Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:00 pm Post subject: Re: Terry v ferdinand or perhaps c**t v c**t
it was a work in progress. My mind goes far too fast for fingers unfortunately.
How can it be like stowjons when i did not ask for money or grass? _________________ The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.
Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:44 pm Post subject: Re: Terry v ferdinand or perhaps c**t v c**t
barmybadger wrote:
Can i not be racially abused because im white english?
I dont understand racism at all
If someone called me an english **** i woildnt care and id expect the same.in return
Try to imagine you are somewhere that you are not the predominant race.
Now imagine that for many years you were unable to get the same jobs, rights, and social standing as the predominant race.
English does not mean where you come from. It is a badge to your inferiority. the prefix and adnoun to every insult.
Now imagine that laws came in to try and rectify that inequality.
All of a sudden they cannot give jobs to just their own race and leave out the English.
Now imagine there is a an underclass of institutionalised racism. You had to try and control it by using laws to stop prejudice. the only way to do it is to ban people from using the race of english in a derogative way. difficult laws to implement and police and fiendishly difficult to enforce. however something must be done to rectify this glaring inequality because of riots and public disorder issues.
You put laws in place and it gets better.
Then with time the laws to protect against serious racism, in some cases, now become draconian. Intent that would see english people unable to obtain office jobs, managerial roles, places at the leading universities are now used to protect someone from being sworn at.
Then whole generations of people who don't even comprehend the racism that used to be understood and complicit are now punished for minor crimes of almost no impact.
Then you are proud to english, basque, greek, black, white or whatever minority you are.
Then English is not an insult. As perhaps black should not be. It is not for you to decide when this occurs. it is for the oppressed minority.
Of course you dont feel that being called english is an insult and perhaps more worrying the word c**t. It does not carry the connotations of inferiority, of oppression, of subjugation, that the other words imply. _________________ The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 2:32 am Post subject: Re: Terry v ferdinand or perhaps c**t v c**t
Sadly we live in a racist country....still
and i thought it was a given the the term Paki was derogatory therefore racist
i would not like being called a c**t, but would take greater offence at being called an english or white c**t
I have been a chelsea supporter since 1970 and kept believing that John Terry would figure out eventually what a prick he is and sort it out, clearly he never did and never will
Terry was brought up in Barking, barking is/was an extreme racist area, so chances are Terry was brought up picking up these views, im not saying he is a racist but chances are if he is he does not have the capability of understanding he is
As Mr Chelsea we must all know how he feels at twice missing out on a champions league medal(missed penalty and non starter this season) Karma?
There was clear provocation from the non to smart Anton and this is all i can see going in Terry's favour
will the court case change anything? would be nice to think it would but i very much doubt it
Whats puzzling me is... the third party who reported this to the police was an off duty policeman, so did this all take place near the touch line where third party people could hear?
oh and my pokerstars account has 5 buxs in it and im out of weed, so any chance of a loan and a bag of weed
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:12 pm Post subject: Re: Terry v ferdinand or perhaps c**t v c**t
It's interesting. I get why you would want a 'racially aggravated assault' crime so random gang violence can be distinguished from lynch mobs, and I get why you would want to make an example of high profile people, though it's ethically dodgy, but I don't see what the law is aiming for by prosecuting run of the mill abusive fighty talk. Abusive fighty talk is not a crime - it's a necessary release of tension.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
We use cookies to make your experience on our website better. To comply with the new e-Privacy Directive, we need to let you know about this. By using our site with cookies enabled in your browser, you agree to their use. You can read more about this on the cookie information page. You can hide this message.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
really
