Clarke Resigns..... right?

[Metalmicky]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football

TBF, my old man still refers to black guys as coloured - doesn't matter how many times I tell him that it's now inappropriate....  He is not trying to offend - it is just how it used to be...

[Metalmicky]

may be off topic mods - feel free to move

[roversdude]

I

[RoversAlias]

Aye, that's how it used to be. And I highly doubt Clarke is racist at all.

But as the leader and face of the FA, an organisation in charge of helping move the game into the modern era and help minorities have a voice, he just cannot use that language.

He came across atrociously today. Not only did he use that outdated term to refer to minorities, he also referred to South Asians being tech-savvy (a tired trope), said Afro-Caribbeans have "different interests", said being gay is a "life choice" and referred to girls being afraid to be hit by a ball in a game.

Ridiculous and completely unfit to be in the position he is (was) in.

[NickDRFC]

Regardless of whether you think offensive words are ok because they used to be ok (I dont personally), if youre in a high profile position then you need to educate yourself/have someone educate you on what is and isnt appropriate terminology.

[Metalmicky]

Aye, that's how it used to be. And I highly doubt Clarke is racist at all.

But as the leader and face of the FA, an organisation in charge of helping move the game into the modern era and help minorities have a voice, he just cannot use that language.

He came across atrociously today. Not only did he use that outdated term to refer to minorities, he also referred to South Asians being tech-savvy (a tired trope), said Afro-Caribbeans have "different interests", said being gay is a "life choice" and referred to girls being afraid to be hit by a ball in a game.

Ridiculous and completely unfit to be in the position he is (was) in.

Didn't realise that - no scope then, had to go...

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Aye, that's how it used to be. And I highly doubt Clarke is racist at all.

But as the leader and face of the FA, an organisation in charge of helping move the game into the modern era and help minorities have a voice, he just cannot use that language.

He came across atrociously today. Not only did he use that outdated term to refer to minorities, he also referred to South Asians being tech-savvy (a tired trope), said Afro-Caribbeans have "different interests", said being gay is a "life choice" and referred to girls being afraid to be hit by a ball in a game.

Ridiculous and completely unfit to be in the position he is (was) in.

Right on. Ironic he was called to account for his role in the Big Picture but shot himself in the foot with these comments showing he is totally unfit for purpose!

[silent majority]

Agreed Baz. He was looking for support amongst board members etc but because of his stance with the Big Picture there wasnt any.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Point of fact. He didn't say being gay is a life choice. He was talking about coming out being a life choice and that footballers who chose to do that needed and deserved support.

[redwine]

What I  can't understand is that he's 63 I believe. That's 3 yrs older than I am.

But he seems 20 yrs older in outlook and attitude.

[RoversAlias]

Point of fact. He didn't say being gay is a life choice. He was talking about coming out being a life choice and that footballers who chose to do that needed and deserved support.

He said the following, word for word:

"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.'"

Whether he meant it to come out in quite that way I don't know, but you shouldn't ever bring the phrase "life choice" into a discussion about gay people because of the obviously offensive connotations. There is no choice involved in being gay, and for any footballer to come out it would be about much more than a simple choice.

[NickDRFC]

Agreed Baz. He was looking for support amongst board members etc but because of his stance with the Big Picture there wasnt any.

So if he had had a different attitude about that, he would have had support, irrespective of his comments? Nice to see cronyism is still alive and well.

[BillyStubbsTears]

RA.

I think we need to be very careful about cognitive bias in reading what people say. What Clarke said on this specific issue wasn't particularly well phrased, but I think automatically assuming he was meaning being gay is a life choice is questionable to say the least. Even The Guardian has reported it as him saying coming out is a life choice, which it clearly is, especially in the context of football culture where that has been far from easy.

I've no axe to grind for Clarke. His other comments are ignorant and from an era I'd have hoped we'd have left well behind, but I can't help feeling this specific comment has been overplayed.

[RoversAlias]

As I say BST, using the term at all in the context is dim-witted at best and indicative of his true opinion at worst. Regardless, he said plenty of other clear-cut offensive things today and has rightly resigned.

What the FA does next will tell its own story. I sincerely hope they don't just go to the next old, white yes man ready to protect the self-interest of the richest clubs.

[RobTheRover]

Nick, I think a term containing the words "cherry" and "top of cake" might apply.

[BillyStubbsTears]

RA.

As I say, criticise him for his antediluvian choice of words. But choose where to draw the line on interpretations.

In the Identity Politics Culture War, I'm regularly thinking that an over-reaction often produces a worse counter-reaction than the original crime.

If you genuinely care about moving society on, I think that's something to ponder.

[dickos1]

What I find strange is
Using the term coloured is deemed unacceptable but using the phrase people of colour is deemed acceptable..

For me they both sound unacceptable but the phrase people of colour is used all the time in the media when describing black people. In fact Andrew marr used the phrase on Sunday.

[Campsall rover]

What I find strange is
Using the term coloured is deemed unacceptable but using the phrase people of colour is deemed acceptable..

For me they both sound unacceptable but the phrase people of colour is used all the time in the media when describing black people. In fact Andrew marr used the phrase on Sunday.

I agree dickos. I am totally confused. I say coloured people all the time. It used to be if you said Black that was deemed offensive.

The world has gone mad. Please would someone of the BAME community explain to me what is acceptable and what is not. Think they themselves might not be sure.

[the vicar]

I still want to know what he has done wrong

[DonnyBazR0ver]

The colour of skin does not matter! Get it?

We are all people!

[DonnyBazR0ver]

People with brown eyes are good at sports. People with blue eyes are good at IT jobs.

How rediculous are the above statements?

[the vicar]

It’s nothing to do with eyes or anything else.  Weather these people are termed black or people is colour is immaterial most of them prefer the be be called black,  some coloured, you call them anything else and they class it as an insult

[IDM]

Sorry for some reason the quote function will not work for me..

Dickos, vicar, (and anyone else unsure) there is a difference between saying “ people of colour “ with “ coloured people “ .

The first statement defines someone as a PERSON FIRST.  The second labels  him or her with a colour first.

It is the same with saying “ disabled “ as opposed to a “ person with a disability “ etc.

Everyone should be described as a person first and foremost.  It is that simple, would you not agree.?

[IDM]

vicar - surely most of “ them “ prefer to be called “ people “

[Campsall rover]

vicar - surely most of “ them “ prefer to be called “ people “

Yes we are all ‘people’

When we are talking about Black Lives Matter we have to differentiate between those who are white and those who are not.
How are we supposed to do that. Yes we are all equal but the fact is we are all different in ethnicity and colour of skin.
The last thing I ever want to do is offend anyone. I am not in any way shape or form racist but I really don’t understand what language is now acceptable and what is not. It is unbelievably confusing.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

It may be easy to get tied up in knots about choosing your words, but it's about the context in which you use them, which in some cases exposes our prejudice and ignorance!

[Branton Rover]

Working where I do I’m pretty much on top of right and wrong terminology

[the vicar]

null
null:  preg_replace(): Compilation failed: disallowed Unicode code point (>= 0xd800 && <= 0xdfff) at offset 34 in null on line nullnull

believe it or not they are proud of there skin as they should be, but IF you call them anything else but place they are insulted.  Just tell me one thing white, is that wrong, there is no difference between the two

[Campsall rover]

Question.

Is our Manager Black, Coloured or A Person of Colour. Is he all 3 of those or none of those.
I am now baffled as to what to say. His skin is a different colour to mine yes but he is exactly the same as me. A human being with exactly same the equality that I  have.

Well that’s the way it should be any way. I am delighted he is our manager not because he is One of the 3 ( above ) but because he was the best person for the job.

I am though delighted our owners were happy to interview him and then actually appoint him because he was the best candidate, acknowledging any other factors were not relevant.

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=278324.msg1001222#msg1001222

This!