Park Ji-Sung asks United fans to stop singing his chant

NotThatSoph

Full Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
3,757
It was sung on Saturday.

I don't think there is any malice from the fans. Just a chant of endearment towards Ji Sung. However, if he requests the fans stop we should respect his wishes.

PS: Could the word dogs be changed to something more edible?
The word can't be changed because it would ruin the meaning of the song. The whole point is to denigrate Koreans for eating dogs, then saying that things could be even worse than being Korean and eating dogs, you could be Scouse and eating rats.

It's not a song praising Park, it's a song ridiculing people from Liverpool for being poor. For the "it could be worse" to have the desired effect both things being compared have to be bad.
 

Withnail

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
29,333
Location
The Arena of the Unwell
There it is
This is hilarious.

You played the victim before anyone said anything then misrepresented some well intentioned posts as justification for your previous claim of getting 'shouted at'

That poster correctly in my view became a bit suspicious that it's likely wilful ignorance and you've used that as further proof, when you've invented the whole thing.

Just to be clear nobody at all has 'yelled at you' in this thread and the Lukaku thing isn't even complex or difficult to understand :lol:
 

Withnail

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
29,333
Location
The Arena of the Unwell
The word can't be changed because it would ruin the meaning of the song. The whole point is to denigrate Koreans for eating dogs, then saying that things could be even worse than being Korean and eating dogs, you could be Scouse and eating rats.

It's not a song praising Park, it's a song ridiculing people from Liverpool for being poor. For the "it could be worse" to have the desired effect both things being compared have to be bad.
Exactly. It's disingenuous for anyone to claim this chant is somehow showing support for Park. There's nothing positive about Park in the lyrics.
 

Houdini

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Messages
2,163
So chicken, pig and cow are ok, even lambs! Why not dogs, horses, snakes?
 

Houdini

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Messages
2,163
Exactly. It's disingenuous for anyone to claim this chant is somehow showing support for Park. There's nothing positive about Park in the lyrics.
The positive is the diet. Better than to eat pork and be fat like Rooney or Fatronaldo.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,446
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Park Park how are you today?
Our fans are thick no matter what they say
But it could be worse, they could be scouse
End
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
39,954
The word can't be changed because it would ruin the meaning of the song. The whole point is to denigrate Koreans for eating dogs, then saying that things could be even worse than being Korean and eating dogs, you could be Scouse and eating rats.

It's not a song praising Park, it's a song ridiculing people from Liverpool for being poor. For the "it could be worse" to have the desired effect both things being compared have to be bad.
Anything korean could be used. The point of the song is to laugh at the scousers for eating rats in a council house.

You can say you eat rice in your home country, that part isn't important.

Anyway it's probably left dead.
 

NotThatSoph

Full Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
3,757
Anything korean could be used. The point of the song is to laugh at the scousers for eating rats in a council house.

You can say you eat rice in your home country, that part isn't important.

Anyway it's probably left dead.
No, that's not how "it could be worse" is used at all. It's a response to something bad, saying that at least it's better than some alternative. Imagine coming home saying you've won the lottery and you're rich, the respone "oh well, it could be worse, you could be homeless and starving". It makes zero sense.
 

V.O.

Last Man Standing finalist 2019/20
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
7,847
Even if the first half of the chant was completely innocuous... why in the feck do a club from an industrial city with a largely working class, left-wing core fanbase have a chant mocking council houses and poverty?

There are a million things to take the piss out of scousers for. That's not one of them. If anything, class/political issues are the only things you can usually reliably agree with a scouser on.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,446
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Even if the first half of the chant was completely innocuous... why in the feck do a club from an industrial city with a largely working class, left-wing core fanbase have a chant mocking council houses and poverty?

There are a million things to take the piss out of scousers for. That's not one of them. If anything, class/political issues are the only things you can usually reliably agree with a scouser on.
None of that rhymes with scouse
 

0le

Full Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2017
Messages
5,806
Location
UK
So chicken, pig and cow are ok, even lambs! Why not dogs, horses, snakes?
People can and do eat dog, horse and snake meat.

All of what follows is pure guess work, but there may be several reasons why those particular meats are not popular aside from taste:

Those animals have greater value aside from consuming their meat:
Dogs are well established domestic pets providing love and care for many families. They are also used for work (e.g. guide dogs or sheep dogs) and sometimes to assist with mental health issues (e.g. autism assistance dogs). Similarly horses are used for both work and recreation. Horses are likely to be expensive to rear as well, so are probably less profitable with regards to meat than other animals. Snakes may be bred in captivity to develop antivenom. Perhaps their venom may also be studied for other medicinal purposes.

Difficulty in food preparation:
Snakes may require special preparation with which few chefs are equipped to manage. Additionally there may be a lack of infrastructure to prepare dog and horse meat on a mass scale and with the focus already on other animals, there may not be a need to implement this infrastructure either. There are also growing concerns about the influence of the existing meat industry with regard to animal welfare rights and climate change which would further make it difficult to set up any new infrastructure.

Vegetarianism/ Veganism:
A growing number of people are moving away from meat products anyway, so demand for other meats may be stagnating or reducing.
 

Chesterlestreet

Man of the crowd
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
19,505
It's disingenuous for anyone to claim this chant is somehow showing support for Park.
This is only true if you remove all intent from the equation.

It was never sung (heh) to take the piss out of Park - it was obviously a positive chant/song (meant to celebrate/support him).

Which means feck all in terms of whether the chant itself (the words used) is problematic- of course. People singing about Lukaku's cock (or whatever) were also generally supportive of him.

(On a more technical/historical note, one could add that when the Park chant was originally made, it was apparently still pretty common to eat dog meat in South Korea - so the claim made in the chant didn't amount to a perfectly baseless stereotype).
 

Flytan

New Member
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
3,754
Location
United States
This is hilarious.

You played the victim before anyone said anything then misrepresented some well intentioned posts as justification for your previous claim of getting 'shouted at'

That poster correctly in my view became a bit suspicious that it's likely wilful ignorance and you've used that as further proof, when you've invented the whole thing.

Just to be clear nobody at all has 'yelled at you' in this thread and the Lukaku thing isn't even complex or difficult to understand :lol:
Thanks
 

Withnail

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
29,333
Location
The Arena of the Unwell
This is only true if you remove all intent from the equation.

It was never sung (heh) to take the piss out of Park - it was obviously a positive chant/song (meant to celebrate/support him).

Which means feck all in terms of whether the chant itself (the words used) is problematic- of course. People singing about Lukaku's cock (or whatever) were also generally supportive of him.

(On a more technical/historical note, one could add that when the Park chant was originally made, it was apparently still pretty common to eat dog meat in South Korea - so the claim made in the chant didn't amount to a perfectly baseless stereotype).
Come on it's a chant which mostly slags off scousers. I never said it was slagging off Park but he's just mentioned at the start to tee up the dog eating bit which tees up the scouse punchline. Which part of the song supports/celebrates or is positive about Park himself?
 

Still ill

Fantasy Football Champ 2018
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
8,154
Location
Ireland
That’s probably down to the type of player you appreciate. Which is fine.
I appreciate lot's of types of players but I do, certainly, see the value of an O'Shea or a Park in a squad. Thousands don't. Which as you say, is fine. Wrong, but fine.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
39,954
No, that's not how "it could be worse" is used at all. It's a response to something bad, saying that at least it's better than some alternative. Imagine coming home saying you've won the lottery and you're rich, the respone "oh well, it could be worse, you could be homeless and starving". It makes zero sense.
The point is the song could still be sung without being racist.
 

V.O.

Last Man Standing finalist 2019/20
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
7,847
I've sussed it, change dogs for frogs and it works*

*Possibly
If it was 'Blanc' instead of 'Park' and 'frogs' instead of 'dogs', nobody would give a shit, of course.
 

Cloud7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
12,778
Even if the first half of the chant was completely innocuous... why in the feck do a club from an industrial city with a largely working class, left-wing core fanbase have a chant mocking council houses and poverty?

There are a million things to take the piss out of scousers for. That's not one of them. If anything, class/political issues are the only things you can usually reliably agree with a scouser on.
Looking past the stuff about Park for a second, this is quite true as well. Especially in today's world, where wealth inequality has never been higher, and the mega rich people are doing what they want blatantly in front our faces, you would think that a song mocking other people for being poor would be considered in poor taste. All for the sake of 'banter' apparently.
 

Ixion

Full Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
15,275
1 million dogs a year killed for food in South Korea.
According to Wikipedia it is something that is on the decline and...

In a 2020 survey, 84% of the Korean population reported never having consumed dog meat nor having plans to ever do so
So the likelihood is Park has never eaten it and it is fair enough he doesn't want 70,000 people singing it
 

Chesterlestreet

Man of the crowd
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
19,505
Come on it's a chant which mostly slags off scousers. I never said it was slagging off Park but he's just mentioned at the start to tee up the dog eating bit which tees up the scouse punchline. Which part of the song supports/celebrates or is positive about Park himself?
Heh - yeah, of course that's part of it (a big part).

I was merely saying (unless it should be misunderstood) that it's not intended as a slight on Park.

And perhaps also that in time (after Park became an Old Trafford favourite, which he did) - the chant became mainly about (supporting) him and less about the scousers (but still about them - yes).
 

moses

Can't We Just Be Nice?
Staff
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
42,771
Location
I have no idea either, yet.
I was merely saying (unless it should be misunderstood) that it's not intended as a slight on Park.
Intent is only part of it. And the intent bit surely becomes redundant if someone is offended. If you don't mean to offend, but are then made aware it offends and you continue to offend; then the conversation is about not caring if you offend.
 

TrustInOle

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
2,464
Location
Manchester
The guy is a cult legend of the club and an ambassador, if he wants his chant to be halted from now, he deserves that much respect. See no problem here, chant only comes out when we go up against the scousers anyway.
 

Sara125

Full Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
3,021
Location
London
Not sure why there’s a back and forth. The person who it’s about and whose country it’s about is telling you it’s offensive so like…stop :/
 

Chesterlestreet

Man of the crowd
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
19,505
Intent is only part of it. And the intent bit surely becomes redundant if someone is offended. If you don't mean to offend, but are then made aware it offends and you continue to offend; then the conversation is about not caring if you offend.
Yes, of course.

I said as much above. Intent doesn't make it unproblematic/inoffensive. Obviously not. See the Lukaku chant - or any number of similar chants.

I only commented because he said - explicitly - that it's disingenuous to interpret the Park chant as being supportive (of Park).
 

moses

Can't We Just Be Nice?
Staff
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
42,771
Location
I have no idea either, yet.
Yes, of course.

I said as much above. Intent doesn't make it unproblematic/inoffensive. Obviously not. See the Lukaku chant - or any number of similar chants.

I only commented because he said - explicitly - that it's disingenuous to interpret the Park chant as being supportive (of Park).
Ah yeah, I wasn't challenging you.
 

Sara125

Full Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
3,021
Location
London
You guys did this in the lukaku chant and I think the vidic chant thread too (I can’t remember if lukaku ever publicly disapproved of it but people explained why it’s not okay; but I defo remember vidic came out and said something like he’s aware of Serbia’s terrible history and it shouldn’t be used in a chant) and you guys were acting as if it was your God given right to still continue.
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,317
Even if the first half of the chant was completely innocuous... why in the feck do a club from an industrial city with a largely working class, left-wing core fanbase have a chant mocking council houses and poverty?

There are a million things to take the piss out of scousers for. That's not one of them. If anything, class/political issues are the only things you can usually reliably agree with a scouser on.
Agreed. Grew up in a council house myself and I would assume one of our own players who helped fight food poverty, did too.

I definitely sung it at the time as a young adult, which is pretty cringe worthy given my circumstances, but not as cringe worthy as not being able to see the issue with the chant 12 years on and changing my opinion.