Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[Diggers]

First topic message reminder :

Re Sterling, he’s got more PL assists than any English player in the last year, 3rd most of anyone. As well as a shedload of goals, what a poopie player he is!!
Could this be it for Jose, I certainly hope so.

[super_realist]

Super, are some of your best friends black?

Show me where I've been racist, anywhere.

It was that your denial just reminded me of when people say im not racist some of my best friends are black.

You may not be racist,  but some of the things you've said, could be construed as racist. Assuming you are only "super realist" on this golf board, thats fine. If you are as you act in reality, a word of warning about your usually irrational views on high profile black sportsmen.

But I'm sure your not racist, just a bit of a grouchy bastrd.

Jesus Christ, please demonstrate how anything I have said about black sportsmen is in any way different from what I have said about non black sportspeople? I consistently have a go at sportspeople of EVERY ethnicity. So pull your head out of your arse and actually try to remember that instead of jumping to infantile conclusions that make you look worse than Mac.

Should I as a white man, simply not be allowed to make any criticism of someone with a different ethnicity than me? Don't be so ridiculous.

If I was racist, why would I not be saying similar things about ALL black sportspeople? Why would I reserve it for those who already divide opinion and who have demonstrably acted like complete jerks? Hamilton and Woods for example. When have I ever said anything about Tony Finau, Sloane Stephens, Harold Varner, Venus Williams, Muhamed Ali, Thierry Henry etc?

YOU are the one making a connection which isn't there, whilst completely ignoring what I say about other people who aren't black. The fact you jump on the "Must be racist" bandwagon probably says a lot more about your views on looking for racism than my views (which haven't shown a single word of racism anywhere), but keep trying Ben, you're only trying to convince yourself.

[super_realist]

Super

I have already pointed out where you were racist in this thread.  And saying that out of context I couldn't tell who you were referring to is a weird defense given you were clearly referring to Abbot.

I think you would agree that you are very keen to flirt as close as is possible with being racist to make the point that people shouldn't be offended, on may occasions the way you write about Serena, Tiger, Sterling and now Abbot crosses into actually being racist (At what point does that just make you a racist?).  Given this I don't understand why you fight so hard to argue you have not been racist given how intentionally close to being racist you try to be.  You have just miss judged the line a little and been called out, why does that bother you so much?

Mac, I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out, which means you are jumping to conclusions as usual. The fact it was Abbott is nothing to do with her gender or race given that such words could refer to any gender or any race. If you can't see that, you're as thick as I suspect you are.

If I'm being sexist then what I said MUST only be applicable to women (given that I'm a man), I'f I'm being racist then what I said could only be applicable to someone from a race other than me. You have no grounds whatsoever to call it racism or sexism.

What have I ever said about Serena Williams, Sterling or Woods which you could define as racist? You have to demonstrate WHY it is racist, you can't just claim it is.  You can claim I have been called out, but I have asked REPEATEDLY for you to explain WHY you think it's racist, and you haven't been able to. The best you could do is claim that because Abbott HAS been racially abused by other people, that other people making legitimate criticisms of her must also be racism. I can't even begin to explain why that is stupid.

I mentioned Williams in regards to her disgraceful behaviour at the US Open, nothing racist there, and also in regard to guerrilla tennis, again I didn't make any racist remarks there. I simply explained the differences in the word.

Sterling, never said anything racist against him other than he appears a bit thick like many footballers, not very cultured and runs in a  really odd way

Woods, never said anything racist against him either, but plenty of examples of where he's been an arse.

Funny how you forget about all the stuff which I've said which relate to non black sportspeople like Lowry, Harrington, Spieth, Watson, Willett, Crane, John Terry, Joey Barton, Steven Gerrard, Zach Johnson etc too.

You claiming I'm racist, is like me claiming you are xenophobic for your comments about Paul McGinley. You'd see that as incredibly stupid. Now apply that to your attack on what I've said and realise what an imbecile you are being.

Like Beninho, Mac, pull your head out of your arse, because you haven't got a leg to stand on (as usual)

[Roller_Coaster]

Got myself into some gun debates on twitter with some American gun people. Its fricking scary the views of these people. The arguments are crazy,  they see it as some sort of defence and protection, yet don't understand that if guns are removed from tge vadt majority you wont really need protection. No other country in the world has these problems, yet they can't see it!

Everyone should have guns. The US and Russia have big, nuclear guns and they haven't killed each other and they proper hate each other. Therefore, if everyone had guns, just normal can only kill a few people guns mind, then ipso facto no-one will get killed. Pure logic shows that gun deaths are precisely because not everyone has them.

That sort of argument Ben? Which is absolutely, theoretically flawless, apart from the massive, looming, colossally stupid flaw of it being utter dribble!

Just let them get on with it. Every American death allows sufficient natural resources of the planet to be diverted from the US to sustainably run a Londoner for a month, an African town of 2,000 for a year or Grimsby for a decade*

*completely made up

[navyblueshorts]

Got myself into some gun debates on twitter with some American gun people. Its fricking scary the views of these people. The arguments are crazy,  they see it as some sort of defence and protection, yet don't understand that if guns are removed from tge vadt majority you wont really need protection. No other country in the world has these problems, yet they can't see it!

Everyone should have guns. The US and Russia have big, nuclear guns and they haven't killed each other and they proper hate each other. Therefore, if everyone had guns, just normal can only kill a few people guns mind, then ipso facto no-one will get killed. Pure logic shows that gun deaths are precisely because not everyone has them.

That sort of argument Ben? Which is absolutely, theoretically flawless, apart from the massive, looming, colossally stupid flaw of it being utter dribble!

Just let them get on with it. Every American death allows sufficient natural resources of the planet to be diverted from the US to sustainably run a Londoner for a month, an African town of 2,000 for a year or Grimsby for a decade*

*completely made up

[beninho]

Roller, that is pretty much the argument they make. All clearly bullsht. I really xant help myself getting involved in the argument though. I hate myself for it, but also enjoy it!

[McLaren]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

[JAS]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

[pedro]

Of course it’s offensive. What if he was a vegan? And we know these people easily become aggressive.

[raycastleunited]

Ray

Super made the same claim about Abbot having made racist comments but I am wondering if you have any links or other evidence to support this?

Abbott tweeted: "White people love playing 'divide and rule' We should not play their game"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16423278

There are more examples if you want to research. But two wrongs don't make a right (there's a joke there about Abbott's poor maths, but I'll leave that to Roller or Pedro as the kings of one liners on this board).

[westisbest]

For what it’s worth, I don’t think super is racist at all.
He called Abbot fat an ugly, ok she’s black.
I’m sure he’s called many white people the same.
He may dislike some people who happen to be black, but that’s more to do with their personality and who they are than the colour of their skin.

Just my opinion, but don’t think there is anything to it really.

[beninho]

What is more interesting is what is he really like. Surely this just some online persona or is he really a ranting nutter shouting at people about religion, john terry, leftists and having a go if they get offended.

Or just some ginger scottish dude drinking irn bru or tenants in his spare time from trolling the golf boards being super realist.

[McLaren]

Ray

Super made the same claim about Abbot having made racist comments but I am wondering if you have any links or other evidence to support this?

Abbott tweeted: "White people love playing 'divide and rule' We should not play their game"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16423278

There are more examples if you want to research. But two wrongs don't make a right (there's a joke there about Abbott's poor maths, but I'll leave that to Roller or Pedro as the kings of one liners on this board).

''White people love playing 'divide & rule'


Sounds like an accurate description of a lot of Tory and #Brexit voters politics now and over the last few hundred years.  Can't see why she should apologise for saying it, and like Super would point out what snowflake would be offended by that.

[navyblueshorts]

Ray

Super made the same claim about Abbot having made racist comments but I am wondering if you have any links or other evidence to support this?

Abbott tweeted: "White people love playing 'divide and rule' We should not play their game"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16423278

There are more examples if you want to research. But two wrongs don't make a right (there's a joke there about Abbott's poor maths, but I'll leave that to Roller or Pedro as the kings of one liners on this board).

''White people love playing 'divide & rule'


Sounds like an accurate description of a lot of Tory and #Brexit voters politics now and over the last few hundred years.  Can't see why she should apologise for saying it, and like Super would point out what snowflake would be offended by that.

You seem to be struggling again. That sort of comment by Abbott is exactly the sort of thing you'd scream "Racist!" at, if said by S_R. The hypocrisy and inability of so many people to apply consistent standards in this sort of area is genuinely amazing.

JAS is 100% correct in his earlier post re. people getting offended on behalf of other groups and in response to comments of shattering insignificance.

[McLaren]

Navy

What older right wingers like yourself can't understand is that imbalances of power still exist and therefore what is a problem in one direction isn't a problem the other way around. It is literally impossible for Abbot to be racist about a white person in the UK.

[navyblueshorts]

Navy

What older right wingers like yourself can't understand is that imbalances of power still exist and therefore what is a problem in one direction isn't a problem the other way around. It is literally impossible for Abbot to be racist about a white person in the UK.

You just can't help yourself can you? "Older right wingers"? There you go with your daft assumptions once again. If you think I don't get it that there are imbalances in society, you really are dumb. Your problem is that a) I don't agree with your take on many of these issues and b) you think what you say on a subject such as this must be the correct stance.

What you blatantly don't understand (and this seems to extend to all your judgements in any area) is that almost nothing is black & white (I am allowed to say that aren't I? Did I offend you?) and just because such power imbalances exist, it doesn't mean that every social interaction between anyone has an inherent imbalance. You appear to think that every interaction between, say, a black and a white person, must have racist undertones in everything the white person might say to the black person. Apparently, you also think that every man, in every interaction with a woman, is displaying inherent sexism in their behaviour. And all in the absence of any actual evidence. Amazing.

Talking of evidence, you also seem to have a major problem with the requirement for some sort of decent evidence, before you go throwing around daft, but potentially libellous, accusations. Your lack of balance and need for evidence is, frankly, laughable, given how often you bang on about "the scientific method" etc etc.

Oh! I missed the implication of your last sentence. If you actually believe that, you're a basket case. Of course it's possible for Abbott to be racist. How can you possibly be this ignorant?

[raycastleunited]

Navy

What older right wingers like yourself can't understand is that imbalances of power still exist and therefore what is a problem in one direction isn't a problem the other way around. It is literally impossible for Abbot to be racist about a white person in the UK.

troll

[McLaren]

Please explain Ray?

[raycastleunited]

Come on. Trying to wind up navy by calling him an older right winger. Stating that Abbott cannot be racist... would you extend this to say that black people cannot be racist?

[I'm never wrong]

Got myself into some gun debates on twitter with some American gun people. Its fricking scary the views of these people. The arguments are crazy,  they see it as some sort of defence and protection, yet don't understand that if guns are removed from tge vadt majority you wont really need protection. No other country in the world has these problems, yet they can't see it!

Whilst on holiday in the US a few weeks ago met a bloke in a bar who couldn't understand why the public (and more so the police) in the UK didn't have guns. He was articulate and appeared reasonably intelligent in the time I was with him. He gave the example of what person would try and rob the bar we were drinking in as they would know that half the people were armed, and that they would probably shoot the robbers. I hate to consider the collateral damage that might ensue. He said he had numerous weapons and even out with his children he would carry a gun in an ankle holster so as not to frighten them. I think the "genie is out of the bottle" regarding guns in the US.

[navyblueshorts]

Got myself into some gun debates on twitter with some American gun people. Its fricking scary the views of these people. The arguments are crazy,  they see it as some sort of defence and protection, yet don't understand that if guns are removed from tge vadt majority you wont really need protection. No other country in the world has these problems, yet they can't see it!

Whilst on holiday in the US a few weeks ago met a bloke in a bar who couldn't understand why the public (and more so the police) in the UK didn't have guns. He was articulate and appeared reasonably intelligent in the time I was with him. He gave the example of what person would try and rob the bar we were drinking in as they would know that half the people were armed, and that they would probably shoot the robbers. I hate to consider the collateral damage that might ensue. He said he had numerous weapons and even out with his children he would carry a gun in an ankle holster so as not to frighten them. I think the "genie is out of the bottle" regarding guns in the US.

Funny isn't it? These blowhards, who'd be sky high on adrenaline, would have no idea who was the real shooter and who was a 'hero', to say nothing of any associated 'friendly fire' casualties. Seem to remember this logic being trotted out when some guy shot up a recent Batman movie premier, and that would have been in a darkened theatre.

[McLaren]

Come on. Trying to wind up navy by calling him an older right winger. Stating that Abbott cannot be racist... would you extend this to say that black people cannot be racist?

I think I already did.

[Diggers]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

[JAS]

Navy

What older right wingers like yourself can't understand is that imbalances of power still exist and therefore what is a problem in one direction isn't a problem the other way around. It is literally impossible for Abbot to be racist about a white person in the UK.

If you are referring to me as an “old right winger” then that is just so hilarious. As I’ve probably mentioned several times I grew up in an Ayrshire mining town where there’s a statue of Keir Hardie outside the Town Hall. On issues like the economics of state provision of Health, Education etc I’m probably just behind Corbyn’s left shoulder. If you take the whole politics smorgasbord the only area I would say I had right of Center views on would be crime & punishment (which would include locking up POlitically correct Muppet for ruining reasonable debate in this country).

[navyblueshorts]

Come on. Trying to wind up navy by calling him an older right winger. Stating that Abbott cannot be racist... would you extend this to say that black people cannot be racist?

I think I already did.

You're clearly ignorant then. Picture the hypothetical scene:

Diane Abbott (just by coincidence, but take your pick) runs a business in which she has to decide on employment of those that work for her business. She decides to employ only black people, because she thinks they're superior to whites, by definition.

The above is racist, by definition. See below for help:

racist | ˈreɪsɪst |
noun
a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another: I had a fear of being called a racist.

adjective
showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another: we are investigating complaints about racist abuse at a newsagents.

Now, maybe I'm missing something, but the the daft example I give, above, is racist by definition, but you think that because the hypothetical Diane Abbott is black, and those discriminated against are white, it cannot be racist? Have I got that right?

[JAS]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

[navyblueshorts]

Come on. Trying to wind up navy by calling him an older right winger. Stating that Abbott cannot be racist... would you extend this to say that black people cannot be racist?

I think I already did.

And another thing, just by way of really illustrating your muppetry. You don't think that, for example, Gandhi's stance and comments on black Africans wasn't racist? Or was Gandhi black enough for you that it wouldn't qualify? What about the Hutus of Rwanda and their views on Rwandan Tutsis? You don't think that was based in what you call racism?

[navyblueshorts]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

This one's been done to death and depends entirely on whether you think Garcia understood the racial connotations of fried chicken in the US and therefore used what he said as a deliberate racial slur. There'll never be agreement on that.

[Diggers]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

Sorry Jas, that's not the point. Fried chicken was an african american slave dish, that's where the racial connotation comes from. It's a very well known racial stereotype about black americans, though I've hear it used over here. If you don't believe me look it up, there is plenty of information online. Think about it, why would Sergio pick that food if he wasn't making a point about who ate it, it would then be a worthless comment. He knew exactly what he was saying. What he said is as clear a case of casual racism as you'll find, and I actually think that it is compound casual racism (that people like to dismiss and say people should stop being so touchy)) that is more frustrating and annoying to people who are subject to discrimination. It's not all about the big stuff.

[Diggers]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

This one's been done to death and depends entirely on whether you think Garcia understood the racial connotations of fried chicken in the US and therefore used what he said as a deliberate racial slur. There'll never be agreement on that.

So explain to me, why would he have mentioned that particular food otherwise? There is no sense to it, unless he knew the connotations, absolutely none.

[McLaren]

I thought at this point the usage of watermelon and fried chicken against black people, especially in the USA, was well known to be racist. Never heard debate about it other than on here. But I do live in a liberal bubble. :roll:

[navyblueshorts]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

This one's been done to death and depends entirely on whether you think Garcia understood the racial connotations of fried chicken in the US and therefore used what he said as a deliberate racial slur. There'll never be agreement on that.

So explain to me, why would he have mentioned that particular food otherwise? There is no sense to it, unless he knew the connotations, absolutely none.

I don't know Digs. On balance, I suspect he knew what he was saying and the racial connotation. Do I think Sergio is a racist, based on that one remark? No, I don't. He apologised and the World is still turning.

[beninho]

1997 Fuzzy Zoehler said about the masters serving fried chicken and collared beans or whatever they serve. That was deemed as pretty racist and was news, think sergio ( who I like) didn't know that?

[navyblueshorts]

I thought at this point the usage of watermelon and fried chicken against black people, especially in the USA, was well known to be racist. Never heard debate about it other than on here. But I do live in a liberal bubble.

More assumptions of yours. Guess what? Most of the World doesn't spend its days looking for offence and memorising potential racial slurs in order to wave them at people while chanting "Racist! Racist!".

If I, knowing nothing about watermelons in a racial context (which I don't), asked Tiger Woods if he liked watermelon and wanted some, that I happened to have, on a Summer's day, would that make me racist?

Look, forget about it. Your concerns for there being less irrational prejudice in the World do you credit, but you wreck that somewhat with your absolutist behaviour re. the context of what people say/do. Maybe one day you'll work it out.

[NedB-H]

Navy

What older right wingers like yourself can't understand is that imbalances of power still exist and therefore what is a problem in one direction isn't a problem the other way around. It is literally impossible for Abbot to be racist about a white person in the UK.

I’ve heard this argument elsewhere. Essentially the logic behind it is that, as a minority who have been discriminated against in the past, you’re entitled to some sort of recompense now. What form the payback comes in can vary... for example:
- preferential treatment (eg grants to cover uni fees)
- guaranteed opportunities (South Africa’s sports quotas, NFL’s Rooney rule)
- Exemption from criticism (Mac saying blacks can’t be racist)
- material gain (Zimbabwean land redistribution)

With the possible exception of Mac, I imagine every one of us thinks that some of those examples are reasonable, and others definitely aren’t. What they all have in common is that they’re attempts to redress historical wrongs by (over-)compensating in the opposite direction.

It shows why you have to careful with this line of thinking, however well intentioned it might be. The risk you run, by prioritising once-marginalised groups, is upsetting members of the status quo group. A Corbynista like Mac, would no doubt say so what, it’s high time we redressed the balance, but that’s no comfort to a white student who doesn’t get any bursaries for their 9k a year fees. The next Corbynista line is that the white student has already benefited from “white privilege” in society; that may be true but even if it is, the student can hardly help what they’re born into.

And the big reason all of this matters, more than just socially over-conscious people arguing about who’s less privileged, is that it entrenches division. Minorities were discriminated against in the past because of ignorance and racism, which are problems that are nowhere near as rife nowadays. But when the old majority start feeling hard done by themselves, the resentment builds up again and the racism comes back. The more resentment you have, the more mistrust there is between different groups, and the less likely you are to ever actually get equality. And this problem is growing, not least because people like Trump, Salvini and Steve Bannon are exploiting it for their own ends.

[Diggers]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".




Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

This one's been done to death and depends entirely on whether you think Garcia understood the racial connotations of fried chicken in the US and therefore used what he said as a deliberate racial slur. There'll never be agreement on that.

So explain to me, why would he have mentioned that particular food otherwise? There is no sense to it, unless he knew the connotations, absolutely none.

I don't know Digs. On balance, I suspect he knew what he was saying and the racial connotation. Do I think Sergio is a racist, based on that one remark? No, I don't. He apologised and the World is still turning.

That’s all good, I didn’t say he was a racist (though for all you or I know he could be), I said it was a racist remark and I think anyone would be naive to think otherwise.
Re casual racism there is program called Schools this week, great in general for showing the depressing educational landscape but it particular the effect minor casual racism can have. Sadly, I still see it in my school which is predominantly white, lots of little barbs to the “different” kids. All meant as harmless of course, all picked up from parents who would be appalled to be described as remotely racist.

[Diggers]

Ooooh, a very dubious ref call away from a win over the AB’s. Got lucky last week so swings and roundabouts. Genuinely a 50 50 game though, both sides in charge for spells, looks like Jones has got them back on track.

[navyblueshorts]

Ooooh, a very dubious ref call away from a win over the AB’s. Got lucky last week so swings and roundabouts. Genuinely a 50 50 game though, both sides in charge for spells, looks like Jones has got them back on track.

Yeah. Just about right though I think. Some of those you get, some you don't. Better performance than many expected though, so on right track.

[Diggers]

Jadon Sanchi apparently had a stormer today as Dortmund beat Bayern. Definitely a big, big talent. Wonder if he’ll end up back at City, but for a lot more than they sold him for.

[beninho]

I'd say more chance Sancho joins Bayern, that what happens with good players in the bundesliga. I see Reiss Nelson is also impressing in Germany, but only on loan from the arse.

[super_realist]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

Then the problem is with you and your hysterical, immature understanding of language.
You routinely demonstrate your poor English, and this is another example of it.

You think you are clever, but every time you write something (or right) if you prefer you demonstrate just how green, naïve and suggestible you are. You seek offence in everything you read, because you like to project that you are more moral than everyone else. You aren't, no one could be as right on as you, unless they are trying to seek election and are simply putting it on. You are a champagne socialist of the worst kind and you have no idea of what you are talking about.

Grow up and stop being so bloody sensitive and for your information of COURSE a black person (or any black person) like Abbott can be racist, not only that she's a complete and utter hypocrite so to describe her as fat and ugly is not only perfectly descriptive (demonstrate she isn't if you don't agree with me) she's also a pretty ugly individual as a person and in her beliefs too.

How is calling her fat and ugly racist? Are you suggesting that one race cannot make comment about other races without it being racist? I didn't think anyone could be more idiotic than people like Owen Jones, or any more ignorant than Femi Olewule but you are taking it to such laughable lengths as to be a caricature of yourself

You don't live in a liberal bubble Mac, you live in an egg, at least you could see out of a bubble.

[beninho]

I assume the femi guy you mention is the anti brexit guy, seems to be anything but ignorant, what makes you say he is ignorant?

[super_realist]

I'm anti Brexit too, but Femi Olewule comes across as an entitled moron who knows nothing about life. Every time I've heard him on radio he comes across as an arrogant arse who can't see anything outside of his age group, talking nonsense about how tough life is for the young, saying stuff about how 50 year olds are too old to have an opinion on Brexit etc.
He makes some good points at times, but most of the time he's a terrible spokeperson for Remain.

I suppose you'll call me a racist because he's black.

[beninho]

Whenever I've heard or seen him I think he is doing a very good job and fighting a good cause. The way he has tripped up sone right wing brexiteers has been wonderful to see. He seems to be anything but entitled, and is making his points for his age group. I think he is definitely not ignorant in any way, but he's not fat or ugly so you needed another abusive term, just think you got the wrong one.

Don't get hung up on the racism, on this one, I see no issues with your opinion, apart from they differ to mine.

[super_realist]

We must be listening to two different sources then because whenever I've heard him he makes some good points but shoots himself in the foot by making some really infantile points. Maybe he just had bad interviews, or was challenged by someone better informed, but I've yet to see him do a good job.

I didn't call him far or ugly.

[NedB-H]

I thought I was fairly switched on politically, and I certainly spend too much time on twitter with a timeline full of Brexitty stuff. But who on earth is Femi Olewule?

[super_realist]

He's a spokesman for some Anti Brexit group which has dubious funding, and he campaigns as if he's in a parallel universe where everyone over the age of 25 is worthless to society and only the young should benefit from society and that everything should be done with them in mind.

[beninho]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Future_Our_Choice
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/education/2018/feb/20/stop-brexit-youth-campaign-university

I'm probably not target audience, but they are passionate.

[kwinigolfer]

I don't spend much time on Twitter, but always check in on Tony Johnstone's efforts. Well worth the trip:

https://twitter.com/TonyJohnstone56?cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

One of the great unsung guys of golf. And life.

[McLaren]

I only recently became aware of Femi but so far I have been pretty impressed with him and cannot see how you could make the argument that he is ignorant. He is one of the few people in the public sphere who talks about #Brexit from a technical/legal (he worked in an EU legal department I think) position instead of just personal misconceptions about the EU.

Super, would you explain why you think he is ignorant?

[raycastleunited]

I said if I had not mentioned ANY name you couldn't construe that I was being racist or sexist.  From my comments you couldn't tell if it was a male/female, black or white if I'd taken the name of Abbott out

You have brought this up again so I assume you think you have hit on a good argument.  What this argument fails to acknowledge is that you can say exactly the same thing to different people and it can have different meanings and different connotations.

Lets use an example from the world of golf.

Sergio is on stage and out of context says "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".

I am at home and say to one of my friends in a conversation about what I am doing at the weekend and say "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken".


Do you see how in one context the set of words "maybe I will invite him round for fried chicken" are racist and in another they are just information about what someone will do?

“Maybe I’ll invite him round for fried chicken” being in anyway construed as a racist remark underlines what a complete and utter mess we are becoming as a country that upholds the values of free speech. This being offended on other people’s behalf is a whole big cluster of Poopie that HAS to stop. If that kind of cowpat ever gets the upper hand we’re all doomed. Stop being such a bloody snowflake MAC.

Interesting, for me what Sergio said was clearly a racist comment, possibly an example of unconscious racism (I don't actually think that in this case), but certainly racist. He was making an intentionally derogatory remark (lets remember this is between two guys who don't like each other) about the food eaten by black Americans, that's the context of the statement. It's a comment based around a persons race. Now, the degree to which an individual may or may not be offended by the comment is a different matter - I can see personally why some would - but it's a racist comment.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one Diggers for the very simple fact that many white people including me also like fried chicken.

If you come from an area with a small black population you wouldn't make the connection. The fried chicken thing is very stereotypical. All these black teenagers getting stabbed in London... it's often outside the chicken shop.

This is just my opinion, but I don't think Garcia was deliberately trying to be offensive, although he knew the connotations and it was a racist comment. He also comes from somewhere with a small black population (Spain) and no history of racial integration. I think he was trying to have a little dig, like saying he would serve haggis to a Scot, without understanding that he would cause offence. So more ignorance than malice.

[Sponsored content]