Liverpool FC Forum

by **RedSi35** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 7:09 pm

dawson99 wrote:I'm actually, as we speak, taking 20th Century Fox to court over the movie White Men Can't Jump. They can jump, so saying they can't, purely on the basis of the colour of their skin, is racialist. I'm expecting a fair few million in damages.

Snow White???............................tut tut Disney

by **Igor Zidane** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:37 pm

I was at the game and i was in block 208 in the kop . Those who know the kop know that that's not far from where the alledgedracism took place. Nowi swear on my kids lives that all i heard was one lad shout "you manc :censored:

" as we know oldham is in greater manchester. I'm not saying it wasn't shouted all i'm saying is what heard . If the ladwas call a black bastdard then the perpatrator should be banned for life.

Regarding the luis suraez song it was being sung all night on the kop . It was sung at it's loudest during this incedent definately but that was only in response to the oldham fans singing "your just a town full of racists ". Oh the irony of it i know ,but that was why the suarez sond was sung then not at the lad in question .

by **Woollyback** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:05 pm

oldham fans singing town full of racists? that's rich coming from a town where the bnp have better support than just about anywhere outside of burnley & bradford :laugh:

by **red till i die!!** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:20 pm

Woollyback wrote:oldham fans singing town full of racists? that's rich coming from a town where the bnp have better support than just about anywhere outside of burnley & bradford

got about 20 or so txts today saying the same thing.
racist f.c v manchester utd.

for all we know that muppet the other night could have been a bitter,a manc or some bnp nutter.

this is all because of the F.A and their farcical handling of the suarez case.

by **Reg** » Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:21 pm

metalhead wrote:
Reg wrote:he's young and can run faster than me

your taller though, waaay taller

Way better looking as well! :eyebrow

by **fivecups** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:10 am

brentd4 wrote:
7_Kewell wrote:As many know, Tom Adeyemi got very upset yesterday and is claiming some fans shouted racial abuse at him. According to the media he was called a “f**king black b*stard” as he approached the Kop. Then, afterwards, while the lad was in tears, a host of our fans started singing Suarez songs.

Can't see how that's racist, what's the difference in calling him a B..stard or a black b,,stard, he is black isn't he. That's not racist it's a fact and also a slagging off

I've heard other people make similar statements on here, over the years. Excuse the pun, but it really is like arguing black is white.

by **fivecups** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:16 am

SOS statement:

Recent events surrounding the FA charge against Luis Suarez have brought racism in football to the forefront of the news agenda. Unlike others, who have chosen to make ill-informed comments, Spirit of Shankly does not feel qualified to make public pronouncements on what is essentially a player discipline issue to be dealt with by club, player and the FA as they see fit.

However, we note with increasing concern attempts to tarnish both the Club and LFC supporters with a reputation for racism that we do not feel is deserved. Events at the FA Cup game, which are now subject to a police investigation, have seemingly already been thoroughly examined and a "guilty" verdict summarily passed on an entire city by elements of the media.

Notwithstanding the outcome of this investigation, Spirit of Shankly stands resolutely against racism in all its insidious forms and stands four square behind the TUC's "Root Out Racism" campaign.

While our members will have their own opinions on the conduct and outcome of the Suarez case, the Union urges all LFC supporters to maintain vigilance against attempts to exploit recent events for the purposes of pushing back the gains made in fighting racism both in football and in society at large.

by **7_Kewell** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:02 am

Igor Zidane wrote:I was at the game and i was in block 208 in the kop . Those who know the kop know that that's not far from where the alledgedracism took place. Nowi swear on my kids lives that all i heard was one lad shout "you manc " as we know oldham is in greater manchester. I'm not saying it wasn't shouted all i'm saying is what heard . If the ladwas call a black bastdard then the perpatrator should be banned for life.

Regarding the luis suraez song it was being sung all night on the kop . It was sung at it's loudest during this incedent definately but that was only in response to the oldham fans singing "your just a town full of racists ". Oh the irony of it i know ,but that was why the suarez sond was sung then not at the lad in question .

the lad thought the song was another dig at him. Hence he was so upset because he thought the entire ground was singling him out for being black.

Not saying that's how it was, but that's why he was in tears.

by **Reg** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:39 am

Just a passing thought on the meaning of life and nothing specific about this form or its members....

Exaggerated protection is a backlash reaction to earlier persecution. IE, its ok to be gay and exercise some very strange rights including same sex marriage and adopting children but you can't call them what they are - gay.

As a result of slavery (abolished in 1833) we're not allowed to even mention the colour of a person's skin - as Maxipaxi can attest.

The problem is not the colour of the guy's skin, nor the fact he might be gay, but that the hang-up's associated with the images created in the past overwhelm peoples' sensitivities. Example 'whenever I think of Cyril Regis I visualise Kunta Kinte'. Nothing wrong with that, 'Roots' was a great book and a great film, very well acted and got a lot of deserved praise. But 90% of people will have thought oh..oh.. its a racist thing when they read my comment. Its not at all but we've conditioned ourselves to fear every reference to black people in fear of upsetting them.

Or laughing at gay skits from the 1960's and 70's etc.. Alf Garnett, 'It aint half hot mum' etc... or the Black and White Minstrels etc.. it was humour, not bad intent. Sure we've moved on, but no racist offense was meant.

Half our problem today exists in our minds and not in reality. The lad was crying.... WHAT? he came to Anfield and cried (remember Nani?) I put it to you he couldn't handle teh occasion, match nerves and nothing to do with racism.

by **Kharhaz** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 6:47 am

Its funny, cos its true: Funny !

by **ethanr** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 6:54 am

Reg wrote:Just a passing thought on the meaning of life and nothing specific about this form or its members....

Exaggerated protection is a backlash reaction to earlier persecution. IE, its ok to be gay and exercise some very strange rights including same sex marriage and adopting children but you can't call them what they are - gay.

As a result of slavery (abolished in 1833) we're not allowed to even mention the colour of a person's skin - as Maxipaxi can attest.

The problem is not the colour of the guy's skin, nor the fact he might be gay, but that the handup's associated with the images created in the past overwhelm peoples' sensitivities. Example 'whenever I think of Cyril Regis I visual Kunta Kinte'. Nothing wrong with that, 'Roots' was a great book and a great film, very well acted and got a lot of deserved praise. But 90% of people will have thought oh..oh.. its a racist thing when they read my comment. Its not at all but we've conditioned ourselves to fear every reference to black people in fear of upsetting them.

Or laughing at gay skits from the 1960's and 70's etc.. Alf Garnett, 'It aint half hot mum' etc... or the Black and White Minstrels etc.. it was humour, not bad intent. Sure we've moved on, but no racist offense was meant.

Half our problem today exists in our minds and not in reality. The lad was crying.... WHAT? he came to Anfield and cried (remember Nani?) I put it to you he couldn't handle teh occasion, match nerves and nothing to do with racism.

I agree. I've been referred to as white, and I take no offense to that. I've referred to people as black, or hispanic, or asian and I've done so because I felt it was relevant. If I was saying something about a black person and saying that they're black wasn't relevant, I didn't mention it. I do the same when I talk about white people, or Asian people, or hispanic people, or anybody.

I think for many it's a comfort level thing. I'm comfortable with the fact I'm not racist, and I'd never say something with racist intent to somebody, but others hear something and love to make a big deal out of it because they want to sound superior or something like that. I've seen more often white people take offense and say that something was inappropriate then a person of the particular race in the same conversation, and it seems they often do so because they want that person of the relevant race to think they aren't racist or something.

A few months ago I went to a preseason American football match. After the game we went down to the parking lot and hung out with some people from the opposing team (it was preseason and nobody really cares). There was this huge black guy named Doug there who introduced himself to us. Somehow the city of Oakland was brought up (Largely a black population) and Doug said he'd stay far away from Oakland right now because there was some dangerous stuff going on. The lady with us said something a long the lines of "You're a big black guy and even you're scared of Oakland right now." It wasn't meant to be racist or insulting, and Doug seemed to take no offense to it at all. But after she said it, Doug said "Hey, I'm not black, I'm Doug." He didn't say it in an angry way or anything, he just said it. I thought it was really cool the way he said it because he doesn't care about his skin color, people are people and that's how he sees them. I looked around and there were white people, black people, hispanic people, asian people, just people from all different races who supported the 2 teams that just played each other, and we were all having a good time. Nobody cared what color anybody else was because it didn't matter. It's all about being comfortable with it, and when all 50 or 60 people that hung out with us were comfortable with it, race basically went away.

A big problem with racism as well is people are always trying to be careful what they say, so they can't always say exactly what they're trying to say. Alan Hansen said the word colored, and had to apologize for it. He didn't mean it in a negative way at all, but some people take offense to it, so it became an issue.

by **maguskwt** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:02 am

dawson99 wrote:I'm actually, as we speak, taking 20th Century Fox to court over the movie White Men Can't Jump. They can jump, so saying they can't, purely on the basis of the colour of their skin, is racialist. I'm expecting a fair few million in damages.

It's racialist AND libelous. I wholeheartedly support you in carrying out this class action suit. Now can I have my share as well?

by **Reg** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:21 am

ethanr wrote:Alan Hansen said the word colored, and had to apologize for it. He didn't mean it in a negative way at all, but some people take offense to it, so it became an issue.

I expect if the shrinks were honest they'd admit its a case of paranoia resulting from historical persecution (despite those people now live 200+ years after the event) mixed with a lack of self-confidence leading to this manic crusade not to mention colour. Y'know I'm tall, fat and ugly with a hump on my back and drag one foot but FFS don't mention my colour.

by **metalhead** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:25 am

Reg wrote:
ethanr wrote:Alan Hansen said the word colored, and had to apologize for it. He didn't mean it in a negative way at all, but some people take offense to it, so it became an issue.

I expect if the shrinks were honest they'd admit its a case of paranoia resulting from historical persecution (despite those people now live 200+ years after the event) mixed with a lack of self-confidence leading to this manic crusade not to mention colour. Y'know I'm tall, fat and ugly with a hump on my back and drag one foot but FFS don't mention my colour.

If your all that mate then what makes maxi?

I know a racist word for white people, "glow in the dark" sue me FA :laugh:

by **andy_g** » Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:51 am

i think people need to take a wider view on the subject, as there are much more subtle and deeper connotations to race reference than many are making out. a lot of the pejorative content of racial abuse is connected with the history of the race being abused. white people have rarely been shát on by another race - hence being called a 'white bast'ard' doesn't really cut too deep, while 'black bast'ard does. a white person called out a black person references the domination of blacks by whites for long periods in history. same with the irish in many respects - and englishman calling someone an 'irish bast'ard' works in a similar way and relates the subjugation of the irish by the english.

racial slurs in this context are exactly that, they make keen reference to the perceived inferiority and undesirability of the one being abused.

its obviously a much more complex issue than this, but its a key point that is often overlooked, especially by those that think its just a casual reference to skin colour and origin.

Liverpool FC Forum

Racism - And lfc

Who is online