Neither does the word Yid in this context. Use the word black or yid in another context then they do have racial meaning.
-
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
F.A statement on the word "yid"
- Thread starter djp82
- Start date
Neither does the word Yid in this context. Use the word black or yid in another context then they do have racial meaning.
I
indianspur
Guest
well said Dave =D>
braineclipse
Willie Hall
Very well put by Cameron.
Astonishing that something like that has to be pointed out perhaps, but it's obviously necessary.
Astonishing that something like that has to be pointed out perhaps, but it's obviously necessary.
ledley's knee injections
Sean Davis
Good to see a prominent football website putting out stuff like this too:
Barely anything about the debate surrounding the use of the word 'Yids' by Spurs fans is simple. One's instinct is to view this as a reclamation of the word, a way to empower Jewish people and draw the sting from those who genuinely use it to offend. However, it is also understandable that some find chants including the word, particularly when coming from non-Jewish Spurs fans, deeply uncomfortable.
The rights and wrongs are complex, but the FA's announcement last week that fans using the word could be banned or even prosecuted was strange, at best. Whichever side of the debate you fall, surely it's plain to see that Spurs fans themselves are not the most pressing problem, but those who use the word as an insult against them, and indeed the wider issue of racism in the game. The FA are, at best, missing the point.
The problem with this whole debate, as with plenty of others, is that context is often lost. It's tempting to think that everyone realises there is plenty of difference between a Spurs supporter using the word 'Yid' as a badge of honour or to 'reclaim' it, and an opposition fan using it as an insult. The pejorative should be obvious, but it is still used as a defence by people who, for some reason, think they should be allowed to say what they like.
The FA don't help this, of course. For them context, the most important thing when judging whether offence has been conveyed or caused, seems irrelevant, which is how they've justified punishing a number of players in recent times. They knew these players said the bad words, but couldn't prove the context, so banned them anyway.
Their statement last week stated: 'The FA considers that for the betterment of the game, rules on acceptable behaviour and language need to be simple, understandable and applicable to all people at all levels of the game.'
As said before, nothing about this is simple, and it's pointless to pretend otherwise.
There are those that argue the word should not be used by Spurs fans because it legitimises its use in the eyes of those who wish to offend, thus making it more common. But surely that argument does not stand, because Spurs fans adopted it as an act of reclamation, in response to its offensive use, not the other way around. If Spurs fans magically stop singing 'Yid Army', it won't stop anti-Semitic abuse from those that want to hurt them.
In any case, the word 'Yids' could be something of a red herring. Darren Alexander, co-chairman of the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters' Trust, told Football365: "I would say though that generally, when things are said back to us, it's never the Y-word - it's normally the word 'Jew' or some other form of slur."
This includes two West Ham fans who were arrested last season for making 'Nazi-style salutes' during a game at White Hart Lane. Both accepted a police caution, and one - a West Ham season ticket holder - was banned by his club. The FA did nothing, but did announce that 'consideration will be given to taking disciplinary action against...West Ham United...if further reports of spectator misconduct are received'.
So basically - naughty boys, don't do it again. And suddenly it's Spurs fans who are the problem.
It's not as if it hasn't been made clear to the FA that they're missing the point. Alexander says: "We told them that as long ago as 2006, when we attended a meeting at the FA. I thought the message that we'd all brought away from that day was that there would be some form of education programme to explain to people why it's different when Spurs fans say the word, using it as a positive and therefore not to intentionally offend.
"Personally, I don't find the word offensive. I can see that in time, the meaning of words change. When Spurs fans use it, it's very much in the positive sense.
"I've felt quite empowered when I've stood there with 3,000 Spurs fans in an away stand and it's being sung or shouted. In that moment people of different colours and religions and from different backgrounds come together, and I've always found that very empowering."
Tottenham are seemingly approaching this incredibly difficult subject in a sensible fashion, recognising the different points of view and sensitivities in play. In response to the FA's statement, they are preparing a questionnaire to be sent to all season ticket holders, asking their opinion on the matter.
Which way does Alexander think the fans will lean? "From what I'm hearing among my friends, and the people I've heard from and spoken to and interacted with on Facebook, Twitter and on message boards - although that might be a small sample size - my initial instinct is that they will say it's not time to give up that identity yet."
And if they do answer that way, how will the FA react? By banning thousands of Spurs fans singing 'Yid Army' at their next home game? Reporting them all to the police? A side issue is how a 'ban' on the word would be enforced. The Metropolitan Police have said it would be difficult to prosecute anyone because intent to offend would be so hard to prove, making the FA's statement look even more pointless.
The FA's intentions are probably good, but by going after Spurs fans and 'the Y word', they are attacking the wrong targets and wasting time in a potentially very damaging way.
http://www.football365.com/f365-says/8926439/FA-Miss-The-Point-In-The-Yids-Debate
Barely anything about the debate surrounding the use of the word 'Yids' by Spurs fans is simple. One's instinct is to view this as a reclamation of the word, a way to empower Jewish people and draw the sting from those who genuinely use it to offend. However, it is also understandable that some find chants including the word, particularly when coming from non-Jewish Spurs fans, deeply uncomfortable.
The rights and wrongs are complex, but the FA's announcement last week that fans using the word could be banned or even prosecuted was strange, at best. Whichever side of the debate you fall, surely it's plain to see that Spurs fans themselves are not the most pressing problem, but those who use the word as an insult against them, and indeed the wider issue of racism in the game. The FA are, at best, missing the point.
The problem with this whole debate, as with plenty of others, is that context is often lost. It's tempting to think that everyone realises there is plenty of difference between a Spurs supporter using the word 'Yid' as a badge of honour or to 'reclaim' it, and an opposition fan using it as an insult. The pejorative should be obvious, but it is still used as a defence by people who, for some reason, think they should be allowed to say what they like.
The FA don't help this, of course. For them context, the most important thing when judging whether offence has been conveyed or caused, seems irrelevant, which is how they've justified punishing a number of players in recent times. They knew these players said the bad words, but couldn't prove the context, so banned them anyway.
Their statement last week stated: 'The FA considers that for the betterment of the game, rules on acceptable behaviour and language need to be simple, understandable and applicable to all people at all levels of the game.'
As said before, nothing about this is simple, and it's pointless to pretend otherwise.
There are those that argue the word should not be used by Spurs fans because it legitimises its use in the eyes of those who wish to offend, thus making it more common. But surely that argument does not stand, because Spurs fans adopted it as an act of reclamation, in response to its offensive use, not the other way around. If Spurs fans magically stop singing 'Yid Army', it won't stop anti-Semitic abuse from those that want to hurt them.
In any case, the word 'Yids' could be something of a red herring. Darren Alexander, co-chairman of the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters' Trust, told Football365: "I would say though that generally, when things are said back to us, it's never the Y-word - it's normally the word 'Jew' or some other form of slur."
This includes two West Ham fans who were arrested last season for making 'Nazi-style salutes' during a game at White Hart Lane. Both accepted a police caution, and one - a West Ham season ticket holder - was banned by his club. The FA did nothing, but did announce that 'consideration will be given to taking disciplinary action against...West Ham United...if further reports of spectator misconduct are received'.
So basically - naughty boys, don't do it again. And suddenly it's Spurs fans who are the problem.
It's not as if it hasn't been made clear to the FA that they're missing the point. Alexander says: "We told them that as long ago as 2006, when we attended a meeting at the FA. I thought the message that we'd all brought away from that day was that there would be some form of education programme to explain to people why it's different when Spurs fans say the word, using it as a positive and therefore not to intentionally offend.
"Personally, I don't find the word offensive. I can see that in time, the meaning of words change. When Spurs fans use it, it's very much in the positive sense.
"I've felt quite empowered when I've stood there with 3,000 Spurs fans in an away stand and it's being sung or shouted. In that moment people of different colours and religions and from different backgrounds come together, and I've always found that very empowering."
Tottenham are seemingly approaching this incredibly difficult subject in a sensible fashion, recognising the different points of view and sensitivities in play. In response to the FA's statement, they are preparing a questionnaire to be sent to all season ticket holders, asking their opinion on the matter.
Which way does Alexander think the fans will lean? "From what I'm hearing among my friends, and the people I've heard from and spoken to and interacted with on Facebook, Twitter and on message boards - although that might be a small sample size - my initial instinct is that they will say it's not time to give up that identity yet."
And if they do answer that way, how will the FA react? By banning thousands of Spurs fans singing 'Yid Army' at their next home game? Reporting them all to the police? A side issue is how a 'ban' on the word would be enforced. The Metropolitan Police have said it would be difficult to prosecute anyone because intent to offend would be so hard to prove, making the FA's statement look even more pointless.
The FA's intentions are probably good, but by going after Spurs fans and 'the Y word', they are attacking the wrong targets and wasting time in a potentially very damaging way.
http://www.football365.com/f365-says/8926439/FA-Miss-The-Point-In-The-Yids-Debate
Totally agree and I think it commendable of him to make this statement as he must realise he has now opened himself up to attack from many sides.
Funny how no media has reprinted the decision by Metpol/Attorney General that use of the word is not a criminal offence when used in this context.I do think though that the Supporters Trust are right to seek opinion from season ticket holders to find out what the majority think and indeed from the Jewish community. Democracy in action I like. I definately do not wish to be accused of insulting a religeous group if that is the overwhelming consensus.
And as the FA have now highlighted the fact that opposition 'fans' use this to commit criminal acts at football grounds, I hope they will investigate with the same vigour they have persued Tottenham fans. I expect to see multiple prosecutions....no seriously...oh ok I wont hold my breath.
greatwhitenorf
Vedran Corluka
Wonder if this will affect Al Jazeera's coverage of the PL? Or of Cameron's policies?
Not that they're bathed in credibility when they hire Keys and Gray as football studio commentators.
Not that they're bathed in credibility when they hire Keys and Gray as football studio commentators.
i know a couple of Arsenal supporting Jews based in North London who love dishing out Yid based insults to me (a non Jewish spurs fan) obviously they avoid the very worst stuff (which doesn't really need repeating here) but am often getting texts ridiculing my lack of foreskin and the like :lol:
it's fast becoming a very blurred line though, i think there are a lot of people outside of Spurs, that see the word Yid as first and foremost a representation of a Spurs fan rather than a derogatory word aimed at Jewish people - in fact id wager most people of a certain age first knew of the word in the footballing sense rather than it's original meaning. As that becomes more the case how do you differentiate between someone saying "you dirty Yid bastard" in a footballing sense and those that use it as an antisemitic insult?
it's fast becoming a very blurred line though, i think there are a lot of people outside of Spurs, that see the word Yid as first and foremost a representation of a Spurs fan rather than a derogatory word aimed at Jewish people - in fact id wager most people of a certain age first knew of the word in the footballing sense rather than it's original meaning. As that becomes more the case how do you differentiate between someone saying "you dirty Yid bastard" in a footballing sense and those that use it as an antisemitic insult?
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Indeed.
It's a bit like the Star of David on an armband is offensive, but it's fine on the Israeli flag. The word/symbol is nothing. The intent is everything.
The Met confirmed this last year too.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Interestingly I've never found Arsenal fans a problem about this, despite them being our fiercest rivals.
Chelsea and West Ham are the clubs who the FA and co need to be clamping down on. Ironically both have Jewish owners too!
Phil Silvers
Ricardo Rocha
I see David Baddiels voted then....?
Baleforce
Ron Henry
i assume that was just someone testing you could vote the other way
JerusalemMan
Johnny Morrison
Dear FA...
clapclapclap
Jurgen the German
Tommy Harmer
Society of Black Lawyers, that's not racist is it? :-"
Naughton16
Clive Wilson
If there were a prize for the most easily offended lawyers who also happen to belong to a society with a potentially offensive name, they would win hand down.
Craig_J
Eidur Gudjohnsen
Never thought I'd say it, but well bloody said Mr. Cameron.
Maybe the society of black lawyers can sod off now and try and stop actual racism from happening rather than making much ado about nothing.
Oh, and for so called lawyers it doesn't seem they know the law very well. No doubt they'll be kicking up a fuss again this time next year.
Maybe the society of black lawyers can sod off now and try and stop actual racism from happening rather than making much ado about nothing.
Oh, and for so called lawyers it doesn't seem they know the law very well. No doubt they'll be kicking up a fuss again this time next year.