Those SJWs in Rwanda eh? Causing all the genocides.
The "lazy black player" stereotype
- Thread starter Barca84
- Start date
What?My post implies nothing of the sort, unless you want to point that out?
Also if you insist ‘there is nothing for you to learn’ on a topic you are clearly ignorant about then you’ve just proved my point.
Even the smartest people are open to learning more things about topics they are experts on, you just want to remain in blissful ignorance because it’s easier than discussing uncomfortable topics.
This is certainly not always the case and a bit of a silly statement. Many people dress, act, have a certain style precisely wanting to be judged a certain way. Same with the latter if there’s advantages in being associated from that area.
Threads aside, these competitions seem to involve some people becoming so open minded that their brain starts to seep out of their skull.
SJWs are far fewer and much less annoying than the average bigot and closet racist who whines against social progress and justice
It was not intended as a catch all statement but taken out of context of the debate at the time I agree it is not correct
That's definitely how I see it. A lot of people are very uncomfortable hearing about the shit minorities have to deal with, for whatever reason (be it guilt, prejudice, ignorance), and instead of taking the time to listen and understand, they take offense and lash out. They've done that thing that you're now saying is racist (you said racially insensitive, but they read it differently), and they know that being a racist is bad. They are not bad, thus they are not racist, so how dare you slander them like that? Maybe you're the racist, seeing race everywhere like that? Bonus points if they complain about SJWs or snowflakes.
Like in this thread. I don't think anyone has called anyone else a racist, yet you still have people up in arms about themselves or others being called racists. They're more concerned with the potential consequences of being called a racist (despite no one calling them a racist) than actual racism and the forms it takes.
It's like when you tell someone that what they just said was idiotic, and they go, "What? Are you calling me an idiot? How dare you call me an idiot?!" Like they're trying to make you out to be the bad one for pointing out their mistake.
So, who is the most progressive? Also, how are they being decided as such? This has been a very informative thread.
Im sorry but am I hearing this in the right context and everything here in this clip from Adrian Durham? Basically saying we shouldn't call any black player 'Lazy' as it may be percieved by some as racist? im sorry but that is way overtop 'pc gone mad etc' When we deny free speach like that more problems and confusion occur, we can't change the rules because one group may be offended. Ridiculous. This is becoming a particular problem with some on the percieved 'left', they have good intentions but channel in completely a way that makes things more polarising for society.
The Racist word is such a powerful one that gets banded about so loosely that it loses it's (wrong word but) heritage and meaning, similarly when labeling a criminal 'an evil person' or a 'nazi'
I'll clarify both points, but I'm not going to continue what feels like an argument rather than a discussion
My post implies nothing of the sort, unless you want to point that out?
Also if you insist ‘there is nothing for you to learn’ on a topic you are clearly ignorant about then you’ve just proved my point.
Even the smartest people are open to learning more things about topics they are experts on, you just want to remain in blissful ignorance because it’s easier than discussing uncomfortable topics.
Regarding your post, the points you made a about racism were each time linked to PoC, rather just referencing it as a general issue that could be faced by any individual of any background. I found it strange that you made the distinction when discrimination/ prejuduce/ racism can impact on anyone
Regarding your point on learning. All humans are falliable and therefore so are their opinions. I like to see alternative views, but in the same way I'd discount opinions in certain publications/ media programmes, I'll eventually do the same with people I come across. I've read several of your posts, but from what I've read I've concluded that there is nothing more to learn or change my opinion on this topic
As highlighted this is my last response to you on this topic, as I don't think our interaction is wedding much to the thread and I suspect it will be I not you that gets the points for arguing/ taking the thread off topic (it happened a week or so ago)
Happy New year btw
Great post.
Just curious about your opinion.
If an Asian goes to, let's say Nigeria, and is being discriminated against by the local population, is it racism?
If a Caucasian goes to, let's say Japan, and is being discriminated against, is it racism?
If an Asian goes to, let's say Nigeria, and is being discriminated against by the local population, is it racism?
If a Caucasian goes to, let's say Japan, and is being discriminated against, is it racism?
It’s racism if it’s discrimination based on race, yes!
Similarly black Brazilians have faced discrimination and prejudice on Japan
It’s racism if it’s any race victimising another based on race
What a naive question
So we can't say Lukuku is lazy? That's racist. But then Ramsford has a tremendous work ethic, is that racist? Or does that just even things out?
We’re in a thread that pertains to PoC, just because that’s the group I chose to comment on, doesn’t mean that I’m discounting that non-PoC can be affect by prejudice.
If you actually read what I said, it’s that in the past PoC faced barriers to expressing their opinions in public, is this not true? In the last 100 years, 50 years of that PoC where still not ‘free’ or still under colonial rule, and in the last 50 years or so, you have first generation PoC immigrants in low-level positions, no representation in media, politics or any industry with access to general society. The last 20 years or so has seen a change in that, and the last 10 years there has been a big shift due to the internet and social media.
At no point does that mean that white people arent capable of being prejudiced - but surely you can see the difference between the hoops that PoC have had to jump through to get their voices heard?
If you can’t see that, then yes you’re right - there’s no point discussing further.
Again - insisting that there’s nothing further you can learn, when you’ve shown that you can’t comprehend what I said is blissful ignorance.
Frankly, I don’t wish to change your mind - I pointed you out because your stance was a common one which happens often, and your posts seemingly centre around racism not existing, or race not existing therefore it shouldn’t be important (despite you seemingly caring about discrimination/prejudice/racism happening to anyone who isn’t PoC and me not explicitly pointing this out - it seems to be important to you then) and that’s fine - but the whole point of the forum is to debate various topics.
Discriminated against because of the colour of their skin? Yes of course it’s racism.
However this is the problem with hypothetical situations, they’re often far too vague. It’s much easier to discuss these things with actual events that happen.
But sometimes it does .
And more often than not Pogba's physical attributes are praised and his deft touch, skill and intelligence are overlooked. The deftness and intelligence characteristics are generally on display more often and are definitely what makes Pogba a great player. So why focus only on the physical? Herein lies the problem, and looking at examples in isolation doesn't necessarily tell the entire story. People are right to point this out, as the fella from Republik of Mancunia (and several others on this thread) have done.
If that's the conclusion you've drawn from this thread then the only car crash in this thread is your deductive reasoning.
When SJWs cut the tall trees, it's white genocide.
I thought we should strive to learn. Getting to know other people's opinion with this question makes it naive? Carry on.
Absolutely bang on. It's the endless, pointless whining that just becomes so tedious. It's like a loop with some people. And I really don't get just what's so bothersome to them about these issues moving forward. Or why it appears to affect them so much...
Happy New Year, psychedelicblues. x
Oof. What a post, well said. Happy New Year. x
It depends if they're being discriminated against due to race! Obviously!
Who compared him to a Gorilla?
Yeah, except that you grouped "SJWs" in with fascists, which gives your game away. SJWs essentially fight for social equality and justice for all (hence the name, d'uh). For those people like you who use the term as one of denigration or to mock the goals of SJWs, it's a big tell that you think "political correctness" and "deplatforming" are probably bigger issues than fighting racism.
It's no surprise that the person on here using "SJWs" as a term to describe people is also the one defending questionable comments.
In fairness, SJW's movement has been somewhat hijacked by deplorable people who are in a constant battle of virtue signaling and shaming of others. We live in a period where people are overly sensitive, and will create drama and call racism where there isn't any. Is there racism? Yes. Is it everywhere? Of course not. However, if you go on Twitter, any and everything can be twisted into racism. One of the poster above calls non-white people PoC (person of color), I guarantee you there are some who will consider that racists as it groups all non-white into this terminology as if they were a subsection of the overall dominant white population.
It gets a bit ridiculous and for some people who are not racists but have had to deal with backlash from this overly sensitive PC culture we live in, it dillutes the important message that racism is still very much alive by going after targets that are not racists but aren't up to snuff on the proper terminology. Avoiding all the buzz words nowadays is like trying to dance tango in a minefield.
If something is a smaller issue than another, it is still probably a good idea to fight it, right?
Also, i bet that if some of the really out there people who fight for the so-called social justice ( it should be justice, period) are to be replaced with more sense-making, less aggressive, ones the overall perception would be more positive.
To put it simply, i feel some give a bad name to the wider group of people who want the world to be a better place for everyone. They push way those sensible individuals who would otherwise support justice and equality. It is also hurtful that many times the loudest noises come from people who push for more than the end of racism. They often have wild ideas about things neither them nor most people understand properly. Things like culture, finance, politics, geography, etc.
It reminds of the "feminism" issue with those colorful individuals who become memes. The message for equality of opportunity, regardless of gender, color, ethnicity, etc., is a worthy of all the attention in the world. The muddying of the issue with aggression, insults, misinformation, is what stops it coming into more people's hearts.
Nope.
Again, you have a big tell when you use terms like "virtue-signalling" to denigrate the idea that people are trying to do the right thing. It's such an obvious whine.
And then you pretend that someone will get terribly criticized for using the term PoC - who are you trying to kid?
It's hysterically funny that it is always the people whining about anti-racism that complain about not being able to speak freely. What exactly is it you want to say? Just tell us.
Yes to both. History will probably play a significant part in determining both the likelihood of it occurring and the impact on the individual.
On a macro level however, where people raise objections to high levels of immigration, such objections are both much more reasonable and less likely to involve racism.
It's ironic that you talk about big tell when scoffing at very valid terms like virtue-signalling (which, heads up, is exactly what you're doing). I promise you if you dig hard enough, you will find people that will get offended about any and everything, PoC being one of them (I know as a fact because I've been to colleges in the USA where that very topic was discussed).
I'm glad you find it hysterically funny, but you're the main one whining right now and no one is stopping me from speaking freely. Not everyone who disagrees with you is some giant closet racist that can't wait to just blurt out the N word. You're just about the worst example of a SJW, and part of the reason I say this movement gets hijacked by people like you.
I fear that you may have wasted two posts already, but if you are able spare one more, I'd be grateful if you could highlight any of my particular posts to back up the two points you made above please (the bigger issues and defending questionable comments) There may be something I could learn and adapt here.
Regards the SJW term. I've only every seen it used as a derogatory term. I use it for people with a questionable approach to 'social issues'. Some examples include some 'single interest' groups who seek extra rights for a limited group of people, those who promote racism and discrimination in the name of fairness (such as promoting job/ training schemes that exclude people based characteristics such as race or sexuality), or conduct fascist type behaviour who seek to bam things they don't agree with. I consider the error of their viewpoints to be driven by the wrong lens/ perspective that I referred to earlier
Going back to the football thread, we need to be careful of branding things as racist when there is little evidence to suggest they are. These thread based claims about Lukaku and Pogba have little to them in my view The recent Koubially incident however is disgusting and needs stamping out with harsh punishment (which sadly does not seem to be getting taken seriously in Italy)
Virtue-signalling is a term that's mostly hurled after people holding progressive/leftist opinions as a way to try to discredit them, in a "you're just saying that so that people can see what a good and caring person you are" way. It may have been valid once, but it has very much been hijacked by shitheads, and these days is no better than "SJW" or snowflake.
And you'll find anything if you dig hard enough. Applying what you find to a whole group, or using it to discredit this group, is what's dumb. I despise tankies (Stalin/Mao/NK apologists), but that doesn't stop me from identifying as a socialist. If some overzealous leftist taking things too far is stopping you from supporting good causes, you need to sort out your priorities.
The demonstrable failure of the philosophy should've done that.
Socialism is an umbrella term that encompasses a massive amount of views and theories on how things should be done. Given that you have no way of knowing what kind of socialist I am, why do you think the failure of ideologies I don't agree with should have stopped me from identifying as socialist?
Id agree with your interpretation of sjw, but as I found out there’s people around here that exist in circles that don’t use the term in that context. It’s best(although tedious) to just say what you mean, and not rely on terms that may or may not be universally understood.
Socialism is a term for which there is (more or less) a common understanding of in the public consciousness.
This is really going off topic now...but if you're an 'a la carte' socialist, then it's for you to articulate the particular brand socialism you subscribe to and identify with.
Last edited:
My priorities are just fine, it's on you if you assume I'm not supporting the good cause. You can look up my post history and you'll see I've always been on the side of equality between players of different ethnicity, I've also had some issues with how some language is used to describe black players and how it's often seen across multiple sports in different countries of the world. I assume everything gets hijacked at some point, but virtue-signaling is absolutely something that is pervasive where there's people who are not looking to make a difference, they just want some attention. It's not about the greater movement, it's about them and their delusion of importance. Unfortunately, more often than not, those are the loudest and because they are the most ridiculous they are the ones you hear about the most and it portrays movements negatively as SJW is a good thing, just like a certain degree of socialism is a good thing but in the country I'm living in (USA), they both have a very negative connotation now and posters like the one I replied to is an example of why that is.
I've said it before, but societal changes often have a rubber-band effect, where the rubber-band was pulled too far to the right (with accepted racism, sexism, etc in the 60's) to now too far on the left with the twitter outrage campaigns that will call anything racist which seriously dilutes the issue when it comes to actual racism and turn off moderates who end up being called racists when it couldn't be further from the truth. At some point, the rubber-band will stop in the middle and we'll (hopefully) resemble a fair society where people truly are judged on their values and not their sexuality, skin color, religion, etc.
This.
With the amount of warped perspectives that there are on display, just writing words like 'when' and 'there' is going to send some posters off into long biled-filled rants. I've seen enough language and free speech taken away, which I feel is what the direction of this thread is trying to do (or at least to take it awat from certain groups/ people)
Last edited:
Great post. Particularly like the end of your 2nd para
The society you describe is a lofty goal we should all strive for. Unfortunately it would likely be opposed by the bigotted who cannot be educated out of the prejudice and those who make a livelihood (financial or just self-gratification) from having a cause to fight for (be it real or part imagined)
From a sporting perspective, the ability to identify true merit that is free from bias (be it racial or any other) would be a competitive advantage to any team. I know it's a fictionalized account, but I love the scouting meeting scence from Moneyball where the General Manager dismisses the old ways of scouting through bias and stereotype, to instead place a higher value on informed opinion*
If fans, pundits, the media and coaching staff could achieve a 'bias-less' perspective, the reward and promotion of true merit would raise the standard of the game in my view. Best example I can think of is the writing off of small players (e.g. Ashley Young as a past example) at youth level due to a bias towards the physical frame that allegedly makes a good footballer - he petsisted and made it, but how many good British players were lost?
*although it was portrayed as primarily quantitative stats based, with limited emphasis on qualitative judgements