The image of the fan - monkey gesture

He might as well have thrown bananas at him.

 

Have to say I did exactly that! I mimicked a monkey type action as I laughed at him with my mate (I did not make monkey noises as I wouldn't make a fool of myself as mine are not that good). No one even batted an eyelid, and nor should they. Had I done that about a black player who was ungainly, I think the reaction would have been somewhat different. Its the "one size fits all" approach to racism I'm uncomfortable with.

Hence I think they will find it very difficult to prosecute this fella. I fully understand what you're saying about monkey noises in football stadiums etc, but you can't apply a cover all method just because it is a football stadium. The law doesn't work like that as far as I can see.

 

He could have been telling his friend on the other side of the ground that Gareth Bale had scored.

He could be showing someone, how earlier in the day he carried two rolls of carpet, whilst eating a hot chilli.

He could be shouting for help as he's got 2 invisable men in headlocks.

He could be doing a whole range of animal impressions after going to the zoo.

Or simply he could be a racist.

 

"My opinions are not outdated, I just believe the idea that people should be allowed the freedom to talk. Having opinions should never be a criminal offense, regardless of how ill-informed and stupid".

So a charismatic individual spouts his beliefs and develops a following. The majority of outside observers find his views repulsive and dangerous but do nothing. The consequences are beyond comprehension as the individual was Adolf Hitler. Other examples include Stalin and more recently a number of Balkan and African leaders.

Think what could have developed if racist or anti-Muslim sentiment was allowed to develop in this country over the last decade or two and was delivered by someone able to "sell" his message to the misled masses. I agree with free speech but with free speech comes responsibility

 

I have to say, WP has raised some very good/interesting points regarding this image and the reaction it gets. Most pertinently, with his own use of monkey gestures, directed at the mackem plodder.
What it says to me, is that the people accusing this person have concluded that anything resembling a monkey gesture, must be directed at a black person. To me, this says that the accuser, has a preconception that black person = monkey. I know this isn't the intention, but it does open up a whole can of worms.

Especially with the distance element, who's to say the gesture wasn't directed at Darren Fletcher?!

Without sound or video to put this in context, it does leave allot to question.

My thoughts are, he's a racist Chelscum who's been caught (almost) red-handed.

 

The key to that is not to ban people saying racist stuff, but to educate people against such bullshit. You'll not stop people having these beliefs, and shouting racial slurs, by throwing them in prison. The best way to tackle it is to educate people so the majority stay away from such horseshit ideology.

 

I think society has come a long way, and the fact we're willing to make jokes about the racist shows things are as they should be. Make them the butt of the jokes, and such behaviour declines, laugh, and you're validating their idiocy.

With regards yet another version of this take on the ongoing racism debate we've all had for a while now, I think it should just be noted that nobody condones being racist, we just disagree on what punishment/rehabilitation process should be incurred by the behaviour with a means to either stamping it out altogether, or driving it as far as possible to extinction. The end goal is the same, it's just the means of getting there that differs. We need to respect that.

For example, Tash is not categorically wrong because he thinks professionals should get on with it, because it fits into his supposed system of rehabilitation and can't be taken into consideration in pure isolation. That'd be a very flawed argument.

 

Some people are beyond reason my friend, but again, I don't think it's right to force people to think our way. People should be free to have racist opinions. If a player calls another play a "black twat" then I can see why he is punished, because we need to develop a community in football. But when you see ****ing front page headlines over racist slurs and monkey noises from certain crowd members, it really pisses me off.

Just ignore them. The fact that we've thrown thousands of racists in jail and people still make these racist slurs, shows how ineffective taking these pathetic little chants seriously really is!

When it comes to the odd idiot, just ignore that person because -

1. Getting pissed off and making front page story headlines about the odd black chant is just separating blacks further away from whites. It will not get rid of racism, it will just make us more likely to be offended. These racist chants will not go away any time soon, so we should instead just grow thicker skins, and learn to just let these things not get us so wound up.

My analogy is of the fat kid at school. He cries and eats for so long, then he eventually stops caring, and the fat jokes and the insults just don't effect him anymore. You should just take it on the chin, and eventually it wont even bother you. It would be like a common day person having someone come up to him saying "I think you are a stinky bum bum". Yep, sounds silly, but people will just laugh it off, instead of doing what we do now and cry about it.

2. People will accuse anyone of using a word or making a comment that is not totally politically correct as a racist or whatever. We'll eventually just have to be totally unoffensive robots that can only say things that everyone agrees with.

 

Personally, if someone was shouting abuse at me at a football match, I'd recognise that it was put across with intention of winding me up and effecting my on-pitch performance. Hopefully I'd react logically under those circumstances and either ignore it (and possibly have a quick word with the officials), or wind them up in response in a way that's within my own ethical boundaries. Obviously, I don't really know what it's like in that real-life situation, but that's what I would suggest is the most acceptable reaction in a perfect world. I very much hate implementing analogies on the subject, because it seems either too simplistic or too derivative of my thoughts on the topic and implies connotations I didn't intend. Everyone else falls into that trap with regularity, and it seems goes too far with them. In that light, I'd like to be a massive hypocrite and tell a quick story. At school, I played for my team (to get out of lessons, mainly...). The team was ****e and we almost always lost, usually because the keeper would stop trying as soon as his nicotine craving wasn't satisfactorily quenched by the cigarette he'd had moments before the game. I volunteered to play in goal, and in one match I ended up standing by myself for ages in nets as the two teams kick the ball between themselves in the middle of the pitch... This meant three lads could walk up behind the goal and start taunting me with insults, especially as I was English and this was Scottish soil. I never got upset and started mouthing off at them. I just tried even harder to shut them up... We succombed to a miserable 4-0 loss in the end, so it was worthless, but I didn't feel the need to report the lads.

Now that is far removed from the pressure-cooker of top level football, but I hope I'd react the same under more extreme circumstances. The crowd are there to see their team win, not be sportingly quiet while you do your job. If a racist knows that a monkey chants etc is going to wind you up, they're going to do it, just as a fan who knows you've cheated on your wife is going to bring that up. That's why I would rather we encouraged footballers to advocate my solutions, rather than kick up a fuss and get themselves sent-off in anger or set-up a separate union etc. People identified from the crowd should not be going to prison, but being actively re-educated, with racism derided as the petty nonsense it is. I would estimate the cost to the state to be relatively equal in either measure.

Between players is different, they should be given bans for using inappropriate language towards anyone on the field of play.

And that's the last time I will ever be bothered sharing that opinion on a forum, it's been exercised far too often in the last few days

 

I agree, sorry mate, didn't mean to make such a big deal, in a way I'm contributing to the problem by making these arguments, but the threads about it keep coming lol.

I agree with a lot of the stuff you said.

 

I'm sorry but your opinion is totally outdated. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion. I have a lot of opinions that makes me prejudice towards certain people. However, I do not act on these prejudices and certainly not in the public domain. There's a fine line between the right and wrong side of the law. Being prejudice isn't against the law but acting on those prejudices i.e. discrimination, is against the law.

Using derogatory language toward another human being because of their race, gender, sexuality etc. is just not acceptable. You are taking the meaning of freedom of speech/expression too literal.

Freedom of speech is fine but it can not conflict with any other human rights. Basically, using your human right of "freedom of expression" to direct foul, abusive, vulgar, sexually explicit, obscene, hateful, threatening, harassing and/or defamatory language towards another human being is against the law, as the freedom of expression human right says that you must respect the rights and reputation of others.

We've thrown hundreds of thousands of people in prison for shoplifting, drugs offences, violence, murder etc. It doesn't deter people from committing these crimes either, so your point is null and void. Half the problem is with the judicial system in this country. It is not harsh enough and prison life is too easy and these are the parts of the Human Rights Act that annoy me. There's too much protection for guilty people! It should be written into the Human Rights Act that when you break the law you forfeit your human rights, apart from the right to a fair trial and one or two others.

I have read most if not all of the Human Right Act as part of my education and I suggest you should read it too and then form an educated opinion. Oh and if you're interested, the other half of the problem is people's ill mannered attitude toward the law and it's representatives. If people, such as yourself and the muppet in the subject of this article, just respected the law then we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.

 

I think that's quite unfair. In the first instance, Tash's opinions could be equally considered revolutionary, as out-dated, and if we're going to have constructive theoretical discussion, there's no point approaching the matter with a view towards being condescending. In the second, just because a law exists in the bounds of society does not mean we should be constrained to them in this theoretical discussion, because if you want to make something better you have to reconstruct existing thought, and that's impossible without at least trying to remove oneself from the particular paragons which hold things as they are. And lastly, to my mind it is entirely null and void to mention the term "out-dated" at all with any conviction, because limiting ourselves spatially and temporally is to intentionally bias the definition of what could be agreed upon as "correct". Just because something was done a long time ago rather than today, does not mean that it is erroneous.

Tash's system has merit and flaws, as does the current system of law (which goes far beyond simply throwing people in jail for longer or even more severe punishment. That is more out-dated than anything Tash has suggested, even if the US still implement such methods), but until either side is willing to actually participate in acknowledging the strengths of each argument, I believe we are done gentlemen. Agree to disagree, and get back to the good old fact we have both white and black on our shirts

 

My thread was not meant to be a racist debate...

More so of racist ignorance from the ignorant..

let me explain..... I am white. My family is white. I have friends who are both black and white... but i look at them as friends. Not one minute has it crossed my mind that their skin colour is an issue. BUT.... since this racism lark has started in the media we have for THE FIRST TIME EVER found ourselves talking (between me and my black and white friends) about the colour of OUR skin.

Let me put that sentance into context.... we have never EVER had a conversation about our skin colour. And yet here we are sitting having a few beers talking about it. Now I raised the question (and dont bring me to justice here) about whether I had.. by accident hurt any one of my black friends feelings when I have said something like "yo bro" when i have met them and shook their hand.... to which I got the response "NO"

Now because its clear that we are close I asked the next question which was "have you ever wanted to call a white person whiteboi" because of his skin colour if they had annoyed you.... They said yes.

I then asked..... is that racist.... the response was "NO"

Now I love my mates and I love them for who they are and what colour they are means nothing but I still believe that racism is a form of abuse....... which SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED.

But to wrap my comments up.... Racism can be taken out of context... I could call my mate who is black "black" and he would say for shizzle.... but if someone overheard it in wrong context they would say im filth!

I hate racism when it is meant to offend, hurt, abuse, degrade... But I do believe there is to much jumping on the bandwagon at the moment... I hope I do not offend anyone.... I dont mean too!

 

Wait a minute, so we aren't allowed to say if someone is black or white?!

So, if in a crowded cafe, the waitresses need to communicate that I am the one who needs serving, because all the other diners (who are black) are currently eating (let's not start debating the racist values of this cafe who are serving me last or the fact they don't know my name ), one can't say to the other "the white chap over there"? What can they do, describe my hair/eye colour? Surely that would be as bad?

It's not about pretending everyone is the same colour, but celebrating our diversity and treating other human beings with simple respect.

 

Well isn't this refreshing, a well thoughtout and constructive counter post, much better than a text body full of "****ing", "that's bollocks" and "it's pathetic". I doff my cap to you sir.

BUT

Using the term out-dated when referring to racism being acceptable is certainly not null and void. Are you inferring that racism will become socially acceptable again in the future? Surely not, which means that opinions supporting the values of the KKK and being an advocate of fascism are very much out of date!

Also, you shouldn't jump to conclusions, I never said that criminals should be incarcerated for longer or be more severely punished either. I said the judicial system isn't harsh enough and that prison life is too easy. There are many ways the rehabilitation of prisoners could be improved and ways crime in the first instance could prevented using the fear of consequences as a deterant but that's an entirely different debate altogether.

Unfortunately, Tash and I could debate this forever without any common ground being met. His views are so extreme, farfetched and naive it will be like trying to convince a creationist that the Earth is 4.5 Billion years old!

 

Tash
IF anyone has racist opinions - not a lot will dissuade them.
IF you think that somebody is a **** ( as per your earlier post ), you are entitled to that opinion. I also agree that you should be free to express that opinion - in a qualified manner.
BUT -
You cannot go around saying BLACK ****. That is racism and not acceptable. Nor should you be making gestures to suggest that a person is of a lower type of species other than a human being.
I don't have a problem if somebody calls me old, fat, grey, ugly, stupid or a ****, or all of them ,as has happened - but nobody has used the word 'white' to precede the aforementioned sentiments. It's just so wrong to use any racist term.

 

When you are calling someone a **** you refer to their behaviour or actions, something they are in control of.

When you use '******' or 'paki' or whatever you refer to their race, something they have no control over. That isn't on, just as taunting someone in a wheelchair isn't. You are entitled to your opinion but common decency should tell you to keep it to yourself.

I agree it's being blown out of proportion though, where football is involved at least, clubs should police it as they do with all abuse. Ban them from the ground. Simple as that. It doesn't then draw attention for the fellow racists to then get uppity with "where muh freedums?!"

 

And Tash strikes again

 

You get exactly what I'm on about, it's something I would like see people to move away from over time. The preconception that making a monkey gesture in a football stadium should be immediately viewed as racist is not an acceptable situation for me. We have to careful about how far we go. I realise that some will say "you're simply providing the racists with an "out" should they be caught. Not at all but its a damn sight better than using a one size fits all approach.

I think this case will be incredibly difficult to push through without help from supporters and/or video/sound.

As I said earlier I actually agree and think the bloke was being a racist scumball.

 

Funky Chicken dance was my first thought.

Also, Toby, wishing cancer upon people is quite possibly one of the most disgraceful things I've ever heard. I know exactly what the guy in the photo appears to be doing, but without proof, you cannot definitively say that he is or isn't a racist.