Admitting they happened only serves a purpose of it's being denied.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Black Lives Matter
- Thread starter AuroRaman
- Start date
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
The point I thought was initially being made by the poster was that by reminding people of their obligation to acknowledge such crimes, they were being somehow "punished" for those sins.
Why should anyone have an obligation to acknowledge anything?
Do you require someone to acknowledge the sky being blue for you to believe they think that?
Like I said, just don't be racist. That's enough. fudge virtue signalling.
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
And there we have it, so simple is the answer that it has been found on a football message board.
My admiration for your belligerence remains unfettered.
glasgowspur
Dimitar Berbatov
That's not addressing my very specific point, accountable for what?
By using the word accountable you are implying that that person has done something wrong and should be held to account.
What exactly do you feel the average person in the street, a fair amount of whom support the issue, should be held accountable for?
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
Here's what I said regarding "accountable"...
"I was saying I think it is laughable to think of greater awareness, and holding oneself to a standard of accountability inacknowledging it exists, was "punishment"."
The "it" was racism and prejudice on all levels. The "holding oneself to a standard of accountability in acknowledging it exists" was not only in direct reference to acknowledging that racism, prejudice and systemic racism exists, but also that WE as INDIVIDUALS have to re-evaluate our OWN behaviours and approaches to life to make sure we are doing all we can do.
Being "accountable" does not always mean "having done something wrong" in my book. It signifies someone who is unafraid to explore and re-evaluate their behaviour, which to me makes them a better person.
I can be no clearer.
glasgowspur
Dimitar Berbatov
And who's talking about "punishing others for crimes committed prior"? How about just being aware and accountable for them? What's the issue with that? Since when did greater awareness become "punishment"
This is a copy and paste of your exact words, and I ask again, what are we as individuals accountable for?
This an emotive issue for you, I totally get that and I support your fight, and I understand that in what is trying times our frustrations are getting the better of us all and maybe in haste or exasperation you have possibly used a word in error.
Understandable, all I'm trying to say is please don't tar us all with the same brush. Don't ask me to be accountable for something that I disagree with, have no part of and in my own tiny, miniscule way try to work against.
This is a copy and paste of your exact words, and I ask again, what are we as individuals accountable for?
This an emotive issue for you, I totally get that and I support your fight, and I understand that in what is trying times our frustrations are getting the better of us all and maybe in haste or exasperation you have possibly used a word in error.
Understandable, all I'm trying to say is please don't tar us all with the same brush. Don't ask me to be accountable for something that I disagree with, have no part of and in my own tiny, miniscule way try to work against.
Life's a lot simpler than most people make it
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
There is clearly a miscommunication. I think YOU believe I am saying something along the lines of "everyone alive today should put their hand in the air and admit their part in crimes and prejudices of yore"...if that's the case, you're wrong and I made it very clear I was NOT saying that.
But I WILL say the bold-face bit got me thinking...isn't it "our" fight? I thought we all agreed that racism and prejudice needs to be eradicated as much as possible?
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
Apparently...you should find a platform to explain that to the world.
glasgowspur
Dimitar Berbatov
As I said this is an emotive issue and I am extremely careful in the words I use, the last thing I want to do is cause offence.
I deliberately used "your fight" as of late it is being increasingly pointed out that not having experienced the prejudice I can't understand it.
Seems like there's no right at times.
Wilheldiva
Kevin Scott
let me clarify what i meant.
i was highlighting that positive discrimination in order to attempt to right the past's wrongs, were punishing people today who should bear no guilt for past wrongdoings. everyone is an individual at the end of the day (whatever your race), and therefore no-one should be punished at the expense of others. a typical example is positive discrimination in job applications - the rooney rule to highlight one. what this rule means is that the best candidates arent necessarily interviewed - and i think its a travesty that someone loses out on an opportunity not based on ability, but purely based on race.
like i said before, you dont fix racism with more racism. Imagine the anger someone feels when they find out that they lost out on a prestigious job based on race. that does the racism cause no good whatsoever. look at the furore surrounding asian applicants at havard, its all getting frankly ridiculous.
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
I appreciate you were looking not to cause offence. Let's just move forth and say that we all want the same thing, that is a respectful society...and a Spurs that look like Spurs of
few years ago with the final yard in their legs.
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
Just to be clear, this is the sameThe Rooney Rule that is applied by the NFL? That Rooney Rule simply says that minorities need to be represented in the interviewing process, not the hiring process. No need to get upset. I don't believe anyone would agree with someone getting a job for which another person is better qualified simply because of a quota, least of all anyone who would be hired under such conditions.
This story is very localized in so much as it is a Dallas, TX paper reporting on a wide issue through a local perspective. Suffice to say, I don't believe your scenario is playing out anywhere.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dallasnews.com/business/commentary/2020/01/26/race-still-matters-why-white-workers-keep-getting-more-of-the-good-jobs/?outputType=amp
Time is a limited resource. If a BAME is not already in the top few candidates when filtered down to interview stage, then the rule is a cost to the hirer and reduces opportunities for those around the margins at that stage.
Wilheldiva
Kevin Scott
yes, im refering to the nfl rooney rule. having an interview stage quota is a problem - it means that you arent giving an interview opportunity to the 10 best candidates who deserve it most. but instead, there will be occasions where someone misses out purely based on race (because of past transgressions, which he had no involvement in).
i cant read the article unfortunately (it says its blocked to EU nations, and i dont have a vpn). but i'm guessing its about how prejudices create an unfair employment climate. if so, i completely accept that this is likely the case in many scenarios. however thats why im such a big advocate of everyone educating themselves on unconscious racism. instead it looks like society is looking to pile on more racism to solve racism.
Wilheldiva
Kevin Scott
absolutely this! people do not seem to be able to grasp that the interview process is not unlike an actual job offer in that theres a finite number of opportunities available, and requires resourcing to fill.
the suggestions seem to be that some white people today must suffer for previous generations' transgressions. i hope everyone can see the massive problem with this line of thinking
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
It’s the FA that have been useless.
Kick it out like many associated with football are hamstrung by footballs authorities.
Stories of them wanting to send in representatives to support players racially abused only to be told they couldn’t by the FA etc.
Like I’ve said on another thread, is football serious about racism or is it in the terraces where it costs the product value only where they care? The rest seems token.
Terry, Suarez, Beardsley, Vardy and the Leeds keeper in recent times have been dealt with terribly it in all seriousness football wants to “kick it out”
Black lives matter unless the one doing the abusing is too valuable to the game.
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
Based on where we are today with the BLM movement and based on my previous post, should the Suarez Incident arise again would you push for a total ban for such a player calling someone a N word?
Baleforce
Ron Henry
I would.