+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
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. Honest!!!
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?
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Of course I have, I just happen to disagree with it.
I might be wrong here but unless you've walked a mile in a man's shoes you can't really comment on what he has experienced.
UTSL got it right earlier on. The white community are imploding over whether this is or is not an issue yet everyone else is laughing at the futility of the arguments.