a previously adoring fanbase.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

It's entertainment. And it's all about making money from the performances of the entertainers.

The whole business is based on providing heroes. Sports rarely (but sometimes) have villains too - people the crowds hate and come to see in the hope that they will lose - but by far the majority of elite sport is about creating and profiting from heroes.

Running fast, jumping high, passing a ball accurately, etc. are just ways to achieve that objective. Just as giving a convincing portrayal of a character is a way to become a movie or TV star. And things that take away from that image of athletes as heroes are bad for business.

Your error here is to look at the sporting ability as though it were the sole criterion for success. But it's not, and it never was.

An athlete who unexpectedly destroys value for promoters, sponsors, and venues will not be welcome to participate. An athlete can make a career as a 'heel', but not if he just springs it on a previously adoring fanbase.

I think you're completely missing my point. It's about focusing on what's important in life. If fans of sports care about anything other than performance, that's evidence of something.

I don't like Maoism. I don't like the Christian Inquisition. I don't like truths that aren't allowed to be challenged. I don't like moral precepts aggressively defended in domains where it's not relevant. It tells us something about that culture. It's tells us how far moralism has come. And how all pervasive it is.

It's one thing if we hold a politician up to high moral standards. But athletes?!? Why? It's the same thing with musicians or actors. Why would anybody be outraged what any of them have to say about anything? Who cares if Tiger Woods was unfaithful to his wife? How has that anything to do with golf?

I understand full well how sponsorships and endorsements work. It's the way they work I have a problem with. I don't want it to be like this. That's my only issue.

I think it's bad if we reach a point where athletes have to get with the program and learn to say all the ideologically correct things.

I know that in the 90'ies Sweden had a Olympic hopeful (nope, didn't win) who was a neo-Nazi. I only know that since we had friends in common. Yet, he waved all the pride flags and said all the right things on TV. I'm not sure this is a good society.

 

[bigfield]

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

I don't think it's a matter of ideological purity, I think it's a matter of decency. Pretty basic decency, really. I think it's a good thing that our culture demands that. We've placed a burden on ignorant people to filter their language so that we can collectively enjoy some peace and harmony. As far as I know that's a constant across all cultures.

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

I don't understand how it's "just moralism". It's the way society works. We need it in order to coexist in a heterogeneous society where people have conflicting beliefs and ideas.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

I don't understand how it's "just moralism". It's the way society works. We need it in order to coexist in a heterogeneous society where people have conflicting beliefs and ideas.

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

I'm sure this is the reason why Denmark and Amsterdam was so fast with legalising prostitution, drug use and gay marriage. Other people not being exactly like you, is less terrifying here. Xenophobia is much less. Because they're so tolerant.

You say that "it's the way society works". No, it's not. What you take as normal and natural is evidence of society being dysfunctional IMHO.

 

[steve_bank]

Over here political correctness is carried to a ridiculous extreme.

There is a move to rename the Gypsy Moth because it may be offensive to Cypsies. The invasive Asian Carp fish to be renamed.

 

[Toni]

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

I don't understand how it's "just moralism". It's the way society works. We need it in order to coexist in a heterogeneous society where people have conflicting beliefs and ideas.

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

I'm sure this is the reason why Denmark and Amsterdam was so fast with legalising prostitution, drug use and gay marriage. Other people not being exactly like you, is less terrifying here. Xenophobia is much less. Because they're so tolerant.

You say that "it's the way society works". No, it's not. What you take as normal and natural is evidence of society being dysfunctional IMHO.

You really believe that it's nice for persons of color to hear racial epithets directed at them?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

I'm sure this is the reason why Denmark and Amsterdam was so fast with legalising prostitution, drug use and gay marriage. Other people not being exactly like you, is less terrifying here. Xenophobia is much less. Because they're so tolerant.

You say that "it's the way society works". No, it's not. What you take as normal and natural is evidence of society being dysfunctional IMHO.

You really believe that it's nice for persons of color to hear racial epithets directed at them?

He’s not saying it’s nice. Just that it is nicer than racists feeling socially pressured to not openly insult people and keep their racists feelings all bottled up inside. Must be hard on those people.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Having said all this, I MIGHT agree with Dr. Z in some specific cases. (I like specifics, but this thread deals only with generalities.) All sentient Americans know that the N_____ word is verboten (except between two blacks). But what about mentioning that a young woman is pretty? Such an ordinary remark is verboten among the Super-PC set, yet still seems natural and relatively innocent to many ordinary people.

You are missing the point. It's SPORTS. Who gives a shit what an athlete thinks about anything? Who gives a rats ass if the guy who wins at long jump is a member of KKK? Or if the bronze medalist pole vaulter is a member of the Taleban? Or if the gold winner of badminton is open about their pedophilia? Or if the guy who does the schedules for the tennis tournament thinks beating your wife is morally ok because it says in the Bible?

How would any of that take away from their athletic performance or ability to organize a sports competition?

I just think that ideology has no place in sports. That's all I wanted to say with this thread. We don't have to police ideological purity ALL THE FUCKING TIME. It's reached a point where I think it's ridiculous and it needs to stop. And when we reach the point where we're rapping athletes on the knuckles for what they say, then it's gone too far, IMHO. They're not paid to think. They're paid to sport.

Zoid, respectfully, is it possible that YOU are missing the point? Have you noticed any very loud noises overhead that you couldn't figure out?

 

[bigfield]

That's just moralism. Why does a guy who runs fast need to be decent? Can't he be an awful person? If the running fast isn't the important bit, then wtf is sports about? Is it just a morality play?

I don't understand how it's "just moralism". It's the way society works. We need it in order to coexist in a heterogeneous society where people have conflicting beliefs and ideas.

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

The example of a "racist and a black person" listening and respecting each other seems a bit silly. Maybe I'm just getting the wrong idea, but I'm imaging the weirdest scenes, like the black person sitting there respectfully listening as the white guy explains how black people have lower IQs or something.

But despite your weird example, I do understand what you're getting at: There are a few large, cosmopolitan cities around the world where people are especially tolerant of people who are different than themselves. However, I don't think toleration and cosmopolitanism have anything to do with being able to "express whatever belief you want". In fact I think it's the opposite; you have to exercise restraint and be mindful of what other people consider to be polite, rude, fair etc. Because not everyone shares your way of thinking or your way of doing things.

One would expect that a tolerant society will have its share of intolerant idiots who, for one reason or another, haven't learned to be tolerant, themselves. You might think of them as a minority of free-loaders, enjoying the benefits of a tolerant society while doing nothing to contribute to it, or even actively trying to undermine it. Such a society exists because a majority of people are polite and respectful in public.

You say that "somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine," but it isn't, really. It's just tolerated.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

I'm sure this is the reason why Denmark and Amsterdam was so fast with legalising prostitution, drug use and gay marriage. Other people not being exactly like you, is less terrifying here. Xenophobia is much less. Because they're so tolerant.

You say that "it's the way society works". No, it's not. What you take as normal and natural is evidence of society being dysfunctional IMHO.

You really believe that it's nice for persons of color to hear racial epithets directed at them?

He’s not saying it’s nice. Just that it is nicer than racists feeling socially pressured to not openly insult people and keep their racists feelings all bottled up inside. Must be hard on those people.

Sometimes people aren't nice, or behave in a way we'd like them to. It's the price we pay for freedom of expression.

We don't need to rearrange all society in order to prevent people from having their feelings hurt.

I am not defending racism or am trying to protect them. I just think that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, people might use colourful language without thinking how it lands.

I have many times said horrendous things, but in contexts where its been appreciated as obvious jokes. My sense of humour is highly inappropriate.

I don't think that makes me a racist

 

[DrZoidberg]

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

The example of a "racist and a black person" listening and respecting each other seems a bit silly. Maybe I'm just getting the wrong idea, but I'm imaging the weirdest scenes, like the black person sitting there respectfully listening as the white guy explains how black people have lower IQs or something.

But despite your weird example, I do understand what you're getting at: There are a few large, cosmopolitan cities around the world where people are especially tolerant of people who are different than themselves. However, I don't think toleration and cosmopolitanism have anything to do with being able to "express whatever belief you want". In fact I think it's the opposite; you have to exercise restraint and be mindful of what other people consider to be polite, rude, fair etc. Because not everyone shares your way of thinking or your way of doing things.

One would expect that a tolerant society will have its share of intolerant idiots who, for one reason or another, haven't learned to be tolerant, themselves. You might think of them as a minority of free-loaders, enjoying the benefits of a tolerant society while doing nothing to contribute to it, or even actively trying to undermine it. Such a society exists because a majority of people are polite and respectful in public.

You say that "somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine," but it isn't, really. It's just tolerated.

My example comes from a racist Danish rally where the leader of Denmark's biggest far right party was demonstrating. A black woman with a lesbian feminist tshirt comes up to him and they start talking. People in his crew hands them both beers. They're joking with eachother and clearly having fun. So Danish.

Or a colleague who had all manner of racist opinions turned out to have a Kurdish bestie. Also, so Danish.

In Denmark its just opinions. They respect that other people have their own beliefs. They praise the ability to not get offended and to have a laugh and connect with anyone. They don't seem to take politics so personally.

 

[Toni]

He’s not saying it’s nice. Just that it is nicer than racists feeling socially pressured to not openly insult people and keep their racists feelings all bottled up inside. Must be hard on those people.

Sometimes people aren't nice, or behave in a way we'd like them to. It's the price we pay for freedom of expression.

That price lands really hard on vulnerable minorities.

We don't need to rearrange all society in order to prevent people from having their feelings hurt.

Harm done by casual racist remarks is not limited to 'hurt feelings.' In fact, I doubt that most black people 'have their feelings hurt' by being subjected to racist language. I imagine it causes a lot of anger and fear of consequences if they express their anger, and also fear of, if racist language is tolerated, then what racist actions might also be tolerated.

I am not defending racism or am trying to protect them. I just think that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, people might use colourful language without thinking how it lands.

It certainly sounds as though you are defending racist language and suggesting that people just 'get over it' if they hear something offensive but are very protective of those who are criticized for using racist language who should not be expected to just get over it.

Yes, in the heat of the moment, sometimes people say things that are thoughtless or rude or unkind or horrendous. Some people would say that such utterances reveal how someone really feels deep down. I don't know about that nor do I much care. People are allowed to have whatever horrendous feelings and attitudes they want to have. They are not free to express them without consequence. Apologies go a long way to helping smooth over the situation but some deep soul searching is really necessary. Of course, there is no way to enforce that deep soul searching.

I have many times said horrendous things, but in contexts where its been appreciated as obvious jokes. My sense of humour is highly inappropriate.

I wonder if that is actually true or if your audience was merely more polite than you are and did not wish to cause a scene. Or maybe they thought you were a lost cause, like an old crazy uncle one tolerates at a family holiday gathering. Or maybe they agree with you that it is more important to share whatever thought, however ugly or offensive or unkind, than to consider whether those words reflect well upon the person uttering them. Obviously, such people do not give a rat's ass about other people's feelings.

I don't think that makes me a racist

I have no idea whether or not you are a racist or whether your are merely thoughtless in your speech and not inclined to inconvenience yourself enough to consider other people's feelings as important as your freedom to express your impulses. Or perhaps you just like a good story and are relating one now. I don't know.

I will say that I grew up where it was very common to use a number of phrases and words and terms that had some pretty awful racist meanings--many/most of which I did not realize in my youth. I will tell you this, though: Once I realized what certain terms really meant, I stopped using them, cold. Because ultimately, they did not express how I really felt or what I really believed. They were just lazy, ignorant habits that I picked up from those around me. When I knew better, I did better.

So can you.

 

[TSwizzle]

So, should spectators who chant monkey noises or throw bananas at black football players be tolerated? That should just be brushed off as banter by the black players ? Maybe they could even go for a pint together after the game and discuss!

These things actually happened at UK football matches and it was condemned in no uncertain terms. People caught doing such things were banned from all football stadiums. It still happens occasionally but no where near as often as it did back in the 80s/90s.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I still think it's bullshit that sponsors are sensitive about stuff like that. It says something about our culture. How we demand ideological purity, no matter if it makes sense or not

Sponsors are supporting the athletes. They do not want to be seen supporting positions that many of their customers will disagree with as the customers are likely to turn to an alternative when that happens.

I understand that. I just don't like it.

Sponsorship is about associating the company's name with a positive image. If people don't see the athlete as a positive image the sponsors will dry up.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I understand that. I just don't like it.

Sponsorship is about associating the company's name with a positive image. If people don't see the athlete as a positive image the sponsors will dry up.

And that's because business is business, assuming sponsors wish to turn a profit and appeal to the widest possible clientele. In theory I could sponsor the local KKK but I would be excluding a very large part of my potential market. Not very smart business.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Having said all this, I MIGHT agree with Dr. Z in some specific cases. (I like specifics, but this thread deals only with generalities.) All sentient Americans know that the N_____ word is verboten (except between two blacks). But what about mentioning that a young woman is pretty? Such an ordinary remark is verboten among the Super-PC set, yet still seems natural and relatively innocent to many ordinary people.

You are missing the point. It's SPORTS. Who gives a shit what an athlete thinks about anything? Who gives a rats ass if the guy who wins at long jump is a member of KKK? Or if the bronze medalist pole vaulter is a member of the Taleban? Or if the gold winner of badminton is open about their pedophilia? Or if the guy who does the schedules for the tennis tournament thinks beating your wife is morally ok because it says in the Bible?

How would any of that take away from their athletic performance or ability to organize a sports competition?

I just think that ideology has no place in sports. That's all I wanted to say with this thread. We don't have to police ideological purity ALL THE FUCKING TIME. It's reached a point where I think it's ridiculous and it needs to stop. And when we reach the point where we're rapping athletes on the knuckles for what they say, then it's gone too far, IMHO. They're not paid to think. They're paid to sport.

Zoid, respectfully, is it possible that YOU are missing the point? Have you noticed any very loud noises overhead that you couldn't figure out?

Perhaps. I don't see the benefit of virtuous theatrics. I haven't seen anybody defend that. Instead arguments are based on that it should be obvious to anyone. When all the evidence suggests that it's not. The arguments against me need to be improved for me to reconsider.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I understand that. I just don't like it.

Sponsorship is about associating the company's name with a positive image. If people don't see the athlete as a positive image the sponsors will dry up.

That's again completely missing my point. Just repeating the same thing over and over won't change my mind.

I think this way of thinking is intellectual and cultural poison

 

[DrZoidberg]

So, should spectators who chant monkey noises or throw bananas at black football players be tolerated? That should just be brushed off as banter by the black players ? Maybe they could even go for a pint together after the game and discuss!

These things actually happened at UK football matches and it was condemned in no uncertain terms. People caught doing such things were banned from all football stadiums. It still happens occasionally but no where near as often as it did back in the 80s/90s.

Has it changed because of the condemnations or because society has changed, and people have less of those opinions today?

I think the world is less racist today.

 

[bigfield]

Everybody parroting the political correct things to say, for the sake of their career, is not a free society IMHO. Free speech is a society, IMHO, where people really can express whatever belief they have and people are cool with it.

To me what hit this home the most was moving to Denmark 5 years ago. A truly tolerant and free society. Here you can express whatever belief you want. Somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine. A racist and a black person can sit at the same table and enjoy a beer together and have a good time. They will make an effort to connect and both listen and respect each other.

When I first moved here I found the culture mind blowing. Coming from Sweden, I'd never experienced it. Sweden is on the other extreme of the spectra. Sweden is intolerant, moralistic and conservative. Since I've also been to Amsterdam. A very similar culture to Copenhagen. I've been told Singapore is similar. It's apparently a port city culture. International trading hubs have been so exposed to other cultures that they become extremely tolerant.

But it's dumb that all of the world isn't like this. It's so nice for everybody! It's an entire layer of stress and social backflipping that is done away with. There's less worry what people are really thinking. They just say it. There is no downside.

The example of a "racist and a black person" listening and respecting each other seems a bit silly. Maybe I'm just getting the wrong idea, but I'm imaging the weirdest scenes, like the black person sitting there respectfully listening as the white guy explains how black people have lower IQs or something.

But despite your weird example, I do understand what you're getting at: There are a few large, cosmopolitan cities around the world where people are especially tolerant of people who are different than themselves. However, I don't think toleration and cosmopolitanism have anything to do with being able to "express whatever belief you want". In fact I think it's the opposite; you have to exercise restraint and be mindful of what other people consider to be polite, rude, fair etc. Because not everyone shares your way of thinking or your way of doing things.

One would expect that a tolerant society will have its share of intolerant idiots who, for one reason or another, haven't learned to be tolerant, themselves. You might think of them as a minority of free-loaders, enjoying the benefits of a tolerant society while doing nothing to contribute to it, or even actively trying to undermine it. Such a society exists because a majority of people are polite and respectful in public.

You say that "somebody can be a racist and express that, and it's fine," but it isn't, really. It's just tolerated.

My example comes from a racist Danish rally where the leader of Denmark's biggest far right party was demonstrating. A black woman with a lesbian feminist tshirt comes up to him and they start talking. People in his crew hands them both beers. They're joking with eachother and clearly having fun. So Danish.

Or a colleague who had all manner of racist opinions turned out to have a Kurdish bestie. Also, so Danish.

In Denmark its just opinions. They respect that other people have their own beliefs. They praise the ability to not get offended and to have a laugh and connect with anyone. They don't seem to take politics so personally.

I'm sorry, but it still seems like a silly story to me, even though you've explained that the racist in your story is actually a veteran politician at a political rally. I thought you were trying to make a point about the way normal Danish people behave. The story about the racist with the ethnic friend is just cringe-worthy. I mean, come on.

Interestingly, I did a few quick searches for most diverse cities in the world/Europe and didn't find a website willing to give Copenhagen a mention.

 

[Toni]

My example comes from a racist Danish rally where the leader of Denmark's biggest far right party was demonstrating. A black woman with a lesbian feminist tshirt comes up to him and they start talking. People in his crew hands them both beers. They're joking with eachother and clearly having fun. So Danish.

Or a colleague who had all manner of racist opinions turned out to have a Kurdish bestie. Also, so Danish.

In Denmark its just opinions. They respect that other people have their own beliefs. They praise the ability to not get offended and to have a laugh and connect with anyone. They don't seem to take politics so personally.

I'm sorry, but it still seems like a silly story to me, even though you've explained that the racist in your story is actually a veteran politician at a political rally. I thought you were trying to make a point about the way normal Danish people behave. The story about the racist with the ethnic friend is just cringe-worthy. I mean, come on.

Interestingly, I did a few quick searches for most diverse cities in the world/Europe and didn't find a website willing to give Copenhagen a mention.

Between his second and third marriages, my racist bigot father (whom I loved very dearly and who, otherwise was a really good person) was living in a divorced men's apartment complex. I think he was startled that his next door neighbor was a black man. But he assured me that he was a really nice guy and he liked him. He did refrain from using any ugly racial epithets although whether it was because he liked the guy next door and recognized some greater shared humanity, or he had grown as a human being in his single state or whether he just knew that I wasn't going to have it, I don't know. I do know that he had black colleagues at work, from time to time and his working relationship with them was good enough that he received expected promotions and bonuses. And when my mother was hospitalized long term during their marriage, he was as respectful and appreciative of the black nurses as he was of the white ones. So, yeah, he knew how to behave when he needed to.

Spoiler alert: his changed world view reverted at some point during his third marriage. By then he had retired and was safely ensconced in a pretty white world.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Zoid, respectfully, is it possible that YOU are missing the point? Have you noticed any very loud noises overhead that you couldn't figure out?

Perhaps. I don't see the benefit of virtuous theatrics. I haven't seen anybody defend that. Instead arguments are based on that it should be obvious to anyone. When all the evidence suggests that it's not. The arguments against me need to be improved for me to reconsider.

Okay, I want to understand your position.

Many of us are parents, raised families, we're grandparents, we raised kids. Are you advocating that I tell my five-year-old who is playing T-ball that it's okay to tell Sammy he's just a dumb nigger boy while you're playing the game? But that when the game is over it's improper and unacceptable to refer to him with racist comments.

Also, if someone calls you a Spook or a Gook or a Coon because your parents are black and asian, take it all with a smile while you're up to bat. It's all in the game. But when the game is over these are insults and cannot be accepted.

Is that your position?

 

[DrZoidberg]

My example comes from a racist Danish rally where the leader of Denmark's biggest far right party was demonstrating. A black woman with a lesbian feminist tshirt comes up to him and they start talking. People in his crew hands them both beers. They're joking with eachother and clearly having fun. So Danish.

Or a colleague who had all manner of racist opinions turned out to have a Kurdish bestie. Also, so Danish.

In Denmark its just opinions. They respect that other people have their own beliefs. They praise the ability to not get offended and to have a laugh and connect with anyone. They don't seem to take politics so personally.

I'm sorry, but it still seems like a silly story to me, even though you've explained that the racist in your story is actually a veteran politician at a political rally. I thought you were trying to make a point about the way normal Danish people behave. The story about the racist with the ethnic friend is just cringe-worthy. I mean, come on.

Interestingly, I did a few quick searches for most diverse cities in the world/Europe and didn't find a website willing to give Copenhagen a mention.

Ethnic diversity is NOT the same thing as tolerance. The left today like using it as a proxy for tolerance, but it's false. It's rather the opposite. And holding it up as a virtue is actually racist and intolerant.

Racism is simply the belief that races have inherent traits and that there's a ranking between them. I can think that Arabs are more likely to be violent than whites (a racist opinion) and still maintain friendships with Arabs who I think are as peaceful as whites. This was just an example. It isn't my real opinion. My point is that racism can be compatible with openness towards other races and ethnicities. This is the racism of my colleague. He was in general a very open, tolerant and liberal kind of guy. He just also is a racist.

USA has an ever widening deep divide between left and right. Denmark is just shades of grey.

Danes are really good at bridging ideological divides and finding common ground, in spite of differences. As a Swede, it's a beautiful thing to behold. They're really cool about disagreeing.

 

[TSwizzle]

So, should spectators who chant monkey noises or throw bananas at black football players be tolerated? That should just be brushed off as banter by the black players ? Maybe they could even go for a pint together after the game and discuss!

These things actually happened at UK football matches and it was condemned in no uncertain terms. People caught doing such things were banned from all football stadiums. It still happens occasionally but no where near as often as it did back in the 80s/90s.

Has it changed because of the condemnations or because society has changed, and people have less of those opinions today?

"monkey chants" and "throwing bananas" are not opinions, they are actions. But this is where it leads to when you don't have filters.

I think the world is less racist today.

Yes, I think it is less racist. Or is it simply people keep their bigoted thoughts to themselves ?

For the most part I agree with much of what you say but you have been ambiguous when people have tried to pin you down. But it doesn't really matter, in polite society and public arenas there are certain blurry lines that cannot be crossed whether it be racist comments, "homophobic", sexist or whatever. I gave an earlier example of a black football player calling another black football player a "choc ice", black on the outside, white on the inside. He was originally investigated for racism. These types of comments I don't get as racism. But you have still failed to bring up an example or incident of what you are actually referring to. Who exactly are you talking about ?

 

[Toni]

"monkey chants" and "throwing bananas" are not opinions, they are actions. But this is where it leads to when you don't have filters.

I think the world is less racist today.

Yes, I think it is less racist. Or is it simply people keep their bigoted thoughts to themselves ?

For the most part I agree with much of what you say but you have been ambiguous when people have tried to pin you down. But it doesn't really matter, in polite society and public arenas there are certain blurry lines that cannot be crossed whether it be racist comments, "homophobic", sexist or whatever. I gave an earlier example of a black football player calling another black football player a "choc ice", black on the outside, white on the inside. He was originally investigated for racism. These types of comments I don't get as racism. But you have still failed to bring up an example or incident of what you are actually referring to. Who exactly are you talking about ?

Actually, he was reprimanded for bringing the game into disrepute. Soccer is more civilized in that respect compared with American football.

From my post #38:

Also from the article you linked:

But it was ruled the centre-half had brought the game into disrepute.

"The commission found that the breach included a reference to ethnic origin, colour or race," read an FA statement.

Ferdinand was also warned as to his future conduct. Manchester United have decided not to appeal against the decision.

The United defender tweeted: "I hear you fella! Choc ice is classic hahahahahaha!!" in response to a message from @carltonEbanks which stated: "Looks like Ashley Cole's going to be their choc ice. Then again he's always been a sell out. Shame on him."

The term relates to the black and white nature of a choc ice and can imply someone is being black on the outside and white on the inside.

The tweet appeared on Ferdinand's timeline after Chelsea and England left-back Cole appeared in court as a defence witness for team-mate John Terry, who was cleared of racially abusing Ferdinand's younger brother, Anton, in a game against QPR on 23 October last year.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I understand that. I just don't like it.

Sponsorship is about associating the company's name with a positive image. If people don't see the athlete as a positive image the sponsors will dry up.

That's again completely missing my point. Just repeating the same thing over and over won't change my mind.

I think this way of thinking is intellectual and cultural poison

Do you think sponsorship is about altruism??

 

[TSwizzle]

Another dodgy racism charge was leveled at Chelsea defender John Terry who was accused of calling a black opposition player Anton Ferdinand (Rio Ferdinand's brother) "a fucking black cunt, knobhead". That got all the way to the criminal court where Terry was cleared. Terry claimed he called Anton a "fucking blind cunt". I can't remember the details and I can't find the video of the incident but I seem to remember it was something like "Anton, I never called you a black cunt, knobhead", there was actual audio of the incident somewhere. Teh Gruaniad has a slo-mo video but no audio. But this sort of exchange should not ruin people's lives or livelihoods. Apparently the Ferdinand brothers still don't speak to Terry.

jeezus, now I am terrified I blurt out "black cunt"

 

[jab]

Having said all this, I MIGHT agree with Dr. Z in some specific cases. (I like specifics, but this thread deals only with generalities.) All sentient Americans know that the N_____ word is verboten (except between two blacks). But what about mentioning that a young woman is pretty? Such an ordinary remark is verboten among the Super-PC set, yet still seems natural and relatively innocent to many ordinary people.

You are missing the point. It's SPORTS. Who gives a shit what an athlete thinks about anything? Who gives a rats ass if the guy who wins at long jump is a member of KKK? Or if the bronze medalist pole vaulter is a member of the Taleban? Or if the gold winner of badminton is open about their pedophilia? Or if the guy who does the schedules for the tennis tournament thinks beating your wife is morally ok because it says in the Bible?

How would any of that take away from their athletic performance or ability to organize a sports competition?

I just think that ideology has no place in sports. That's all I wanted to say with this thread. We don't have to police ideological purity ALL THE FUCKING TIME. It's reached a point where I think it's ridiculous and it needs to stop. And when we reach the point where we're rapping athletes on the knuckles for what they say, then it's gone too far, IMHO. They're not paid to think. They're paid to sport.

Who gives a shit? At a minimum:
for hypothetical 1. team members who aren't Wasps; for hypothetical 2. people with children, particularly any competitors who are not of legal age; for hypothetical 3. women he has to work with, including women tennis players.

 

[jab]

Dude, you asked a question.

Who gives a shit what an athlete thinks about anything?

I answered it. Clearly companies and advertisers and those advertised to care what athletes think due to the amount of money athletes are paid to promote a product. They've been paying them a lot for a long while.

You tried to negate the importance of what athletes think by pretending no one cares what they think. That was pretty easily debunked. So if you don't like having a question you asked being answered, you should stop asking questions.

It was a rhetorical question. Why would anyone care what an athlete thinks about anything? It's retarded.

in some sports at least, ones that require tactics--dumbness is a detriment. You seem to be condescending to people in the sports world by situating them as lower class than you--i. e. as working class, and therefore inclined to be verbally and socially crass, to be uninformed, and to be incapable of becoming informed. Except for the working class, this is a description of Donald Trump, and Marjorie Taylor Greene, members of America's "educated" economic elite.

 

[jab]

Another dodgy racism charge was leveled at Chelsea defender John Terry who was accused of calling a black opposition player Anton Ferdinand (Rio Ferdinand's brother) "a fucking black cunt, knobhead". That got all the way to the criminal court where Terry was cleared. Terry claimed he called Anton a "fucking blind cunt". I can't remember the details and I can't find the video of the incident but I seem to remember it was something like "Anton, I never called you a black cunt, knobhead", there was actual audio of the incident somewhere. Teh Gruaniad has a slo-mo video but no audio. But this sort of exchange should not ruin people's lives or livelihoods. Apparently the Ferdinand brothers still don't speak to Terry.

jeezus, now I am terrified I blurt out "black cunt"

so, misogyny in his insult was okay.

 

[TSwizzle]

Another dodgy racism charge was leveled at Chelsea defender John Terry who was accused of calling a black opposition player Anton Ferdinand (Rio Ferdinand's brother) "a fucking black cunt, knobhead". That got all the way to the criminal court where Terry was cleared. Terry claimed he called Anton a "fucking blind cunt". I can't remember the details and I can't find the video of the incident but I seem to remember it was something like "Anton, I never called you a black cunt, knobhead", there was actual audio of the incident somewhere. Teh Gruaniad has a slo-mo video but no audio. But this sort of exchange should not ruin people's lives or livelihoods. Apparently the Ferdinand brothers still don't speak to Terry.

jeezus, now I am terrified I blurt out "black cunt"

so, misogyny in his insult was okay.

I will assume you are referring to the use of the word "cunt". In the grand scheme of things "cunt" is just a generic swear word in the UK. Very much part of the vernacular. Some people find it very offensive. I don't find it offensive. I don't use that word very often but I do in certain situations. Or at least I used to.

 

[Tigers!]

jeezus, now I am terrified I blurt out "black cunt"

So don't blurt it out. Its not terribly difficult to avoid saying it.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Yes, I think it is less racist. Or is it simply people keep their bigoted thoughts to themselves ?

Here's a theory. Don't you think it's simply down to more time has passed since the age of imperialism? Or for USA it was segregation. When all of society was collectively conspiring to convince themselves that brown people really were inferior as to justify the colonial holdings and the treatment of blacks. Once all the major colonies were dismantled in the 60'ies that need went away.

The reason I think this is because prior to the age of imperialism racism wasn't a thing. Ethnic cleansing, tribalism and and extreme forms of nationalism existed. But that was on a much smaller level. And in no way justified scientifically. Scientific racism, I think is a product of a specific historical time. And will go away the further back that historical time can be found.

For the most part I agree with much of what you say but you have been ambiguous when people have tried to pin you down. But it doesn't really matter, in polite society and public arenas there are certain blurry lines that cannot be crossed whether it be racist comments, "homophobic", sexist or whatever. I gave an earlier example of a black football player calling another black football player a "choc ice", black on the outside, white on the inside. He was originally investigated for racism. These types of comments I don't get as racism. But you have still failed to bring up an example or incident of what you are actually referring to. Who exactly are you talking about ?

I couldn't find the specific article again. But this it's the German cycling coach, Patrick Moser, who comes up at the top when googling for coaches who have been fired for racist remarks.

https://www.google.com/search?q=coa...22i29i30l2.10439j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

But it wasn't just that article. It was the article that made me see the pattern.

I'd just like to add a little slice of life from back when I had a Jewish wife and I was visiting her sisters and mother in Budapest. One sister says to the other sister, "if Hitler would have done a better job, you wouldn't be standing in my way now". People say edgy stuff when they think nobody is listening. Our world of everything being recorded and put out in public is new. The less technologically savvy among most likely haven't had enough time to adapt. Everybody on this forum clearly are cool with the new Internet paradigm and have adapted to the new culture. But everybody isn't like this. A lot of people aren't. A lot of people are just out there in the world living life and are too busy having fun and getting shit done to worry about how their words might be interpreted by people they'll never meet.

I'm willing to bet that anybody who manages to achieve any kind of greatness and extraordinary achievement will be a little bit retarded when it comes to current events. Otherwise they wouldn't have time to be so awesome.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Having said all this, I MIGHT agree with Dr. Z in some specific cases. (I like specifics, but this thread deals only with generalities.) All sentient Americans know that the N_____ word is verboten (except between two blacks). But what about mentioning that a young woman is pretty? Such an ordinary remark is verboten among the Super-PC set, yet still seems natural and relatively innocent to many ordinary people.

You are missing the point. It's SPORTS. Who gives a shit what an athlete thinks about anything? Who gives a rats ass if the guy who wins at long jump is a member of KKK? Or if the bronze medalist pole vaulter is a member of the Taleban? Or if the gold winner of badminton is open about their pedophilia? Or if the guy who does the schedules for the tennis tournament thinks beating your wife is morally ok because it says in the Bible?

How would any of that take away from their athletic performance or ability to organize a sports competition?

I just think that ideology has no place in sports. That's all I wanted to say with this thread. We don't have to police ideological purity ALL THE FUCKING TIME. It's reached a point where I think it's ridiculous and it needs to stop. And when we reach the point where we're rapping athletes on the knuckles for what they say, then it's gone too far, IMHO. They're not paid to think. They're paid to sport.

Who gives a shit? At a minimum:
for hypothetical 1. team members who aren't Wasps; for hypothetical 2. people with children, particularly any competitors who are not of legal age; for hypothetical 3. women he has to work with, including women tennis players.

Sports isn't a wasp activity anymore. Just look at the participant roster at the Olympics. You are living in the past. People of colour aren't a vulnerable minority at the Olympics that we need to go out of our way to protect. That's a silly world view today.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Another dodgy racism charge was leveled at Chelsea defender John Terry who was accused of calling a black opposition player Anton Ferdinand (Rio Ferdinand's brother) "a fucking black cunt, knobhead". That got all the way to the criminal court where Terry was cleared. Terry claimed he called Anton a "fucking blind cunt". I can't remember the details and I can't find the video of the incident but I seem to remember it was something like "Anton, I never called you a black cunt, knobhead", there was actual audio of the incident somewhere. Teh Gruaniad has a slo-mo video but no audio. But this sort of exchange should not ruin people's lives or livelihoods. Apparently the Ferdinand brothers still don't speak to Terry.

jeezus, now I am terrified I blurt out "black cunt"

Slurs are interesting that way. It tells us about what is the most taboo in society. Over time they get overused and then they stop packing a punch. But racial slurs are kept potent by this liberal conspiracy to keep them so. It's sociologically interesting.

I once saw a study on words for vagina. They start out among dockworkers who thought the current words were a bit lame. They manage to find words that horrify everybody else. So they use them profusely. After a while other working class people get used to it and they start using it. Over time it climbs up the social ladder until fancy people can use it in polite conversation and it has lost all its punch.

I wish I could find that list again. It's was pretty cool to read it.

 

[Toni]

No, racial slurs are kept popular and potent by racism and by racists using the slurs.

There is a reason that certain words are slurs. Those reasons have not vanished because DrZoidberg isn't offended by them or willing to consider the insult to other people as valid as his own feefees.

 

[TSwizzle]

Here's a theory. Don't you think it's simply down to more time has passed since the age of imperialism?

It may be part of it but I think there are other factors involved.

The reason I think this is because prior to the age of imperialism racism wasn't a thing. Ethnic cleansing, tribalism and and extreme forms of nationalism existed. But that was on a much smaller level. And in no way justified scientifically. Scientific racism, I think is a product of a specific historical time. And will go away the further back that historical time can be found.

You think/observe this or you read it somewhere ? It's actually getting quite difficult to define racism. Almost any incident is declared "RACIST!!" when actual fact it probably isn't. I think a lot of things that are "racist" is really more of a class/caste category. An extreme snobbery perhaps

I couldn't find the specific article again. But this it's the German cycling coach, Patrick Moser, who comes up at the top when googling for coaches who have been fired for racist remarks.

https://www.google.com/search?q=coa...22i29i30l2.10439j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

But it wasn't just that article. It was the article that made me see the pattern.

Yes, I saw that earlier and that's a pretty good example. Sports is very competitive, it really is about stamping your superiority over others in a measurable way.
Moser was trying to motivate his team by telling them they were superior to the "goat/camel herders in front of them". Racist ? Hmm, not really. I feel that this falls into the class/caste category where the Germans are a superior culture and have better athletes than a poor nation such as Algeria.

I'm willing to bet that anybody who manages to achieve any kind of greatness and extraordinary achievement will be a little bit retarded when it comes to current events. Otherwise they wouldn't have time to be so awesome.

A lot of elite athletes are ignorant, knuckle dragging boneheads with too much money. Perhaps a certain amount of leeway should be given when they make a faux pas. But the Twitterati lynch mob and offense archeologists who comb through social media looking for indiscretions must have their pound of flesh.

 

[TSwizzle]

Another dodgy racism charge was leveled at Chelsea defender John Terry who was accused of calling a black opposition player Anton Ferdinand (Rio Ferdinand's brother) "a fucking black cunt, knobhead". That got all the way to the criminal court where Terry was cleared. Terry claimed he called Anton a "fucking blind cunt". I can't remember the details and I can't find the video of the incident but I seem to remember it was something like "Anton, I never called you a black cunt, knobhead", there was actual audio of the incident somewhere. Teh Gruaniad has a slo-mo video but no audio. But this sort of exchange should not ruin people's lives or livelihoods. Apparently the Ferdinand brothers still don't speak to Terry.

Slurs are interesting that way. It tells us about what is the most taboo in society. Over time they get overused and then they stop packing a punch. But racial slurs are kept potent by this liberal conspiracy to keep them so. It's sociologically interesting.

I agree with you there. Let's say Terry had simply said "Anton you cunt". Nothing would have come of it. Or if Terry had picked on a different physical feature "Anton, you big nosed cunt" or "Anton you baldy cunt". Same lack of reaction I expect. But add in the word "black", all hell is let loose. That's a strange one to me. Anton is clearly black, why is this attribute never to be pointed out, why is it "racist" to do so ? Of course other attributes are getting into the mix of being taboo. Call someone a "fat cunt" and you are now guilty of fat shaming.

Masculinity is another taboo. There was a recent soccer game here in San Diego (Loyal) where an openly gay player was "abused" by an opponent. The manager, Landon Donovan pulled his players out of the game. The "abuse" was basically name calling. I don't know exactly what term was used but I imagine someone called another player a 'faggot" or something like that during a heated moment in the match. Poor baby couldn't cope with this and threw a hissy fit. "Someone called me a bad name so I'm not playing." I don't know how a professional athlete gets to this level with such a fragile mentality. I played lower level amateur soccer and getting called names was common if things got heated. So was off the ball acts of violence. It was part of the gamesmanship if you wanted to stamp your superiority over your opponent. Even when I played in the USA on a mostly Latino team, these guys used to use really let fly with the most inappropriate language. It was interesting to see their "racism". How certain Mexicans looked down upon Hondurans or Guatemalans and of course the African Americans. Oof, it was quite an eye opener. But I think it was more class/caste orientated than "racism". But there could be out and out racist behavior from some of these Latino guys, particularly towards African Americans.

I once saw a study on words for vagina. They start out among dockworkers who thought the current words were a bit lame. They manage to find words that horrify everybody else. So they use them profusely. After a while other working class people get used to it and they start using it. Over time it climbs up the social ladder until fancy people can use it in polite conversation and it has lost all its punch.

I wish I could find that list again. It's was pretty cool to read it.

No doubt.

 

[jab]

Another dodgy racism charge was leveled at Chelsea defender John Terry who was accused of calling a black opposition player Anton Ferdinand (Rio Ferdinand's brother) "a fucking black cunt, knobhead". That got all the way to the criminal court where Terry was cleared. Terry claimed he called Anton a "fucking blind cunt". I can't remember the details and I can't find the video of the incident but I seem to remember it was something like "Anton, I never called you a black cunt, knobhead", there was actual audio of the incident somewhere. Teh Gruaniad has a slo-mo video but no audio. But this sort of exchange should not ruin people's lives or livelihoods. Apparently the Ferdinand brothers still don't speak to Terry.

jeezus, now I am terrified I blurt out "black cunt"

so, misogyny in his insult was okay.

I will assume you are referring to the use of the word "cunt". In the grand scheme of things "cunt" is just a generic swear word in the UK. Very much part of the vernacular. Some people find it very offensive. I don't find it offensive. I don't use that word very often but I do in certain situations. Or at least I used to.

oh, the "generic swear word" defense--well, alrighty then; tell me, is "sod" still a generic swear word in the UK?
"cunt" is an english word, going back centuries--you can find it in Chaucer--for the female genitalia.

 

[TSwizzle]

I will assume you are referring to the use of the word "cunt". In the grand scheme of things "cunt" is just a generic swear word in the UK. Very much part of the vernacular. Some people find it very offensive. I don't find it offensive. I don't use that word very often but I do in certain situations. Or at least I used to.

oh, the "generic swear word" defense

Defense ? No, I'm just trying to explain to you how this word is generally used in the UK. The context is typically not misogynist. And to be fair to Terry, he did call Anton a knobhead too which is a reference to the penis. Dickhead and bell end are often used.

alrighty then; tell me, is "sod" still a generic swear word in the UK?

Pretty much.

Not sure what your point is so if you have one, get to it eh ?

 

[ZiprHead]

Sometimes people aren't nice, or behave in a way we'd like them to. It's the price we pay for freedom of expression.

But it sounds like you want to take away the freedom of expression of people that criticise the "not nice" people.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's actually getting quite difficult to define racism. Almost any incident is declared "RACIST!!" when actual fact it probably isn't.

I don't care what wokes say any longer. And I certainly won't let them define words for us. That's a dangerous slippery slope to go down.

I think a lot of things that are "racist" is really more of a class/caste category. An extreme snobbery perhaps

The Greeks were amazingly arrogant and condescending when it comes to non-Greeks. But their definition of Greek was simply if they spoke Greek. As long as the foreigner did that and honoured the Greek gods (as well as their own) they were welcome with open arms.

Rome had a similar view of things, but a lot more liberal.

Vikings weren't racist, elitist or looked down on non-Vikings at all.

Scientific racism didn't become a thing until mid 1850'ies when the trans Atlantic slave trade had been going for over a hundred years. It's with people like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Ignaz_Pruner

Before this it was something we did because it was out of sight. But Europeans were never cool about the slave trade. It was something we did because the people we sent to the colonies weren't the cream of the European crop. A lot of them were pretty horrible people who had left Europe for good reasons. It was these horrible people who had no qualms about getting in on the slave trade.

Moser was trying to motivate his team by telling them they were superior to the "goat/camel herders in front of them". Racist ? Hmm, not really. I feel that this falls into the class/caste category where the Germans are a superior culture and have better athletes than a poor nation such as Algeria.

I don't think that's racist. You'd need to try very hard to find anything racial about that. Danes call Swedes perpetual drunks all the time. We make fun of them for sounding retarded when they speak. Nobody is offended. Herding goats is a big part of the Algerian economy. So it's a class thing, rather than race thing.

I think it's perfectly permissible in the land of sports, to do your best to wind up your opponents.

I'm willing to bet that anybody who manages to achieve any kind of greatness and extraordinary achievement will be a little bit retarded when it comes to current events. Otherwise they wouldn't have time to be so awesome.

A lot of elite athletes are ignorant, knuckle dragging boneheads with too much money. Perhaps a certain amount of leeway should be given when they make a faux pas. But the Twitterati lynch mob and offense archeologists who comb through social media looking for indiscretions must have their pound of flesh.

A lot of athletes are also more focused on winning than they are on how they formulate themselves politically correct. Especially in the heat of the moment.

Getting offended by this, is trying way too hard to get offended.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

A lot of athletes are also more focused on winning than they are on how they formulate themselves politically correct. Especially in the heat of the moment.

Getting offended by this, is trying way too hard to get offended.

But why just athletes, what about plumbers and steel workers? What about a host of other trades? Earlier I posted this:

Okay, I want to understand your position.

Many of us are parents, raised families, we're grandparents, we raised kids. Are you advocating that I tell my five-year-old who is playing T-ball that it's okay to tell Sammy he's just a dumb nigger boy while you're playing the game? But that when the game is over it's improper and unacceptable to refer to him with racist comments.

Also, if someone calls you a Spook or a Gook or a Coon because your parents are black and asian, take it all with a smile while you're up to bat. It's all in the game. But when the game is over these are insults and cannot be accepted.

Is that your position?

I will assume you took that as a rhetorical post as it elicited no response from you. Or am I missing the assumption that at some "proper" age children engaged in table tennis are best advised to begin appearing dull and intellectually dimwitted when they pick up their paddles? This is sport after all, so feel free to grunt, sweat and be abusive.

 

[Toni]

I think the real lesson of this thread is just how important it is to some people to be able to think well of themselves.

 

[DrZoidberg]

A lot of athletes are also more focused on winning than they are on how they formulate themselves politically correct. Especially in the heat of the moment.

Getting offended by this, is trying way too hard to get offended.

But why just athletes, what about plumbers and steel workers? What about a host of other trades? Earlier I posted this:

Okay, I want to understand your position.

Many of us are parents, raised families, we're grandparents, we raised kids. Are you advocating that I tell my five-year-old who is playing T-ball that it's okay to tell Sammy he's just a dumb nigger boy while you're playing the game? But that when the game is over it's improper and unacceptable to refer to him with racist comments.

Also, if someone calls you a Spook or a Gook or a Coon because your parents are black and asian, take it all with a smile while you're up to bat. It's all in the game. But when the game is over these are insults and cannot be accepted.

Is that your position?

I will assume you took that as a rhetorical post as it elicited no response from you. Or am I missing the assumption that at some "proper" age children engaged in table tennis are best advised to begin appearing dull and intellectually dimwitted when they pick up their paddles? This is sport after all, so feel free to grunt, sweat and be abusive.

It's not a question of just letting it slide. It's a question of what punishment is appropriate. Would the acceptable punishment for Sammy be that you give him up for adoption, or is it more reasonable to just give him a stern talking to?

It's also a question of context. Your kid is playing sports with friends that he's going to have around for a while. He's insulting people in his own tribe. For kids anybody they play sports with will always be people in the same tribe. For adults in national competitions, it's another environment, with a hell of a lot more riding on succeeding. When more is riding on winning, people might say more unfortunate things.

And then it's also the situation of making everything said about anybody in any way ethnically different into racism. The cycle coach called Algerians a bunch of goat herders. What exactly is racist about that?

 

[TSwizzle]

It's also a question of context. Your kid is playing sports with friends that he's going to have around for a while. He's insulting people in his own tribe. For kids anybody they play sports with will always be people in the same tribe. For adults in national competitions, it's another environment, with a hell of a lot more riding on succeeding. When more is riding on winning, people might say more unfortunate things.

Eh ? That's not the way youth sports work. There are cross town rivalries, high school rivalries, out of state tournaments. You actually seldom compete within your "tribe". You compete almost always against another tribe. Jeezus, high school basketball, softball AYSO soccer gets real chippy and that's just the girls !! Parents are ejected from gym/field all the time too.