Paul Gascoigne guilty over racist comment

[Barry Dragon]

Apparently his tour tickets are selling really well now.

[MacAdder]

Apparently his tour tickets are selling really well now.

Unsurprising. No such thing as bad publicity.
Gazza's happy, bouncer's happy, law people happy... everyone's a winner

[Vimana.]

Unsurprising. No such thing as bad publicity.
Gazza's happy, bouncer's happy, law people happy... everyone's a winner

Smiles all round.

[Barry Dragon]

Smiles all round.

[richard.]

"When we went to see Bernard Manning..."

Wow.

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

The difference is you went to see Bernard Manning, you knew what to expect, and indeed paid for the experience. A security guard shouldn't expect to be racially abused whilst doing his job.

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

[The Rev Arthur Belling]

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

Well said colonel

[lardy]

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

Terrible example. Everyone hates the bleedin' French.

[Mrs Steve R]

The difference is you went to see Bernard Manning, you knew what to expect, and indeed paid for the experience. A security guard shouldn't expect to be racially abused whilst doing his job.

Obviously that situation is different, I meant the difference in how we hurt or offend people.

"When we went to see Bernard Manning..."

Wow.

Wow what? it was not really my choice to see him and it was nearly 20 years ago.. wow

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

[Tuerto]

You can't even tell a joke about the colour of a person's skin these days, it's political corectness gone mad. If i ever get pulled on it though, i mention the gingers and the fatties who get a slating, yet nobody seems to stick up for their rights-usually shuts the bastards up!

[Pearcey3]

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

Good post Colonel.

[BLUETIT]

Unsurprising. No such thing as bad publicity.
Gazza's happy, bouncer's happy, law people happy... everyone's a winner

Bouncers dentist happy.

[Tuerto]

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

What makes you think that you can categorise levels of Racism? i am presuming that you aren't black? if that is the case, you would never know how it feels to have a white person, in a room with a load of other white people, make a joke about the colour of your skin, however meek or piss-poor the joke is. I can't say for sure, but i would say that plenty of black people have had 'gentle' remarks disguised as humour thrown at them over the years, and i'd bet that it pisses them off, because it probably isn't that funny to them. Analise the intent, by all means, what isn't measurable is how the person on the end of the joke feels, what they have experienced, or if they have been victims of racism in the past. Could you see how it would not be a joke to them?

[BLUETIT]

What makes you think that you can categorise levels of Racism? i am presuming that you aren't black? if that is the case, you would never know how it feels to have a white person, in a room with a load of other white people, make a joke about the colour of your skin, however meek or piss-poor the joke is. I can't say for sure, but i would say that plenty of black people have had 'gentle' remarks disguised as humour thrown at them over the years, and i'd bet that it pisses them off, because it probably isn't that funny to them. Analise the intent, by all means, what isn't measurable is how the person on the end of the joke feels, what they have experienced, or if they have been victims of racism in the past. Could you see how it would not be a joke to them?

Ok for it to go the other way though is it. ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG5Kjsz_Y2E

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

What makes you think that you can categorise levels of Racism? i am presuming that you are white? if that is the case, you would never know how it feels to have a white person, in a room with a load of other white people, make a joke about the colour of your skin, however meek or piss-poor the joke is. I can't say for sure, but i would say that plenty of black people have had 'gentle' remarks disguised as humour thrown at them over the years, and i'd bet that it pisses them off, because it probably isn't that funny to them. Analise the intent, by all means, what isn't measurable is how the person on the end of the joke feels, what they have experienced, or if they have been victims of racism in the past. Could you see how it would not be a joke to them?

I'm saying it might not be the best thing for our society if we start hauling people into a courtroom each time someone has their feelings hurt by a piss poor joke, whatever their race, religion, ailment, weight, height...

[Vimana.]

What Gazza said is not acceptable.

IMO , what should have happened is that the offended person should have made his offense known to the perpetrator - in this case Gazza - and also explained , clearly and plainly to Gazza why is was unacceptable. Either in front of the audience, or at first opportunity to do so
If Gazza (or any perp) responded to that with 'whatever , I don't give a shite', or wouldn't speak about it, then he would need dragging through the mire, having utterly deserved it.

Surely, there was no need for tabloid headlines, lawyers, stories of (exaggerated?) hurt - nor fines, nor financial considerations.
Nor further anguish for a clearly fragile Gazza.

He did wrong. He needed telling so, in no uncertain terms. But that's probably all.

[Something Blue]

By applying the term "racial abuse" to what Gazza did you are doing a disservice to people who have actually suffered racial abuse in their lives.

I think Mrs R's point is that if Gazza had made the "flattened some grass" joke then we wouldn't be hearing about it now, it wouldn't be in the press and it certainly wouldn't have made it to court.

What if the security guard was a Frenchman and Gazza made some allusion to "frog's legs" or "snails"? Nobody would have batted an eye. It would appear that some people's feelings are worth more than others.

So just for a second, lets take colour, race and religion out of the equation and just say that out of the whole population there are some people that you can safely make jokes about, but there are some that are off limits for one reason or another. That in itself is a form of discrimination that can only eventually lead to animosity.

Treating only certain sections of society with kid gloves is the opposite of the equality the politically correct claim to seek.

In future it would better if whilst deciding where to put the line between a joke and what you've called "racial abuse" is that the first place we look is at the intent of the person who delivered it and in this instance, poor though the joke was, somehow I don't think Gazza's intent was to denigrate an entire race of people with it.

Good post.

[Something Blue]

What makes you think that you can categorise levels of Racism? i am presuming that you aren't black? if that is the case, you would never know how it feels to have a white person, in a room with a load of other white people, make a joke about the colour of your skin, however meek or piss-poor the joke is. I can't say for sure, but i would say that plenty of black people have had 'gentle' remarks disguised as humour thrown at them over the years, and i'd bet that it pisses them off, because it probably isn't that funny to them. Analise the intent, by all means, what isn't measurable is how the person on the end of the joke feels, what they have experienced, or if they have been victims of racism in the past. Could you see how it would not be a joke to them?

Another good post, I've got splinters in my arse over this.

[Tuerto]

I'm saying it might not be the best thing for our society if we start hauling people into a courtroom each time someone has their feelings hurt by a piss poor joke, whatever their race, religion, ailment, weight, height...

In this case, i agree, although i think that i read somewhere that the majority of racist abuse isn't reported to the police. I think that you are being very dismissive using the term 'feelings hurt' when describing the person on the end of Gazza's comments, Vimana summed it up well for me, but like i said in my earlier post, i doubt you or i have ever been victims of racism that can, and does reach much further that a shit joke by an alcoholic. Anyway, good debate.

[Colonel Cærdiffi]

In this case, i agree, although i think that i read somewhere that the majority of racist abuse isn't reported to the police. I think that you are being very dismissive using the term 'feelings hurt' when describing the person on the end of Gazza's comments, Vimana summed it up well for me, but like i said in my earlier post, i doubt you or i have ever been victims of racism that can, and does reach much further that a shit joke by an alcoholic. Anyway, good debate.

How is it dismissive to use the phrase 'hurt feelings'? What else is it other than that? If he didn't find Gazza's joke funny and instead got pissed off then how else are we to describe it other than 'hurt feelings'?

There's nothing mystical about non-white people, their feelings get hurt the same as everyone else's. Skin colour doesn't have a monopoly on being offended.

Nobody likes having the piss taken out of them but some people are taught how to deal with it when it inevitably happens as a part of life and others are taught that they should spend their lives being outraged about it.

As for you doubting I've been a victim of racism, as a kid I was once called a 'honky' by my black next-door neighbour. I don't recall if they ended up in the dock for it, I'll have to check.

[TruBlue]

In this case, i agree, although i think that i read somewhere that the majority of racist abuse isn't reported to the police. I think that you are being very dismissive using the term 'feelings hurt' when describing the person on the end of Gazza's comments, Vimana summed it up well for me, but like i said in my earlier post, i doubt you or i have ever been victims of racism that can, and does reach much further that a shit joke by an alcoholic. Anyway, good debate.

Playing devils advocate here, but if we are to go on the notion that alcoholism is an illness, haven't you just been similarly insulting there?

As I say I'm playing devils advocate so just interested in your opinion rather than trying to catch you out?

[Organ Morgan.]

In this case, i agree, although i think that i read somewhere that the majority of racist abuse isn't reported to the police. I think that you are being very dismissive using the term 'feelings hurt' when describing the person on the end of Gazza's comments, Vimana summed it up well for me, but like i said in my earlier post, i doubt you or i have ever been victims of racism that can, and does reach much further that a shit joke by an alcoholic. Anyway, good debate.

I would have felt more sympathy for Gascoigne had he pled not guilty and stated in his defence that his remarks were innocent banter. Instead he pled guilty then insisted outside court that he wasn't racist.

And I'd bet that both you and the Colonel have been subjected to racism many times, albeit at the extraordinary low level that Gascoigne was prosecuted for.

[jackrabbit]

When will we see someone being prosecuted for referring to a non-Muslim as a kaffir? Or using the term 'whitey'?

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09...721.1455897487

[Tuerto]

How is it dismissive to use the phrase 'hurt feelings'? What else is it other than that? If he didn't find Gazza's joke funny and instead got pissed off then how else are we to describe it other than 'hurt feelings'?

There's nothing mystical about non-white people, their feelings get hurt the same as everyone else's. Skin colour doesn't have a monopoly on being offended.

Nobody likes having the piss taken out of them but some people are taught how to deal with it when it inevitably happens as a part of life and others are taught that they should spend their lives being outraged about it.

As for you doubting I've been a victim of racism, as a kid I was once called a 'honky' by my black next-door neighbour. I don't recall if they ended up in the dock for it, I'll have to check.

I suppose that for a Black person, the connotations run a whole lot deeper than just 'Hurt Feelings' if only it just was that. I find it incredible that you can be that blase about a subject that has huge historical weight behind it, singling a person out due to the colour of their skin isn't as simple as a throw away remark or insult, there are huge historical connotations behind what some percieve as harmless piss taking. Sure, white people have feelings, and they do get hurt, but the offence you may or may not have felt when your neighbour called you 'Honky' stopped right there, you would have grown to know that his racist comments, as wrong as they were, held no weight, and wouldn't affect your chances in life. There are plenty of black people who have been discriminated against for being black, and that alone. When dickheads like Gazza make moronic observations in the way he did, it manifests in such a way that is beyond being offended.

[Tuerto]

Playing devils advocate here, but if we are to go on the notion that alcoholism is an illness, haven't you just been similarly insulting there?

As I say I'm playing devils advocate so just interested in your opinion rather than trying to catch you out?

Not really, just pointing out his condition, although i can see how it could be construed, so fair point.