pɐǝɹɥʇ lɐᴉɔᴉɟɟoun ǝɥʇ - ɐᴉlɐɹʇsn∀

[prisonermonkeys]

What Issue?

The issue of people pretending that so long as they can justify their dislike of Goodes on grounds other than race, then they're somehow in the clear, and the issue of blaming the victim for bringing a racist response onto himself.

 

[Com Fox]

The issue of people pretending that so long as they can justify their dislike of Goodes on grounds other than race, then they're somehow in the clear, and the issue of blaming the victim for bringing a racist response onto himself.

I already said it all in my first comment, you just completely ignored 75% of it just to call me a racist. How am I supposed to add more for the against if the side for the for ain't going against what I am saying. The Pendulum isn't coming to me at the moment.

 

[Spurgy 777]

The issue of people pretending that so long as they can justify their dislike of Goodes on grounds other than race, then they're somehow in the clear, and the issue of blaming the victim for bringing a racist response onto himself.

So let me get this right, anyone booing him is a racist?

 

[Imari]

So let me get this right, anyone booing him is a racist?

Apparently so.

One wonders why everyone booing Goodes is a racist, but when people boo Tony Abbott they're not all racists?

 

[mustafur]

Am I racist for saying that I think it's just down to the aggressive way he did that dance clearly aimed at opposition supporters and his attitude that followed it.

Do I think there are racists involved in the booing?
Yes

Do I believe most people are Racist that are doing the booing?

No or not conclusive enough(keep in mind the worst minds yell the loudest this applies to every subject you can think of).

What makes it worse is the finger pointing he did afterwards, people don't like it when they are blamed for something they didn't intend and the frustration can compound this.

Lets get this clear, Attitude and race are two completely separate things, and you look at people who have terrible attitudes and they get vilified in basically the same way with many cases not having race being mentioned.

 

[LeMansAid]

@prisonermonkeys You've already had your arse handed to you on this. You couldn't logically show that the people booing were racist, and certainly couldn't show that people not tarring all of the booers with that brush were racist.

Here, you're relying on a tenuous link to an issue that had a tenuous (at best) grasp on reality. In short, are they actually the same people? You're running further and further from logic, and I'm quite sure that *BP Couriers are on their way to you again.

*Body Parts

** Due to expected demand, thousands are being grown in a lab

 

[Joel]

I don't know the specifics of this case, but stuff like this...

Am I racist for saying that I think it's just down to the aggressive way he did that dance clearly aimed at opposition supporters and his attitude that followed it..

reminds me a lot of when black hockey/american football players, or hispanic baseball players are chastised for not playing the game "the right way" or for a lack of perceived respect. Of course booing a pro athlete doesn't mean you're racist, but I do think racism often plays into this stuff in sports.

I'm not directing this at you in particular @mustafur , and of course you can have issues with the way a player acts or a player's attitude without being racist. I don't know the situation, the player, or the sport and I'm not pretending to know what's happening. I'm just saying that in my experience there's a decidedly non-zero amount of racism in sports that is often hidden behind a veil of attitude, etiquette, or sportsmanship.

And yes, I think it goes without saying that PM is being unreasonable and sanctimonius, as is tradition.

 

[jimipitbull]

Still believe that the booing of Adam Goodes was just sports fans giving voice to a legitimate opinion about his talent on the sports field?

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-20/karvelas-the-racists-are-exposed/6867926

Boo to you.

Am I a racist too?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You've already had your arse handed to you on this.

And you don't contribute anything of value to discussions, so I couldn't care less about your opinion.

I promise you that every single person who is a racist is trying to justify their beliefs by saying "Goodes brought it on himself".

 

[Com Fox]

And you don't contribute anything of value to discussions, so I couldn't care less about your opinion.

I promise you that every single person who is a racist is trying to justify their beliefs by saying "Goodes brought it on himself".

Once again, I really don't think you are listening. You seem to not be bothered into understanding the Why like everyone else in this discussion and instead just making a quick assumption on What happened.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You seem to not be bothered into understanding the Why like everyone else in this discussion and instead just making a quick assumption on What happened.

The why doesn't matter, because like I said, all of the racists are trying to justify it. They think that if they can reasonably explain it away, then they're off the hook.

 

[mustafur]

The why doesn't matter, because like I said, all of the racists are trying to justify it. They think that if they can reasonably explain it away, then they're off the hook.

The question is then what is your Assumption on how much racists make up the numbers of this saga?

 

[Com Fox]

The why doesn't matter, because like I said, all of the racists are trying to justify it. They think that if they can reasonably explain it away, then they're off the hook.

So what you are saying is that the only relevant thing is What happened (which was people booing someone who is indigenous)? You need to know the Why in order to determine if it is racism or if it isn't. Unless I, an English Studies student (lowest English class for all you non-Australians) needs to tell an English Teacher what is the definition of racism?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

So what you are saying is that the only relevant thing is What happened

No, I'm saying that the only relevant thing is that blaming the victim is racist. Your attitude is "I'm not a racist because Goodes brought it on himself; if he didn't make a big deal out of it, we wouldn't be criticising him for it", where "it" is his racial identity, which is extremely important to all indigenous people. So your comments amount to "I'm not racist; it's Goodes' fault that he's indigenous".

 

[Imari]

The why doesn't matter, because like I said, all of the racists are trying to justify it. They think that if they can reasonably explain it away, then they're off the hook.

And so this is how you justify labelling anyone who claims to dislike Goodes for non-racist reasons as a racist?

That's excellent. So if you don't like Goodes, then either you're openly racist, or you're a closet racist trying to pretend that you have other reasons for not liking him.

Just because there are racists trying to pass their hatred off under a false flag, doesn't mean you get to tar everyone who doesn't like the guy with the same brush. That's faulty logic, and you know it as well as anyone.

In the Venn diagram of "racists" and "people who don't like Goodes", the group of "people who don't like Goodes" is not entirely contained within the group of racists. Or at least, it could be, but you'd have to actually establish that fact first. As long as your proof is "people who don't like Goodes" = "racists", you're not going anywhere. That's circular.

No, I'm saying that the only relevant thing is that blaming the victim is racist.

No. Blaming the victim is blaming the victim.

 

[Com Fox]

No, I'm saying that the only relevant thing is that blaming the victim is racist. Your attitude is "I'm not a racist because Goodes brought it on himself; if he didn't make a big deal out of it, we wouldn't be criticising him for it", where "it" is his racial identity, which is extremely important to all indigenous people. So your comments amount to "I'm not racist; it's Goodes' fault that he's indigenous".

So because I despise him for using his race to take advantage, over and over and over again, to the point where he sees anything negative towards him a racist, that makes me a racist?

 

[Spurgy 777]

The why doesn't matter, because like I said, all of the racists are trying to justify it. They think that if they can reasonably explain it away, then they're off the hook.

So everyone who has a non-racist reason to boo him, is in fact just trying to hide their true racist intentions? Your argument is becoming more stupid by the minute.

 

[BobK]

Unless I, an English Studies student (lowest English class for all you non-Australians) needs to tell an English Teacher what is the definition of racism?

That's unsurprising, given that he doesn't even know the difference between religion and race. More specifically:

actively targeting people by taking advantage of their faith is, in itself racist.

 

[Grayfox]

Shame people cant be like this when david johns said he is ambassador


I cant see how him being ambassador effects people in same way.
Will david jones add a Goodes Tax?
No.

 

[NW48]

Y'know, we wouldn't be discussing this if it hadn't been brought up again by the media. I believe they are as much to blame as anyone for how big this issue has become.

 

[LeMansAid]

That's unsurprising, given that he doesn't even know the difference between religion and race.:

The moral of the story is - never buy ideals off the rack. The price one pays for doing so is that they're stuck with whatever the pre-designed version is. In this case, the uniform worn goes beyond even stereotype, and into the realm of caricature.

Y'know, we wouldn't be discussing this if it hadn't been brought up again by the media.

So true, and my how the media love the uniformed. The media in question don't have to think, they can simply dish out the same generic slop they did last time, and the time before that.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I don't know the specifics of this case, but stuff like this...

reminds me a lot of when black hockey players...snip... are chastised for not playing the game "the right way" or for a lack of perceived respect. Of course booing a pro athlete doesn't mean you're racist, but I do think racism often plays into this stuff in sports.

I don't recall this as being an issue in hockey, or at least I have never noticed that black players got singled out for not playing the game the "right way" any more than any other players do. Do you have some examples of this?

 

[Joel]

I don't recall this as being an issue in hockey, or at least I have never noticed that black players got singled out for not playing the game the "right way" any more than any other players do. Do you have some examples of this?

PK Subban and Evander Kane immediately come to mind. The same applies to Russian players as well. There was a banana thrown on the ice at Wayne Simmonds in London, ON. A banana was thrown at Kevin Weekes after a game in Montreal. Joel Ward and PK Subban have both scored game winning playoff goals against Boston, and both times Boston fans took to twitter and posted tons of disgustingly racist stuff. Habs fans have showed up at games in blackface wearing Subban jerseys.

A lot of the criticism of Subban and Kane in particular is about the idea that they're too arrogant or cocky. I've heard people describing Subban as an athlete who seems like he's "from another sport". Now again, this stuff isn't explicitly racist in origin, but there's an interplay between race and culture here when hockey is almost entirely a sport whose players and culture is from a WASP lineage which values a perceived humility and sacrifice.

The stuff directed at First Nations players was even worse, growing up playing hockey every game we played against Six Nations coaches and parents thought it was OK to just trot out blatantly racist comments about how "they" played. It was abhorrent and probably the only time in my personal life I've encountered people in a position of leadership spreading that kind of overt racism.

I didn't say this stuff was super prevalent, and I didn't say it was a massive issue. I said there is a non-zero amount of it and it contributes to the perception of players and the way they're talked about. I don't think teams are deciding who they sign as players or hire as coaches based on race, but I think there's a subtle racism that exists beneath the surface in hockey (and Canadian) culture overall.

 

[Carbonox]

Habs fans have showed up at games in blackface wearing Subban jerseys.

Explain what's wrong with this.

 

[Joel]

Explain what's wrong with this.

White fans dressed up in blackface and big afro wigs to pretend to be a hockey player who is black (and does not have an afro). It is not an attempt to dress up as the player, or even an attempt to dress up as an exaggerated version of the player. It's dressing up as an exaggerated version of a black man which has nothing to do with the player besides the player being black.

They dressed up like this:

The player looks like this:

The origins of blackface are minstrel shows in the US from around 1850-1960 where white actors would dress up in blackface and act as exaggerated caricatures of black people for comedic effect. The origins of blackface aren't an attempt in good faith to portray a black person in art. They were gutter trash shows where the punchline is "gee they sure are dumb!"

 

[Johnnypenso]

PK Subban and Evander Kane immediately come to mind. The same applies to Russian players as well. There was a banana thrown on the ice at Wayne Simmonds in London, ON. A banana was thrown at Kevin Weekes after a game in Montreal. Joel Ward and PK Subban have both scored game winning playoff goals against Boston, and both times Boston fans took to twitter and posted tons of disgustingly racist stuff. Habs fans have showed up at games in blackface wearing Subban jerseys.

A lot of the criticism of Subban and Kane in particular is about the idea that they're too arrogant or cocky. I've heard people describing Subban as an athlete who seems like he's "from another sport". Now again, this stuff isn't explicitly racist in origin, but there's an interplay between race and culture here when hockey is almost entirely a sport whose players and culture is from a WASP lineage which values a perceived humility and sacrifice.

The stuff directed at First Nations players was even worse, growing up playing hockey every game we played against Six Nations coaches and parents thought it was OK to just trot out blatantly racist comments about how "they" played. It was abhorrent and probably the only time in my personal life I've encountered people in a position of leadership spreading that kind of overt racism.

I didn't say this stuff was super prevalent, and I didn't say it was a massive issue. I said there is a non-zero amount of it and it contributes to the perception of players and the way they're talked about. I don't think teams are deciding who they sign as players or hire as coaches based on race, but I think there's a subtle racism that exists beneath the surface in hockey (and Canadian) culture overall.

The video proves nothing I'm afraid. I have seen that type of comment many, many, many times, about all kinds of players from many commentators. Watch HNIC and Coach's Corner and you'll see Don Cherry telling players of all nationalities to knock off the hot dogging and just play the game and keep your mouth shut. It's a traditionalist vs. new player type of thing and it's been going on for years and will continue to go on for years. The fact that Wayne Simmons played in 529 games in front of likely more than 7 million fans in 30 different markets and had a single banana thrown on the ice at him, to me indicates a distinct lack of racism in hockey, rather than the opposite. One banana is one too many, but it's also just one banana with one idiot on the throwing end of it.

I find the whole "non-zero" argument a total copout to be honest. It literally means as long as someone can point out a single issue that fits their narrative they are somehow validated. It's a way of seeing racism in everything that involves people of race and it overshadows any real racism that might exist or overshadows nearly a complete lack of it as well. I don't doubt your personal experiences, but mine are completely different and this is 2015, not 1997 or 1974.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

That's unsurprising, given that he doesn't even know the difference between religion and race.

What's unsurprising is that you have no idea of the role spirituality plays in racial identity among indigenous people. The two, in this case, are inseparable.

But the fact that you're willing to trawl through months of discussions to prove a point and undermine another user speaks volumes about your character. So you can continue to deny that my points have any merit, but it doesn't change the fact that blaming the victim is racist.

 

[Joel]

The video proves nothing I'm afraid. I have seen that type of comment many, many, many times, about all kinds of players from many commentators. Watch HNIC and Coach's Corner and you'll see Don Cherry telling players of all nationalities to knock off the hot dogging and just play the game and keep your mouth shut. It's a traditionalist vs. new player type of thing and it's been going on for years and will continue to go on for years.

Sure, there's definitely a traditionalist vs. new player element to it, I don't disagree. I'm going to leave the Don Cherry discussion for another time and another thread. I also don't think Darren Pang is an awful person or a capital R racist, he was very apologetic and clearly did not mean to say that. I just consider it an example of how Subban is viewed and the tendency to have players fall into a neat line of supposed etiquette.

I find the whole "non-zero" argument a total copout to be honest. It literally means as long as someone can point out a single issue that fits their narrative they are somehow validated.

It's not really a cop-out to talk about gray areas when we're talking about something as subjective as race and culture. I said I think there's an element to this that is a part of the perception. It's not a cop out to talk about implicit racial bias when I'm talking about...implicit racial bias. I don't agree that I'm seeing racism in everything, nor do I agree it overshadows "real racism". I brought this up because in my opinion I believe that there's often a racial and cultural element to the traditionalist vs. new player argument in the sports I follow (hockey and baseball), to tie into the discussion of the Australian football player. It doesn't mean everyone who boos the players are racist, all it means is that in my opinion a part of the player's perception is due to a racial and/or cultural perception and bias.

The reason I used the term "non-zero" is precisely this, the talk of "real racism". Racial biases impacting the way a player is perceived is racism, and it's real. I say non zero because there's a tendency to wash our hands of this stuff when it happens in a sport we like. It's comforting to believe that the guys in London and Montreal throwing bananas at players are just idiots, and that their views are far out of the norm. But I don't know if I personally believe it's true. I think there's something there that's bigger than one guy throwing a banana.

It's a way of seeing racism in everything that involves people of race and it overshadows any real racism that might exist or overshadows nearly a complete lack of it as well. I don't doubt your personal experiences, but mine are completely different and this is 2015, not 1997 or 1974.

This discussion is subjective and opinion based. We have different opinions about the role of race in hockey commentary and that's perfectly fine. I'm probably reading too much into these things at times. The fundamental difference is that (correct me if I'm wrong) you view the guy who threw a banana at Simmonds as a one off idiot, and I view him as the extreme example of what is a subtle culture of racism in hockey. I like this article for the most part, it loses the plot a bit towards the end but I think there's a lot of good discussion there and it's generally along the lines of what I'm talking about.

Again, I don't think this stuff is completely awful and widespread but I think it's disingenuous to write off black hockey players being called arrogant or flamboyant and criticized for being too hot dog as just a style of play issue when it happens almost every time a black player veers away from the hockey cliches. I think it's disingenuous to write off this same thing happening in baseball, where a hispanic player is criticized for not respecting the game or being too showy. In my opinion there's an interplay between race and culture here, where certain subjective cultural values (the existing hockey or baseball culture/etiquette) are being considered an objectively superior way to act.

 

[jimipitbull]

What's unsurprising is that you have no idea of the role spirituality plays in racial identity among indigenous people. The two, in this case, are inseparable.

But the fact that you're willing to trawl through months of discussions to prove a point and undermine another user speaks volumes about your character. So you can continue to deny that my points have any merit, but it doesn't change the fact that blaming the victim is racist.

Can you explain how a supposedly spiritual indigenous person can just wake up one day and decide to become a Muslim? Perhaps use Anthony Mundine as an example, as he is another athlete of color who gets booed regularly.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Can you explain how a supposedly spiritual indigenous person can just wake up one day and decide to become a Muslim?

Considering that the decision to convert religions is not one to be taken lightly nor made on the spot, can you explain how a supposedly spiritual indigenous person can just wake up one day and decide to become a Muslim?