by peterroyal76 » 06 Nov 2013 20:00
by Royal Lady » 06 Nov 2013 21:15
Extended-PhenotypeRoyal Lady Thanks for that I'd never seen those examples before. That's fair enough, if that's what he's basing his comments on. TBF, I'm not giving him stick as such, just questioning whether sometimes he might go over the top a bit. Still think those who sent in pathetic questions to #AskJason are the ones who should be getting flak, rather than me for my comments though.
Aye, it's not like you insisted JR was screaming non-stop absolutes from atop a plinth, then attempted to deflect criticism of said ridiculous strawman argument with the one times table.
sandmanLacoste Looks like the PC brigade have won in here.
They would have been destroyed by the propaganda of WW2, luckily, some of us are man (or woman RL) enough to speak our minds and not what 2013 UK wants us to say.
The problem with that is that you have a retarded mind.
by Pseud O'Nym » 06 Nov 2013 23:00
Royal LadyExtended-Phenotype Aye, it's not like you insisted JR was screaming non-stop absolutes from atop a plinth, then attempted to deflect criticism of said ridiculous strawman argument with the one times table.
I have no idea what you're blathering on about.
by Extended-Phenotype » 07 Nov 2013 08:56
Pseud O'NymRoyal LadyExtended-Phenotype Aye, it's not like you insisted JR was screaming non-stop absolutes from atop a plinth, then attempted to deflect criticism of said ridiculous strawman argument with the one times table.
I have no idea what you're blathering on about.
I think he's confused you with a Sex Whale tbh.
by southbank1871 » 07 Nov 2013 09:17
Lacoste Looks like the PC brigade have won in here.
They would have been destroyed by the propaganda of WW2, luckily, some of us are man (or woman RL) enough to speak our minds and not what 2013 UK wants us to say.
by The Rouge » 07 Nov 2013 09:35
postman pat Looks like the PC brigade have won in here.
They would have been destroyed by the propaganda of WW2, luckily, some of us are man (or woman RL) enough to speak our minds and not what 2013 UK wants us to say.
by melonhead » 07 Nov 2013 10:59
Ian RoyalmelonheadIan Royal Interesting article from Barnes, can't fault the intent even if I don't agree exactly with everything he says.
The problem I have with Roberts (on this subject), is he pushes his criticisms to highlight racism with little regard to the context and seems to deliberately ignore any attempts to actually open a serious dialogue on that context. And I do think that his pushing of things that are clearly not racist undermines him as a spokesman on the subject, because makes it look trivial or crying wolf. And that's damaging to the campaign against racism and the work of groups like 'kick it out' and 'show racism the red card'.
You need those campaigning in the public eye to make sure that they only push robust arguments and actively enter into the debate seriously. Otherwise it only helps people ignore it as not the problem they claim. I've no doubt that Roberts and his family have suffered horrible racist abuse. And the reactions of those idiots on twitter is only going to reinforce his view about racism and how he should speak out about everything that could be even vaguely construed as racism through one eye, rather than take a more constructive approach.
should you try and negotiate the levels of racism down to compromise levels, or just say its never acceptable.
if anything i lean towards the latter
I agree, but you need to be fighting clear battles where possible. And it's difficult to imagine a world without any degree of racism. So fight the fight you can win. Also, that doesn't take into account labelling things that aren't racist, as racist.
by Joe 90 » 07 Nov 2013 11:07
by Extended-Phenotype » 07 Nov 2013 11:16
melonhead
its easy if you try.
hes just asking the questions. and theyre valid. and it seems we really need to get to the bottom of the questions he asks, so its good he asks them.
will the answer be- they dont get the jobs cos the people in charge are racist, maybe not. but the disconnect between coaches taking badges and getting jobs does need looking at. imo.
agree totally that he did more damage than good with his comments on monkeyg8 though
by melonhead » 07 Nov 2013 11:59
by Extended-Phenotype » 07 Nov 2013 12:25
melonhead agreed.
i just thought the anecdote wasnt racist, the monkeys were the superior beings in the set up as was townsend in the analogy.
it wasnt intended to be racist, or to offend anyone.
no one there was offended.
i understand why a black man may be slightly more sensitive about it than i though
by Pseud O'Nym » 07 Nov 2013 13:32
Extended-PhenotypePseud O'NymRoyal Lady I have no idea what you're blathering on about.
I think he's confused you with a Sex Whale tbh.
It was a no sarcismo, "you have not been as bad as..." compliment.
by Extended-Phenotype » 07 Nov 2013 14:01
Pseud O'Nym
Oh, so I suppose you think I should actually try reading posts before I respond to them?
by Royal Biscuitman » 07 Nov 2013 14:16
Pepe the Horseman He's a nob. I know him IRL.
by melonhead » 07 Nov 2013 16:56
Extended-Phenotypemelonhead agreed.
i just thought the anecdote wasnt racist, the monkeys were the superior beings in the set up as was townsend in the analogy.
it wasnt intended to be racist, or to offend anyone.
no one there was offended.
i understand why a black man may be slightly more sensitive about it than i though
Aye, that's what I said - the context wasn't racist but the word used to refer to a person of mixed race, COULD be offensive: as was JR's point.
I don't disagree that a person might be over-sensitive if they WERE offended, just that I could understand why it might be and don't really see it a cardinal sin to mention it.
by Extended-Phenotype » 07 Nov 2013 17:02
by melonhead » 07 Nov 2013 17:05
by Extended-Phenotype » 07 Nov 2013 17:16
melonhead fair point
my gran wouldnt have meant offence when calling brown wool n***** wool either i suppose
by peterroyal76 » 07 Nov 2013 17:22
Extended-Phenotype Dunno. I've seen a flinch when I've called a black dude a cheeky monkey.
Again, not commenting on whether bloke was being over-sensitive, just pointing out that it can jar.
Arguably, my Gramps isn't meaning offence when he "abbreviates" Pakistani but I'd advise him to refrain as the abbreviation does indeed stir alarm whether he intended it or not.
Users browsing this forum: WestYorksRoyal and 237 guests