Thick people in positions of power, number 547 (football post)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

People complaining that Christmas is banned is basically a Christmas tradition now.

This usually refers to "winterval"
Birmingham Council branded a lot of different events "winterval" including some Christmas ones. People started to claim that this was so as not to offend Muslims, and that idea caught on amongst some people. It was never true, and has been widely debunked.

If you google Winterval Myth you'll see a dozen or more articles on it.

---

I just googled decorations being banned from offices and the Dailymail ran a story in 2006 saying 75% offices are banning decorations because they're afraid of offending people based on a survey done in the US.

If you find the same story being reported by someone who isn't trying to wind up the sort of people who love this sort of stuff it looks like the year before 71% of offices in the US didn't allow personal christmas decorations because it looks unprofessional.

A case of the whole country reading a headline and getting annoyed about nothing yet again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

I just googled decorations being banned from offices and the Dailymail ran a story in 2006 saying 75% offices are banning decorations because they're afraid of offending people based on a survey done in the US.

If you find the same story being reported by someone who isn't trying to wind up the sort of people who love this sort of stuff it looks like the year before 71% of offices in the US didn't allow personal christmas decorations because it looks unprofessional.

A case of the whole country reading a headline and getting annoyed about nothing yet again.

---

Having been in many American offices in the build up to Christmas I can tell you that you would be in no doubt that Christmas was approaching, but yes much more likely to be an expensive official display that people pitting a bit of their own tinsel from home around their cubicle.

Back to the thread, has anyone at the FA spoken to the relevant community leaders and asked if they were indeed offended by the wording used? Or have the powers that be simply adopted the same old approach that we are so uncomfortable with the concept of skin colour that we've just assumed it must be offensive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

Back to the thread, has anyone at the FA spoken to the relevant community leaders and asked if they were indeed offended by the wording used? Or have the powers that be simply adopted the same old approach that we are so uncomfortable with the concept of skin colour that we've just assumed it must be offensive?

---

Have you actually heard what he said?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Have you actually heard what he said?

---

Yes, he referred to black people as coloured, which we all know is an anachronistic term, dated, but hardly offensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

Back to the thread, has anyone at the FA spoken to the relevant community leaders and asked if they were indeed offended by the wording used? Or have the powers that be simply adopted the same old approach that we are so uncomfortable with the concept of skin colour that we've just assumed it must be offensive?

---

I don't think it was too do with offense I think it was to do with the head of a huge corporation doing a speech about diversity infront of parliament and yet again showing he is out of touch.

His role was untenable due to him being a moron, not because people were offended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

I don't think it was too do with offense I think it was to do with the head of a huge corporation doing a speech about diversity infront of parliament and yet again showing he is out of touch.

His role was untenable due to him being a moron, not because people were offended.

---

so you have no issues with the words he's used, just that they were dated. right.

and because he's not used words you prefer, he's a moron. I see.

and people wonder why some say we have political correctness gone mad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

Yes, he referred to black people as coloured, which we all know is an anachronistic term, dated, but hardly offensive.

---

He used the term "coloured" to describe black people
He said that gay people choose to be gay.
He said that women footballers don't like the ball being kicked at them
He said theren't aren't many asian football players as they have different interests, which is why there are many asians in the FA IT department.

Using an old fashioned term to described someone's race is ignorant at best, but when you're in his position - fronting an organisation that involves so many black people you really have to go out of your way to be that ignorant.

He's clearly made no atempt to educate himself or even try to understand any of these issues - as such he is not suitable to be in that job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

That is complete bollocks

---

A nicely constructed response RJK, well thought out and elucidated.

Another example is Stoke on Trent rebranding Christmas as Winterfest in 2014, as reported in the Telegraph and Express. Hopefully that example will be more to your liking. It's not too difficult to find similar examples but forget Christmas, the point I'm making is that political correctness is not always a good thing. Especially when decisions are taken by individuals without consulting the public first which ends up alienating a not inconsiderable chunk of the population.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

so you have no issues with the words he's used, just that they were dated. right.

and because he's not used words you prefer, he's a moron. I see.

and people wonder why some say we have political correctness gone mad.

---

He's a ****ing idiot to be in that job , at the very least

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

A nicely constructed response RJK, well thought out and elucidated.

Another example is Stoke on Trent rebranding Christmas as Winterfest in 2014, as reported in the Telegraph and Express. Hopefully that example will be more to your liking. It's not too difficult to find similar examples but forget Christmas, the point I'm making is that political correctness is not always a good thing. Especially when decisions are taken by individuals without consulting the public first which ends up alienating a not inconsiderable chunk of the population.

---

What makes me laugh is the people I know , but don't associate with , who kick up a fuss about Xmas being banned and that our Christian values lol are being eroded don't go to church and haven't been since got married , they are just offended for the sake of it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

so you have no issues with the words he's used, just that they were dated. right.

and because he's not used words you prefer, he's a moron. I see.

and people wonder why some say we have political correctness gone mad.

---

He's a moron because he was giving a talk about diversity and used an outdated term. I couldn't care less about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

Come on mate you’re chatting bollocks :hehe:

Wasn’t this rumour invented by some looney in America because in the shops they were saying happy holidays to be inclusive of thanks giving and christmas?

They’ve never stopped putting Christmas decorations up in one town centre even in the U.K. ffs.

If it’s quite well documented find us one trustworthy source showing it.

---

Croesy, I'm crap at attaching articles using my mobile ! However it was from the Daily Express in 2006. I'm not clever enough to spread fake news lol

See my reply to RJK for a more recent example in Stoke from 2014, in which someone decided to rebrand Christmas as Winterfest. Didn't go down too well I gather.

Leaving aside Christmas, the point I'm making is that political correctness is not always a good thing. Something that is likely to be controversial should in my opinion always be open to public debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

Croesy, I'm crap at attaching articles using my mobile ! However it was from the Daily Express in 2006. I'm not clever enough to spread fake news lol

.

---

:hehe: don't trust anything about political correctness from them.

It was the same on I read. There was a slight interest in offices not having christmas decorations but it was down to the office not looking professional nothing to do with offending people, don't get taken in by it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

Croesy, I'm crap at attaching articles using my mobile ! However it was from the Daily Express in 2006. I'm not clever enough to spread fake news lol

See my reply to RJK for a more recent example in Stoke from 2014, in which someone decided to rebrand Christmas as Winterfest. Didn't go down too well I gather.

Leaving aside Christmas, the point I'm making is that political correctness is not always a good thing. Something that is likely to be controversial should in my opinion always be open to public debate.

---

Similar to the Birmingham "rebranding" it wasn't done for fear of offending muslims, there were still elements of the festivities that contained the word "christmas"
People just see stuff like this and like to kick up a fuss and blame it on muslims when there's really no truth in it.
Its a quick and easy way to write a newspaper article that'll get people angry over their morning toast, and you can probably reprint it each year.

These things have been debunked many times.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...on.communities

As usual the real outrage and offense is coming from people who read the daily express and daily mail and getting offended by proxy.

As usual no real world examples of people having trouble from political correctness just people saying they're walking on eggshells for no real reason.

And people defending someone for being sacked despite not being able to grasp why :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

What makes me laugh is the people I know , but don't associate with , who kick up a fuss about Xmas being banned and that our Christian values lol are being eroded don't go to church and haven't been since got married , they are just offended for the sake of it

---

Sludge, I would imagine that it's not so much about Christian values being eroded but more likely that people hold certain traditions very dear and don't want others tinkering with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

Sludge, I would imagine that it's not so much about Christian values being eroded but more likely that people hold certain traditions very dear and don't want others tinkering with them.

---

In what way are the traditions of Christmas being tinkered with?

We seem to be living in some mad paradox at the moment where people simultaneous moan about Christmas stuff being put up and in the shops earlier and earlier every year and Christmas being stiffled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

We seem to be living in some mad paradox at the moment where people simultaneous moan about Christmas stuff being put up and in the shops earlier and earlier every year and Christmas being stiffled.

---

At least it gives us something to have a civilised (sometimes) debate about 😊

I just wish we could get as passionate about our beloved football team lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

We seem to be living in some mad paradox at the moment where people simultaneous moan about Christmas stuff being put up and in the shops earlier and earlier every year and Christmas being stiffled.

---

It would perhaps be an irony if some people complaining about Christmas being 'diluted' are probably not practising Christians.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

In what way are the traditions of Christmas being tinkered with?

---

I think I've just walked on to the set of Groundhog Day !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

I think I've just walked on to the set of Groundhog Day !!

---

So the only thing is Christmas Decorations not being allowed in offices from an article from 2006? :hehe:

I'm 35 and as far as I can see not much has changed about Christmas since I was a kid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whisperer

LOL I said yes please just take my word for it.

---

Oh no, that's not good enough on here, you need at least 2 links, several personal witnesses and a voice recording of the actual incident. Otherwise you're just making it up to have an argument. :shrug: Honest!!! :hehe:

But on a more serious note, my father were he alive toady would be about 9 days off 111 yr old. He had a name for every single race you could thing of, or with whom he'd had dealings in his life, but he wouldn't speak badly of anyone. It was just the names used to identify and separate people, in what was, particularly during and after 2 big wars when there were lots of "Johnnie Foreigners" in this country.
He had the following covered:
french
Italians
black folks,
persons of colour,
Jews (Not zionists)
Polish
Scottish
Londoners, (I think to my Dad they were a separate race)
Germans
Russians
Dutch
Americans.........to name but a few. I suspect lots of the descriptive words he used then would not raise an eyebrow in this country used today, whilst others certainly would. I wonder why that might be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

He used the term "coloured" to describe black people
He said that gay people choose to be gay.
He said that women footballers don't like the ball being kicked at them
He said theren't aren't many asian football players as they have different interests, which is why there are many asians in the FA IT department.

Using an old fashioned term to described someone's race is ignorant at best, but when you're in his position - fronting an organisation that involves so many black people you really have to go out of your way to be that ignorant.

He's clearly made no atempt to educate himself or even try to understand any of these issues - as such he is not suitable to be in that job.

---

what you are describing is political correctness - people are getting upset with him because he has used dated terms. It should be about whether someone is the best person for the job (I have no idea whether he is or not but that's not the point we are discussing), and not whether they are familiar with what is and isn't fashionable or least likely to cause offence to the woke generation.

agree with your stance re: gays - I've already commented elsewhere in this thread

Are asians under represented? I have no idea whether they are or not and if they are, what the reasons for that under representation might be. If you can show me your evidence that states his comments are wrong, then please share it. If you think they're wrong just because they sound bigoted then come out and say it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

He's a moron because he was giving a talk about diversity and used an outdated term. I couldn't care less about it.

---

the fact you've posted several times in this thread indicates you clearly do.

so, we have the lead of the FA promoting equality and diversity - which ultimately is what is important - but because he isn't woke then that's it, off with his head.

I'm sure you agree there is no such thing as political correctness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

As usual the real outrage and offense is coming from people who read the daily express and daily mail and getting offended by proxy.

As usual no real world examples of people having trouble from political correctness just people saying they're walking on eggshells for no real reason.

And people defending someone for being sacked despite not being able to grasp why :hehe:

---

what about the head of the FA - he has just lost his job due to political correctness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

So the only thing is Christmas Decorations not being allowed in offices from an article from 2006? :hehe:

I'm 35 and as far as I can see not much has changed about Christmas since I was a kid.

---

Right, as Yvette from 'allo 'allo used to say, "I will say this only once"

I am referring to political correctness not Christmas per se. I've made this abundantly clear in my previous responses which you've apparently chosen to overlook.

The whole gist of my argument is that political correctness is not always a good thing, even the term itself has negative connotations. You may have a different viewpoint and I respect that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

the fact you've posted several times in this thread indicates you clearly do.

so, we have the lead of the FA promoting equality and diversity - which ultimately is what is important - but because he isn't woke then that's it, off with his head.

I'm sure you agree there is no such thing as political correctness

---

He has had numerous chances where he's said daft things before now he's gone infront of parliament to talk about diversity and said something that was considered out of touch years ago showing he probably isn't the best person for the job.

There was a joke in the UK office about someone saying coloured because they were out of touch which aired 20 years ago. So it's not like it's something new, it's an important part of his job to keep up with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

what about the head of the FA - he has just lost his job due to political correctness.

---

No he hasn't, he lost his job because he held prejudices and expressed views completely incompatible with his role.

He fronts an organisation that has railed to reach out to the sizable South Asian population in the UK - why does he think that is? because asians prefer computers to football, he knows this because there are lots of asians working in his IT department.

He is head of an organisation that includes women's football and he thinks that women don't like being hit with a ball.

Using outdated terms for race is one thing (and I think he dd it through ignorance) but to do that while head of an organisation that represents thousands of black footballers is inexcusable.

He was in a public facing role - it was his job to speak on these subjects and in displaying his own prejudices so apparently he has failed th organisation and therefore he had to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

No he hasn't, he lost his job because he held prejudices and expressed views completely incompatible with his role.

He fronts an organisation that has railed to reach out to the sizable South Asian population in the UK - why does he think that is? because asians prefer computers to football, he knows this because there are lots of asians working in his IT department.

He is head of an organisation that includes women's football and he thinks that women don't like being hit with a ball.

Using outdated terms for race is one thing (and I think he dd it through ignorance) but to do that while head of an organisation that represents thousands of black footballers is inexcusable.

He was in a public facing role - it was his job to speak on these subjects and in displaying his own prejudices so apparently he has failed th organisation and therefore he had to go.

---

Surely no one can disagree with this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

He has had numerous chances where he's said daft things before now he's gone infront of parliament to talk about diversity and said something that was considered out of touch years ago showing he probably isn't the best person for the job.

There was a joke in the UK office about someone saying coloured because they were out of touch which aired 20 years ago. So it's not like it's something new, it's an important part of his job to keep up with this.

---

is it? why? surely you measure someone by their actions not their words. isn't it better for the head of the FA to be actively ensuring football is played by all and accessible to all, rather than spending time watching what words he may use for fear of offending the snowflakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

No he hasn't, he lost his job because he held prejudices and expressed views completely incompatible with his role.

He fronts an organisation that has railed to reach out to the sizable South Asian population in the UK - why does he think that is? because asians prefer computers to football, he knows this because there are lots of asians working in his IT department.

He is head of an organisation that includes women's football and he thinks that women don't like being hit with a ball.

Using outdated terms for race is one thing (and I think he dd it through ignorance) but to do that while head of an organisation that represents thousands of black footballers is inexcusable.

He was in a public facing role - it was his job to speak on these subjects and in displaying his own prejudices so apparently he has failed th organisation and therefore he had to go.

---

how do you know he is prejudicial just because he uses outdated terms. if anything, the one showing prejudice here is you. We all know individuals who use the term coloured instead of black and we know they aren't racist, yet here you are suggesting the very same thing.

I've asked for evidence and you've not provided any - that is fine, The Cheeto in chief did that last week in the US election so you're in good company. We can all say whatever we want, but that doesn't make it true.

we're going round in circles - you seem to think coloured is offensive, not everyone agrees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

how do you know he is prejudicial just because he uses outdated terms. if anything, the one showing prejudice here is you. We all know individuals who use the term coloured instead of black and we know they aren't racist, yet here you are suggesting the very same thing.

I've asked for evidence and you've not provided any - that is fine, The Cheeto in chief did that last week in the US election so you're in good company. We can all say whatever we want, but that doesn't make it true.

we're going round in circles - you seem to think coloured is offensive, not everyone agrees.

---

Greg Clarke was Chairman of the Football Association

The FA produced its Vision on Diversity and Inclusion called In Pursuit of Progress

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/thefac...-progress.ashx


In the Foreword Greg Clarke said this:

Football shouldn’t just be trying to keep up with the pace of societal change; it should be helping lead it.

I guess some could think his choice of language at the Select Committee was leading societal change rather than keeping up with it but each to their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays

Greg Clarke was Chairman of the Football Association

The FA produced its Vision on Diversity and Inclusion called In Pursuit of Progress

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/thefac...-progress.ashx


In the Foreword Greg Clarke said this:

Football shouldn’t just be trying to keep up with the pace of societal change; it should be helping lead it.

I guess some could think his choice of language at the Select Committee was leading societal change rather than keeping up with it but each to their own.

---

are you suggesting that Greg Clark is football?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

are you suggesting that Greg Clark is football?

---

Strange question.

No I was pointing out that one of the key signatories to the Vision in that document, who held a pivotal leadership role as Chairman was unable to show the Leadership and diminished the words he put his name towards. This alone made his position untenable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

how do you know he is prejudicial just because he uses outdated terms. if anything, the one showing prejudice here is you. We all know individuals who use the term coloured instead of black and we know they aren't racist, yet here you are suggesting the very same thing.

I've asked for evidence and you've not provided any - that is fine, The Cheeto in chief did that last week in the US election so you're in good company. We can all say whatever we want, but that doesn't make it true.

we're going round in circles - you seem to think coloured is offensive, not everyone agrees.

---

Provide evidence that the people that you know that use the word 'Coloured' aren't racist. We can all say whatever we want, but that doesn't make it true-unless it suits our argument. :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

how do you know he is prejudicial just because he uses outdated terms. if anything, the one showing prejudice here is you. We all know individuals who use the term coloured instead of black and we know they aren't racist, yet here you are suggesting the very same thing.

I've asked for evidence and you've not provided any - that is fine, The Cheeto in chief did that last week in the US election so you're in good company. We can all say whatever we want, but that doesn't make it true.

we're going round in circles - you seem to think coloured is offensive, not everyone agrees.

---

You clearly haven't taken on board anything I've written.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Provide evidence that the people that you know that use the word 'Coloured' aren't racist. We can all say whatever we want, but that doesn't make it true-unless it suits our argument. :thumbup:

---

Well considering she's black and describes herself as coloured, I'd hazard a guess she's entitled to hold that view. Maybe she is racist, but having married a pony white arsed husband, I'd hazard a guess she's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays

Strange question.

No I was pointing out that one of the key signatories to the Vision in that document, who held a pivotal leadership role as Chairman was unable to show the Leadership and diminished the words he put his name towards. This alone made his position untenable.

---

You're defining (his) leadership by actions not deeds.