I had no idea that it is now considered racist to refer to black people as coloured. When I was a kid it was considered respectful. Now it's racist?
Greg Clarke's "Once in a Generation" FA Reforms; with added racism and sexism
- Thread starter endless_wheelies
- Start date
It was never respectful because the term didn't originate from a respectful place.
And the fact that you said when were a kid should probably inform you why it might be out of date.
The term "coloured" started being considered offensive in what, the 1960's? That was certainly when Malcolm X (who very much belongs to the group in question) helped popularise the use of words like "black" instead of words like "coloured" and "negro". So 55+ years ago? Covering the entirety of Greg Clarke's adult life, in fact.
Not sure this is the best example for the point you're making there. It's a very old term that has been considered offensive for decades, specifically by the people it gets applied to.
Coloured has been a racist term in England for at least 20 years, and probably much longer than that. How out of touch are some of you?
Yeah its a term I've not used in a long time, simply because it's rarely used in society today. I just didn't know it was now considered racist. When me and my sister were kids, my parents made us understand that it was disrespectful to refer to black people as black people. We should say coloured people. Now it's the complete opposite.
It's person-first language.
It's becoming an increasingly prevalent discussion in other areas of life too, not just with race. There was a big push recently, for example, to stop saying 'disabled person' and instead say 'person with a disability'.
On a purely personal level, as a first generation Ethiopian in the UK, it's not something that bothers me. Coloured person, person of colour, black...for me it's still about the intent behind the words. I've interacted with extremely 'politically correct' people, who knew all the buzzwords and latest terminology but treated me in a patronising way. I've also interacted with people - usually from older generations - who have used terms that are no longer deemed 'correct' but did so with clearly good intent.
'Coloured' just sounds wrong. My grandad uses it and I tell him quite often that it's not okay anymore.
You'd think the FA would be more on top of diversity and inclusive terms.
As a side - I was told recently in a diversity meeting at work that we should avoid the term BAME.
You'd think the FA would be more on top of diversity and inclusive terms.
As a side - I was told recently in a diversity meeting at work that we should avoid the term BAME.
Last edited:
well this is it. It's fine to teach the new generation on the politically correct ways but it's ludicrous to criticize people who accidentally use the wrong term out of habit, so long as they don't mean it with any malice of course.
Not all posters lives in England probably.
I'd say almost no one likes it. When we played football for fun the losers would go in goal and have the ball kicked hard straight at them. Same in handball. I remember a lot of team mates being scared of going to goal during practise.
Having seen some of the *men* hide themselves from a ball hitting them, I think he should take a long look at his views.
“So how did the interview go Mr Clarke?”
“That bad I’m now resigning”
What an absolute car crash to watch and I’m gobsmacked in his most senior position he is either a) so scarily out of touch or b) so badly briefed by the FA’s Comms Dept or c) just ignores everything he’s told anyway.
“That bad I’m now resigning”
What an absolute car crash to watch and I’m gobsmacked in his most senior position he is either a) so scarily out of touch or b) so badly briefed by the FA’s Comms Dept or c) just ignores everything he’s told anyway.
I remember a year or so back I described a character in a movie as black and my black friend told me it was racist to say black and the correct way is coloured... so I just don’t bother saying either now.
How is it ludicrous? Your acting like it's impossible for people to learn. Ignorance isn't an excuse there's limitless access to knowledge
Someone ought to have a word with the NAACP.
BAME seems to lump together a bunch of random ethnicities which have no connection to each other beyond being not white. It's little wonder it's not being embraced by people caught by it tbf.
Meh I’ve never minded it, my lad’s the same. They say goalkeepers are a different breed
Back to the topic, I’ve coached from U8-U12s and during that time coached 3 girls. 2 were pretty timid but 1 was game as hell, kicked lumps out of other kids. Playing against other teams you often get girls that play aggressively, particularly at a younger age when boys haven’t developed testosterone that gives them their physical advantage. So from my very limited experience I’d say Clarke’s comment is probably a baseless generalisation
What do you say instead?
Nothing, I just avoid using skin colour to describe a character now and find other ways to tell the person who I’m talking about.
Very unfortunate brain freeze on my part!This clip is so relevant here by the way
'Of colour' and 'coloured' literally mean the same thing. It's like saying 'of Spain' or 'Spanish'.
So clearly the literal meaning of implying that non-white people have 'colour' isn't offensive. How about the context in which he used it? Was that derogatory? I don't think so.
This is dumb shit. You used to hear 'coloured' a lot growing up, back when it was unacceptable to say black. Changing people's use of language is difficult, he shouldn't be fired for it.
Perhaps people should just be called what they are whether it's Black, Asian, Indian or just 'ethnic minorities'. Clearly people can't keep up with these terms proliferated by the identity politics crowd (BAME and people of colour).
So clearly the literal meaning of implying that non-white people have 'colour' isn't offensive. How about the context in which he used it? Was that derogatory? I don't think so.
This is dumb shit. You used to hear 'coloured' a lot growing up, back when it was unacceptable to say black. Changing people's use of language is difficult, he shouldn't be fired for it.
Perhaps people should just be called what they are whether it's Black, Asian, Indian or just 'ethnic minorities'. Clearly people can't keep up with these terms proliferated by the identity politics crowd (BAME and people of colour).
What I don't understand is those in the media stating this is an opportunity for the FA to replace him with someone who is black. That the next man in charge needs to be black or the FA have made the wrong decision.
Why is perfectly acceptable (and even encouraged) to publicly call for one person of race to get the job over the other, and not be called up on it?
It needs to go both ways or it's just positive discrimination.
Why is perfectly acceptable (and even encouraged) to publicly call for one person of race to get the job over the other, and not be called up on it?
It needs to go both ways or it's just positive discrimination.
Have you read all of the quotes? Doesn’t sound like you have
Genuine question:
Is it ok to say black players?
If not, what should we be saying?
Is it ok to say black players?
If not, what should we be saying?
I just say Black? I didn't realise coloured was bad but don't see why I'd use it.
I don't think Greg Clarke using the term "coloured" makes him a racist. Language is ephemeral, now more than ever, so I understand why someone of his age might slip up. "Coloured" has been an iffy term in the UK for a while but we're not all up to speed, and the context Clarke said it in indicated that he was aware of how female footballers and BAME footballers are held back in the game. So while I think it's a terrible error of judgement that he deserves to be told about, I don't think it suggests anything about his character.
But what definitely exposed some prejudices he has, and what he should probably be punished for, was the line about the make-up of their IT staff being Asian rather than Afro-Caribbean "because they've got different career interests". You only have to look about a millimetre beneath the surface of that little quip to find all sorts of hideous stereotypes that have held back both Asians and people of African descent for decades, maybe centuries. I think he can be forgiven for the "coloured" remark because we all slip up sometimes, but not that second one.
But what definitely exposed some prejudices he has, and what he should probably be punished for, was the line about the make-up of their IT staff being Asian rather than Afro-Caribbean "because they've got different career interests". You only have to look about a millimetre beneath the surface of that little quip to find all sorts of hideous stereotypes that have held back both Asians and people of African descent for decades, maybe centuries. I think he can be forgiven for the "coloured" remark because we all slip up sometimes, but not that second one.
In what context?
Is it factual though? He shouldn't be throwing stereotypes about in his position but there's often some truth in stereotypes.
A similar comment would be the make-up of NHS nurses is mainly women rather than men because they have different career interests. A factual statement?
Two words can mean the same thing but still have entirely different connotations and histories that mean they can't be used interchangeably to the same effect. That's how language works, it's rooted in a context that extends far beyond how words are used in a given conversation.
In this case the word "coloured" has been considered offensive for decades. It isn't some modern change of language that has snuck up on otherwise in-tune people. It's a word that first started being considered a problem some half century ago. And certainly one anyone in a position to answer questions on diversity in football in the year 2020 should know not to use.
Which is the key issue here. Not that he should be removed from his role as punishment for saying stupid things (multiple, the use of the word "coloured" wasn't the only issue), but rather that saying such stupid things highlights why he is unfit to be in that role. You simply cannot say those things and still be trusted to speak with any authority on issues surrounding diversity in football.
It's a weird one as "people of colour" is deemed respectful in some parts, I'm of African descent for instance and I have no qualms with it, however "coloured" has disrespectful connotations because of it's history, and I'd probably take issue with that. I wouldn't push for a resignation though, just education. We're in a weird societal situation now where every slip has to be punished by blood.
Interestingly, I don't like the term black - never did. Why? Because my skin is actually not black, however, that has become mainstream and yet it means the same thing as negro anyway.
Interestingly, I don't like the term black - never did. Why? Because my skin is actually not black, however, that has become mainstream and yet it means the same thing as negro anyway.
Stating that NHS nurses are mostly women would be a factual statement. Stating it's because "they have different career interests" isn't, as that's an opinion. One that ignores all the other reasons a given profession may lack diversity, or why certain types of people are directed to certain professions.
So if the FA happens to have a few people of South Asian descent in its IT department, clearly the whole subcontinent sees IT as their career of choice?
And you say he shouldn't 'be throwing stereotypes about', but what, it;s fine cos 'there's often some truth in stereotypes'. You are contradicting yourself unless you're saying that only those in the public eye shouldn't say them.
It is now.
It hadn't used to be.
It probably won't be in the future.
It does become difficult to keep up as what's acceptable and what is not changes so frequently and has become a real minefield, but Clarke in his position should be better informed.
Maybe, but women are more interested in people than men? There's certainly different career interests between men and women.
Does it? We don't know. He's clearly seen something to throw out the stereotype. Do you not think there's some truth in stereotypes? It's just the human brain parameterising it's environment.
e.g. gypsies are trouble. Now...not all gypsies are trouble but you can guarantee you don't want them turning up in your local area trying to tarmac your drive.
It wasn't only his use of the word "coloured" in isolation which forced him to leave. It was also his comments on Asian "career choices" and women's football too. Absolute car crash.
Or maybe he just holds dated, bigoted views. This is the guy who dismissed institutional racism as 'fluff', remember. He should have gotten the axe for that.
There can be some truth in stereotypes, but it's more often than exaggerated and twisted with zero context. Worse still much of what they are based on are decades, if not centuries out of date.
Re the gypsy comments, let's not perpetuate stereotypes in this thread.
This seems a very sensible and well balanced summary.
I don't think Clarke was ultimately in an untenable position because of his use of the word coloured. It's the rest of the stuff in conjunction with that.
Prime example of an older generation person with old views and old stereotypes imprinted in his personality.
We can’t be sure how much he believes those stereotypes but somebody in his position should be well aware of what he is saying and what can cause offence.
We can’t be sure how much he believes those stereotypes but somebody in his position should be well aware of what he is saying and what can cause offence.