Law1 min ago
"We know what you are Anton Ferdinand, we know what you are"
Sang by 1,100 Chelsea supporting morons last night.
http://www.telegraph....-from-the-stands.html
Whatever can they mean?
http://www.telegraph....-from-the-stands.html
Whatever can they mean?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Erm.....Someone displaying a skin colour different from your own is from another race.
Which is why I am in the same racial group as the (white) French and the Germans, although my nationality is different.
I am in a different racial group from a Black French or German.
I am the same race as a White West-Indian....I am a different race from a Black West-Indian.
Are you starting to understand, now?
Which is why I am in the same racial group as the (white) French and the Germans, although my nationality is different.
I am in a different racial group from a Black French or German.
I am the same race as a White West-Indian....I am a different race from a Black West-Indian.
Are you starting to understand, now?
sp1814
/// it confuses me when people try to compare gingerness or baldness or some other physical trait with racism. ///
Since you and others have often remarked "you have to be black to understand our objections to this, that or the other".
Perhaps a 'ginger haired person', a 'bald' person or even a 'fat' person, should also say the same?
After all don't you think these persons are also often abusively insulted, they also have feelings too, or is the privilege of taking action against their abusers only reserved specifically for certain groups?
/// it confuses me when people try to compare gingerness or baldness or some other physical trait with racism. ///
Since you and others have often remarked "you have to be black to understand our objections to this, that or the other".
Perhaps a 'ginger haired person', a 'bald' person or even a 'fat' person, should also say the same?
After all don't you think these persons are also often abusively insulted, they also have feelings too, or is the privilege of taking action against their abusers only reserved specifically for certain groups?
I'm not terribly offended by people calling me names about my baldness, it's merely a comment on my physical appearance and it's never suggested that my baldness gives me any natural predispositions.
If, in general society, bald people were or, had been in the past, treated differently, were judged to complete certain acts because of our baldness, we thought of by some to be a plague on this country, if someone who I thought to be in this group, who percieved bald people as a lower class of person, went on to make a comment about my baldness, I would probably be more offended.
If, in general society, bald people were or, had been in the past, treated differently, were judged to complete certain acts because of our baldness, we thought of by some to be a plague on this country, if someone who I thought to be in this group, who percieved bald people as a lower class of person, went on to make a comment about my baldness, I would probably be more offended.
jackthehat
/// Erm.....Someone displaying a skin colour different from your own is from another race. ///
That is incorrect, we are all Homo sapiens.and we belong to one race that being the Human Race.
There have been many arguments amongst anthropologists as regards the number of races, some have said there are just three others have disagreed, but I can find no one but you who has said it is all down to skin colour.
I myself is quite aware that there are different skin colours in different races.
The question is why are those that have a different skin colour from white, allowed certain privileges?
/// Erm.....Someone displaying a skin colour different from your own is from another race. ///
That is incorrect, we are all Homo sapiens.and we belong to one race that being the Human Race.
There have been many arguments amongst anthropologists as regards the number of races, some have said there are just three others have disagreed, but I can find no one but you who has said it is all down to skin colour.
I myself is quite aware that there are different skin colours in different races.
The question is why are those that have a different skin colour from white, allowed certain privileges?
The comparison between Blacks and Baldies is a point well-made.
Referencing someone's lack of hair in an abusive manner just stirs up all those fears caused by generations of abuse.
It isn't so long ago that men in the USA were lynched from trees simply because they were follically-challenged.
And we should acknowledge that our own development as a world class industrial nation was largely based on the exploitation of people taken from Baldyland and enslaved by hairy people.
Indeed, until the 1960s it was allowable in this country to advertise accommodation with a sign 'No Dogs. No Irish. No Baldies'.
Even today, people are murdered, threatened with violence, denied jobs and accommodation simply because - through no fault of their own - they are slap heads.
So let's remember, it's not just Afro-Caribbeans who have problems. Next time you see a bald person show them the same respect you would expect - they are people too.
Referencing someone's lack of hair in an abusive manner just stirs up all those fears caused by generations of abuse.
It isn't so long ago that men in the USA were lynched from trees simply because they were follically-challenged.
And we should acknowledge that our own development as a world class industrial nation was largely based on the exploitation of people taken from Baldyland and enslaved by hairy people.
Indeed, until the 1960s it was allowable in this country to advertise accommodation with a sign 'No Dogs. No Irish. No Baldies'.
Even today, people are murdered, threatened with violence, denied jobs and accommodation simply because - through no fault of their own - they are slap heads.
So let's remember, it's not just Afro-Caribbeans who have problems. Next time you see a bald person show them the same respect you would expect - they are people too.
What!?!
There are, certainly, different shades of hue between members of the same 'racial groups' but this has more to do with mixing of dissimilar genes, than being a separate colour.
The Sino-Japanese races have a lighter rather than darker skin pigment, but they are very obviously similar given their facial features. Perhaps that does chime with the 'Colour doesn't necessarily equal race' argument as they do not fit into the Western Caucasian model despite being white, for all intents and purposes.
But to be frank, arguing quite what more knowledgeable folks mean by 'race and colour' with you is a fruitless exercise as you have a single drum to bang when it comes to skin-colour.
There are, certainly, different shades of hue between members of the same 'racial groups' but this has more to do with mixing of dissimilar genes, than being a separate colour.
The Sino-Japanese races have a lighter rather than darker skin pigment, but they are very obviously similar given their facial features. Perhaps that does chime with the 'Colour doesn't necessarily equal race' argument as they do not fit into the Western Caucasian model despite being white, for all intents and purposes.
But to be frank, arguing quite what more knowledgeable folks mean by 'race and colour' with you is a fruitless exercise as you have a single drum to bang when it comes to skin-colour.
pa___ul3
Very well explained Paul, so what you are saying it is all down to what happened hundreds of years ago.
Surely there were lots of things going off years ago, that are completely alien to us now, even certain white people where made slaves etc.
But by just calling someone names isn't going to transport us all back to those days, is not going to happen.
Also in these days, how can black persons say they are treated any different from the rest of us, after all even the greatest nation in the west has a black president, is just one example.
Incidentally if you are still there Gromit, I apologise for
high jacking your thread, but as you can see it has all escalated, trying to find out what all this fuss over Ferdinand is about.
Very well explained Paul, so what you are saying it is all down to what happened hundreds of years ago.
Surely there were lots of things going off years ago, that are completely alien to us now, even certain white people where made slaves etc.
But by just calling someone names isn't going to transport us all back to those days, is not going to happen.
Also in these days, how can black persons say they are treated any different from the rest of us, after all even the greatest nation in the west has a black president, is just one example.
Incidentally if you are still there Gromit, I apologise for
high jacking your thread, but as you can see it has all escalated, trying to find out what all this fuss over Ferdinand is about.
<<I myself is quite aware that there are different skin colours in different races. >>
Is you? Jolly good.
Of course 'white people' aren't actually white.
And 'black people' aren't actually black.
It is a just a shorthand commonly used to reference people who are genetically african or genetically caucasian or nordic.
Is you? Jolly good.
Of course 'white people' aren't actually white.
And 'black people' aren't actually black.
It is a just a shorthand commonly used to reference people who are genetically african or genetically caucasian or nordic.
@AOG: The question is really about identity, I think. You're right to observe that biologically speaking, skin colour is a fairly mundane physical attribute. But something that social and intellectual historians have been putting a lot of work into demonstrating for the past few decades is that for centuries humans have started placing significances on it which are purely social. So for centuires, learned people were attributing inherent or innate features to races, typically with the superiority of whites in rulership and innovation being the take-home message.
Fast-forward to today, and we now know that most of those conclusions were wrong. But what you have in Western societies is a legacy of people who have historically been categorized according to race - in a way that whites, bald people or gingers haven't been. As such, some racial groups have distinct identities which in modern times they've tried to reclaim/reinvent and undermine the idea that they're inferior. So you're right to point out that there's no biological reason that ethnic minorities should have distinct identities while whites don't - but there are social/cultural reasons.
So, to answer your question, I guess going by the letter of the law it would certainly be illegal to discriminate or insult a white man on the grounds of his race - but there's just not the same history or social implication to it because whites have historically been categorised differently. So people don't do it by and large or are just a bit confused when it does happen.
Fast-forward to today, and we now know that most of those conclusions were wrong. But what you have in Western societies is a legacy of people who have historically been categorized according to race - in a way that whites, bald people or gingers haven't been. As such, some racial groups have distinct identities which in modern times they've tried to reclaim/reinvent and undermine the idea that they're inferior. So you're right to point out that there's no biological reason that ethnic minorities should have distinct identities while whites don't - but there are social/cultural reasons.
So, to answer your question, I guess going by the letter of the law it would certainly be illegal to discriminate or insult a white man on the grounds of his race - but there's just not the same history or social implication to it because whites have historically been categorised differently. So people don't do it by and large or are just a bit confused when it does happen.
<<But by just calling someone names isn't going to transport us all back to those days, is not going to happen.>>
That must be reassuring for any black person walking down the street who hears someone call out 'Look at that f****n black b*****d!'
Of course, you dismiss the impact of mere verbal abuse;
Tell you what Old Git. I can suggest a few pubs in Belfast you could visit.
In some you will call the barman 'a dirty catholic' and in the others 'a dirty prod'.
We can take bets on which pub delivers the best beating.
That must be reassuring for any black person walking down the street who hears someone call out 'Look at that f****n black b*****d!'
Of course, you dismiss the impact of mere verbal abuse;
Tell you what Old Git. I can suggest a few pubs in Belfast you could visit.
In some you will call the barman 'a dirty catholic' and in the others 'a dirty prod'.
We can take bets on which pub delivers the best beating.
I think it is down to what started hundreds of years ago yes, if, as a large group of people you are victims of, well I'm sure you'll agree, a massive amount of wrong doing, is it not understandable to harbour some sort of 'victim mentality' even when the wrong doing is on a much smaller scale. The roots of the wrong doing are in the same place, prejudice and hatred based on race.
Calling people names isn't going to transport us back to those time, I agree, but it has come from those times.
We have developed. We, as a nation, have accepted that racism is abhorent. It is getting a lot better, and this 'kick racism out of football' campaign is just another step towards further development. While the shadows of that ugly past are still looming, we have to do what we can get rid of these too, which is exactly why making such comments is illegal.
When it happens on a football pitch, in front of millions, then an example must be set to show that the law does treat such matters with the severity it requires.
Calling people names isn't going to transport us back to those time, I agree, but it has come from those times.
We have developed. We, as a nation, have accepted that racism is abhorent. It is getting a lot better, and this 'kick racism out of football' campaign is just another step towards further development. While the shadows of that ugly past are still looming, we have to do what we can get rid of these too, which is exactly why making such comments is illegal.
When it happens on a football pitch, in front of millions, then an example must be set to show that the law does treat such matters with the severity it requires.
/// AOG - "The question is why are those that have a different skin colour from white, allowed certain privileges?" ///
/// For example...? ///
Oh no, we are back to square one.
In this case, a black person is given the privilege of being able to get the police to look into the case of a white person who may have been insulting towards him.
A white person, would not be given the same privilege.
/// For example...? ///
Oh no, we are back to square one.
In this case, a black person is given the privilege of being able to get the police to look into the case of a white person who may have been insulting towards him.
A white person, would not be given the same privilege.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
ChatterBank35 mins ago
Assisted Dying, Here's Where It...
News39 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.