General Football 23/24

[Sus]

It may or may not have been racist but to me it wasn't acceptable. I can count on no fingers the amount of times I was called a white guy in my middle aged life.

This.

Unless you've walked in a minority's shoes, it's hard to fully understand. It's not the same as explicit racial abuse, but it is used as a differentiator that is not applied to Caucasians.

No one is ever called "the white guy" so being singled out on your skin colour is not a great feeling, from my own personal experience

[dom9]

It may or may not have been racist but to me it wasn't acceptable. I can count on no fingers the amount of times I was called a white guy in my middle aged life.

Yeah, he could have just referred to him by his shirt number, which is standard and would have avoided the unnecessary mess.

Meanwhile..

[ame]https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1336438663161540609[/ame]

Match to continue this evening.

[Shaggy]

Musa Okwonga on Twitter is very insightful and helpful on all this stuff. I'm naturally inclined to think race as an identifier would be clumsy but not abusive, but really I guess it's not up to white guys and we should all listen.

[Roboklopp]

I’ve been referred to as “this Asain guy” to one of my mates. It surprised both of us cos I’m only half Indian and I look more Mediterranean but it certainly wasn’t offensive to me.

[Kenneth]

Yeah, he could have just referred to him by his shirt number, which is standard and would have avoided the unnecessary mess.

Meanwhile..

https://twitter.com/tariqpanja/status/1336438663161540609

Match to continue this evening.

Not justifying anything, but he was wearing a puffer jacket, not a numbered football shirt.

[Scratch]

I’ve been referred to as “this Asain guy” to one of my mates. It surprised both of us cos I’m only half Indian and I look more Mediterranean but it certainly wasn’t offensive to me.

I was the 'white boy', 'whitey' and 'orang-puti' (white man) growing up in Borneo and Malaysia, and I never considered it offensive. To be fair, I was one of the few white guys in my College, and the only one in my group, so it was just a simple way of singling me out.

[Zapater]

I think that's where a lot of the race miscommunication comes from - people assuming what should or should not offend other people. Several people on here are saying that it's not offensive. I think it is because if you're saying the 'black guy' for example, it's saying that all you see when you look at him is the colour. It's like there's nothing more to the human - just black.

The majority of our team is of colour. I've never heard anyone refer to Henderson, Robertson or Alisson as the white guy even though they're the minority on the pitch. Off topic - Never noticed it before, but all of our first XI white players surnames end in 'son', is it a prerequisite?

If Ba and Webo are offended by it, it's probably for good reason regardless of how innocuous or trivial it may seem to some. These things are complex and you can't paint everyone with one brush. Many black people like referring to themselves as black or others identifying them as such which I think is strange and at some level self-degrading personally, but again, what do I know. Regardless I'd never use that kind of description in a professional sphere because one never knows how others will react. Not worth it.

[dom9]

Not justifying anything, but he was wearing a puffer jacket, not a numbered football shirt.

Ah, I didn't see the game nor the footage.

[Fivex]

James Milnerson? Alisson Beckerson?

[dom9]

but really I guess it's not up to white guys and we should all listen.

Basically, this.

I've raised a wry smile a few times at some of discussions about race in the library, between what I'm pretty sure is predominantly a bunch of middle aged white men (myself, certainly included).

Sure, it's great that people are taking the time to openly discuss and understand discrimination and try and make the world a better place, but really, it's not really anything we'll truly understand. And as long as we know that, then it's healthy to talk about it.

But really, the most important voices are from the minority communities. So from me and people like me, a little less talking, a lot more listening and a hell of a lot more action.

[Zapater]

I was the 'white boy', 'whitey' and 'orang-puti' (white man) growing up in Borneo and Malaysia, and I never considered it offensive. To be fair, I was one of the few white guys in my College, and the only one in my group, so it was just a simple way of singling me out.

I live in South Africa and it's something which I get from strangers quite a lot. The other day I was walking to the pub to get my car as I was too ****ed to drive home from the night before. I walked past a kid who must've been about 6 or 7 and he greeted me by saying 'shap umlungu' which means 'it's cool white man' in Zulu (I don't speak Zulu so it might not be the best translation). I found it amusing, but it's a bit sad that kids that young are already conditioned to think like that. At my old work I managed a team of predominantly black people and they'd all refer to me in the same terminology and I can't say I really liked it - not that I was offended by it, but I found it unprofessional.

Then in the UK, Australia and New Zealand I get targeted too. Get called a Japie and a Dutchman etc because of my accent. Which is weird because I'm English speaking. Or the classic assumption that I'm a racist - worst of all giving me a 'heads up' when black people will be present I burn really dark (is olive the term?) in the summer - I definitely have some mixed blood down the line and have also been mistakenly called the P word and a curry muncher in the UK too after being very sunburnt on holiday. Feel like I can't win sometimes. If I get that after being sunburnt for a month or so, imagine going through that every single day. I'm not complaining and don't really have grounds to stand on when it comes to complaining about racism, but it's a complex thing which impacts upon everyone differently with so many facets.

[Scratch]

It's predominantly in the 'western world' that other ethnic races are the minority, but they are the ones with the loudest voices.

However, if you live in certain other countries, where white skin is the minority and are treated as a second class citizen, (and I've lived in a few of them), the difference in treatment towards the Westerner (including Ozzies and Kiwis) is sometimes quite pronounced, but I was always told "it's their country, their culture and we are guests here" so you just got on with life.

In this country, the racism is always seen as whites towards others, but it exists in different forms depending on where in the world you are. So when discussing racism, all voices have a bearing.

[Kenneth]

Whether or not Ba had a right to be offended is only one aspect of last night. Irrespective, there are protocols in place that are designed to protect players (and staff presumably) from racial abuse, and they are designed to prevent players being abused. Teams leaving the pitch is not a form of punishment for abusers, or a PR stunt, or a means of protest, but a protection from further abuse. I don't see how there was any further risk to any of the players or staff after that altercation, so the action was a protest decided unilaterally by the teams themselves.

Now if there was a particularly strong and compelling case for such protest then I'm sure a strong consensus of condemnation would ensue, but this doesn't meet that criteria imo, and the opinions of many others less middle-aged and white, and there hasn't been such a consensus in the fall out. John Barnes and Micah Richards aren't black enough apparently, so says twitter. I think the decision was probably more divisive and unhelpful than the alternative of following the usual process of lodging a complaint about the incident after the match.

[dom9]

Whether or not Ba had a right to be offended is only one aspect of last night. Irrespective, there are protocols in place that are designed to protect players (and staff presumably) from racial abuse, and they are designed to prevent players being abused. Teams leaving the pitch is not a form of punishment for abusers, or a PR stunt, or a means of protest, but a protection from further abuse. I don't see how there was any further risk to any of the players or staff after that altercation, so the action was a protest decided unilaterally by the teams themselves.

Now if there was a particularly strong and compelling case for such protest then I'm sure a strong consensus of condemnation would ensue, but this doesn't meet that criteria imo, and the opinions of many others less middle-aged and white, and there hasn't been such a consensus in the fall out. John Barnes and Micah Richards aren't black enough apparently, so says twitter. I think the decision was probably more divisive and unhelpful than the alternative of following the usual process of lodging a complaint about the incident after the match.

Players leaving the pitch is a protest.

Why should a consensus be reached on anything like this? Walking off the pitch is a deeply personal decision and reaction to a deeply personal experience.

It's not up to you set some sort of threshold of acceptable practice based on some kind of arbitrary consensus.

[Kenneth]

It's certainly up to me where I think that threshold is.

What is or is not reasonable as a protest is always determined via consensus, and usually defined by law as s result, not by the individual. The idea that it can't be judged is bizarre. Being demba ba is not a prerequisite