Watch what you say, it is important. (Some content may offend some people)

[BeeEmm]

Greg Clarke resigned as FA chairman after apologising for saying ‘coloured footballers’. If he had said ‘footballers of colour’ or ‘people of colour, who play football’, this would have been perfectly acceptable, as the description ‘people of colour’ has been used many times by ‘people of colour’ to include anyone who is a different shade and not necessary black.

The man did a huge amount to kick out racism in football and to me it is harsh that he felt obliged to resign over confusing terminology.

If the word colour should not be used, then I feel it is wrong to say ‘people of colour’.

Am I on my own with this view? I am genuinely interested in how everyone feels.

 

[Mr Tidy]

I must admit I thought it was a bit harsh - it didn't look like he used the words he did in any derogatory context.

But these days it's a minefield so it's a topic that needs to be approached in much the same way as one!

 

[john-e89]

Why did he even mention their colour....? Was there any need to BeeEmm..?

 

[BeeEmm]

Why did he even mention their colour....? Was there any need to BeeEmm..?

John, he was giving evidence to a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee meeting today and was answering a question around the difficulty of gay players in football coming out because of social media backlash. He said, "If I look at what happens to high-profile female footballers, to high-profile coloured footballers, and the abuse they take on social media... social media is a free-for-all".

 

[Chris_D]

It's like stepping on fkg eggshells these days!

When I was hiring project managers at NRG in Holland a few years ago I was given a briefing from HR about correct terminology and what not to say and how to address certain people. By the end of it my head was hurting and tbh it was going in one ear and out the other in favour of trying to keep a focus on whether the candidates were up to scratch in terms of if they were competent as a PM in a nuclear environment, not if they identified as a gay-trans-person of colour with a side-helping of ADH-fkg-D!!

:x

 

[john-e89]

Why did he even mention their colour....? Was there any need to BeeEmm..?

John, he was giving evidence to a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee meeting today and was answering a question around the difficulty of gay players in football coming out because of social media backlash. He said, "If I look at what happens to high-profile female footballers, to high-profile coloured footballers, and the abuse they take on social media... social media is a free-for-all".

He’s gone because of that....???????????? You’re kidding right....??

 

[Stevo1987]

Why did he even mention their colour....? Was there any need to BeeEmm..?

John, he was giving evidence to a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee meeting today and was answering a question around the difficulty of gay players in football
coming out because of social media backlash. He said, "If I look at what happens to high-profile female footballers, to high-profile coloured footballers, and the abuse they take on social media... social media is a free-for-all".

He’s gone because of that....???????????? You’re kidding right....??

He said some other stuff as well.

 

[ph001]

I thought it was ridiculous. In fact it was a disgrace that such a trivial comment could be contrived as so inappropriate to warrant the ‘outrage’ that it did. What kind of snowflake society do we live in this days??

Honestly, it beggars belief.

 

[GJ1]

I too thought it was harsh (based on the context of his speech) but I'm not black and a black person may feel differently. I am mixed race and I don't like the term half-cast.

I believe what is acceptable is constantly evolving. What was acceptable in caveman time probably wasn't acceptable in Medieval times and what was acceptable in Medieval times probably isn't acceptable now and so on and so on. Exaggerated for effect. Evolution is gradual but necessary to gain the large differences you see when looking at a longer time period.

Maybe in the future some of the language I've used in this post won't be seen as acceptable.

We all have our opinions built up on our experiences throughout our lives. This is mine. Other opinions are available

 

[BeeEmm]

He is being accused of 'living in the past' using a term that was common in the 50s and 60s and is now regarded as insulting. I believe that it's use is insulting. I feel though that rather than using an old unacceptable phrase, he used an adjective of a very modern phrase, 'people of colour'.

people with disabilities = disabled people
people of Scotland = Scottish people
people of colour = coloured people

In my opinion, the only way to prevent this happening again is to 'outlaw' the phrase 'people of colour'. Do not use the word colour in this context.

 

[enuff_zed]

What kind of snowflake society do we live in this days??

Whoa! Unless you live in Chernobyl, snowflakes are predominantly white, so you're alienating a large part of the population there.
I'm calling for your resignation!

 

[Vornwend]

John, he was giving evidence to a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee meeting today and was answering a question around the difficulty of gay players in football
coming out because of social media backlash. He said, "If I look at what happens to high-profile female footballers, to high-profile coloured footballers, and the abuse they take on social media... social media is a free-for-all".

He’s gone because of that....???????????? You’re kidding right....??

He said some other stuff as well.

My first reaction too was that it seemed harsh but digging in a bit it does seem he made several gaffes during the interview with the select committee: Said that "different career interests led South East Asians to choose careers in IT over sport" based on his experience in an office at the FA. Described a gay player coming out as a ‘life choice’ and recounted an anecdote about girl footballers being afraid to be hit by a ball. You may regard these comments as harmless or as someone who is out of touch with how the FA wishes to present itself.

Upshot was there was a storm created and when he phoned around for support from other senior members of the hierarchy there was none to be found. He had also been heavily criticised for his involvement in" Project Big Picture " about which he had been less that honest. I suspect the powers that be had his card marked for some time and these comments provided the opportunity to wave goodbye.

 

[buzyg]

Completely agree. I listened to what he said and any racist comment went straight over my head. Does that make me a racist too. The worlds gone fecking mad.

 

[ph001]

Whoa! Unless you live in Chernobyl, snowflakes are predominantly white, so you're alienating a large part of the population there.
I'm calling for your resignation!

It's the yellow snow you really need to be wary of!

 

[Z4paul]

Completely agree. I listened to what he said and any racist comment went straight over my head. Does that make me a racist too. The worlds gone fecking mad.

Agree the world does feel a tad mad and uncertain given the ongoing covid pandemic, dramas in the US etc. Also agree with other poster about the likley lack of support for him, his words certainly were clumsy at least which is a shame given what i think were his good intentions. He has though referred to the possibility of racism at FA as fluff and i am not sure who would refer to a neighbour or a bmw salesperson or a colleague as 'coloured', why would we?? I think the label has very difficult associations with the period of appartheid in SA and 'no colourds' type signs that rosa parkes campaigned against decades ago... my mum remembers this message being a pretty standard 'welcome' at clubs, guest houses etc.

 

[john-e89]

He’s gone because of that....???????????? You’re kidding right....??

He said some other stuff as well.

My first reaction too was that it seemed harsh but digging in a bit it does seem he made several gaffes during the interview with the select committee: Said that "different career interests led South East Asians to choose careers in IT over sport" based on his experience in an office at the FA. Described a gay player coming out as a ‘life choice’ and recounted an anecdote about girl footballers being afraid to be hit by a ball. You may regard these comments as harmless or as someone who is out of touch with how the FA wishes to present itself.

Upshot was there was a storm created and when he phoned around for support from other senior members of the hierarchy there was none to be found. He had also been heavily criticised for his involvement in" Project Big Picture " about which he had been less that honest. I suspect the powers that be had his card marked for some time and these comments provided the opportunity to wave goodbye.

Yes agreed, I’ve now read the piece after the same initial reaction. I still think it’s harsh, he’s not a young man, old habits die hard and he’s hardly been hugely outrageous has he.

Times are a changing, but if you get culled for this along the way it’s a poor show imho, there’s not much gradual improvement, just the axe if you make a gaff, people need to get over themselves.

 

[MrPT]

Thought the reaction has been a bit harsh too - especially since his apologies seemed genuine and he willingly stepped down (unlike a few “fingers crossed behind the back” political ones we’ve had recently re. covid breaches).

He’s no monster and has done a lot of good work. I suspect that he would probably have gotten away with any one of those 3-4 slurs on their own, on the grounds of being well-intentioned but clumsy, but firing them all out in quick succession proved that he is, if nothing else, massively out of touch with the groups of people he is supposed to serve and champion. There is just no way they could have slipped out, were he more actively engaged. He would have been called on it already.

And, to echo the comments by others, “coloured” as a derogatory term is hard for us to appreciate here, but in parts of the world where it has strong historical links to oppression/segregation it is abhorred as much as the yellow badge etc.

 

[Z4paul]

Thought it was a bit harsh too - especially since his apologies seemed genuine and he willingly stepped down (unlike a few “fingers crossed behind the back” political ones we’ve had recently re. covid breaches).

He would probably have gotten away with any one of those 3-4 slurs on their own, on the grounds of being well-intentioned but clumsy, but firing them all out in quick succession proved that he is, if nothing else, massively out of touch with the groups of people he is supposed to serve and champion. There is just no way they could have slipped out, were he more actively engaged - he would have been called on it already.

And, to echo the comments by others, “coloured” as a derogatory term is hard for us to appreciate here, but in parts of the world where it has strong historical links to oppression/segregation it is abhorred as much as the yellow badge etc.

Absolutely agree, he showed some character in acting as he did compared with certain political characters and yet another faith leader who rarely seem to bow to the will of victims or the concensus...let's say sorry, sign up learn the lessons and ignore it all again...

 

[exdos]

Is there any official reference work to which we can look up definitions and the actual use of language (i.e. words, terms etc.) which are deemed appropriate and inappropriate, that we must abide by when discussing any subject which might cause offence to others? Or, are the "rules" of political correctness known only to those whom wish to take offence either personally, or on behalf of others by way of "virtue signalling"?

 

[john-e89]

Is there any official reference work to which we can look up definitions and the actual use of language (i.e. words, terms etc.) which are deemed appropriate and inappropriate, that we must abide by when discussing any subject which might cause offence to others? Or, are the "rules" of political correctness known only to those whom wish to take offence either personally, or on behalf of others by way of "virtue signalling"?

I think the idea is you’re supposed to have a sixth sense of who you’re going to offend, where the goal posts are going to shift to at any one time, keep track of them AS they shift, keep one step ahead and have superior knowledge of the cultural values and acceptable language required of the people that might get offended, be ready to immediately throw yourself under a train when your spider senses have a brief moments sleep, have the finest ability by any human to be able to dig yourself out of a very large hole when speaking about subjects that are there to help people but taken out of context by others with nothing else to do but fill their time with trying to undermine someone be they right or wrong.

I’m surprised you didn’t know that John to be honest.... :?