Greg Clarke resigns as FA chairman

Why not just use mixed race then or better just stop labelling people period?
Heritage opens up all sorts of interpretations.
Surely the ultimate goal.Labelling people,and/or highlighting physical characteristics,will only ever cause and prolong division.People should only ever be judged on how they behave and never by how they look.
Whilst I agree with the general thought, surely the goal should be that we live in a society where we CAN label people, but without any prejudice or judgement, consciously or unconsciously. I assume this is what you meant though FI? I'm just including your post in case you didn't mean that.

I mean for example if someone's black then they're black. If someone asked me to describe that person I might say that they're black. It's part of who they are, quite literally, and ignoring that seems to be a bit extreme.
 
Whilst I agree with the general thought, surely the goal should be that we live in a society where we CAN label people, but without any prejudice or judgement, consciously or unconsciously. I assume this is what you meant though FI? I'm just including your post in case you didn't mean that.

I mean for example if someone's black then they're black. If someone asked me to describe that person I might say that they're black. It's part of who they are, quite literally, and ignoring that seems to be a bit extreme.
Yes,you have probably said it better.

Of course its fine to describe people,but that is where it end in terms of how we judge and define an individual.Constantly highlighting difference,and making it into an issue,can only be a negative IMO.
 
So how does it work then? It such a wide generalisation.
why do you think using the word “heritage” opens up all kinds of interpretations.

The word heritage literally means inherited, ie characteristics from parents or something passed down.

So me using mixed heritage or that other poster saying mixed race is both fine.

I don’t agree on your argument that most of the world is mixed heritage, you’ve only got to look at China, India or Africa as a continent to know that.
 
as an aside, I see very few if any black supporters in the stadium.

and also very few people that go to west ham live in east London, they mainly travel in from Kent/Essex
The last time I was at WH away was at Upton Park many moons ago and I saw quite a few black supporters, I haven’t been to the new stadium.

Anyway that aside, using the word coloured isn’t massively racist, it’s just uneducated that’s all.
 
Everyone. There will quite clearly never be total agreement but if enough people raise their voice in objection at being labelled as something they deem offensive then it's basic human decency to accept that and listen to what they have to say.

I don't know why some of you act like anyone is trying to control you and the words you use because , to be quite frank, you're not important. It's about the collective and having respect for others within it. This is also precisely why arguments like "my black mate, Dave, doesn't care what you call him" are completely irrelevant. My partner couldn't care less if I call her a woman but that doesn't mean I now have license to go around calling all women bitches.

Oddly enough, people of a certain age often seem to think those values of respect and good manners are things that have mostly disappeared since they were young and it's often those very same people who will kick and scream and drag their feet when it comes to changing how they address people when objections have been raised.

Like I said earlier, a mistake is a mistake. But it's quite obvious from a lot of responses on this thread (not to mention the countless previous threads where racism and racist language have been the main talking points) that there's a lot of willful ignorance from users on here.

The other thing is, how often do people feel the need to identify someone by the colour of their skin? Because there are people on here acting like they're walking on thin ice every minute of the day and living in fear that they'll say the wrong word. Seems a bit odd.

"To be quite frank you're not important".

By this reasoning, neither are you.

Therefore, everything else you've said is utterly irrelevant, and only goes to demonstrate who the "ignorant" one is.
 
why do you think using the word “heritage” opens up all kinds of interpretations.

The word heritage literally means inherited, ie characteristics from parents or something passed down.

So me using mixed heritage or that other poster saying mixed race is both fine.

I don’t agree on your argument that most of the world is mixed heritage, you’ve only got to look at China, India or Africa as a continent to know that.
It's not an argument its an observation.

Do I have mixed heritage, Irish and English? Both my parents had completely different cultural upbringings, religion and were raised in a different class system.
 
Whilst I agree with the general thought, surely the goal should be that we live in a society where we CAN label people, but without any prejudice or judgement, consciously or unconsciously. I assume this is what you meant though FI? I'm just including your post in case you didn't mean that.

I mean for example if someone's black then they're black. If someone asked me to describe that person I might say that they're black. It's part of who they are, quite literally, and ignoring that seems to be a bit extreme.

Your last paragraph has hit the nail that hard on its head theres no way it can come back from it.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.