1. If the fungus that spoke to it used the 'ge' sound
2. If the fungus that spoke to it was from the same sub type.
Please don't ban me.
' "Football is about the people and the players,” he said. “Then there are those who will mingle in the middle: the coaches, executives and journalists. That last group represents the worst part about football" Marcelo Bielsa
rab_rant wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 8:34 am
Much like the use of gender pronouns I suppose every "person of colour" would like to be referred
to with a specific adjective that they associate with and if you don't use the correct one then you could be classified as racist.
Presumably you wouldn't wish to describe the resistance towards using appropriate terminology for minorities as white/ male fragility though?
A more important consideration than language itself is the relative power relationship between majority and minority demographics. Who gets to choose the terminology applied to particular groups, the people in those groups themselves, or the dominant race/ class/ gender in that population?
The resistance to 'political correctness' in certain quarters is really just a resistance to a more equitable shift in the balance of power.
SaraM wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 10:48 am
A more important consideration than language itself is the relative power relationship between majority and minority demographics. Who gets to choose the terminology applied to particular groups, the people in those groups themselves, or the dominant race/ class/ gender in that population?
There is a some discongruity attached to minority groups using certain words to
describe certain ethnic groups. In the black rap culture the singers themselves
and their fans will often use the "N" word to refer to each other. There is no
condemnation associated with the use of the word. However if a white person
uses the word then immediately it becomes racist.
So it appears that when the minority uses the word it is acceptable yet when the majority
uses it then it is prejudicial. You would think that a word would be neutral but apparently not.
Life should not be a semantic minefield where we have to tread very carefully for fear of
the use of words.
rab_rant wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:39 am
There is a some discongruity attached to minority groups using certain words to
describe certain ethnic groups. In the black rap culture the singers themselves
and their fans will often use the "N" word to refer to each other. There is no
condemnation associated with the use of the word. However if a white person
uses the word then immediately it becomes racist.
So it appears that when the minority uses the word it is acceptable yet when the majority
uses it then it is prejudicial. You would think that a word would be neutral but apparently not.
Life should not be a semantic minefield where we have to tread very carefully for fear of
the use of words.
It's not a discongruity at all, because the contexts are entirely different.
On the one hand, an oppressed race reclaiming a derogatory word as a stand against disempowerment, on the other, the dominant race refusing to stop using a word born out of white supremacism.
You're surely not suggesting those two usages are equivalent?
SaraM wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 12:36 pm
It's not a discongruity at all, because the contexts are entirely different.
On the one hand, an oppressed race reclaiming a derogatory word as a stand against disempowerment, on the other, the dominant race refusing to stop using a word born out of white supremacism.
You're surely not suggesting those two usages are equivalent?
Words should be neutral and not be acceptable or unacceptable depending on who is
saying them.
I do not see how the use of a derogatory word empowers you. I would say it reinforces
the stereotype. If you don't want others to use it then don't use it yourself.
rab_rant wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:46 pm
Words should be neutral and not be acceptable or unacceptable depending on who is
saying them.
I do not see how the use of a derogatory word empowers you. I would say it reinforces
the stereotype. If you don't want others to use it then don't use it yourself.
Rab "Whitey" Rant
It's not for you (or me) to determine whether black people find the word unacceptable or not, or whether they feel empowered by rehabilitating it amoungst themselves or not.
You cannot simply erase a history of colonialism, slavery and torture by declaring that, in your opinion, the word should be neutral.
If you attempt to do that, then you are still trying to control the way language is used about, and by, other people, which is not a 'neutral' act.
I think that the "N" word has become a weapon for black people to show that only they have the power to use it.
In the scenario already mentioned by Sarah, I am totally dejected that Kiko is not allowed to say "someone cover the black guy". How on earth is that racist?
SaraM wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 3:16 pm
You cannot simply erase a history of colonialism, slavery and torture by declaring that, in your opinion, the word should be neutral.
Sara "Whitey" M
May I ask then are black people trying to assert power over white people by using the word Whitey.
I don't think I would take umbrage at being called Whitey. Words are just words.
There are somethings that I find hard to comprehend such as black people criticizing "Black lives matter"
If a individual feels oppressed he can say that the root cause has a historical background, That is the easy way out.
But some black people reject that completely saying by taking that route you are just reinforcing a victim
mentality. They would say that under the law slavery was done away with after the civil war and segregation disappeared in the 1960's and under the constitution all men are created equal and can pursue life liberty and happiness and those are the principles that are worth fighting for. The law gives dignity whereas history denies
it. You have to choose what you want to live under. If you act like a victim you will be treated like a victim.
There is a movie portraying the life of Lenny Bruce. It stars Dustin Hoffman and he explores the use
of words in which he says that if JFK continually used the "N" word then it would be less likely to upset
people. I don't think this is true and if any politician these days does "blackface" then the media
is immediately down on them like a ton of bricks. Justin Trudeau for example. This year he is being more
careful at Halloween.
As Lenny Bruce said "It is the suppression of the word that gives it power"
Don't watch this if you are easily offended
Even if you could render the word meaningless, as Lenny Bruce suggests, that wouldn't remove the discrimination behind it. You are still far more likely to be stopped, arrested, killed, by the police if you are black. You still cannot walk down the street without receiving abuse, you are still less likely to get the job, the house, whatever.
In any case, people simply find new words to demean and discriminate; look at the change of language around learning difficulties, for example. We no longer say 'retard', so kids just call each other 'special' with the same derogatory intent.
Take a non race related example of a persecuted community reclaiming a word for themselves: queer. The word, originally meaning unnatural and deviant, is now used in LGBT communities to express solidarity in diversity. Does anyone object to this?
Words are not neutral, their purpose is to convey meaning, and that can be nuanced and multilayered. Even a word like 'football'. If someone says to me, 'do you like football', that can imply approval or disapproval depending on how it is said, by whom, and in what context.
The trouble with the 'n' word is that racism still exists, and white supremacists still use it to demean black people as inferior. Until that goes away, white people claiming that they can use the word in a neutral fashion are.... naive at best.
I don't buy this whole argument about the 'policing of language', it's disingenuous and totally unnecessary. If you wish to refer to people of colour in a respectful, or neutral, way, there are plenty of words you can use which don't instantly evoke burning crosses.
SaraM wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:08 am
Even if you could render the word meaningless, as Lenny Bruce suggests, that wouldn't remove the discrimination behind it. You are still far more likely to be stopped, arrested, killed, by the police if you are black. You still cannot walk down the street without receiving abuse, you are still less likely to get the job, the house, whatever.
Stats show that black men are more likely to be killed by other black men than by the police.
Spike Lee Jones (a black man) made the movie Chi Raq saying homicide death toll in Chicago
surpasses the death toll of special forces in Iraq.
Black on black violence... does whitey still get blamed for that?
Black people on youtube are saying there needs to be a solution to gang violence
and when they speak up about it other blacks call them Jim Crow.
Seems you can't criticize your own race and have to toe the party line of slavery and oppression.
It is complicated and nothing to do with KIKO so I rest my case and say no more.
If you are using black on black violence to suggest that there isn't also a problem of institutional racism, then I disagree; one doesn't preclude the other. The reasons for black on black violence are also largely to do with class, and the problems which arise when you have few opportunities to escape poverty and ghetto culture. As you say though, this has nothing to do with Kiko, and I'm not going to get drawn into an argument about it.
Kiko Casilla has been charged with a breach of FA Rule E3.
It is alleged that, contrary to Rule E3(1), the Leeds United goalkeeper used abusive and/or insulting words towards a Charlton Athletic player during an EFL Championship fixture on 28 September 2019.
It is further alleged that the words constitute an “Aggravated Breach”, which is defined in Rule E3(2), as they made reference to race and/or colour and/or ethnic origin.
Kiko Casilla has until 12 November 2019 to provide a response.
CLUB STATEMENT
Statement.
Leeds United Football Club acknowledges the charge from the FA today relating to Kiko Casilla and an alleged breach of FA Rule E3 during our Sky Bet Championship match with Charlton Athletic at The Valley in September.
Kiko strenuously denies the allegation and has proactively worked with the FA during their investigation to date.
The next step of this process will be a personal hearing, in the meantime Kiko will remain available for selection.
God has numbered the days of your kingdom and has brought it to an end.
Think that might apply to our promotion chances if a big ban comes Kikos' way.
' "Football is about the people and the players,” he said. “Then there are those who will mingle in the middle: the coaches, executives and journalists. That last group represents the worst part about football" Marcelo Bielsa
rab_rant wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 7:17 pm
Are you referring to King Keogh who drank his wine from the golden vessels of the holy of holies and when he saw the writing went weak at the knees?
Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
Yep, the very same. Only his real name was was Bob the Builder after his construction work throughout the Babylonian Empire..
' "Football is about the people and the players,” he said. “Then there are those who will mingle in the middle: the coaches, executives and journalists. That last group represents the worst part about football" Marcelo Bielsa
feel sorry for Kiko. I think it’s not disputed that he called the player something that was perceived as racist, but if you take into account the language barrier, his tone of voice, in what way was it directed they all stand in kikos favour. Excuse the pun, but it’s not a black and white issue here. Has an explanation been put to the charlton player? Does he accept kikos explanation and I would hope apology, will that be taken into account? If he doesn’t and feels it was racist and hate driven fair enough, but I would hate to see a players reputation tarnished over something like this, when he is not fluent in English and no harm was intended, surely a educational programme of some sort could be an outcome?
If the club backs him, with more facts than us then I back him too
I realised I was dyslexic when I went to a toga party dressed as a goat..