No see your seeing what you want to see black people traded black slaves there own black people for money and greed it wasn’t just white slave traders there were black slave traders too
I would say some punctuation would help me make sense of this but, with the absolute bullshit over the past couple of pages, I'm not so sure.
Interesting debate, but bringing it back to the present day and a replacement for Clarke; who would be a progressive FA Chief who can represents the myriad of folk who play, coach, watch, ref and partake in this crazy game of football ?
I couldn’t believe it when he said he had grown up kids. They look like they’ve been written by a 7 year old. I haven’t managed to get to the end of any of his posts as they’re so difficult to read.
The black slave trade was not just white people trading slaves but black people as well.
Were white people traded as slaves?
Yes they were. Barbary slavers travelled as far north as Iceland raiding for slaves. The village of Baltimore in Ireland was completely cleared out. Pubs in the west country are often named the Turks head. Raiding Arab slavers were beheaded when caught.
i was playing football last week - centre mid - 2 of us up against the other 2 centre mids - in the heat of the moment when trying to communicate with my co midfielder i said pick up the dark fella - i thought at the time have i said something wrong - i genuinely thought should i have said dark, black, coloured... I felt dark was 'softer' than saying black but god knows really. The other player had zero problem with it because he was a sensible chap and knew there was zero racist intent - there is a massive difference between using certain language and being racist - tbh I've got no views whatsoever on greg whatisname and can see how he is probably not the right bloke in this day and age but jesus christ, when is this treading on eggshells and denying common sense going to be put in check - its not about what people think, its all about saying accepted stuff = a load of bollox.
Exactly the sort of complacent, careless fuckwittery that Clarke is guilty of. Why not "you pick up the number 8, I'll get number 10"? The fact you see this bloke and the colour of his face is the thing you settle on as your reference point damns you. Refusing to comprehend the issue, doubles down on the offense. We can't be "colourblind", insofar as we see the fact of his colour. If we're not racist we choose to act colourblind. It's a choice, pure and simple. Any trouble experienced in avoiding certain language or assumptions is the result of deep seated, unchallenged bigotry. You can change your behaviour, if you're sincere, in no time it becomes 2nd nature, you can overcome your conditioning, it's a choice. I hear bleating about people's age "it was different when I was growing up" that's hollow complacent appeasement for bigotry. I was exposed to all that same conditioning - the street I grew up on had one non-white household in 70; 6 years in primary school (in the 70's) -1 black girl the whole time I was there; 7 years in secondary school maybe 2 dozen non-white boys in the 1500 or so that passed through - active hostility was almost unheard of but all the racist tropes, generalisations, language were common parlance. I just don't repeat it, I can't remember when I did - I must have done cos 'back then' it would not have been challenged, but no more. "certain language" is racist. This is uncomfortable reading, I'm sure, but you'll get no apology from me. Any shrugging it off, 'oh it was a slip of the tongue', appeasement or equivocation leaves room for the bigotry to persist, oxygen for it to thrive.
complete prat as always - in the heat of the moment, you don't know the guy's number, he's just come on its a choice of black or dark to quickly identity him - i chose the latter thinking it was softer as i say, complete prat as always - i have black family, friends etc etc so don't for one minute think you know what you're talking about - go back to your mindless rants
used to work with a bloke who was so scared of his own shadow that when i asked him what the new project manager looked like, all he could come up with was 'mousy' - when i got to site and met her she was a 30 stone Indian woman!!! I rest my case.
Are you sure he didn't say 'housey' (as in size of)?
The black slave trade was not just white people trading slaves but black people as well.
Were white people traded as slaves?
Yes they were. Barbary slavers travelled as far north as Iceland raiding for slaves. The village of Baltimore in Ireland was completely cleared out. Pubs in the west country are often named the Turks head. Raiding Arab slavers were beheaded when caught.
Completely true. I live in this village. We even have an Algiers Inn. re opened this year by Americans. Managed a Carlsberg in the beer garden before the latest lockdown.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
Tbh, I do not refer to people's colour when I speak to them because, for me, it's irrelevant. They are either ok or not.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
Tbh, I do not refer to people's colour when I speak to them because, for me, it's irrelevant. They are either ok or not.
Sure, but sometimes, especially if you're working for a business or organisation, you might have to refer to demographics, or someone's race might be an important detail (for instance in reporting a racist attack). So in those cases, I'm sure we can agree, it's best to use terminology that has been most recently agreed as appropriate by a broad consensus of the people to whom it refers.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
Tbh, I do not refer to people's colour when I speak to them because, for me, it's irrelevant. They are either ok or not.
Sure, but sometimes, especially if you're working for a business or organisation, you might have to refer to demographics, or someone's race might be an important detail (for instance in reporting a racist attack). So in those cases, I'm sure we can agree, it's best to use terminology that has been most recently agreed as appropriate by a broad consensus of the people to whom it refers.
Totally agree but what happens after years of using the agreed terminology it then becomes wrong to do so?
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
Tbh, I do not refer to people's colour when I speak to them because, for me, it's irrelevant. They are either ok or not.
Sure, but sometimes, especially if you're working for a business or organisation, you might have to refer to demographics, or someone's race might be an important detail (for instance in reporting a racist attack). So in those cases, I'm sure we can agree, it's best to use terminology that has been most recently agreed as appropriate by a broad consensus of the people to whom it refers.
Totally agree but what happens after years of using the agreed terminology it then becomes wrong to do so?
It's a good question. I guess we should just be aware that these things change over time (much like scientific understanding) and maybe it's good to check in now and again to see what is most current. Of course someone might point out a change we're not aware of, which can be a helpful guide. There will always be people to explain the reasoning too. Just being aware and willing to make small changes is enough, I think.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
Tbh, I do not refer to people's colour when I speak to them because, for me, it's irrelevant. They are either ok or not.
Sure, but sometimes, especially if you're working for a business or organisation, you might have to refer to demographics, or someone's race might be an important detail (for instance in reporting a racist attack). So in those cases, I'm sure we can agree, it's best to use terminology that has been most recently agreed as appropriate by a broad consensus of the people to whom it refers.
Totally agree but what happens after years of using the agreed terminology it then becomes wrong to do so?
It's a good question. I guess we should just be aware that these things change over time (much like scientific understanding) and maybe it's good to check in now and again to see what is most current. Of course someone might point out a change we're not aware of, which can be a helpful guide. There will always be people to explain the reasoning too. Just being aware and willing to make small changes is enough, I think.
Which is basically what Clarke done. He made a mistake and apologised for it and explained why he made the mistake.
However, his crass comment about being gay is unforgivable
I have tried to find the exact comments that Greg Clarke made regarding the “It’s a Lifestyle Choice” , this does not appear to be published any where. The comment was made regarding the lack of openly gay male players in England. I am not defending his comments in anyway.... but could he not have meant their Lifestyle choice was to not be public with their sexuality. Rather than their sexuality was the choice ?
If anybody has a copy of the exact nature of his comment or link to a recording of his speech, I am happy to be put right. I find it hard to believe that even a complete moron, would state the people choose to be Gay as Lifestyle.
An as I stated many pages back, I am genuinely putting a point forward not looking for a row.... Last time I commented I was immediately attacked and insulted by a poster on here.
Interesting debate, but bringing it back to the present day and a replacement for Clarke; who would be a progressive FA Chief who can represents the myriad of folk who play, coach, watch, ref and partake in this crazy game of football ?
Paul Elliott ? (No not Elliottt !)
No , Paul Elliott gambled “invested” some money with Rufus and lost a load and cos he didn’t like it he called Richard the “n” word in an aggressive text message , he then went on to resign as a trustee from Kick it Out
I have tried to find the exact comments that Greg Clarke made regarding the “It’s a Lifestyle Choice” , this does not appear to be published any where. The comment was made regarding the lack of openly gay male players in England. I am not defending his comments in anyway.... but could he not have meant their Lifestyle choice was to not be public with their sexuality. Rather than their sexuality was the choice ?
If anybody has a copy of the exact nature of his comment or link to a recording of his speech, I am happy to be put right. I find it hard to believe that even a complete moron, would state the people choose to be Gay as Lifestyle.
An as I stated many pages back, I am genuinely putting a point forward not looking for a row.... Last time I commented I was immediately attacked and insulted by a poster on here.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Yep. The difference has been explained further back up the thread.
Tbf I have not and nor wish to trawl through 10 pages of crap to find the answer but I did ask my wife, who is black that same question and she said there is no difference. I guess its down to the individual to say whats offensive to them or not.
Guess so. But seeing as you can't know everyone personally, it's best to go with consensus, where that exists, when you are speaking publicly or to people you don't know.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
Tbh, I do not refer to people's colour when I speak to them because, for me, it's irrelevant. They are either ok or not.
I have tried to find the exact comments that Greg Clarke made regarding the “It’s a Lifestyle Choice” , this does not appear to be published any where. The comment was made regarding the lack of openly gay male players in England. I am not defending his comments in anyway.... but could he not have meant their Lifestyle choice was to not be public with their sexuality. Rather than their sexuality was the choice ?
If anybody has a copy of the exact nature of his comment or link to a recording of his speech, I am happy to be put right. I find it hard to believe that even a complete moron, would state the people choose to be Gay as Lifestyle.
An as I stated many pages back, I am genuinely putting a point forward not looking for a row.... Last time I commented I was immediately attacked and insulted by a poster on here.
I really don't see much difference honestly.
Completely different, one is stating the “ Lifestyle Choice” is privacy about ones personal life, and no desire to be public with sexual preference. The other is the choice is to be Gay.
I have tried to find the exact comments that Greg Clarke made regarding the “It’s a Lifestyle Choice” , this does not appear to be published any where. The comment was made regarding the lack of openly gay male players in England. I am not defending his comments in anyway.... but could he not have meant their Lifestyle choice was to not be public with their sexuality. Rather than their sexuality was the choice ?
If anybody has a copy of the exact nature of his comment or link to a recording of his speech, I am happy to be put right. I find it hard to believe that even a complete moron, would state the people choose to be Gay as Lifestyle.
An as I stated many pages back, I am genuinely putting a point forward not looking for a row.... Last time I commented I was immediately attacked and insulted by a poster on here.
"The real issue is once you run out in front of 60,000 people and you decided on Monday that you wanted to disclose your sexuality - and I would never pressure anybody to disclose their sexuality - what I would want to do is to know that anybody who runs out onto the pitch and says, 'I'm gay. I'm proud of it and I'm happy. It's a life choice, and I've made it because my life is a better place', I'd like to believe and I do believe they would have the support of their mates in the changing room," Clarke said.
Comments
I would say some punctuation would help me make sense of this but, with the absolute bullshit over the past couple of pages, I'm not so sure.
Paul Elliott ? (No not Elliottt !)
Barbary slavers travelled as far north as Iceland raiding for slaves. The village of Baltimore in Ireland was completely cleared out.
Pubs in the west country are often named the Turks head. Raiding Arab slavers were beheaded when caught.
I live in this village.
We even have an Algiers Inn.
re opened this year by Americans.
Managed a Carlsberg in the beer garden before the latest lockdown.
So is calling someone a person of colour different to calling someone a coloured person? This was from an article published today on the BBC website.
Lots of information on the terminology available online if you don't fancy reading back through the thread.
However, his crass comment about being gay is unforgivable
If anybody has a copy of the exact nature of his comment or link to a recording of his speech, I am happy to be put right. I find it hard to believe that even a complete moron, would state the people choose to be Gay as Lifestyle.