Anybody who is 'comfortable' with this issue is not taking it seriously. When issues of free speech and racism are inter-twined and placed in opposition it is, or should be very uncomfortable for everyone. Freedom and respect for some should not be gained by the loss of fundamental freedoms for all.
If what Sky have said is true and the Society of Black Lawyers are focusing mainly on the Spurs fans with regards to the Y-word I must say I find it strange and somewhat hypocritical. For starters as has been mentioned undoubtedly endless times the Y-word is used by Spurs fans as a defensive mechanism for a slant that was used against them by endless fans up and down the country (mainly Arsenal, Chelsea and West Ham though). Personally I don't think the use of the word is acceptable but why have the Society of Black Lawyers not focused on stamping out the use of the N-word amongst members of the Black Community? For me this whole thing just seems agenda driven.
No, representatives from the club will if they are deemed to have not done anything to stamp it out. Currently, Spurs' stance is that 'It's not meant offensively, therefore nobody is offended' ​ and that will not stand up in court.
It is not a luxury of freedom to use a racial insult. As for not being 'comfortable' with it, would you then concede that Ledley King and Gary Lineker have got a valid point and are not simply jumping on a media circus which they know nothing about ?
Damn these thin-skinned people who interfere with my life! Once you accept that words can change their meanings, as happens a lot in the English language, all this becomes fascicle. Today, it's our word; we use it all the time; we define it's meaning. The fans of old, being the think ****s they were, thought "Yid" was a derogatory word, and used it in anger, when nothing could be further from the truth. Hopefully we've educated them and the word has returned to it's original meaning.
If they did that they would have to prove that THFC broke the law. We are not talking FA Kangaroo courts here.
It's as I've said from the beginning. The Terry-Ferdinand saga has opened up an opportunity for leeches to come and shout about nothing. The Society of Black Lawyers are using the Terry incident to raise their own profile just as Jason Roberts and Clarke Carlisle did before them. It's quite disturbing. The Jewish Community have a voice. If they feel strongly about this let them come forward and talk about it. Once again football is the target of this liberal PC driven bullshit, but it's easy because football (generally speaking) doesn't have a voice.
True, but if the court found that Spurs had failed to address racist chanting within the stadium, then there would be a case against them.
If the Society of Black Lawyers somehow manages to outlaw the use of the Y-Word by Spurs fans then I'd like a society of Gay Lawyers to outlaw the use of the term "Rent Boy" at football matches as that chant is sung endlessly around football grounds by Northerners. Why is racism deemed worse than Homophobia? I know there is the argument that Race is inherent and sexuality isn't but to me it's still as bad.
In this case it is not a racist issue because as Inda has said the word has been taken by Spurs fans for themselves and used within that context. There is no offence, the meaning of words is not immutable they change all the time. Gay for example which has been taken by a section of the community for themselves. Gay simply meant happy, but now means loving the same sex, or **** which now means go away as well as screwing, or screwing which now means ****ing as well as placing a screw into a material and so on.
Possibly, but the loopholes are closing, especially in football. I'll repeat, don't get me wrong, I don't want to see spurs charged with racially motivated chanting, as I do understand the historical context in which Spurs fans are using the word. However, I think Spurs as a club need to wake up and begin to address this issue. There are members of the Jewish community who are not comfortable with it and now even their own players are coming out and saying it's not acceptable. I think Spurs should be proactive about the issue, and not try to bury their heads in the sand simply because 'it's been going on for a long time'. At the end of the day, LDL is right. It's racially motivated chanting and regardless of the intent, it's not acceptable in modern football grounds. Spurs can't have it both ways, if they want fans prosecuted for anti-semetic chanting, then they have to take responsibility for their own fans part in this.
Sorry, Spurs fans can't claim the word 'Yid' from the Jewish community and define it how they want. That is an insult to that community. Spurs fans are using the word to form some kind of commonality amognst fans of a football club, the word was used as an insult to Jews and shouted at Jewish prisoners as they were led to the gas chambers. I think the Jewish community should have ownership over the meaning of the word, and the context in which it's used, not a bunch of football fans who have appropriated it for their club. As for the word Gay meaning happy and now meaning Homosexual. Do you think that if someone were to hurl abuse at a homosexual player calling him 'Gay' he could use a reasonable defence claiming he was actually calling him 'happy' ? Spurs fans are in no position to determine whether the word 'Yid' causes offence, simply because they don't intend for it to be offensive.
Yid /derog. 0jɪd; neutral (among Yiddish-speakers) 0ji:d/ noun. slang (chiefly derog. & offensive). L19. [ORIGIN Yiddish from Middle High German Jude, Jüde ult. from Latin Judaeus Jew noun.] A Jew. This is from the Oxford English Dictionary, one of the worlds leading authorities on the English language and it's interesting to note that it defines YID as neutral, whereas when pronounced (Yeed) it becomes offensive. This in itself is a defence that Spurs could bring with recordings to prove their point.
And yes Spurs fans can take a word and make it their own, this is called custom and practice which is a standard part of English law.
You've got it the wrong way around 'Yeed' is deemed neutral, Yid is deemed offensive. However, I would expect that any criminal case would not take the intonation into consideration
