This will go well! So with our bandwagon jumping PM getting involved in the spurs chanting debate and expressing a view that to use a word, you as a member of a wider fraternity that is usually in a derogatory if not illegal way, the recipient of the use of that word may chant the word themselves and shouldn't be sanctioned, I am wondering where the FA will come down in the debate or if they will conveniently forget about it and hope it goes away. The way I am seeing it the FA having established they will not tolerate any use of any language that could be deemed offensive by any group, even if the word is native to the speaker or not. No explanations will be accepted and no quarter given. When that fella who used to play for us used "that word" which in his own native tongue was a term used in casual friendships he was banned. Now you have a situation were the word being debated is offensive all round and never used in casual conversation between people of the ethnicity its aimed at but is somehow OK? Really expecting the FA to come out now and tell the PM he is talking nonsense and clean up the terraces once and for all ................ OK the previous line was sarcasm because it wont happen but does make for an interesting debate of sorts and will be interesting to see how the FA react (or not). Heard a rumor that fella is still signed to the club but is completing his ban, seems a bit harsh, the incident was nearly two years ago now!
I'm off the opinion that he has better things to do than get involved in every sporting problem/event that happens.
Cameron was right to say what he did. When used by themselves they are taking that word back & it is not being used in the context of hate. When used by others in order to mock, it's being used in precisely that context. p.s. the comparison with Suarez is crass btw.
I think that a certain section of people are taking back the word but there are aslo many people in the Jewish community that find it offensive. However this world is way OTT when it comes to PC issues and I agree that the word is only wrong if used in a certain context. It's **** all to do with Cameron let the Spurs fans and the Jewish community sort it out.
I agree with your point but at the same time, by using said word, you're promoting and glamorising it. Same with the N word. So many singers and rappers use the word that it's becoming a 'cool' word to use.
So what if there are fans of that ethnicity at the matches who are upset and offended by the use of that word? Should they have to tolerate it because its been "taken back". We either act because some people may find some language offensive or we ignore it, and in general parlance this word is offensive. The comparison was about the contrast in response from the organisation because having established itself at the forefront of racial issues its silence is deafening.
For goodness sake let's not go round this tree over and over again! There are NO words that are intrinsically wrong to use. It is the intent of their use that is open to debate. What I don't understand is why Cameron has to get involved!
He gets involved because footy is very high profile and he looks cool and down with the 'hood. Or so he thinks. Man's a ****ing ****er
The same reason PM's invite winning Cricket teams, Footballers, Olympians, etc. an opportunity to demonstrate they are still in touch and some reflected glory no doubt. Possibly wont be inviting successful rugby teams any time soon especially if Mr. Tuilagi plays for them!
Regardless of whether or not I agree with him, I think Cameron ought to have more important things on his mind. Call me old-fashioned, but I like my Prime Minister to concern himself with matters of State, the economy and such. The situation itself is complex. I'm not really a subscriber to the idea that something is offensive if somebody decides to be offended. If that were true then anyone could take it upon themselves to be offended by any matter that suited them and expect everyone else to change to accommodate them. I think the general consensus should decide what is acceptable rather than an agenda-driven pressure group, and even then the degree of intent to offend needs to be taken into consideration. I'm not an expert on this matter, but I believe there is a tradition of the use of Yid in the Jewish community generally, and its context and pronunciation decide whether it is pejorative or not. With that in mind I think they should debate it and sort it out amongst themselves rather than us descend to the arbitrary rule-making approach. In the meantime, Cameron and his cronies should busy himself trying to sort out the unholy ****ing mess they're making of the country.
Why would Jewish Spurs fan be offended by it, when there's plenty of Jewish Spurs fans chanting it? I think the fact that it's been used for years by them & the issue of it offending their own has never risen it's head - gives you the answer. That answer being that the context & intent is what's important, rather than the word itself - which incidentally has been used by Jews to describe themselves since Victorian times & is merely a shortening of Yiddish.
Perfectly put saint, particularly the politics piece. I was under the impression that 'Yid' was a contraction of the word 'Yiddish', which is the Jewish language. How then, can this be pejorative?
It is a contraction, but then Yiddish is not Hebrew, it's a language that developed amongst the Jewish diaspora in middle Europe and is a mix of Hebrew and Germanic influences, so perhaps some find it offensive? Like I said, I'm no expert and wouldn't presume to understand the response the word evokes in some people. that's why I said it's for the Jewish community to debate and sort out amongst themselves. Words change their meaning through usage and can acquire connotations along the way. After all, the word "negro" is simply Spanish for the colour black, but look what a can of worms you can open with it.
