I don’t know, it’s just outdated I think. I assume if coloured is racist then “people of colour” is also a no no. My gran used to call anyone not white “darkies” - I think this is an even more outdated term, probably from the war or something - but again she was just trying to find a word other than the one she knew she definitely shouldn’t be using.
Greg Clarke's "Once in a Generation" FA Reforms; with added racism and sexism
- Thread starter endless_wheelies
- Start date
He quoted a female coach if I heard it correctly, not his actual opinion. The rest are crass comments in today's society I admit.
I am confused. Why is it ok to say "Person of color", but not "colored"?
People of colour is perfectly acceptable, for now. When that was decided, why that was decided and who that was decided by I'm not sure but for now it's safe to use.
The correct standard word / phrase etc. for this and many other things changes all the time, sure the term "Sexual Preference" (now offensive according to whomever) was used by everyone until recently - He who controls language controls the world.
This is from Alice in Wonderland:
“Must a name mean something?” Alice asks Humpty Dumpty, only to get this answer: “When I use a word… it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”
Racism loses its meaning when everything gets labelled as such, same with bigotted, sexist etc.
All of the above are serious problems, but not everything falls into that category, and I don't believe this instance showed racism.
This is my opinion and interpretation, you are of course free to disagree with me but there is no ill intended by my comments.
This is from Alice in Wonderland:
“Must a name mean something?” Alice asks Humpty Dumpty, only to get this answer: “When I use a word… it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”
Racism loses its meaning when everything gets labelled as such, same with bigotted, sexist etc.
All of the above are serious problems, but not everything falls into that category, and I don't believe this instance showed racism.
This is my opinion and interpretation, you are of course free to disagree with me but there is no ill intended by my comments.
In fairness I don't know if anyone really knows what's ok to say these days. There are certain words which are clearly derogatory like half-caste and I think everyone knows are completely unacceptable. My father in law who is black, for example, has no issue with 'coloured' and pointed out he'd rather be that than 'colourless'. Also people say 'person of colour' all the time so it's counter intuitive. I have seen people get into trouble for saying 'brown' and also seen people argue online about why you should never say 'Indian' for someone from India or how African-American is not acceptable anymore. If someone makes a one off error which isn't clearly meant in a racist way, I hope people give them the benefit of the doubt the first time.
I'd say in this specific case if he has no history of racism, I hope common sense prevails.
What a horrible new world we live in.
Clarke clearly never meant any offence and mistakenly used terminology that was not so long ago widely accepted.
Even worse that anyone who speaks out about this kind of story nowadays is instantly branded a racist or homophobe. Christ!
Clarke clearly never meant any offence and mistakenly used terminology that was not so long ago widely accepted.
Even worse that anyone who speaks out about this kind of story nowadays is instantly branded a racist or homophobe. Christ!
It’s hard to keep up - where I work they recently appointed a “BAME Champion”, trying to do something positive for inclusivenes, and next thing, that term is supposedly also offensive.
seriously?Imagine instead of outrage and mob mentality there was instead a wave of highlighting issues and a spread of education.
Again, common sense is to not have an FA chairman who doesn't know how fecking weird it sounds these days to say 'coloured' to describe people. He's not working washing windows, he was the chair of the FA. He has to know these things.
I was surprised when first reading people of colour a few years back, it means the same as coloured and non white but it's the newer polite term which I think he should know. He doesn't sound fit for the job looking at all his comments.
The term still sounds odd after 4-5 years years though as it sets up white vs non whites which is one small ethnic group vs every other ethnic group on the planet and oddly says so called whites have no colour when they obviously do have a colour.
The term still sounds odd after 4-5 years years though as it sets up white vs non whites which is one small ethnic group vs every other ethnic group on the planet and oddly says so called whites have no colour when they obviously do have a colour.
Suicide rates among LGBTQ people are among the highest in any group in society. They're a collection of people that for a long time have been mocked and ridiculed, and in many cases treated as inferior. There's still many places where coming out as gay means being ostracized from your family. Until these things change, gay jokes have no place in society in my opinion.
While it's not a term i would have ever used to be honest i had no idea it was considered offensive until relatively recently when Alan Hansen and Cumberbatch were criticized for using the term and i'm not exactly old at 38.
I don't remember that one. When was it?
It’s hard to keep up - where I work they recently appointed a “BAME Champion”, trying to do something positive for inclusivenes, and next thing, that term is supposedly also offensive.
Who decides these things?
I had to google it but the cumberbatch incident was in a 2015 interview. I think the Hansen one was a few years before that.
Coloured is a term my Dad used to say when I was growing up. I suppose at one point it was considered ok and maybe even a polite way to describe people.
It was, yeah. 'Coloured' used to be considered the appropriate term and 'black' was considered racist. I don't expect everyone, particularly those over 65 to know that it isn't any more. The chair of the FA has to though.
In a talk to MPs about diversity he :
Called black people "coloured"
Made a sweeping statement about the career interests of South Asians
Said being gay is a "life choice"
Said females don't like the ball being hit hard at them.
But yeah... Poor chap. Cry me a river.
Dare I say if he's saying these things in a discussion about diversity then maybe he's not actually fit for the role?
Was thinking of this myself.
The question is. Whether you can make words mean so many different things?
And that is it really
In this day and age people are twisting what people say and the meaning of the words to suit their agenda and seeking things to be offended by.
I know this guy is a dinosaur. But, Im not sure what term he is supposed to use here. What I mean by that, is that it's hardly white footballers suffering racist abuse from the stands or on the internet.
Does anyone know the acceptable term?
I think he should have said people from an ethnic minority.
He's got a head like a potato.
When was it not so long ago ‘widely accepted’?
It was widely used,yes without any consideration that it offended so many. With its connotations of slavery, apartheid and white superiority I can’t imagine who was comfortable with it except the white people that used it so liberally to denigrate black and Asian people.
You are within your rights to defend him and yes he’s probably a decent guy. However a man in charge of one of the world’s most powerful governing bodies should be a hell of a lot more self aware about the terminology he uses.
Funny you should say that, this thread is brimming with people who are clearly delighted to be offended by "PC culture". Will the real snowflakes please stand up?
I was in Asda in the 90s with my mum and grandma. My grandma referred to a checkout lady as "coloured" and my mum immediately told her she shouldn't be saying that.
This is not a new thing by any stretch of the imagination.
But of course we needed another thread for people to complain about how overly sensitive and PC society is these days, we've gone about twenty-six minutes since the last one.
This is not a new thing by any stretch of the imagination.
But of course we needed another thread for people to complain about how overly sensitive and PC society is these days, we've gone about twenty-six minutes since the last one.
Maris Piper?
It really baffles me why some people come to a football forum and ask questions on sensitive topics such as race & sexuality, without going to google and doing basic research themselves.
Because I’d imagine they want a debate...or an argument
I get what you are saying, but it’s not in sync with historical evidence. There is lots of research showing that gender skewness does not right itself up without active means like quotas or compensatory interventions. ‘Awareness’ and ‘ambitions’ have shown themselves time and again not to be enough when it’s up to the favored to makespace for the disfavored. It is not needless, it’s shown in practice to be needed to make change possible.
For those who argue for an LGBT quota or similar, they may do so if they want it, but I think one step at a time is enough, and it makes sense starting with the biggest boulder.
This I agree with.
Even if he didn't mean to sound racist, he has clearly showed signs of homophobia and sexism, and the 'coloured' comment, for a man in his position he has the responsibility to be more aware of what words are acceptable in todays climate.
The FA need more progressive leaders who are not dinosaurs, which can only benefit the FA and football in general.
The FA need more progressive leaders who are not dinosaurs, which can only benefit the FA and football in general.
Surprising number of neanderthal newbies in here.
Is this your first time here?
Should've put it in italics to highlight the sarcasm.
Not surprising in the slightest. Football does attract fans with a wide range of views
The problem with using the term coloured in my opinion is that it means nothing. Every human on this earth is coloured.
See, even you've taken my post out of context and twisted it to mean something that it wasn't meant to mean.
Your just adding to the perpetually offended circle there by being offended by someone who you see as being offended by the PC brigade.
Beacause there is some kind of agreement that one is fine the other not.
Either way, they clearly don't want to actually learn & understand for themselves.
I think by "India" he means south Asia in its entirety.