Ye which is what I would expect so in the end it's a similar outcome to a drunk & disorderly case
But without wasting time and money on a 2 years legal process
Sam Kerr allegations - supporters twist themselves into knots
- Thread starter ryansgirl
- Start date
But without wasting time and money on a 2 years legal process
No totally different to D&D which is non imprisonable and has a max fine of £1000.
Under the offence she has been charged for she can be imprisoned, have it suspended and/or given an unlimited fine.
Should have just called him a cnut.
But she still has a long way to go to match her brother Daniel's crime count.
But she still has a long way to go to match her brother Daniel's crime count.
Exactly - You just don't go up to randoms and say this kind of stuff, people take this stuff in different ways.Completely agree that how people react to racism (or any type of treatment, for that matter) is completely subjective and depends on the individual. But just because some people won't be offended, it doesn't mean it isn't racist. It's just weird that some people seem to be completely accepting of a specific type of racism. That if I wanted to racially abuse a white woman, I could. But if she gave me the same treatment back (as an Asian woman), she'd be in the wrong.
Back when I was in uni, I had 4 housemates (5 guys) - So we had myself (South Asian descent), a white South African-Australian, An Asian-Australian (Vietnamese), A half-lebanese Australian, and a gay Australian with a bit of indigenous roots in our household. Given the kind of diversity we had there and because we eventually became good friends, you can bet the gloves came off when it came to racist/homophobic remarks in our household. It was fine between us because we'd just give out as much as we'd take and it was kind of our way of making fun of the stereotypes that existed in Australia, you'd see a tonne of this stuff if you watched a few Superwog videos for example.
What we said to each other was way worse than what Sam Kerr allegedly said, and none of us would be allowed anywhere near our workplaces if our eventual employers heard some of the stuff we said
But all of that was between us and never once said with actual malicious intent. We definitely wouldn't go around saying that stuff to random people who didn't know us - As an advocate for awareness around racism in football, Sam (if she's said what she said) should know better here, and is rightly being scrutinised for her behaviour.I think it's dangerous to start saying it isn't racism based on the police officer's skin colour and concluding he wouldn't be offended by the statement. Even accounting for historical context and how racism tends to be towards people of colour etc.
If a male is the subject of domestic abuse by a female - do we downplay the seriousness of it because it's normally the other way round? Same with rape? Obviously they are more serious crimes but if what she said is true then she deserves the same punishment if it was the other way round - it's the law after all. Can't ask for equality but not equality in punishment.
If a male is the subject of domestic abuse by a female - do we downplay the seriousness of it because it's normally the other way round? Same with rape? Obviously they are more serious crimes but if what she said is true then she deserves the same punishment if it was the other way round - it's the law after all. Can't ask for equality but not equality in punishment.
Racism is racism. Any narrative that it carries less weight due to power dynamics/identity status is q classic case of imbalanced scales. The ONLY standard it should ever be judged by is would it be tolerated if the roles are reversed. The momment you erase that line you allow humans to imagine it palatable in any form in normal life.
IMO Comedy should be the only bastion you can get away with it because everyone is supposed "to get it in the neck" in that arena if it's used in good faith. Every where else just incites needless truble and conflict and is not a standard any civilizied society should tolerate.
As for Ms. Kerr. If she is guilty of such, it would be tragic. I then hope she would be willing do the work to change that aspect of her self.
IMO Comedy should be the only bastion you can get away with it because everyone is supposed "to get it in the neck" in that arena if it's used in good faith. Every where else just incites needless truble and conflict and is not a standard any civilizied society should tolerate.
As for Ms. Kerr. If she is guilty of such, it would be tragic. I then hope she would be willing do the work to change that aspect of her self.
Although Women footballers earn much less than Men, £1000 is pittance TBF so I guess the more serious charge at least gives more flexibility there
There is still a chance this case gets thrown out long before court, Kerr's lawyers will be trying to in April hearing apparently
As racist insults in the UK? Obviously no in almost all circumstances.
They don’t. Which is - if you think about it - my point.
Yeh god forbid we actually try and create an equal society where actions and consequences are the same for everyone. You one of those people who think you can’t be racist against white people then?
Yeah there may be some plea bargaining also to avoid a trial. Will be interesting to see what happens.
I can see it’s taken around 14 months to process which is a while but also reflects on the backlog of work, and lack of resources, both the Police and CPS are dealing with. In view of that I wouldn’t say it’s overly unusual.
it is incredibly dumb to think otherwise.
Racism is racism, no matter the colour involved.
Even if racism against white people is less offensive, it's still racism. If people think this is okay then people especially kids will think racism is okay including against other racial groups.
It sets a bad precedent. She needs to be punished for this.
It sets a bad precedent. She needs to be punished for this.
It is interesting how this case has sparked strong discussion about what exactly 'racism' is
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Interesting article, thanks for sharing.
wayne’s the real bad egg in the family.
We know about historical oppression. So now what? What is it that some people are really saying here?
We should have different legal standards based on whom makes the racist remark?
We should have different legal standards based on whom makes the racist remark?
Yes. Also also different standards based on what the racist remark is.
Different punishments when you're white vs non-white. What a great idea.
Different punishments depending on the context, situation and people involved. Yes its a great idea.
No, what you're saying is white people should be treated differently from non-white people.
This isn't the same as whether something is manslaughter, self-defence or murder.
If you think the context of who makes a racist remark, what that remark is and who it is made to is irrelevant then OK. I think that's a wildly simplistic way to look at a very complicated issue.
Do you think Ron Atkinson calling someone a "Lazy n*gger" should be viewed the same as Sam Kerr calling a cop a "stupid white bastard"? The very fact I can't even write what Atkinson said surely shows you not all racist abuse is the same.
Seems an odd definition. Let’s say we have two individuals. One hates all black people, one hates all white people. I suspect everyone would agree that both are quite clearly racist but the article seems to be saying that, in Australia, the second person wouldn’t be?
There is certainly difference, and enormous difference, between rasism as an ideology using skin colour, gentic markers and/or cultural stereotyping, versus singular acts based on skin colour or stereotypes.
An ideology is something collective and theoretical that one person can express, enforce, uphold or take part in, like the racism of nazism in Europe was and is acted out in mant different ways from acts of violence to silent bystanding or denial.
One person acting against everyone with the same colour of skin (a bit hypotetical in this case, no?) but which isn’t part of such a collective ideology, makes it a different kettle of fish. Not necessarily a nice one, but certainly less powerful than the ideological one.
‘Mike Tyson claims being victim of ageism and weightism after candy shop brawl with a now hospitalized eight year old. ‘We exchanged blows, yea, and then I’m charged and she off the hook just because I’m fifty years older and weigh more?’ he says, lamenting that she gets flowers sent to her hospital bed even when she actually shoved him first.’
Sam Kerr has pleaded not guilty in court to a charge of racially aggravated harassment.
That should tell you, legally, all you need to know about whether her alleged remark is racist or not. It really is that simple.
That should tell you, legally, all you need to know about whether her alleged remark is racist or not. It really is that simple.
Splitting hairs but one can plead whatever the hell they like - the authoritative position will only be revealed when a ruling from the courts is handed down.
Ethically speaking though, does it really matter if it’s racist? It was a bad thing to say regardless. I’d suggest, like 99% of other footballers, she’s probably rather dim, so it’s utterly unsurprising that a daft person made an ill thought out comment. Give her a slap on the wrist and move on.
… what’s staggering though is the people idolising her, as though she saved a fecking kitten from a fire. Utter morons.
I don't understand how this isn't classified as racism. Using someone's skin colour as an insult in a rage is unequivocally racist. White, black, brown, it doesn't matter.
Not sure what the debate is
Not sure what the debate is
My point (which you may have missed?) was she has been charged with a racist offence so what she is reported to have said is racist. End of.
I agree it was a bad thing to say regardless but it’s not good enough to treat this in any way other than you would if the word black was used instead of white. It’s a massive double standard.