The Kingston Chants

[Antifa Hibs]

Havn't read the whole post and don't want to, but I can't believe a song that was sung by about 30 t0ssers has managed a 7 page thread on here.

Not like Hibs net members to make a song and dance out of nothing eh.

[Storar]

Havn't read the whole post and don't want to, but I can't believe a song that was song by about 30 t0ssers has managed a 7 page thread on here.

Not like Hibs net members to make a song and dance out of nothing eh.

Please don't call me a tosser

[TariqE]

THE POINT I'M MAKING IS THAT, TO ME, IT'S AN ABBREVIATION, NOT A SLANG FORM OF RACISM. Rsoles like you make it racism by being a **** pr!ck.

Now, now..... There's no need to be like that. :greengrin
The point I'm trying to make is that simply because you don't mean it to be a racist term, doesn't mean that it isn't.


I go down to Newcastle a lot and they always says "here's the jock's". Do I start crying like a little girl? Have you ever been outside or do you live in some kind of bubble where everything is perfect?

If you cannot see that it's not the same thing then there's little point in me trying to educate you where professionals have obviously failed.


If you really give a sht about everyone being nice to each other and having a perfect world why aren't you out helping homeless people or starving people in poor countries? You're more worried about an abbreviation of a countries name and a few Hibs fans signing about Kinston looking like a Looky Looky man (If you can even remember the point of the topic).

Don't we all want to live in a better world? :wink:

It's not the words, Silly.

[Danderhall Hibs]

the day folk attack me in the street for being a 'Scot' i may reconsider...

Not what I was getting at.


This is ****.

If you are from Scotland, then you are a Scot just like if you are from Poland, you are a Pole.

Nobody is ever a 'paki' or a 'chinky'. Many people are Pakistanis and many more are Chinese though.

Do you see the difference or are you an idiot? Because it's one or the other.

So we can abbreviate Scottish to Scot, Polisish to Pole, presumably Australian to Aussie but not Pakistanis aor Chinese?

Why? Surely we should treat everyone the same? :dunno:

I think I must be an idiot because your points appear to be full of pish to me.

[Beefster]

So we can abbreviate Scottish to Scot, Polisish to Pole, presumably Australian to Aussie but not Pakistanis aor Chinese?

Possibly because of the discriminatory origins of the words when they were first used? Or the way the BNP use the words as a term of hatred?

Or the fact that anyone from that region of the world is called it, whether they're actually from that country or not?

Not everything boils down to "This is a shortened version of that word and that's a shortened version of this word. What is the difference?". Sometimes things are a little more subtle than that.

[lapsedhibee]

Possibly because of the discriminatory origins of the words when they were first used? Or the way the BNP use the words as a term of hatred?

Or the fact that anyone from that region of the world is called it, whether they're actually from that country or not?

Not everything boils down to "This is a shortened version of that word and that's a shortened version of this word. What is the difference?". Sometimes things are a little more subtle than that.

Some people from the USA have sometimes been guilty of referring to all UK citizenry as 'English', whether or not they were actually English. In your view does this habit make those Americans racist, or subtly racist? Presumably it does, otherwise you wouldn't have introduced the country/region concept into this thread. :dunno:

[Danderhall Hibs]

Possibly because of the discriminatory origins of the words when they were first used? Or the way the BNP use the words as a term of hatred?

Or the fact that anyone from that region of the world is called it, whether they're actually from that country or not?

Not everything boils down to "This is a shortened version of that word and that's a shortened version of this word. What is the difference?". Sometimes things are a little more subtle than that.

I'm not a very subtle person. As for your middle paragraph I'd say that's ignorance rather than racism - a bit like the Americans calling Scots English.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Some people from the USA have sometimes been guilty of referring to all UK citizenry as 'English', whether or not they were actually English. In your view does this habit make those Americans racist, or subtly racist? Presumably it does, otherwise you wouldn't have introduced the country/region concept into this thread. :dunno:

Good point. :cool2:

[Woody1985]

If you cannot see that it's not the same thing then there's little point in me trying to educate you where professionals have obviously failed.

I think you'll find it is the same.

[bighairyfaeleith]

So what's the outcome then lads, we can't call anyone anything?

Or do we just carry on calling a spade a spade?

And before anyone says it yes, I am a spadeist!!!

[The_Todd]

Some people from the USA have sometimes been guilty of referring to all UK citizenry as 'English', whether or not they were actually English. In your view does this habit make those Americans racist, or subtly racist? Presumably it does, otherwise you wouldn't have introduced the country/region concept into this thread. :dunno:

I think you'd get the hump if you were called English by everybody all the time. Some people really get narky about this.

But to illustrate how inaccurate it is, it would also like someone calling all Scots "French" or "German" or "Croatian" simply because we're white.

Dark skinned folk get called "Paki" no matter where they're from. They could be Indian, Bangladeshi, or even Egyptian which isn't even on the same continent. Not hard to see why they might start getting offended.

[lapsedhibee]

I think you'd get the hump if you were called English by everybody all the time. Some people really get narky about this.

But to illustrate how inaccurate it is, it would also like someone calling all Scots "French" or "German" or "Croatian" simply because we're white.

Dark skinned folk get called "Paki" no matter where they're from. They could be Indian, Bangladeshi, or even Egyptian which isn't even on the same continent. Not hard to see why they might start getting offended.
If this is true (which it isn't), then black people of Caribbean descent will get called "Paki". In your experience, do they? :dunno:

[The_Todd]

If this is true (which it isn't), then black people of Caribbean descent will get called "Paki". In your experience, do they? :dunno:


So when you go to the "Pakis" to buy whatever it is your buying, have you ever taken the time out to find out if the owner of said shop is in fact from Pakistan?

I somehow doubt the only nationality of person operating convenience stores is Pakistani.

[lapsedhibee]

I think you'd get the hump if you were called English by everybody all the time. Some people really get narky about this.

But to illustrate how inaccurate it is, it would also like someone calling all Scots "French" or "German" or "Croatian" simply because we're white.

Dark skinned folk get called "Paki" no matter where they're from. They could be Indian, Bangladeshi, or even Egyptian which isn't even on the same continent. Not hard to see why they might start getting offended.

Whether people get annoyed or offended by something is entirely different to whether it is racist. I get annoyed at The Stupidity Of Yams, and even on this board I don't think I or they would be considered racist because of it.

[lapsedhibee]

So when you go to the "Pakis" to buy whatever it is your buying, have you ever taken the time out to find out if the owner of said shop is in fact from Pakistan?

I somehow doubt the only nationality of person operating convenience stores is Pakistani.

Answer my question please.

[The_Todd]

Whether people get annoyed or offended by something is entirely different to whether it is racist. I get annoyed at The Stupidity Of Yams, and even on this board I don't think I or they would be considered racist because of it.


:hilarious

I used to be like that. These days I'm mostly just amused by it all now.

[The_Todd]

Answer my question please.

Ok, I exaggerated a little. But my point still stands. Most people who get called "Paki" aren't even Pakistani. So it's not just an abbreviation, it's also laziness and/or ignorance on the part of folk who do so.

[lapsedhibee]

Ok, I exaggerated a little. But my point still stands. Most people who get called "Paki" aren't even Pakistani. So it's not just an abbreviation, it's also laziness and/or ignorance on the part of folk who do so.

No, your point doesn't stand. You were attempting to divide the whole world into two types: (1) white and (2) Paki. Which doesn't work. The mental confusion in the UK between Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi (neighbouring countries) is of exactly the same order as the mental confusion between English, Scots, Irish and Welsh (neighbouring countries) in the USA. Agree this is laziness and/or ignorance. Why is this laziness/ignorance/confusion racist in the UK if not racist in the USA? :dunno:

[The_Todd]

No, your point doesn't stand. You were attempting to divide the whole world into two types: (1) white and (2) Paki. Which doesn't work. The mental confusion in the UK between Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi (neighbouring countries) is of exactly the same order as the mental confusion between English, Scots, Irish and Welsh (neighbouring countries) in the USA. Agree this is laziness and/or ignorance. Why is this laziness/ignorance/confusion racist in the UK if not racist in the USA? :dunno:


No no.

And I think it's a different kettle of fish. We're confused with English/Welsh/Irish etc because whether we like it or not, we're in a different situation being part of GB/UK - NOT BECAUSE WE'RE WHITE otherwise folk would start calling us German/French/Dutch/Australian whatever. And on another note, not all Scots are white anyway.

People get labelled "Paki" primarily because of skin colour and appearance.

Therein lies the difference.

Glad you agree both are instances of ignorance and laziness, 2 things the Americans are very good at concerning affairs outwith their borders.

[lapsedhibee]

No no.

And I think it's a different kettle of fish. We're confused with English/Welsh/Irish etc because whether we like it or not, we're in a different situation being part of GB/UK - NOT BECAUSE WE'RE WHITE otherwise folk would start calling us German/French/Dutch/Australian whatever. And on another note, not all Scots are white anyway.

People get labelled "Paki" primarily because of skin colour and appearance.

Therein lies the difference.

Glad you agree both are instances of ignorance and laziness, 2 things the Americans are very good at concerning affairs outwith their borders.

:confused: Why are you so hung up on who's black and who's white? Of course there are black Scots. Why not mention that there are white Asians, white Caribbeans, black Chinese, whatever? You still haven't explained why it's racist, rather than just lazy/ignorant, to confuse an Indian shopkeeper with a Pakistani shopkeeper. Do you think it's deliberately insulting to an Indian shopkeeper to be taken for a Pakistani? In other words, is being Indian superior to being Pakistani? If so, isn't that itself a form of racism?

Aw this being hung up about the colour of people skin's (eg Kingston's) mibbe prevents people seeing the deepest racism of aw in this country, namely the concept of the 'proud Scot' who is superior to any other nationality on the planet. Best education system, best engineers, invented everything worth inventing, best this, best that, bla bla bla. Racist, pure and simple. Black and white don't come into it. :devil:

[The_Todd]

:confused: Why are you so hung up on who's black and who's white? Of course there are black Scots. Why not mention that there are white Asians, white Caribbeans, black Chinese, whatever? You still haven't explained why it's racist, rather than just lazy/ignorant, to confuse an Indian shopkeeper with a Pakistani shopkeeper. Do you think it's deliberately insulting to an Indian shopkeeper to be taken for a Pakistani? In other words, is being Indian superior to being Pakistani? If so, isn't that itself a form of racism?

Aw this being hung up about the colour of people skin's (eg Kingston's) mibbe prevents people seeing the deepest racism of aw in this country, namely the concept of the 'proud Scot' who is superior to any other nationality on the planet. Best education system, best engineers, invented everything worth inventing, best this, best that, bla bla bla. Racist, pure and simple. Black and white don't come into it. :devil:


I've never said it was racist - I've just said it's lazy and ignorant, and can quite easily see why those affected can get wound up by it. That is all.

[khib70]

There is a great deal of difference between not being racist and being overly PC.
Yes there is, but don't expect some people on here to see it. The abuse directed at any of us who dare to criticise racist chanting from our own fans has become so vituperative that you wonder what the agenda is:dunno:

The point so many people are missing is that the success achieved by the BNP in local elections in working class English neighbourhoods has been solidly based on a myth. That myth is that non-white people receive preferential treatment in areas such as housing and jobs, because they are over-protected by the "PC brigade" and complain of racism at the drop of a hat. The rise of the BNP in elections has been down to people believing this crap in the face of the evidence. With these Nazis about to stand in an Edinburgh council seat, it's scary to see similar sentiments expressed on this board. (I'm not accusing anyone of being a BNP supporter, merely pointing out the atmosphere on which they thrive)

Many posts on this thread wouldn't be out of place on the Daily Mail letters page, and some of the attempts at laddish "humour" have been pathetic.

Full credit to the few posters who have stood their ground against this mass justification of the unacceptable

[The_Todd]

Yes there is, but don't expect some people on here to see it. The abuse directed at any of us who dare to criticise racist chanting from our own fans has become so vituperative that you wonder what the agenda is:dunno:

The point so many people are missing is that the success achieved by the BNP in local elections in working class English neighbourhoods has been solidly based on a myth. That myth is that non-white people receive preferential treatment in areas such as housing and jobs, because they are over-protected by the "PC brigade" and complain of racism at the drop of a hat. The rise of the BNP in elections has been down to people believing this crap in the face of the evidence. With these Nazis about to stand in an Edinburgh council seat, it's scary to see similar sentiments expressed on this board. (I'm not accusing anyone of being a BNP supporter, merely pointing out the atmosphere on which they thrive)

Many posts on this thread wouldn't be out of place on the Daily Mail letters page, and some of the attempts at laddish "humour" have been pathetic.

Full credit to the few posters who have stood their ground against this mass justification of the unacceptable

:top marks

[TariqE]

So we can abbreviate Scottish to Scot, Polisish to Pole, presumably Australian to Aussie but not Pakistanis aor Chinese?

Why? Surely we should treat everyone the same? :dunno:

I think I must be an idiot because your points appear to be full of pish to me.

Jeez this is getting difficult, so let me try again.

Scot (noun) is NOT an abbreviation of Scottish (adjective). I am not a Scottish, I am a Scot.
Artur Boruc is a Pole. He is Polish not a Polish.

Now, I appreciate that you're having trouble with this, but Pakistani is both the noun and adjective describing someone from Pakistan (in the same way that Australian is for Australia).
So, Salim Malik is Pakistani as well as being a Pakistani.
Mel Gibson is Australian. Mel Gibson is an Australian.

Once you understand this (and leaving all racial connotations of words aside), you will see that there is no equivalence between Scot and Paki. The equivalent word of Scot is Pakistani (or Australian, or Pole, etc).

Aussie is an abbreviation or slang term of Australian. So you could say (again leaving all racial connotations aside) that it is an equivalent word to Paki.

So why is it less offensive to use the word Aussie than the word Paki? Context. Not just the context in which the word will be used by the person who next uses it, but the context in which the words have been used in the past. That history has lent different meanings to each of these words to the extent that while 'Aussie' has remained, for the most part, a harmless abbreviation of 'Australian'. 'Paki' on the other hand, has departed from this and become a term of abuse in itself.

[lapsedhibee]

Jeez this is getting difficult, so let me try again.

Scot (noun) is NOT an abbreviation of Scottish (adjective). I am not a Scottish, I am a Scot.
Artur Boruc is a Pole. He is Polish not a Polish.

Now, I appreciate that you're having trouble with this, but Pakistani is both the noun and adjective describing someone from Pakistan (in the same way that Australian is for Australia).
So, Salim Malik is Pakistani as well as being a Pakistani.
Mel Gibson is Australian. Mel Gibson is an Australian.

Once you understand this (and leaving all racial connotations of words aside), you will see that there is no equivalence between Scot and Paki. The equivalent word of Scot is Pakistani (or Australian, or Pole, etc).

Aussie is an abbreviation or slang term of Australian. So you could say (again leaving all racial connotations aside) that it is an equivalent word to Paki.

So why is it less offensive to use the word Aussie than the word Paki? Context. Not just the context in which the word will be used by the person who next uses it, but the context in which the words have been used in the past. That history has lent different meanings to each of these words to the extent that while 'Aussie' has remained, for the most part, a harmless abbreviation of 'Australian'. 'Paki' on the other hand, has departed from this and become a term of abuse in itself.
Follow the grammatical distinctions you're making, but not sure why you think they're of such overwhelming significance to the general argument that you think yourself justified in abusing other posters who haven't picked up on those distinctions.

There's been a fair bit of namecalling - idiot, pathetic, ineducable, ignorant, etc - on this thread. For a movement which started out with an intention of being tolerant towards allsorts, anti-racism has come a long way. Being now a part of the establishment orthodoxy, it appears to have adopted some of its smugness.

[TariqE]

Follow the grammatical distinctions you're making, but not sure why you think they're of such overwhelming significance to the general argument that you think yourself justified in abusing other posters who haven't picked up on those distinctions.

They're significant because a previous poster made claim that Scot and Paki were equivalent. I am pointing out that they are not, even without race argument. Added to the race argument, it shows a distinct lack of understanding (to the point of wilful ignorance) on the part of such posters.


There's been a fair bit of namecalling - idiot, pathetic, ineducable, ignorant, etc - on this thread. For a movement which started out with an intention of being tolerant towards allsorts, anti-racism has come a long way. Being now a part of the establishment orthodoxy, it appears to have adopted some of its smugness.

Inevitably there is name calling as different sides of the argument collide, but I think I've tried my best to stick to the main thrust of my points without getting too bogged down in that. The name-calling hasn't IMO been too bad- we've not degenerated (too much) into the realms of 'f-you, you're wrong, endof' bollox that such an argument is more than capable of sliding into.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I haven't been able to post on here for a while and, for what it's worth, I think it's quite good to see this being argued at such length.

I don't think I can add anything that hasn't already been covered by TariqE, sadtom, khib (especially his latest post) and others. As khib said, well done to them for standing their ground. :agree:

[wilkie_1]

i will be singing the song again next time we play hearts coz i like it and i think its funny and i dont think its racist! and i know alot of ppl that will be singing it along with me and im sure it will be herd at full volume in the roseburn bar on Jan 3rd! if u dont like it and u think its racist dont sing it simple as that! stop moaning on here telling ppl what they can and cannot say and go moan to ur wifes, well thats if theyv not already left yous for being a pain in the arse!

[Danderhall Hibs]

There's been a fair bit of namecalling - idiot, pathetic, ineducable, ignorant, etc - on this thread. For a movement which started out with an intention of being tolerant towards allsorts, anti-racism has come a long way. Being now a part of the establishment orthodoxy, it appears to have adopted some of its smugness.

I think I prefer to call it patronising.

[lapsedhibee]

I think I prefer to call it patronising.

:tsk tsk: But patronising is an adjective, whereas - crucially - smugness is a noun.

Idiot!

[khib70]

i will be singing the song again next time we play hearts coz i like it and i think its funny and i dont think its racist! and i know alot of ppl that will be singing it along with me and im sure it will be herd at full volume in the roseburn bar on Jan 3rd! if u dont like it and u think its racist dont sing it simple as that! stop moaning on here telling ppl what they can and cannot say and go moan to ur wifes, well thats if theyv not already left yous for being a pain in the arse!
Well, aren't you the big man? As long as people supporting the club I've supported for nearly 50 years sing this offensive garbage, I'll object to it. If you want to shame us in public I can't stop you, but I'm damn well going to criticise you for it, however many juvenile insults you string together.

[bighairyfaeleith]

Well, aren't you the big man? As long as people supporting the club I've supported for nearly 50 years sing this offensive garbage, I'll object to it. If you want to shame us in public I can't stop you, but I'm damn well going to criticise you for it, however many juvenile insults you string together.

Why do you keep telling us you have supported the club for nearly 50 years? :confused:

Do you think that makes you a better fan?

Do you think that gives you the moral high ground?

I'v only supported the club for around 24 years does that mean you are twice as good a fan as me and therefore I should say what you want me to say?

I've never sung the kingston song, but I can't say that I find it offensive and probably would sing it.

[TariqE]

:tsk tsk: But patronising is an adjective, whereas - crucially - smugness is a noun.

Idiot!


You're bashing your head against a brick wall with that one..... :wink:

[wilkie_1]

Well, aren't you the big man? As long as people supporting the club I've supported for nearly 50 years sing this offensive garbage, I'll object to it. If you want to shame us in public I can't stop you, but I'm damn well going to criticise you for it, however many juvenile insults you string together.


in what way does my statement say that i am the big man? am goin to sing it coz i find it funny and want to have a laugh when i go to see the match, instead of sittin there moanin at what other ppl have got say. it all come with goin to a match. u sound like u would be more suited to sittin in ur house and watchin the match! just because u are older and u keep on saying uv supported this club for nearly 50 years does that give u more rights in what to say and what not to say? by sayin shaming us? who do u mean? u can only make this point about urself! so i am only shaming u. so a dont give a toss!

[Speedy]

I think you'd get the hump if you were called English by everybody all the time. Some people really get narky about this.

But to illustrate how inaccurate it is, it would also like someone calling all Scots "French" or "German" or "Croatian" simply because we're white.

Dark skinned folk get called "Paki" no matter where they're from. They could be Indian, Bangladeshi, or even Egyptian which isn't even on the same continent. Not hard to see why they might start getting offended.

Surely that is no more racist than assuming someone is Pakistani from the colour of their skin?

[The_Todd]

Surely that is no more racist than assuming someone is Pakistani from the colour of their skin?

That's the same as I was saying :confused:

[bighairyfaeleith]

That's the same as I was saying :confused:

Ok I am confused, can summarise what makes us racist please, I think this is right

1. If you guess someones nationality and get it wrong you are racists
2. The term pakistani is also racist if the person is not from pakistan

This is ****ing nuts, it's just a song, sing it or don't sing it!!

[The_Todd]

Ok I am confused, can summarise what makes us racist please, I think this is right

1. If you guess someones nationality and get it wrong you are racists
2. The term pakistani is also racist if the person is not from pakistan

This is ****ing nuts, it's just a song, sing it or don't sing it!!

FFS, my input has been limited to most people called "Paki" aren't actually Pakistani. That is all. As an aside, the term "Paki" is often used as an insult - "Pakis Go Home" I believe is whats scrawled in one of the toilet cubicles at work. I assume, much like the Hun famine song, it's not a polite request but meant to cause upset.

I don't give two hoots about the song. I didn't sing it, I won't sing it. On the other hand, I don't think it was sung with racism or malice in mind.

[Ivan Drago]

Don't think it was racist at all. And if it was it definately wouldn't have been sang with racist intentions.

[ozhibs1875]

Hand bags at dawn


bloody hell you lot argue about hee haw


look in the mirror and get a life:brickwall

[Danderhall Hibs]

Hand bags at dawn


bloody hell you lot argue about hee haw


look in the mirror and get a life:brickwall

Are you trying to start an argument?

[khib70]

Why do you keep telling us you have supported the club for nearly 50 years? :confused:

Do you think that makes you a better fan?

Do you think that gives you the moral high ground?

I'v only supported the club for around 24 years does that mean you are twice as good a fan as me and therefore I should say what you want me to say?

I've never sung the kingston song, but I can't say that I find it offensive and probably would sing it.


in what way does my statement say that i am the big man? am goin to sing it coz i find it funny and want to have a laugh when i go to see the match, instead of sittin there moanin at what other ppl have got say. it all come with goin to a match. u sound like u would be more suited to sittin in ur house and watchin the match! just because u are older and u keep on saying uv supported this club for nearly 50 years does that give u more rights in what to say and what not to say? by sayin shaming us? who do u mean? u can only make this point about urself! so i am only shaming u. so a dont give a toss!
No it doesn't make me a bigger or better fan than either of you. I'm not claiming that. I'm pointing out that as a supporter, I feel ashamed that fellow Hibbies sing this kind of song, or think it's funny. Bighairy says he wouldn't sing it and that'll do for me. Wilkie, I don't think I have any more rights than you. I have the same right as everyone else to have an opinion about this and my opinion is that if you think this song is funny, you should think harder.

[Hibbyradge]

I have a number of thoughts in no specific order.

Just because someone doesn't "go crying like a girl" everytime they get called "a sweaty sock", doesn't mean it's not offensive or racist. I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.

The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

I work in England a lot and I regularly hear the usual comments. They're not funny, never were. I don't complain but it irritates.

Because one black guy says he is not offended by the Looky Looky song, doesn't mean it's not racist. On the contrary, because 2 black guys were offended by it, doesn't necessarly make it racist. It makes it offensive. It's meant to be. Just like the Fulton ugly song.

However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way.

The Paul Hartley is gay song is meant to be offenive. It's also homophobic even if the singers are "only having a laugh".

I find the arguments that Hartley and Kingston would "probably just laugh" laughable and a bit too convenient. If a football player admitted that a song annoyed him, opposing fans would just sing it with more gusto.

Furthermore, how long would you allow someone to insult you before you stopped laughing? Once? Twice?

Racism and bigotry can sneak in and become institutionalised, if it's allowed to. Not so long ago, I heard a sports commentator saying how the impressive the noise was when Rangers fans had sang the Bouncy Bouncy song at some European game. There was also some outrage expressed when Strathclyde police banned them from singing it on the subway in case the train de-railed.

The Bouncy Bouncy is accepted in our society.

However, this song "celebrates the cold-blooded murder of Portadown Catholic Robert Hammill one night by a loyalist mob as officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) looked on. The mob jumped up and down on his head repeatedly until his skull was crushed."

I bet many of the singers are "just having a laugh" too and don't realise the significance.

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

I sort of think, though, that if people genuinely don't want to cause racial offence, if there is any doubt about a given song or joke, then it's probably wise to avoid repeating them.

There should be no such confusion about the Ediie Murphy song. There is no likeness whatsoever between Nade and Murphy. Apart from the fact that they are both black. The insults are that he is black, like someone else we've heard of and that he is fat. How people see any humour in that is beyond me.

Murphy. (http://flashyourstache.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/eddie-murphy.jpg) Nade. (http://images.teamtalk.com/08/01/800x600/Christian_Nade_Hearts_new_628266.jpg)

It's also a wee bit worrying that although there are only a few black players in the SPL, we have songs about 2 of them. Just co-incidence? :dunno:

[LiverpoolHibs]

I have a number of thoughts in no specific order.

Just because someone doesn't "go crying like a girl" everytime they get called "a sweaty sock", doesn't mean it's not offensive or racist. I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.

The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

I work in England a lot and I regularly hear the usual comments. They're not funny, never were. I don't complain but it irritates.

Because one black guy says he is not offended by the Looky Looky song, doesn't mean it's not racist. On the contrary, because 2 black guys were offended by it, doesn't necessarly make it racist. It makes it offensive. It's meant to be. Just like the Fulton ugly song.

However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way.

The Paul Hartley is gay song is meant to be offenive. It's also homophobic even if the singers are "only having a laugh".

I find the arguments that Hartley and Kingston would "probably just laugh" laughable and a bit too convenient. If a football player admitted that a song annoyed him, opposing fans would just sing it with more gusto.

Furthermore, how long would you allow someone to insult you before you stopped laughing? Once? Twice?

Racism and bigotry can sneak in and become institutionalised, if it's allowed to. Not so long ago, I heard a sports commentator saying how the impressive the noise was when Rangers fans had sang the Bouncy Bouncy song at some European game. There was also some outrage expressed when Strathclyde police banned them from singing it on the subway in case the train de-railed.

The Bouncy Bouncy is accepted in our society.

However, this song "celebrates the cold-blooded murder of Portadown Catholic Robert Hammill one night by a loyalist mob as officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) looked on. The mob jumped up and down on his head repeatedly until his skull was crushed."

I bet many of the singers are "just having a laugh" too and don't realise the significance.

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

I sort of think, though, that if people genuinely don't want to cause racial offence, if there is any doubt about a given song or joke, then it's probably wise to avoid repeating them.

There should be no such confusion about the Ediie Murphy song. There is no likeness whatsoever between Nade and Murphy. Apart from the fact that they are both black. The insults are that he is black, like someone else we've heard of and that he is fat. How people see any humour in that is beyond me.

Murphy. (http://flashyourstache.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/eddie-murphy.jpg) Nade. (http://images.teamtalk.com/08/01/800x600/Christian_Nade_Hearts_new_628266.jpg)

It's also a wee bit worrying that although there are only a few black players in the SPL, we have songs about 2 of them. Just co-incidence? :dunno:

:top marks

Very good post.

[matty_f]

I have a number of thoughts in no specific order.

Just because someone doesn't "go crying like a girl" everytime they get called "a sweaty sock", doesn't mean it's not offensive or racist. I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.

The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

I work in England a lot and I regularly hear the usual comments. They're not funny, never were. I don't complain but it irritates.

Because one black guy says he is not offended by the Looky Looky song, doesn't mean it's not racist. On the contrary, because 2 black guys were offended by it, doesn't necessarly make it racist. It makes it offensive. It's meant to be. Just like the Fulton ugly song.

However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way.

The Paul Hartley is gay song is meant to be offenive. It's also homophobic even if the singers are "only having a laugh".

I find the arguments that Hartley and Kingston would "probably just laugh" laughable and a bit too convenient. If a football player admitted that a song annoyed him, opposing fans would just sing it with more gusto.

Furthermore, how long would you allow someone to insult you before you stopped laughing? Once? Twice?

Racism and bigotry can sneak in and become institutionalised, if it's allowed to. Not so long ago, I heard a sports commentator saying how the impressive the noise was when Rangers fans had sang the Bouncy Bouncy song at some European game. There was also some outrage expressed when Strathclyde police banned them from singing it on the subway in case the train de-railed.

The Bouncy Bouncy is accepted in our society.

However, this song "celebrates the cold-blooded murder of Portadown Catholic Robert Hammill one night by a loyalist mob as officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) looked on. The mob jumped up and down on his head repeatedly until his skull was crushed."

I bet many of the singers are "just having a laugh" too and don't realise the significance.

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

I sort of think, though, that if people genuinely don't want to cause racial offence, if there is any doubt about a given song or joke, then it's probably wise to avoid repeating them.

There should be no such confusion about the Ediie Murphy song. There is no likeness whatsoever between Nade and Murphy. Apart from the fact that they are both black. The insults are that he is black, like someone else we've heard of and that he is fat. How people see any humour in that is beyond me.

Murphy. (http://flashyourstache.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/eddie-murphy.jpg) Nade. (http://images.teamtalk.com/08/01/800x600/Christian_Nade_Hearts_new_628266.jpg)

It's also a wee bit worrying that although there are only a few black players in the SPL, we have songs about 2 of them. Just co-incidence? :dunno:


:top marks

Very good post.

A very good, well-reasoned post.:thumbsup:

[Danderhall Hibs]

A very good, well-reasoned post.:thumbsup:

It is a decent post although it doesn't really explain how the Paul Hartley song is homophobic, just says it is.


homophobia
intense hatred or fear of homosexuals or homosexuality

[LiverpoolHibs]

It is a decent post although it doesn't really explain how the Paul Hartley song is homophobic, just says it is.

As with the Yams version of the song, it's predicated on the assumption that being gay is something to be ashamed of/abused for.

'Gay' is used pejoratively and is therefore homophobic.

[marinello59]

in what way does my statement say that i am the big man? am goin to sing it coz i find it funny and want to have a laugh when i go to see the match, instead of sittin there moanin at what other ppl have got say. it all come with goin to a match. u sound like u would be more suited to sittin in ur house and watchin the match! just because u are older and u keep on saying uv supported this club for nearly 50 years does that give u more rights in what to say and what not to say? by sayin shaming us? who do u mean? u can only make this point about urself! so i am only shaming u. so a dont give a toss!

That's fine then. as long as you are happy the rest of us should be.:bitchy:

[marinello59]

I have a number of thoughts in no specific order.

Just because someone doesn't "go crying like a girl" everytime they get called "a sweaty sock", doesn't mean it's not offensive or racist. I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.

The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

I work in England a lot and I regularly hear the usual comments. They're not funny, never were. I don't complain but it irritates.

Because one black guy says he is not offended by the Looky Looky song, doesn't mean it's not racist. On the contrary, because 2 black guys were offended by it, doesn't necessarly make it racist. It makes it offensive. It's meant to be. Just like the Fulton ugly song.

However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way.

The Paul Hartley is gay song is meant to be offenive. It's also homophobic even if the singers are "only having a laugh".

I find the arguments that Hartley and Kingston would "probably just laugh" laughable and a bit too convenient. If a football player admitted that a song annoyed him, opposing fans would just sing it with more gusto.

Furthermore, how long would you allow someone to insult you before you stopped laughing? Once? Twice?

Racism and bigotry can sneak in and become institutionalised, if it's allowed to. Not so long ago, I heard a sports commentator saying how the impressive the noise was when Rangers fans had sang the Bouncy Bouncy song at some European game. There was also some outrage expressed when Strathclyde police banned them from singing it on the subway in case the train de-railed.

The Bouncy Bouncy is accepted in our society.

However, this song "celebrates the cold-blooded murder of Portadown Catholic Robert Hammill one night by a loyalist mob as officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) looked on. The mob jumped up and down on his head repeatedly until his skull was crushed."

I bet many of the singers are "just having a laugh" too and don't realise the significance.

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

I sort of think, though, that if people genuinely don't want to cause racial offence, if there is any doubt about a given song or joke, then it's probably wise to avoid repeating them.

There should be no such confusion about the Ediie Murphy song. There is no likeness whatsoever between Nade and Murphy. Apart from the fact that they are both black. The insults are that he is black, like someone else we've heard of and that he is fat. How people see any humour in that is beyond me.

Murphy. (http://flashyourstache.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/eddie-murphy.jpg) Nade. (http://images.teamtalk.com/08/01/800x600/Christian_Nade_Hearts_new_628266.jpg)

It's also a wee bit worrying that although there are only a few black players in the SPL, we have songs about 2 of them. Just co-incidence? :dunno:

Sometimes you read a post on here and feel like cheering. That's one. Well said.:agree:

[Danderhall Hibs]

As with the Yams version of the song, it's predicated on the assumption that being gay is something to be ashamed of/abused for.

'Gay' is used pejoratively and is therefore homophobic.

I think you're giving the guys that made this up a bit too much credit. It was more than likely picked because the words fit the tune better.

[jacomo]

As with the Yams version of the song, it's predicated on the assumption that being gay is something to be ashamed of/abused for.

'Gay' is used pejoratively and is therefore homophobic.

Don't mean to pick a fight, but isn't everything gay these days? People seem to use it as a synonym for "rubbish" or "crap".

[Hibbyradge]

It is a decent post although it doesn't really explain how the Paul Hartley song is homophobic, just says it is.

You're right.

The Hartley song is intended to offend Paul Hartley.

The insult is that he is gay. That implies that there is something wrong in being gay. Otherwise, it wouldn't be an insult.

Like Fulton is ugly implies that there is something wrong in being ugly.

And the Sheep ****ging song.

And Richard Gough song.

We don't sing songs about opponents in order to compliment them.

All together now, "Craig Levein is very intelligent".

[Danderhall Hibs]

Don't mean to pick a fight, but isn't everything gay these days? People seem to use it as a synonym for "rubbish" or "crap".

If they're using it pejoratively then I'd say they're clearly homophobic. :agree:

[Danderhall Hibs]

All together now, "Craig Levein is very intelligent".

:hilarious I think that one might catch on.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I think you're giving the guys that made this up a bit too much credit. It was more than likely picked because the words fit the tune better.

That's something that Hibbyradge touched on. Just because people singing the Kingston song/Nade song/Hartley song aren't fully paid up members of Combat 18 doesn't mean that the songs themselves aren't implicitly racist or homophobic.

[wilkie_1]

No it doesn't make me a bigger or better fan than either of you. I'm not claiming that. I'm pointing out that as a supporter, I feel ashamed that fellow Hibbies sing this kind of song, or think it's funny. Bighairy says he wouldn't sing it and that'll do for me. Wilkie, I don't think I have any more rights than you. I have the same right as everyone else to have an opinion about this and my opinion is that if you think this song is funny, you should think harder.

am thinkin and am still laughin!!!

well to say i would put shame on us is meanin that u are sayin u are the majority and you are spkin for the whole of hibernian fc supporters, which i very much doubt is true! u are only spkin for urself and only u are really pissed off at this! all am sayin is stop gettin ur pants in a twist and get over it! if u think am racist so be it! stop acting like some grumpy old man!

[marinello59]

am thinkin and am still laughin!!!

well to say i would put shame on us is meanin that u are sayin u are the majority and you are spkin for the whole of hibernian fc supporters, which i very much doubt is true! u are only spkin for urself and only u are really pissed off at this! all am sayin is stop gettin ur pants in a twist and get over it! if u think am racist so be it! stop acting like some grumpy old man!

Please cut out the text speak.

[Greentinted]

You're right.

The Hartley song is intended to offend Paul Hartley.

The insult is that he is gay. That implies that there is something wrong in being gay. Otherwise, it wouldn't be an insult.

Like Fulton is ugly implies that there is something wrong in being ugly.

And the Sheep ****ging song.

And Richard Gough song.

We don't sing songs about opponents in order to compliment them.

All together now, "Craig Levein is very intelligent".

Does this then infer that being stupid is wrong, therefore half-witist?

I am, of course, being flippant, but some of this is a bit OTT. Too many people, far too precious about far too much!!!

People will always cause offensive to some, just as others will be offended. Maybe simplistic but thats the way of things!

[Hibbyradge]

People will always cause offensive to some, just as others will be offended. Maybe simplistic but thats the way of things!

Indeed they will.

People will always steal things, throw litter, con old folk out of their life savings, cheat at golf, commit rape, dive at football, spit on the pavement, beat their wives, burgle houses, commit murder and scratch cars.

Maybe simplistic but thats the way of things!

Should we give up trying to stop them too?

[Greentinted]

Indeed they will.

People will always steal things, throw litter, con old folk out of their life savings, cheat at golf, commit rape, dive at football, spit on the pavement, beat their wives, burgle houses, commit murder and scratch cars.

Maybe simplistic but thats the way of things!

Should we give up trying to stop them too?

Already, and lamentably, in some cases that does indeed simply, seem to be the way of things. Its a priority thing; many of those that you mention above are, IMHO, far more worthy of attention than some daft football chant!

[Woody1985]

I thought the Murphy joke is sung at Darcheville. Anyhoo.

I imagine some people on here have very boring lives. Get up and go outside, get a GF/wife, anything. Stop being pedantic and analysing everything that people say.

All together now... Larry Kingston is a Loo....:devil:

[Hibbyradge]

Already, and lamentably, in some cases that does indeed simply, seem to be the way of things. Its a priority thing; many of those that you mention above are, IMHO, far more worthy of attention than some daft football chant!

Again, you're right, but where do we draw the line?

How much racism is acceptable?

From the Equal Opportunities website;

"Fighting racism and racial discrimination does not need to be about worldwide or life changing actions.

Instead, every time an individual reconsiders a stereotype, speaks out against discrimination, ceases to make racist jokes and references, tells others that such jokes and references are unacceptable, and does all that they can to learn from the talents of each individual, regardless of race or skin colour, then discrimination is being fought.

Hopefully racism and racial discrimination will soon become a thing of the past, but until then everyone can play a part in helping it to end."

[Sir David Gray]

I think it depends on how you personally define "racism" and "homophobia".

IMO, and i'm not saying this is correct but it's how I define the two;

Racism is when you discriminate against someone on the grounds of their race i.e. by not giving them a job because of the colour of their skin, by refusing certain privileges to people solely because of the colour of their skin or deliberately setting out to cause someone harm/offence by making hurtful references to their skin colour.

IMO making a stereotype is not racist and that is what I believe the Kingston song to be. I didn't sing the song on Sunday, partly because I didn't hear what was being sung but also because I just think the song's silly, but not racist.

Now I had no idea what a "looky looky man" was prior to a few days ago and i'm still not 100% certain but it would appear that a "looky looky man" is a (mainly) black man who sells dodgy, broken goods in holiday resorts to tourists.

Again IMO, the song being sung to Kingston has as much to do with his appearance/characteristics as it has the colour of his skin.

If making stereotypes was racist then a lot of English TV presenters would be sacked as a lot of them make stereotypes/jokes about the Scots and try to be funny by dressing up in kilts, doing the Highland fling, playing bagpipes whilst attempting an awful Scottish accent and alluding to the fact that they think we're all tight fisted etc. They do this to be funny but it's also done to make a stereotype of the entire Scottish nation.

I also know of someone who was down in England a few years ago meeting relatives. One of the men there constantly referred to the person as "haggis". Now this would annoy most Scots and it's certainly childish and ignorant but I don't believe it to be racist.

Kingston is, as far as i'm aware, the first black Hearts player to receive such a song from the Hibs fans. If it was really racist and sung PURELY because Kingston is black, would it not have been sung about other black Hearts players in the past like Quitongo, Tall, De Vries and Goncalves?

Maybe they didn't receive such a song because, although they are black, they don't look like "looky looky men" but Kingston does.

I think the song is silly and I don't particularly find it funny but I think we should start to worry if monkey chants start and bananas are thrown onto the pitch. That would be completely unacceptable and is extremely racist and would be correctly condemned.

And far as homophobia is concerned, again my definition of it is;

The discrimination of someone due to their sexual orientation again, by not giving them a job because they happen to be homosexual. By deliberately causing harm/offence to someone by making hurtful references to their sexual orientation.

On that basis, I don't believe that a song about a man that is, as far as i'm aware, heterosexual can be described as homophobic.

The Hartley song was just harmless banter that was done as a reaction to the "Ohh the Hibees are gay" chant and originates from the picture of Hartley and Skacel kissing on the lips in celebration of a goal.

Anyone who thinks there is anything sinister/homophobic to that song is wrong IMO.

Someone with a different outlook and definition of the two terms will probably disagree with my post and that's fine. I'm not saying that what I'm saying is correct and everyone else is wrong, I just think it's open to interpretation.

What I would say is people should only sing songs and shout chants that they wouldn't mind others shouting and singing to them.

What I mean by that is, if you sing the Kingston song but wouldn't like 14,000 black people singing something similar to you if you were a footballer in Africa then don't sing it. If it wouldn't bother you then by all means continue to sing it, so long as you keep within the law.

[Hibbyradge]

I thought the Murphy joke is sung at Darcheville. Anyhoo.

I imagine some people on here have very boring lives. Get up and go outside, get a GF/wife, anything. Stop being pedantic and analysing everything that people say.

All together now... Larry Kingston is a Loo....:devil:

You think singing racist songs makes you interesting? :bitchy:

[Hibbyradge]

I think it depends on how you personally define "racism" and "homophobia".

IMO, and i'm not saying this is correct but it's how I define the two;

Racism is when you discriminate against someone on the grounds of their race i.e. by not giving them a job because of the colour of their skin, by refusing certain privileges to people solely because of the colour of their skin or deliberately setting out to cause someone harm/offence by making hurtful references to their skin colour.

Yes, those are racist and would constitute criminal offences.

IMO making a stereotype is not racist and that is what I believe the Kingston song to be. I didn't sing the song on Sunday, partly because I didn't hear what was being sung but also because I just think the song's silly, but not racist.

Making a stereotype is not a crime, but it is precisely what racism is.

All Irish are thick. Scots are mean. Black men with short dreadlocks are Looky Looky men.

Now I had no idea what a "looky looky man" was prior to a few days ago and i'm still not 100% certain but it would appear that a "looky looky man" is a (mainly) black man who sells dodgy, broken goods in holiday resorts to tourists.

Again IMO, the song being sung to Kingston has as much to do with his appearance/characteristics as it has the colour of his skin.

Isn't the colour of his skin, his appearance? Would it be ok to call all black men with dreadlocks, looky looky men?

If making stereotypes was racist then a lot of English TV presenters would be sacked as a lot of them make stereotypes/jokes about the Scots and try to be funny by dressing up in kilts, doing the Highland fling, playing bagpipes whilst attempting an awful Scottish accent and alluding to the fact that they think we're all tight fisted etc. They do this to be funny but it's also done to make a stereotype of the entire Scottish nation.

It's only minor but it is racist. I think someone will get into trouble eventually for making comments about Scots being mean.

I also know of someone who was down in England a few years ago meeting relatives. One of the men there constantly referred to the person as "haggis". Now this would annoy most Scots and it's certainly childish and ignorant but I don't believe it to be racist.

That's just a childish nickname. Annoying, yes, but not in itself offensive.

Kingston is, as far as i'm aware, the first black Hearts player to receive such a song from the Hibs fans. If it was really racist and sung PURELY because Kingston is black, would it not have been sung about other black Hearts players in the past like Quitongo, Tall, De Vries and Goncalves?

How many people must be racially offended before it's wrong?

Maybe they didn't receive such a song because, although they are black, they don't look like "looky looky men" but Kingston does.

I think the song is silly and I don't particularly find it funny but I think we should start to worry if monkey chants start and bananas are thrown onto the pitch. That would be completely unacceptable and is extremely racist and would be correctly condemned.

:agree:

And far as homophobia is concerned, again my definition of it is;

The discrimination of someone due to their sexual orientation again, by not giving them a job because they happen to be homosexual. By deliberately causing harm/offence to someone by making hurtful references to their sexual orientation.

On that basis, I don't believe that a song about a man that is, as far as i'm aware, heterosexual can be described as homophobic.

The Hartley song was just harmless banter that was done as a reaction to the "Ohh the Hibees are gay" chant and originates from the picture of Hartley and Skacel kissing on the lips in celebration of a goal.

Anyone who thinks there is anything sinister/homophobic to that song is wrong IMO.

It implies that there is something wrong with a person because they are gay. If there was a scale from 1 - 100 of homophobia, that song wouldn't be close to half way but it would be on it.

Someone with a different outlook and definition of the two terms will probably disagree with my post and that's fine. I'm not saying that what I'm saying is correct and everyone else is wrong, I just think it's open to interpretation.

What I would say is people should only sing songs and shout chants that they wouldn't mind others shouting and singing to them.

What I mean by that is, if you sing the Kingston song but wouldn't like 14,000 black people singing something similar to you if you were a footballer in Africa then don't sing it. If it wouldn't bother you then by all means continue to sing it, so long as you keep within the law.

I know what you're getting at but just because you can tolerate a lot of insults, doesn't give you the right to dish them out.



.

[lapsedhibee]

I think it depends on how you personally define "racism" and "homophobia".

IMO, and i'm not saying this is correct but it's how I define the two;

Racism is when you discriminate against someone on the grounds of their race i.e. by not giving them a job because of the colour of their skin, by refusing certain privileges to people solely because of the colour of their skin or deliberately setting out to cause someone harm/offence by making hurtful references to their skin colour.

IMO making a stereotype is not racist and that is what I believe the Kingston song to be. I didn't sing the song on Sunday, partly because I didn't hear what was being sung but also because I just think the song's silly, but not racist.

Now I had no idea what a "looky looky man" was prior to a few days ago and i'm still not 100% certain but it would appear that a "looky looky man" is a (mainly) black man who sells dodgy, broken goods in holiday resorts to tourists.

Again IMO, the song being sung to Kingston has as much to do with his appearance/characteristics as it has the colour of his skin.

If making stereotypes was racist then a lot of English TV presenters would be sacked as a lot of them make stereotypes/jokes about the Scots and try to be funny by dressing up in kilts, doing the Highland fling, playing bagpipes whilst attempting an awful Scottish accent and alluding to the fact that they think we're all tight fisted etc. They do this to be funny but it's also done to make a stereotype of the entire Scottish nation.

I also know of someone who was down in England a few years ago meeting relatives. One of the men there constantly referred to the person as "haggis". Now this would annoy most Scots and it's certainly childish and ignorant but I don't believe it to be racist.

Kingston is, as far as i'm aware, the first black Hearts player to receive such a song from the Hibs fans. If it was really racist and sung PURELY because Kingston is black, would it not have been sung about other black Hearts players in the past like Quitongo, Tall, De Vries and Goncalves?

Maybe they didn't receive such a song because, although they are black, they don't look like "looky looky men" but Kingston does.

I think the song is silly and I don't particularly find it funny but I think we should start to worry if monkey chants start and bananas are thrown onto the pitch. That would be completely unacceptable and is extremely racist and would be correctly condemned.

And far as homophobia is concerned, again my definition of it is;

The discrimination of someone due to their sexual orientation again, by not giving them a job because they happen to be homosexual. By deliberately causing harm/offence to someone by making hurtful references to their sexual orientation.

On that basis, I don't believe that a song about a man that is, as far as i'm aware, heterosexual can be described as homophobic.

The Hartley song was just harmless banter that was done as a reaction to the "Ohh the Hibees are gay" chant and originates from the picture of Hartley and Skacel kissing on the lips in celebration of a goal.

Anyone who thinks there is anything sinister/homophobic to that song is wrong IMO.

Someone with a different outlook and definition of the two terms will probably disagree with my post and that's fine. I'm not saying that what I'm saying is correct and everyone else is wrong, I just think it's open to interpretation.

What I would say is people should only sing songs and shout chants that they wouldn't mind others shouting and singing to them.

What I mean by that is, if you sing the Kingston song but wouldn't like 14,000 black people singing something similar to you if you were a footballer in Africa then don't sing it. If it wouldn't bother you then by all means continue to sing it, so long as you keep within the law.

Good perspective. :agree:

[Landells]

Why sing about it

its the exact same as skacel song I think kingston knows hes black and we can all see he is so theres no need to bring skin colour into it.:dunno:

[lapsedhibee]

I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.

The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

Since you presumably only went to that play the once, it couldn't have been the frequent repetition, over a long period of time, of the stereotype that offended you. What was it that offended you? (I'm assuming that 'not finding something funny' and 'being offended' are different things, though on this board it's a pretty murky distinction.)

[Woody1985]

You think singing racist songs makes you interesting? :bitchy:

1. The song is not racist.
2. I bet I'm a damn sight more interesting than you. 12,000 posts! You live your life on the internet. Away and play warcraft if you don't already.
3. Re the above points, I never sung the song and never said I was interesting.

[Ivan Drago]

Why sing about it

its the exact same as skacel song I think kingston knows hes black and we can all see he is so theres no need to bring skin colour into it.:dunno:

No it's not, it's because he looks like a dodgy jewelry seller in the beaches across Spain.

[Darth Hibbie]

Just my take on it but peronally I don't reall find it funny (butI have a friend who is black with dreads six foot found and built like a brick s**t house and would prob flatten anbody that said that to him) and I would not sing it.

Interstingly the government say that something is racist if it is perceived to be racist. Given that some people think it was, it probably is.

[lapsedhibee]

Interstingly the government say that something is racist if it is perceived to be racist.
That'll make the Pittodrie ref a racist then, since Larry perceived him to be so. :bitchy:

[maximushibee]

come on now guys this post is getting a wee bit out of hand.. it was a joke get over it.. we cant take back what was sung so no point in going on and on and on about sorry for any typo's

[Hibbyradge]

1. The song is not racist.
2. I bet I'm a damn sight more interesting than you. 12,000 posts! You live your life on the internet. Away and play warcraft if you don't already.
3. Re the above points, I never sung the song and never said I was interesting.

1. Yes it is.

2. You're not.

3. I never said you did.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I imagine some people on here have very boring lives. Get up and go outside, get a GF/wife, anything. Stop being pedantic and analysing everything that people say.

When this sort of thing is wheeled out, it's a fairly sure sign of desperation. Attempt to demean rather than argue...

[Dashing Bob S]

Some good posts on here. Well done to those who have argued their cases. At the end of the day though, we are forced to make a lot of assumptions, but I really do wish we didn't sing songs like that. If we must be offensive (and we probably must) then let's do so with a decnt song.

[Steve-O]

I have a number of thoughts in no specific order.

Just because someone doesn't "go crying like a girl" everytime they get called "a sweaty sock", doesn't mean it's not offensive or racist. I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.

The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

Sorry, but it would appear you are overly sensitive. If you know that we are not all kilt wearing drunken oafs who are mean with their money, then why are you so offended? Do you walk out of the room when Groundskeeper Willie appears on The Simpsons??

I work in England a lot and I regularly hear the usual comments. They're not funny, never were. I don't complain but it irritates.

Because one black guy says he is not offended by the Looky Looky song, doesn't mean it's not racist. On the contrary, because 2 black guys were offended by it, doesn't necessarly make it racist. It makes it offensive. It's meant to be. Just like the Fulton ugly song.

However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way.

Can't see how you can state it as fact that it IS definitely racist when opinion on here is so divided. I am absolutely against racism and I do not believe this song is racist. Looky-looky men are (in ALL my experiences of them) black Africans who sell cheap rubbish to tourists, i.e. not the best job in the world. Larry Kingston is a black African who, because of his style, happens to look like some of these characters that have been encountered on holidays. The 'insult' in the song incinuates that Kingston has a job selling cheap watches etc to tourists?

I can't see how this song could insult a race as such? Is it saying that all black African men are looky looky men? No. Is it saying we hate looky looky men because of their race? No. Does the song infer that we are superior to another race? No. It may suggest that we consider the job of selling fake watches and sunglasses is a rubbish job, but that's it!

The Paul Hartley is gay song is meant to be offenive. It's also homophobic even if the singers are "only having a laugh".

Have you spoken to a homosexual person who finds this song offensive?

I find the arguments that Hartley and Kingston would "probably just laugh" laughable and a bit too convenient. If a football player admitted that a song annoyed him, opposing fans would just sing it with more gusto.

Furthermore, how long would you allow someone to insult you before you stopped laughing? Once? Twice?

It depends on the insult.

Racism and bigotry can sneak in and become institutionalised, if it's allowed to. Not so long ago, I heard a sports commentator saying how the impressive the noise was when Rangers fans had sang the Bouncy Bouncy song at some European game. There was also some outrage expressed when Strathclyde police banned them from singing it on the subway in case the train de-railed.

The Bouncy Bouncy is accepted in our society.

However, this song "celebrates the cold-blooded murder of Portadown Catholic Robert Hammill one night by a loyalist mob as officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) looked on. The mob jumped up and down on his head repeatedly until his skull was crushed."

I bet many of the singers are "just having a laugh" too and don't realise the significance.

This has never been 100% proven as the reason for the song (although it wouldn't be a surprise if true), but if people don't know what it's about, how can they be accountable for what they are doing? You could say ignorance, but I have never felt inclined to ask anyone why we do the Hibees Bounce?

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

I sort of think, though, that if people genuinely don't want to cause racial offence, if there is any doubt about a given song or joke, then it's probably wise to avoid repeating them.

There should be no such confusion about the Ediie Murphy song. There is no likeness whatsoever between Nade and Murphy. Apart from the fact that they are both black. The insults are that he is black, like someone else we've heard of and that he is fat. How people see any humour in that is beyond me.

Murphy. (http://flashyourstache.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/eddie-murphy.jpg) Nade. (http://images.teamtalk.com/08/01/800x600/Christian_Nade_Hearts_new_628266.jpg)

While I would agree that they don't really look like each other, I really can't see where the insult about being black is in that song? The fact they are both black may be the only similarity as you say, but how is that an insult? I also can't see any racism in this as I would've thought Eddie Murphy was someone who is generally quite well liked, being a comedian and movie star?

It's also a wee bit worrying that although there are only a few black players in the SPL, we have songs about 2 of them. Just co-incidence? :dunno:

And how many songs have their been about white players over the years? I can recall songs about the following white players -

Charlie Adam - various tunes about dental health
Barry Ferguson - w**k w**k w**k
Gary Caldwell - various, including what's it like to sh*g a hun
Stevie Fulton - so ****ing ugly, booked for being ugly
Kris Boyd / Charlie Miller / Gazza / Wayne Rooney et al - Sumo, sumo (racist against the Japanese?)
Richard Gough - certain allegations
Every single player who has ever left and played against us has had a song about them!
I know you are going to say that there are no 'lookalike' type insults in here, but I am sure there have been some. I seem to recall someone being a 'fat Dale Winton' or similar at some point but I can't remember.


Are we saying that black players are exempt from being in football songs now?

FWIW, the song isn't really that witty, and I probably wouldn't be singing it at the top of my lungs, but I will stick to my guns that it is not racist.

[Dashing Bob S]

Jamacia few good points about Kingston.

[Steve-O]

.

racism -

–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

stereotype
noun, verb, -typed, -typing.
–noun 1. a process, now often replaced by more advanced methods, for making metal printing plates by taking a mold of composed type or the like in papier-mâché or other material and then taking from this mold a cast in type metal.
2. a plate made by this process.
3. a set form; convention.
4. Sociology. a simplified and standardized conception or image invested with special meaning and held in common by members of a group: The cowboy and Indian are American stereotypes.
–verb (used with object) 5. to make a stereotype of.
6. to characterize or regard as a stereotype: The actor has been stereotyped as a villain.
7. to give a fixed form to.

Not too sure they are the same to be honest.

[Riordans Boots]

Deary me, it seems to me that some people just want to see the bad/offensive in certain situations, just about every song sung at football games in every country will offend someone, be it the opposition fans or people with one eye as per the Hearts charming wee ditty, or the "Are you Zibi in disguise?" that was sung at the Hearts keeper (surely Zibi would be offended at that?) I heard a fair few insults directed at Mikey Stewart regarding the colour of his hair, surely the Gingers of the world would be offended? Where does it all end? I can't think of many songs sung at Hibs games that wouldn't offend someone except maybe GGTTH, and as has already been pointed out, I think we need to look at the context a song is sung in before deeming it racist/offensive. :rolleyes:


I Have just read through this thread.OZM

Yes we will all be offended in some way or another (Never actually heard the chants as my 2 boys tend to fight between themselves during the whole game - with me in the middle)


My oldest son is 'Ginger' and proud. Has loads of friends, is confident, and being his 'Colour' has never kept him back from ANYTHING.


Your points are valid mate ....


This whole thread is going off on one I think ... :rolleyes:

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

I have a number of thoughts in no specific order.

Just because someone doesn't "go crying like a girl" everytime they get called "a sweaty sock", doesn't mean it's not offensive or racist. I once walked out of a play in Guildford because of the "hilarious" potrayal of "Jocks" as drunk, kilt wearing oafs who were mean with their money.
The actors were "only having a laugh" but it was offensive and racist.

I work in England a lot and I regularly hear the usual comments. They're not funny, never were. I don't complain but it irritates.

Because one black guy says he is not offended by the Looky Looky song, doesn't mean it's not racist. On the contrary, because 2 black guys were offended by it, doesn't necessarly make it racist. It makes it offensive. It's meant to be. Just like the Fulton ugly song.

However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way.

The Paul Hartley is gay song is meant to be offenive. It's also homophobic even if the singers are "only having a laugh".

I find the arguments that Hartley and Kingston would "probably just laugh" laughable and a bit too convenient. If a football player admitted that a song annoyed him, opposing fans would just sing it with more gusto.

Furthermore, how long would you allow someone to insult you before you stopped laughing? Once? Twice?

Racism and bigotry can sneak in and become institutionalised, if it's allowed to. Not so long ago, I heard a sports commentator saying how the impressive the noise was when Rangers fans had sang the Bouncy Bouncy song at some European game. There was also some outrage expressed when Strathclyde police banned them from singing it on the subway in case the train de-railed.

The Bouncy Bouncy is accepted in our society.

However, this song "celebrates the cold-blooded murder of Portadown Catholic Robert Hammill one night by a loyalist mob as officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) looked on. The mob jumped up and down on his head repeatedly until his skull was crushed."

I bet many of the singers are "just having a laugh" too and don't realise the significance.

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

I sort of think, though, that if people genuinely don't want to cause racial offence, if there is any doubt about a given song or joke, then it's probably wise to avoid repeating them.

There should be no such confusion about the Ediie Murphy song. There is no likeness whatsoever between Nade and Murphy. Apart from the fact that they are both black. The insults are that he is black, like someone else we've heard of and that he is fat. How people see any humour in that is beyond me.

Murphy. (http://flashyourstache.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/eddie-murphy.jpg) Nade. (http://images.teamtalk.com/08/01/800x600/Christian_Nade_Hearts_new_628266.jpg)

It's also a wee bit worrying that although there are only a few black players in the SPL, we have songs about 2 of them. Just co-incidence? :dunno:

Well why did you not say something there and then? Why did you not make a stand? Hibbyradge? That’s a bit of a misnomer…
Did you mount a protest at the height of the chanting on Sunday?

This is what I fail to understand about you, LiverpoolHibs and KHibs07 who look to score points, belittle other posters, and put them down at every opportunity no matter the subject matter. What do you, tangibly and collectively, do to address these issues? Lets hear some evidence.

I spent 4 days in Richmond Hospital after jumping in for my friend who was IN FACT being racially abused, and also got a severe doing in a Portrush harbour bar as another mate was attacked due to his “southern accent”.

Personally, I abhor racism. I am however mature enough to distinguish the line of demarcation rather than have them dictated to me by hysterical internet theorists. As a vehicle for change of consciousness you could hardly be more ineffective than housemasters in a mid 20th century boarding school…. The message you seek to deliver is lost in the overpowering dictatorial style in which it is delivered. This could warrant some psychological investigation.

I did not join in with the Kingston chant as I considered it inappropriate, not racist. However I did not feel compelled to come on here and slate those who did.

[Hibbyradge]

The Hartley/Hibees are Gay song hits 2 birds with one stone, so to speak.

Sort of like "Are you Rangers in disguise" does.

Do you think the song "I'd rather be a Paki than a Turk" is only insulting to Turks?

The Hibees/Hartley are gay song is intended to offend Hibs supporters but it is also clearly insulting to gay folk.

It suggests that the singers are superior to the target because of their sexuality.

I know several gay people, some of whom are so afraid of the attitude of the hetrosexual majority, that they are still too scared to "come out".

I know gay people and hetrosexual people who find the song offensive.

If one group of people were to sing a song about someone with the lyric "You're so mean, you're nearly Scottish", would we sit back and merely laugh at that person's misfortune?

I'm not for a second suggesting that any of these songs are crime of the century but their basis in racist and homophobic beliefs needs to be discussed.

By the way, Groundskeeper Willie is not offensive to Scots because he is not portrayed as either drunk or mean.

[Franck Stanton]

And which white players were called "looky looky men"? I would say on the basis of incontrovertible evidence - none. Therefore it was directed at Kingston because of his race. Therefore, it was racist.
You don't half talk a load of ***** - I go abroad on holiday 3 times a year and have done for a number of years now and have seen many, many "Looky Looky" men and none - repeat none were white skinned. The good-natured - and in my opinion funny chant was directed at Kingston purely because he does look like a Looky Looky man, End of. Not racist in any way and it is overly sensitive idiots complaining about somethin as trivial as this that are screwing society up. Talk about the tail wagging the dog - GET A LIFE>:brickwall

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

The Hartley/Hibees are Gay song hits 2 birds with one stone, so to speak.

Sort of like "Are you Rangers in disguise" does.

Do you think the song "I'd rather be a Paki than a Turk" is only insulting to Turks?

The Hibees/Hartley are gay song is intended to offend Hibs supporters but it is also clearly insulting to gay folk.

It suggests that the singers are superior to the target because of their sexuality.

I know several gay people, some of whom are so afraid of the attitude of the hetrosexual majority, that they are still too scared to "come out".

I know gay people and hetrosexual people who find the song offensive.

If one group of people were to sing a song about someone with the lyric "You're so mean, you're nearly Scottish", would we sit back and merely laugh at that person's misfortune?

I'm not for a second suggesting that any of these songs are crime of the century but their basis in racist and homophobic beliefs needs to be discussed.

By the way, Groundskeeper Willie is not offensive to Scots because he is not portrayed as either drunk or mean.


Thats more like it. You're getting there.... (did that sound a bit patronising :dunno:)

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

The Hartley/Hibees are Gay song hits 2 birds with one stone, so to speak.

Sort of like "Are you Rangers in disguise" does.

Do you think the song "I'd rather be a Paki than a Turk" is only insulting to Turks?

The Hibees/Hartley are gay song is intended to offend Hibs supporters but it is also clearly insulting to gay folk.

It suggests that the singers are superior to the target because of their sexuality.

I know several gay people, some of whom are so afraid of the attitude of the hetrosexual majority, that they are still too scared to "come out".

I know gay people and hetrosexual people who find the song offensive.

If one group of people were to sing a song about someone with the lyric "You're so mean, you're nearly Scottish", would we sit back and merely laugh at that person's misfortune?

I'm not for a second suggesting that any of these songs are crime of the century but their basis in racist and homophobic beliefs needs to be discussed.

By the way, Groundskeeper Willie is not offensive to Scots because he is not portrayed as either drunk or mean.

Wrong.

[Hibbyradge]

Well why did you not say something there and then? Why did you not make a stand?



Er, as I said, I walked out in disgust, taking my wife and her family with me. That's a stand, right?


Did you mount a protest at the height of the chanting on Sunday?



I was in New York on Sunday.



This is what I fail to understand about you, LiverpoolHibs and KHibs07 who look to score points, belittle other posters, and put them down at every opportunity no matter the subject matter. What do you, tangibly and collectively, do to address these issues? Lets hear some evidence.



I haven't belittled or put down anyone. I thought I was having a reasoned debate.


What do you, tangibly and collectively, do to address these issues? Lets hear some evidence.



From here. (http://www.aboutequalopportunities.co.uk/racism.html)

Can I Make A Difference In the Fight Against Racism?

Most definitely. Fighting racism and racial discrimination does not need to be about worldwide or life changing actions. Instead, every time an individual reconsiders a stereotype, speaks out against discrimination, ceases to make sexist jokes and references, tells others that such jokes and references are unacceptable, and does all that (s)he can to learn from the talents of each individual, regardless of race or skin colour, then discrimination is being fought. Hopefully racism and racial discrimination will soon become a thing of the past, but until then everyone can play a part in helping it to end.



I spent 4 days in Richmond Hospital after jumping in for my friend who was IN FACT being racially abused, and also got a severe doing in a Portrush harbour bar as another mate was attacked due to his “southern accent”.



I've never been in that situation. I would hope that I would be brave enough to do something similar.



Personally, I abhor racism. I am however mature enough to distinguish the line of demarcation rather than have them dictated to me by hysterical internet theorists. As a vehicle for change of consciousness you could hardly be more ineffective than housemasters in a mid 20th century boarding school…. The message you seek to deliver is lost in the overpowering dictatorial style in which it is delivered. This could warrant some psychological investigation.

I did not join in with the Kingston chant as I considered it inappropriate, not racist. However I did not feel compelled to come on here and slate those who did.



My point of view is different to yours but I hardly think that it's hysterical or dictatorial. Have a look at what you have been writing.

You must draw your demarcation lines where ever you feel comfortable. I'll do the same.

Maybe you have missed the point of a discussion board?

[Hibbyradge]

Wrong.

Well, I've never noticed him either drunk or mean with money.

If he is portrayed like that, then it's a racist stereotype.

[Bayern Bru]

Some good posts on here. Well done to those who have argued their cases. At the end of the day though, we are forced to make a lot of assumptions, but I really do wish we didn't sing songs like that. If we must be offensive (and we probably must) then let's do so with a decnt song.

well said sir.
i agree 100%; the offensive chanting is, and has been for as long as i've been going to Hibs (around 15-16 years) a big part of the occasion for some people.

But, as you say, with a decent song that isn't questionable.

[RickyS]

Yes there is, but don't expect some people on here to see it. The abuse directed at any of us who dare to criticise racist chanting from our own fans has become so vituperative that you wonder what the agenda is:dunno:

The point so many people are missing is that the success achieved by the BNP in local elections in working class English neighbourhoods has been solidly based on a myth. That myth is that non-white people receive preferential treatment in areas such as housing and jobs, because they are over-protected by the "PC brigade" and complain of racism at the drop of a hat. The rise of the BNP in elections has been down to people believing this crap in the face of the evidence. With these Nazis about to stand in an Edinburgh council seat, it's scary to see similar sentiments expressed on this board. (I'm not accusing anyone of being a BNP supporter, merely pointing out the atmosphere on which they thrive)

Many posts on this thread wouldn't be out of place on the Daily Mail letters page, and some of the attempts at laddish "humour" have been pathetic.

Full credit to the few posters who have stood their ground against this mass justification of the unacceptable

so are you bracketing everyone who votes for the bnp racist? surely not

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

Er, as I said, I walked out in disgust, taking my wife and her family with me. That's a stand, right?



I was in New York on Sunday.



I haven't belittled or put down anyone. I thought I was having a reasoned debate.



From here. (http://www.aboutequalopportunities.co.uk/racism.html)

Can I Make A Difference In the Fight Against Racism?

Most definitely. Fighting racism and racial discrimination does not need to be about worldwide or life changing actions. Instead, every time an individual reconsiders a stereotype, speaks out against discrimination, ceases to make sexist jokes and references, tells others that such jokes and references are unacceptable, and does all that (s)he can to learn from the talents of each individual, regardless of race or skin colour, then discrimination is being fought. Hopefully racism and racial discrimination will soon become a thing of the past, but until then everyone can play a part in helping it to end.




I've never been in that situation. I would hope that I would be brave enough to do something similar.



My point of view is different to yours but I hardly think that it's hysterical or dictatorial. Have a look at what you have been writing.

You must draw your demarcation lines where ever you feel comfortable. I'll do the same.

Maybe you have missed the point of a discussion board?


Er, as I said, I walked out in disgust, taking my wife and her family with me. That's a stand, right?

It's a bit feeble though isn't it? Maybe you could have made your feeling known on a local message board?

I haven't belittled or put down anyone. I thought I was having a reasoned debate.
Not personally, but having read your earlier posts I felt compelled to defend the countless others you have dismissed at a keystroke in your inimitable condescending manner.

Fighting racism and racial discrimination does not need to be about worldwide or life changing actions. Instead, every time an individual reconsiders a stereotype, speaks out against discrimination, ceases to make sexist jokes and references, tells others that such jokes and references are unacceptable, and does all that (s)he can to learn from the talents of each individual, regardless of race or skin colour, then discrimination is being fought. Hopefully racism and racial discrimination will soon become a thing of the past, but until then everyone can play a part in helping it to end.

This is where I find issue with your cut and paste. Why did you not speak out against the discrimination in the theatre? Why do you consider it would be better to wait until you could vent your frustrations on a football messageboard?

dictatorial. ...... Can I suggest you review your previous 100 posts.....


Maybe you have missed the point of a discussion board Would the point of the Hibs.net message board be that they must agree with Hibbyradges viewpoint or no be considered valid?

The reality is that you and your pals turn so many off to the real issues by overplaying the weak hand. When you unearth a true injustice I will fight along side you in the trenches.......................................... ..................


The archetypal Boy who cried Wolf.

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

Well, I've never noticed him either drunk or mean with money.

If he is portrayed like that, then it's a racist stereotype.

You need to vacate your keyboard for an hour at 6pm on a Sunday, as that is where the real racism is being perpetrated.

Scots, Irish, Italians, Jews, comic store guys and police chiefs are being handed a beating comrade.

[Steve-O]

The Hartley/Hibees are Gay song hits 2 birds with one stone, so to speak.

Sort of like "Are you Rangers in disguise" does.

Do you think the song "I'd rather be a Paki than a Turk" is only insulting to Turks?

The Hibees/Hartley are gay song is intended to offend Hibs supporters but it is also clearly insulting to gay folk.

It suggests that the singers are superior to the target because of their sexuality.

I know several gay people, some of whom are so afraid of the attitude of the hetrosexual majority, that they are still too scared to "come out".

I know gay people and hetrosexual people who find the song offensive.

If one group of people were to sing a song about someone with the lyric "You're so mean, you're nearly Scottish", would we sit back and merely laugh at that person's misfortune?

I'm not for a second suggesting that any of these songs are crime of the century but their basis in racist and homophobic beliefs needs to be discussed.

By the way, Groundskeeper Willie is not offensive to Scots because he is not portrayed as either drunk or mean.

He hardly portrays Scotland in a positive light thought does he, most of the time he is acting like a complete nutter? Ginger hair and beard? However, I find it quite funny along with the various other Scottish stereotypes out there. Perhaps self-deprication is exclusive to Scots though? :rolleyes:

As for the example of the "You're so mean..." song, I couldn't really imagine getting too wound up about that either to be honest, I don't find it offensive at all.

[Steve-O]

You need to vacate your keyboard for an hour at 6pm on a Sunday for an hour, as that is where the real racism is being perpetrated.

Scots, Irish, Italians, Jews, comic store guys and police chiefs are being handed a beating comrade.

You forgot the Indian shopkeeper! :wink:

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

He hardly portrays Scotland in a positive light thought does he, most of the time he is acting like a complete nutter? Ginger hair and beard? However, I find it quite funny along with the various other Scottish stereotypes out there. Perhaps self-deprication is exclusive to Scots though? :rolleyes:

As for the example of the "You're so mean..." song, I couldn't really imagine getting too wound up about that either to be honest, I don't find it offensive at all.

I see it as a national/racial maturity. Maybe we can determine between humour and outright aggressive racism?

[Steve-O]

I see it as a national/racial maturity. Maybe we can determine between humour and outright aggressive racism?

:agree:

I'd like to think that I can always see the difference between the two, it's not hard.

[khib70]

so are you bracketing everyone who votes for the bnp racist? surely not
Not necessarily. Though it's hard to see why anyone who was anti-racist would vote for them.

With respect, I think you're missing the point here. What I was saying was that the BNP convinces a large number of people - especially white people in deprived areas - to vote for them by trumpeting the inaccurate view that ethnic minorities are over-protected by a liberal elite, and are given unfair advantages over white people.

This is also the view taken by the right-wing British press - most notably the Daily Mail. The terms "PC gone mad" and "PC brigade" appear daily all over the paper. Indeed, until this thread got going, these expressions rarely appeared anywhere else.

Complacency about racism allows it to flourish, even though those who are complacent or dismissive of perceived racism are not racists themselves.

As far as intolerance or abuse on this thread is concerned, most of it has come from people taking the opposite view and seeking to defend the song in question. If someone disagrees with you, or expresses concerns you don't have, there's nothing big about telling them to "get a life" - that's just ignorance. Making assumptions about people's personal lives when you don't know them - on the basis that they don't share your populist viewpoint is unworthy of any serious debate, and certainly unworthy of Hibbies.

[Woody1985]

1. Yes it is.

2. You're not.

3. I never said you did.

1. It's not.

2. I'm not a sado. Average of about 3 posts per day for the last 6 years:dunno::dunno::dunno: TBF you might be more interesting on this site because your life revolves around it.

3.

You think singing racist songs makes you interesting? :bitchy:

Yes you did.:bye:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Well why did you not say something there and then? Why did you not make a stand? Hibbyradge? That’s a bit of a misnomer…
Did you mount a protest at the height of the chanting on Sunday?

This is what I fail to understand about you, LiverpoolHibs and KHibs07 who look to score points, belittle other posters, and put them down at every opportunity no matter the subject matter. What do you, tangibly and collectively, do to address these issues? Lets hear some evidence.

I spent 4 days in Richmond Hospital after jumping in for my friend who was IN FACT being racially abused, and also got a severe doing in a Portrush harbour bar as another mate was attacked due to his “southern accent”.

Personally, I abhor racism. I am however mature enough to distinguish the line of demarcation rather than have them dictated to me by hysterical internet theorists. As a vehicle for change of consciousness you could hardly be more ineffective than housemasters in a mid 20th century boarding school…. The message you seek to deliver is lost in the overpowering dictatorial style in which it is delivered. This could warrant some psychological investigation.

I did not join in with the Kingston chant as I considered it inappropriate, not racist. However I did not feel compelled to come on here and slate those who did.


If you could point out where I, or either of the others, have done that then that would help. Whereas I have been called a 'fanny', a 'boring *******' and told I'm 'talking ******'. You seem to equate arguing calmly and rationally with condescension.

I don't have to explain what I do to 'address these issues'. Suffice to say that I do plenty. And as someone pointed out, raising such things on here is doing so.

[khib70]

If you could point out where I, or either of the others, have done that then that would help. Whereas I have been called a 'fanny', a 'boring *******' and told I'm 'talking ******'. You seem to equate arguing calmly and rationally with condescension.

I don't have to explain what I do to 'address these issues'. Suffice to say that I do plenty. And as someone pointed out, raising such things on here is doing so.
Exactly. All the abuse has come in one direction. This guy seems to have developed some sort of persecution complex he thinks everyone else has. Methinks he doth protest too much:dunno: Like you, I'm not going to parade my anti-racist credentials, but I've done enough. Also like you, I'm still doing it at this very moment.

It's amazing how criticism of a racist song can get so many people so agitated. Lots of people who've hardly posted at all suddenly springing into action to abuse and belittle fellow Hibbies who are members of the "PC Brigade".:cool2:

This is conspiracy theory at its worst. How is this "brigade" constituted? I know from reading your posts that you and I would probably disagree about 90% of issues. Ditto most of the others who take the same view as us on this issue. Hardly an organised conspiracy. I think, though, we would probably manage to conduct our disagreements without resorting to the kind of language you mention above.

[lapsedhibee]

Exactly. All the abuse has come in one direction. This guy seems to have developed some sort of persecution complex he thinks everyone else has. Methinks he doth protest too much:dunno: Like you, I'm not going to parade my anti-racist credentials, but I've done enough. Also like you, I'm still doing it at this very moment.

It's amazing how criticism of a racist song can get so many people so agitated. Lots of people who've hardly posted at all suddenly springing into action to abuse and belittle fellow Hibbies who are members of the "PC Brigade".:cool2:

This is conspiracy theory at its worst. How is this "brigade" constituted? I know from reading your posts that you and I would probably disagree about 90% of issues. Ditto most of the others who take the same view as us on this issue. Hardly an organised conspiracy. I think, though, we would probably manage to conduct our disagreements without resorting to the kind of language you mention above.

What a strange distorting prism you must keep in front of your eyes when you read hibs.net.

[HibeeBigFly]

This thread is a total farce. Was in the east when it was being belted out and imo it was done in a jovial manner with no rascist undertones. I didnt know what a looky looky man was till after. Did not sing the song but dont see the problem. A man next to me at the time said that it was bordering on being rascist and i think he is right.

[khib70]

If you could point out where I, or either of the others, have done that then that would help. Whereas I have been called a 'fanny', a 'boring *******' and told I'm 'talking ******'. You seem to equate arguing calmly and rationally with condescension.

I don't have to explain what I do to 'address these issues'. Suffice to say that I do plenty. And as someone pointed out, raising such things on here is doing so.


What a strange distorting prism you must keep in front of your eyes when you read hibs.net.

See above - he said it better than I could

[Hibbyradge]

1. It's not.

2. I'm not a sado. Average of about 3 posts per day for the last 6 years:dunno::dunno::dunno: TBF you might be more interesting on this site because your life revolves around it.

3.


Yes you did.:bye:

Point 3 was a question.

[lapsedhibee]

See above - he said it better than I could

Without trawling the nine pages, I can recall "****wits" "fuds" "pathetic" "idiotic" and "pig ignorant" from the very small number of posters who broadly agree with your stance. Perhaps in your mind these are not abusive terms, since they have nothing to do with a person's colour.

[Woody1985]

Point 3 was a question.

It was more of a comment than a question, although you structured it that way, otherwise you wouldn't have used :bitchy:.

You're just trying to be a smart rse because you looked like an idiot when I said I hadn't sung the song. You've assumed it all the way through your posts:bye:

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

If you could point out where I, or either of the others, have done that then that would help. Whereas I have been called a 'fanny', a 'boring *******' and told I'm 'talking ******'. You seem to equate arguing calmly and rationally with condescension.

I don't have to explain what I do to 'address these issues'. Suffice to say that I do plenty. And as someone pointed out, raising such things on here is doing so.


Arguing calmly and rationally does not include calling other posters names and dismissing their points of view out of hand.

I suggest you review your own, HibbyRadge, khib07 and my previous posts over the last few months. Then we can discuss. You will find the only time I have kicked off has been in response to the way you all, collectively and consistently, talk down to others who do not hold your beliefs. I can’t stand the overbearing debating styles you adopt and hoped, naively, that by reflecting that back at you in the same manner you dismiss others that you would be able to see how destructive it is.

Perhaps I am the only one on this board that has this issue? If I am, then so be it, but as you evidently strive for the greater good then a bit of self introspection as to how you treat others wouldn’t go amiss.

[khib70]

Without trawling the nine pages, I can recall "****wits" "fuds" "pathetic" "idiotic" and "pig ignorant" from the very small number of posters who broadly agree with your stance. Perhaps in your mind these are not abusive terms, since they have nothing to do with a person's colour.

It's probably a good idea if you do trawl the nine pages, because you'll then find that the terms you quote were directed at the people who sang the song, or at racists in general, rather than at those who were defending it. On the other hand a huge group of posters ( to be fair, not including yourself) have spewed out a stream of abuse at those who disagree with them.

Those people should check out what an "ad hominem" argument is. Here (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html) will do nicely.

[Hibbyradge]

It was more of a comment than a question, although you structured it that way, otherwise you wouldn't have used :bitchy:.

You're just trying to be a smart rse because you looked like an idiot when I said I hadn't sung the song. You've assumed it all the way through your posts:bye:

Not true, I'm afraid.

I took issue with the fact that you suggested that the people who had objected to what they perceived as racist songs were boring.

I don't even know if you were at the game. I wasn't.

[lapsedhibee]

It's probably a good idea if you do trawl the nine pages, because you'll then find that the terms you quote were directed at the people who sang the song, or at racists in general, rather than at those who were defending it. On the other hand a huge group of posters ( to be fair, not including yourself) have spewed out a stream of abuse at those who disagree with them.

Those people should check out what an "ad hominem" argument is. Here (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html) will do nicely.

Some of the terms quoted were directed specifically at posters on this thread. The point is, your 'side' has been dishing out abuse to people you've never met, and then complained about getting abuse from people who've never met you. If you're going to dish it out, learn to take it.

[Hibbyradge]

Er, as I said, I walked out in disgust, taking my wife and her family with me. That's a stand, right?

It's a bit feeble though isn't it? Maybe you could have made your feeling known on a local message board?



I'm not quite sure what other options I had. Maybe you would have gone fighting?


[
I haven't belittled or put down anyone. I thought I was having a reasoned debate.
Not personally, but having read your earlier posts I felt compelled to defend the countless others you have dismissed at a keystroke in your inimitable condescending manner.



Although you agree I have not belittled anyone, it seems you have appointed yourself some sort of peoples champion against me anyway.

If you have previously taken issue with something I said, or the way you perceived it, why wait till now?





[B]Fighting racism and racial discrimination does not need to be about worldwide or life changing actions. Instead, every time an individual reconsiders a stereotype, speaks out against discrimination, ceases to make sexist jokes and references, tells others that such jokes and references are unacceptable, and does all that (s)he can to learn from the talents of each individual, regardless of race or skin colour, then discrimination is being fought. Hopefully racism and racial discrimination will soon become a thing of the past, but until then everyone can play a part in helping it to end.

This is where I find issue with your cut and paste. Why did you not speak out against the discrimination in the theatre? Why do you consider it would be better to wait until you could vent your frustrations on a football messageboard?



I think you may have mis-interpreted my remarks.

My example about the theatre was given to add context to my general point about racist humour. The incident happened in 1984.






[B]Fighting racism and racial discrimination does not need to be about worldwide or life changing actions. Instead, every time an individual reconsiders a stereotype, speaks out against discrimination, ceases to make sexist jokes and references, tells others that such jokes and references are unacceptable, and does all that (s)he can to learn from the talents of each individual, regardless of race or skin colour, then discrimination is being fought. Hopefully racism and racial discrimination will soon become a thing of the past, but until then everyone can play a part in helping it to end.




Maybe you have missed the point of a discussion board Would the point of the Hibs.net message board be that they must agree with Hibbyradges viewpoint or no be considered valid?



It's a debate. I don't expect everyone to agree with my point of view, but I will make my point the best I can and I try to do so without insulting folk or making it personal.

I even started my contribution by saying that I had a number of thoughts. Hardly dictatorial.

You haven't entered the debate, you have merely attacked me personally for my views and for the way you think I mean to put them across.



[B]

The reality is that you and your pals turn so many off to the real issues by overplaying the weak hand. When you unearth a true injustice I will fight along side you in the trenches.......................................... ..................


The archetypal Boy who cried Wolf.


I haven't unearthed anything. I entered an interesting debate after 292 other opinions had been expressed.

I guess your idea of injustice and mine are quite different.

[Hibbyradge]

Arguing calmly and rationally does not include calling other posters names and dismissing their points of view out of hand.

I suggest you review your own, HibbyRadge, khib07 and my previous posts over the last few months. Then we can discuss. You will find the only time I have kicked off has been in response to the way you all, collectively and consistently, talk down to others who do not hold your beliefs. I can’t stand the overbearing debating styles you adopt and hoped, naively, that by reflecting that back at you in the same manner you dismiss others that you would be able to see how destructive it is.

Perhaps I am the only one on this board that has this issue? If I am, then so be it, but as you evidently strive for the greater good then a bit of self introspection as to how you treat others wouldn’t go amiss.

I thought my arguments were rational and calm and I would be very surprised if you could find an occasssion when I have called another poster names.

[clerriehibs]

Just my take on it but peronally I don't reall find it funny (butI have a friend who is black with dreads six foot found and built like a brick s**t house and would prob flatten anbody that said that to him) and I would not sing it.

Interstingly the government say that something is racist if it is perceived to be racist. Given that some people think it was, it probably is.

Surely a joke, or a misrepresentation of what the government said? I can't be ersed checking. If true, anything whatsoever anyone ever says can be taken as racist? The world-wide community is fekced then.

A bloke behind me at Easter Rd is racist. He constantly moans about black players inability to stay on their feet, ours included. It's because they're black, apparently. He obviously uses far more abusive words to go with his racist attitude.
The Kingston song isn't racist; I doubt it's even a form of stereotyping. He's being ridiculed for having an image similar to one of the many guys who harass you to buy stuff when on holiday. It's an attempt to put the guy off by insulting him, slagging off his image. It's not racist.
Some folks knickers are in far too much of a twist.

[Hibbyradge]

Some of the terms quoted were directed specifically at posters on this thread. The point is, your 'side' has been dishing out abuse to people you've never met, and then complained about getting abuse from people who've never met you. If you're going to dish it out, learn to take it.

LH, I don't see myself as being on any "side". I have my opinions on certain political and social issues and I try to put them across in as convincing manner as I can.

Clearly, that irks some folk so I will re-consider my writing style.

Maybe I'll just put "IMHO" after every sentence. That's a joke, btw.

I don't think I give out abuse or attack people personally but I rarely complain when I receive it.

[lapsedhibee]

LH, I don't see myself as being on any "side". I have my opinions on certain political and social issues and I try to put them across in as convincing manner as I can.

Clearly, that irks some folk so I will re-consider my writing style.

Maybe I'll just put "IMHO" after every sentence. That's a joke, btw.

I don't think I give out abuse or attack people personally but I rarely complain when I receive it.
Naw, I ken.
I was just objecting to the idea that the (relatively mild) abuse on this thread had been all one-way.
I did put 'side' in inverted commas, as it's anti-constructive to polarise and label imho.
Now GTF back to your crying-like-a-girl-brigade headquarters. :wink:

[Woody1985]

Interstingly the government say that something is racist if it is perceived to be racist. Given that some people think it was, it probably is.

Are you having a laugh? Are the government correct on everything they say and do?

[Barman Stanton]

Arguing calmly and rationally does not include calling other posters names and dismissing their points of view out of hand.

I suggest you review your own, HibbyRadge, khib07 and my previous posts over the last few months. Then we can discuss. You will find the only time I have kicked off has been in response to the way you all, collectively and consistently, talk down to others who do not hold your beliefs. I can’t stand the overbearing debating styles you adopt and hoped, naively, that by reflecting that back at you in the same manner you dismiss others that you would be able to see how destructive it is.

Perhaps I am the only one on this board that has this issue? If I am, then so be it, but as you evidently strive for the greater good then a bit of self introspection as to how you treat others wouldn’t go amiss.


No you are not, I agree with you also. Not wanting to get too much into it as I think it has all been said already on this thread. But imo the likes of Liverpool Hibs likes trying to tell fellow Hibees what to do a bit too much. I remember a very similar theme on a thread about the Wallace Mercer song a wee while ago.

[LiverpoolHibs]

No you are not, I agree with you also. Not wanting to get too much into it as I think it has all been said already on this thread. But imo the likes of Liverpool Hibs likes trying to tell fellow Hibees what to do a bit too much. I remember a very similar theme on a thread about the Wallace Mercer song a wee while ago.

Unless I'm being very forgetful I don't remember posting on a Mercer thread recently (or not recently for that matter).

And it's not a case of 'trying to tell fellow Hibees what to do' (unless you can find such a post), it's about objecting to a song.

[Barman Stanton]

Unless I'm being very forgetful I don't remember posting on a Mercer thread recently (or not recently for that matter).

And it's not a case of 'trying to tell fellow Hibees what to do' (unless you can find such a post), it's about objecting to a song.

Then appologies if I have the wrong person.

It certainly looks like you are telling people what to sing and what not to sing from reading this thread.

I think this song is bordeline, some will think its racist and some wont. I dont think anyone really has the authority to class it as such either way.

[khib70]

Then appologies if I have the wrong person.

It certainly looks like you are telling people what to sing and what not to sing from reading this thread.

I think this song is bordeline, some will think its racist and some wont. I dont think anyone really has the authority to class it as such either way.
No he isn't. He's saying "I don't like what people are singing". He, and I, and others think the song is racist. We don't have the authority to tell anyone what to do or not to do. You don't need "authority" to decide whether or not, in your opinion, something is racist. It's a personal view which others may or may not share. You've got your view, and unlike some posters on here, I'm not going to make snap character judgements about you because I disagree with it.

[Barman Stanton]

No he isn't. He's saying "I don't like what people are singing". He, and I, and others think the song is racist. We don't have the authority to tell anyone what to do or not to do. You don't need "authority" to decide whether or not, in your opinion, something is racist. It's a personal view which others may or may not share. You've got your view, and unlike some posters on here, I'm not going to make snap character judgements about you because I disagree with it.

No, he is not saying he thinks it is Racist, he is saying it is Racist. Look on the 1st page of this thread if you doubt that. My point is that neither him, you , or I have the autority to class this song as racist. The fact its almost 50-50 on this thread shows that.

[Dashing Bob S]

I think Kingston is a decent player and Hearts are a looky, looky team to have him in their line oop.

And i don't mean no disrepect to people from Manchester, chook.

[Darth Hibbie]

Surely a joke, or a misrepresentation of what the government said? I can't be ersed checking. If true, anything whatsoever anyone ever says can be taken as racist? The world-wide community is fekced then.

A bloke behind me at Easter Rd is racist. He constantly moans about black players inability to stay on their feet, ours included. It's because they're black, apparently. He obviously uses far more abusive words to go with his racist attitude.
The Kingston song isn't racist; I doubt it's even a form of stereotyping. He's being ridiculed for having an image similar to one of the many guys who harass you to buy stuff when on holiday. It's an attempt to put the guy off by insulting him, slagging off his image. It's not racist.
Some folks knickers are in far too much of a twist.


Are you having a laugh? Are the government correct on everything they say and do?


No I am not having a laugh and I never suggested at any time that it was correct or right or just. All I done was post what I had heard.

From The Scottish Government Publication website.

The definition of a racist incident as given by Sir William MacPherson in his Report on the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry is "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person

[lapsedhibee]

From The Scottish Government Publication website.

The definition of a racist incident as given by Sir William MacPherson in his Report on the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry is "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person"

As a definition, that's absolutely staggering in its ineptitude.
If LiverpoolHibs thinks we're aw racists, we're aw racists.

[Mibbes Aye]

As a definition, that's absolutely staggering in its ineptitude.
If LiverpoolHibs thinks we're aw racists, we're aw racists.

I think it's important to bear in mind that definition is of whether an incident is a 'racist incident' (my italics). It didn't come from Scottish or UK government as such but from McPherson in his Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report.

Nevertheless McPherson's definition is nothing new. ACPO's definition in use prior to McPherson was the same, just worded longer. And while the term 'incident' may be unsatisfying in its vagueness, it does allow crimes and what might be perceived as non-crimes (insults, abuse etc) to be brought together based on their supposed common denominator.

[lapsedhibee]

I think it's important to bear in mind that definition is of whether an incident is a 'racist incident' (my italics). It didn't come from Scottish or UK government as such but from McPherson in his Steven Lawrence Inquiry Report.

Nevertheless McPherson's definition is nothing new. ACPO's definition in use prior to McPherson was the same, just worded longer. And while the term 'incident' may be unsatisfying in its vagueness, it does allow crimes and what might be perceived as non-crimes (insults, abuse etc) to be brought together based on their supposed common denominator.

:agree: Thirty people sing a song on a Sunday afternoon = incident. LH is offended. The singing is racist. The following week forty people on an interweb messageboard conspire in a single thread to defend the song = incident. LH is offended. The defence is racist. This is ****ing nuts!

[BroxburnHibee]

After reading through all this I'd just like to say that we have recently had harassment training at work where we were basically told that if another person finds anything you do or say offensive even if it is not directed at them...........then it is.

Indeed recently I lost one off my brigade as a woman overheard him singing an offensive song(in her words) and he got the sack even though he was just having a laugh with a pal.

So if someone finds something racist ergo..................

Personally I don't find the song racist but I respect people's opinions as long as they respect mine.

[Steve-O]

No, he is not saying he thinks it is Racist, he is saying it is Racist. Look on the 1st page of this thread if you doubt that. My point is that neither him, you , or I have the autority to class this song as racist. The fact its almost 50-50 on this thread shows that.

Exactly. Sorry Hibbyradge, but I think it is this very point that irked me with your long post, you explicitly stated it IS racist, as if it was fact? I think this is where TheHibeesandtheBaddies took issue also (although I don't know). My opinion is that it is not racist, yours may be that it is, but I don't think you can state that it IS and that's that.


After reading through all this I'd just like to say that we have recently had harassment training at work where we were basically told that if another person finds anything you do or say offensive even if it is not directed at them...........then it is.

Indeed recently I lost one off my brigade as a woman overheard him singing an offensive song(in her words) and he got the sack even though he was just having a laugh with a pal.

So if someone finds something racist ergo..................

Personally I don't find the song racist but I respect people's opinions as long as they respect mine.

I remember getting this sort of nonsense at work as well. i.e. if someone is walking past your computer and looks over your shoulder to see you type something THEY find offensive, then it's offensive and you are in bother about it? Utter nonsense IMO.

[clerriehibs]

The Hartley/Hibees are Gay song hits 2 birds with one stone, so to speak.

Sort of like "Are you Rangers in disguise" does.

Do you think the song "I'd rather be a Paki than a Turk" is only insulting to Turks?

The Hibees/Hartley are gay song is intended to offend Hibs supporters but it is also clearly insulting to gay folk.

It suggests that the singers are superior to the target because of their sexuality.

I know several gay people, some of whom are so afraid of the attitude of the hetrosexual majority, that they are still too scared to "come out".

I know gay people and hetrosexual people who find the song offensive.

If one group of people were to sing a song about someone with the lyric "You're so mean, you're nearly Scottish", would we sit back and merely laugh at that person's misfortune?

I'm not for a second suggesting that any of these songs are crime of the century but their basis in racist and homophobic beliefs needs to be discussed.

By the way, Groundskeeper Willie is not offensive to Scots because he is not portrayed as either drunk or mean.

Could your avatar not be construed as offensive by a significant proportion of our population, i.e. it could be seen to demean women? Whether they are right or not is an issue, but until that question is ever answered, would it not be in line with your other views to have a less 'offensive' avatar?

[The Voice Of Reason]

Surely a joke, or a misrepresentation of what the government said? I can't be ersed checking. If true, anything whatsoever anyone ever says can be taken as racist? The world-wide community is fekced then.

A bloke behind me at Easter Rd is racist. He constantly moans about black players inability to stay on their feet, ours included. It's because they're black, apparently. He obviously uses far more abusive words to go with his racist attitude.
The Kingston song isn't racist; I doubt it's even a form of stereotyping. He's being ridiculed for having an image similar to one of the many guys who harass you to buy stuff when on holiday. It's an attempt to put the guy off by insulting him, slagging off his image. It's not racist.
Some folks knickers are in far too much of a twist.
:agree::applause::top marks

[The Voice Of Reason]

Could your avatar not be construed as offensive by a significant proportion of our population, i.e. it could be seen to demean women? Whether they are right or not is an issue, but until that question is ever answered, would it not be in line with your other views to have a less 'offensive' avatar?

:agree: :tee hee:

[Katy]

I would say this is more of a stereotype than out and out racism.

I agree. Looky looky men aren't all black, and it's not racist it's like their job. Called looky looky men because they come up to you and say "Looky looky" because they're foreign.

[Hibbyradge]

Could your avatar not be construed as offensive by a significant proportion of our population, i.e. it could be seen to demean women? Whether they are right or not is an issue, but until that question is ever answered, would it not be in line with your other views to have a less 'offensive' avatar?

How do you know it's a woman? :confused:

[Hibbyradge]

Exactly. Sorry Hibbyradge, but I think it is this very point that irked me with your long post, you explicitly stated it IS racist, as if it was fact? I think this is where TheHibeesandtheBaddies took issue also (although I don't know). My opinion is that it is not racist, yours may be that it is, but I don't think you can state that it IS and that's that.


Who's getting prissy now?

Does it not go without saying that everything typed on a messageboard is someone's opinion?

Do we always have to write, "IMHO" or "I think", before we say something.

e.g. Morais should be punted now. The song isn't racist. Petrie won't give mixu money for Deek. Murray should be captain. Beckham's past it. Mixu hasn't got wat it takes etc etc etc.

Do you always qualify your opinion before typing it?

[Brizo]

If this internet thingy had existed in the 70s / 80s we'd be having this debate about "rebel" songs. Those songs were sung by hordes of impressionable youths solely because they had become flavour of the month and the done thing to be singing. Most singing them probably thought the Easter Rising was a lane off Easter Rd and that James Connolly was Billys dad. The majority singing them had no strong Republican beliefs , it was just the prevailing Hibs songbook.Thankfully self policing got rid of those songs.

Todays dubious song repertoire is I believe similar. The vast majority singing them will have no racist opinions but songs of this nature have become flavour of the month amongst a small section of the support. Whether theyre overtly racist or just abusive is all down to opinions. IMO whatever they are theyre unneccesary infantile p@sh that we should self police out of existance so we can get back to singing songs supporting the club.

[Hibbyradge]

How about if Hibs fans sung about a Chinese player going back to his laundry because we had seen someone in a New York laundry who had some similar characteristics?

Or if Hearts fans had shouted away back and sell your onions to Franck Sauzee?

Or someone shouted "you're a Zulu" to a black player because they'd seen a similar looking person in a documentary?

All those remarks are racist. IMHO.

The Kingston song is in the same bag.

[Steve-O]

Who's getting prissy now?

Does it not go without saying that everything typed on a messageboard is someone's opinion?

Do we always have to write, "IMHO" or "I think", before we say something.

e.g. Morais should be punted now. The song isn't racist. Petrie won't give mixu money for Deek. Murray should be captain. Beckham's past it. Mixu hasn't got wat it takes etc etc etc.

Do you always qualify your opinion before typing it?

After ALL the debate that had gone before, you simply said the song IS racist, in that long post, with no argument to back up the statement. The song was racist and that was that. As someone who does not believe the song is racist, I felt I was branded a racist for believing that by your apparent statement of fact. Your use of bold font makes out that it is FACT it is racist when this is not the case. Why else would you say it is racist?

People having different views on the ability of a footballer is completely different, I just will not accept being effectively branded a racist by a sweeping generalisation and opinion of a song. You said IT IS racist when in fact it is your opinion that it is racist. Two completely different things.

[Steve-O]

How about if Hibs fans sung about a Chinese player going back to his laundry because we had seen someone in a New York laundry who had some similar characteristics?

Or if Hearts fans had shouted away back and sell your onions to Franck Sauzee?

Or someone shouted "you're a Zulu" to a black player because they'd seen a similar looking person in a documentary?

All those remarks are racist. IMHO.

The Kingston song is in the same bag.

Chinese player? Laundry? I dont get it? Are you making a racial stereotype?

Away and sell you onions to Sauzee? I'm sure Franck would have been devastated. I defintely would've written to my MP had I heard such a shocking chant...

A Zulu? Eh? Your analogies are simply not working...

[Steve-O]

Who's getting prissy now?

Does it not go without saying that everything typed on a messageboard is someone's opinion?

Do we always have to write, "IMHO" or "I think", before we say something.

e.g. Morais should be punted now. The song isn't racist. Petrie won't give mixu money for Deek. Murray should be captain. Beckham's past it. Mixu hasn't got wat it takes etc etc etc.

Do you always qualify your opinion before typing it?

As for being "prissy", I don't think I am. We dont always HAVE to state "I think" or "my opinion is..." before every statement, but I have already explained myself in another post. You said the song IS racist, with no argument behind your statement, and people, including me, may effectively be offended at being branded a racist because of that. I don't see what's so difficult about that to see, nor do I appreciate being called "prissy" about it.

[bighairyfaeleith]

Is this thread still going? I blame the looky looky men myself!!!

:take that

[GREEN BRAZIL]

if the Kingston song is racist, then most of the posters on this site are racist or have broken the law in some way including me.
heres a small list to find out if you should go to jail.

yams
daily ******
huns
weegies

if you have used any of the above in your posts :tsk tsk:

[Hibbyradge]

After ALL the debate that had gone before, you simply said the song IS racist, in that long post, with no argument to back up the statement. The song was racist and that was that. As someone who does not believe the song is racist, I felt I was branded a racist for believing that by your apparent statement of fact. Your use of bold font makes out that it is FACT it is racist when this is not the case. Why else would you say it is racist?

People having different views on the ability of a footballer is completely different, I just will not accept being effectively branded a racist by a sweeping generalisation and opinion of a song. You said IT IS racist when in fact it is your opinion that it is racist. Two completely different things.

Steve, I did not brand you, or anyone else a racist.

If you look back, I clearly said that it was the song that was racist, even if the intentions of the singers were not.

"However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way."

I also said that I understood why folk would consider it as non-racist

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

And I said that it wasn't crime of the century.

For what it's worth, all of those things are IMHO,too.

Loads of folk have stated that "the song is not racist". I don't see anyone saying, "in my opinion".

[Steve-O]

Steve, I did not brand you, or anyone else a racist.

If you look back, I clearly said that it was the song that was racist, even if the intentions of the singers were not.

"However, the Looky Looky song is also racist even if some of the singers genuinely don't intend it that way."

I also said that I understood why folk would consider it as non-racist

In the same vein, I can understand why folk may not realise that the Kingston song is racist but it is, and non-racists and anti-racists shouldn't sing it.

And I said that it wasn't crime of the century.

For what it's worth, all of those things are IMHO,too.

Loads of folk have stated that "the song is not racist". I don't see anyone saying, "in my opinion".

You said the song IS racist, without any argument to say why? I said it isn't, which is why I think your statement automatically makes me a racist in your eyes. Whether that was the inference or not, I am saying that your comment infers that to be the case, and that was the problem I had with your comments.

Its fair enough you saying you understand why some think it isn't racist, but you still go on to say IT IS racist, when, IMO, it isn't. In certain cases, I think you should say it is your opinion, and apologies if that sounds "prissy".

[Hibbyradge]

Chinese player? Laundry? I dont get it? Are you making a racial stereotype?

Away and sell you onions to Sauzee? I'm sure Franck would have been devastated. I defintely would've written to my MP had I heard such a shocking chant...

A Zulu? Eh? Your analogies are simply not working...

In my opinion...all the analogies above would offend people of different races.

The Looky Man thing is similar.

Therefore, they are racist.

Therefore, they shouldn't be repeated by people who don't want to cause racial offence.

You may not think they are particulary serious or wish to report them to your MP, then that's your values and you're entitled to them, but the wieght of the offence isn't the issue.

Is stealing a packet of polo mints from a shop, theft? Or does it have to be worth a certyain amount before it's called theft?

If you really don't/can't/won't accept any of my points, then there isn't much point in further discussion between us on this subject.

[Hibbyradge]

You said the song IS racist, without any argument to say why? I said it isn't, which is why I think your statement automatically makes me a racist in your eyes. Whether that was the inference or not, I am saying that your comment infers that to be the case, and that was the problem I had with your comments.

Its fair enough you saying you understand why some think it isn't racist, but you still go on to say IT IS racist, when, IMO, it isn't. In certain cases, I think you should say it is your opinion, and apologies if that sounds "prissy".

You think wrong.

Having said that, I can see why you could have come to that conclusion and in future, on sensitive subjects such as racism, I'll make sure I choose my words more carefully.

For my own mental health, not just that of the prissy amongst us.

[Beefster]

if the Kingston song is racist, then most of the posters on this site are racist or have broken the law in some way including me.
heres a small list to find out if you should go to jail.

yams
daily ******
huns
weegies

if you have used any of the above in your posts :tsk tsk:

What race do they all belong to? Is 'Yam' an insult? Is 'weegie' an insult? Or am I missing the point?

Calling that rag the 'Daily ******' may be insulting to some but it's not racist.

Judging by recent legal verdicts, the other one is sectarian though.


You said the song IS racist, without any argument to say why? I said it isn't, which is why I think your statement automatically makes me a racist in your eyes. Whether that was the inference or not, I am saying that your comment infers that to be the case, and that was the problem I had with your comments.

Its fair enough you saying you understand why some think it isn't racist, but you still go on to say IT IS racist, when, IMO, it isn't. In certain cases, I think you should say it is your opinion, and apologies if that sounds "prissy".

A pragmatist might say "If I don't want to be considered a racist then I won't sing a song that some folk consider racist".

For the record, if someone tells me that I'm an ersehole, I always take it that they are of the opinion that I'm an ersehole rather than I actually am an ersehole. Always works for me.

[GREEN BRAZIL]

What race do they all belong to? Is 'Yam' an insult? Is 'weegie' an insult? Or am I missing the point?

Calling that rag the 'Daily ******' may be insulting to some but it's not racist.

Judging by recent legal verdicts, the other one is sectarian though.



A pragmatist might say "If I don't want to be considered a racist then I won't sing a song that some folk consider racist".

For the record, if someone tells me that I'm an ersehole, I always take it that they are of the opinion that I'm an ersehole rather than I actually am an ersehole. Always works for me.
did you read my post :confused:

[Hibbyradge]

if the Kingston song is racist, then most of the posters on this site are racist or have broken the law in some way including me.
heres a small list to find out if you should go to jail.

yams
daily ******
huns
weegies

if you have used any of the above in your posts :tsk tsk:

None of the above are racist slurs.

They are insults and not only do I not critisise them, I join in.

Although i have never sung it, I have never critisised anyone for singing the Mercer song. Hugely offensive it may be, but it's not against someone's Race, creed, sex or sexual orientation, of which people have no choice.

[Beefster]

did you read my post :confused:

Yup, you're comparing 'Yam', 'weegie' etc etc to racism.

Aren't you?

[GREEN BRAZIL]

if the Kingston song is racist, then most of the posters on this site are racist or have broken the law in some way including me.
heres a small list to find out if you should go to jail.

yams
daily ******
huns
weegies

if you have used any of the above in your posts :tsk tsk:
:agree:

[Hibbyradge]

:agree:

In what way is using the word Yam a crime? :confused:

[GREEN BRAZIL]

In what way is using the word Yam a crime? :confused:
what is a yam

[Coco Bryce]

what is a yam

Its a potato :agree:

[GREEN BRAZIL]

Its a potato :agree:
its commonly known as a vegetable

[Beefster]

In what way is using the word Yam a crime? :confused:

It isn't. But it suits some agendas to compare all possible insults with proper discrimination in a bid to prove that the world is "PC gone mad" nowadays.

[Beefster]

its commonly known as a vegetable

Am I okay to get my son 'Mr Potato Head' for Christmas?

[Nailrod]

:agree:

Was offered Dog soup in Korea. Gave me the dry boak so i politely declined.
Big mistake. Excellent hangover cure...

[Hibbyradge]

I found this which gives some food for thought, particularly item 3 in respect of the Eddie Murphy chant. Was it sung at Nade, by the way?

Ten Harmless Racist Remarks:
Comments That Make Me Think You Are Racist (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/65558/ten_harmless_racist_remarks.html)

[Houchy]

Good point.

Some folk say I look like the scottish cup, because of my big ears.

Others say I look like concorde, because of my big nose.

Other folk just say I'm ugly.

Until I am denied job opportunities, threatened in the street, paid less, or considered to be a lesser human being in any way because of the way I look, I won't call any of my detractors big ear-ist, big nose-ist, nor ugly-ist.

Sounds like you're ugliest:offski::greengrin:wink:

[Houchy]

Big mistake. Excellent hangover cure...

I found that Korean soup is pretty rank:agree:...




but their meatballs really are the dogs b0llocks:greengrin

[Steve-O]

What race do they all belong to? Is 'Yam' an insult? Is 'weegie' an insult? Or am I missing the point?

Calling that rag the 'Daily ******' may be insulting to some but it's not racist.

Judging by recent legal verdicts, the other one is sectarian though.



A pragmatist might say "If I don't want to be considered a racist then I won't sing a song that some folk consider racist".

For the record, if someone tells me that I'm an ersehole, I always take it that they are of the opinion that I'm an ersehole rather than I actually am an ersehole. Always works for me.

Well, I didn't sing the song as I wasn't there, and not sure I would have anyway. It is just my opinion that it's not racist. Some may say they find it racist (I am still to hear a valid argument as to why it is specifically racist) but I still don't think people have the authority (for want of a better word) to tell me, and others that it IS definitely racist!

[Steve-O]

I found this which gives some food for thought, particularly item 3 in respect of the Eddie Murphy chant. Was it sung at Nade, by the way?

Ten Harmless Racist Remarks:
Comments That Make Me Think You Are Racist (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/65558/ten_harmless_racist_remarks.html)

I don't think any of the other points are pertinent to what's been discussed here.

Everything on that link is the opinion of one black person, just like the one black person (that we know of) who has posted on this thread said he didn't find the Kingston song to be racist.

Opinions, opinions!

[majorhibs]

I don't think any of the other points are pertinent to what's been discussed here.

Everything on that link is the opinion of one black person, just like the one black person (that we know of) who has posted on this thread said he didn't find the Kingston song to be racist.

Opinions, opinions!

Listen, dont ever question the right of the "brigade" who do their own good work for what they believe, on what they choose to ignore or not! Wether it's pertinent or not!

[Hibbyradge]

Well, I didn't sing the song as I wasn't there, and not sure I would have anyway. It is just my opinion that it's not racist. Some may say they find it racist (I am still to hear a valid argument as to why it is specifically racist) but I still don't think people have the authority (for want of a better word) to tell me, and others that it IS definitely racist!

So how come you said that you thought I accused you of being racist. :confused:

[Hibbyradge]

I don't think any of the other points are pertinent to what's been discussed here.

Everything on that link is the opinion of one black person, just like the one black person (that we know of) who has posted on this thread said he didn't find the Kingston song to be racist.

Opinions, opinions!

Absolutely.

As I said, it's food for thought.

[Steve-O]

So how come you said that you thought I accused you of being racist. :confused:

Drunk :greengrin

What I was trying to get at is that if you are stating it IS racist as a matter of fact, then surely if I think the song is fair game, by default I am racist?

Anyway, we can agree to disagree since I am now sober :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Drunk :greengrin

What I was trying to get at is that if you are stating it IS racist as a matter of fact, then surely if I think the song is fair game, by default I am racist?

Anyway, we can agree to disagree since I am now sober :wink:

I didn't accuse anyone of being a racist. It would be cool if you could acknowledge that, despite of your previous, drunk, comments.

Next question - do you know Disco Drisco?

[Hibbyradge]

Listen, dont ever question the right of the "brigade" who do their own good work for what they believe, on what they choose to ignore or not! Wether it's pertinent or not!

Excellent point.

Maybe you can share your views on the issue under discussion, now?

[Steve-O]

I didn't accuse anyone of being a racist. It would be cool if you could acknowledge that, despite of your previous, drunk, comments.

Next question - do you know Disco Drisco?

Not an outright accusation, just by default as stated. I acknowledge there's a difference.

Answer to question - no, why?

[Hibbyradge]

Not an outright accusation, just by default as stated. I acknowledge there's a difference.

Answer to question - no, why?

Just cos you used him to back up your claim that the song isn't racist.

I don't know him either.

I don't know if he's a Hibs supporter, never mind if he's black.

Anyway, time for bed.

[Steve-O]

Just cos you used him to back up your claim that the song isn't racist.

I don't know him either.

I don't know if he's a Hibs supporter, never mind if he's black.

Anyway, time for bed.

Well he said he was black, and was posting on Hibs site, so we can only take people at their word?

[Hibbyradge]

Well he said he was black, and was posting on Hibs site, so we can only take people at their word?

I'm an expert on racist songs.

Take me at my word?

Really, it's time for bed...

[Steve-O]

I'm an expert on racist songs.

Take me at my word?

Really, it's time for bed...

No.

:greengrin

[Woody1985]

How do you know it's a woman? :confused:

You have some of the most ridiculous comebacks. Although a lot of valid ones aswell.

Are you suggesting that the pic in your avatar isn't a women?! I'm sure that people of certain backgrounds may find it offensive. I demand you remove it immediately as it offends me.:devil: Only kidding, I actually think it's the best one I've seen on here!

[Keith_M]

So did we decide on whether the song is racist or not?

Maybe we could do a poll on it, accept the result and put the whole thing to bed.

[steviehfc]

You have some of the most ridiculous comebacks. Although a lot of valid ones aswell.

Are you suggesting that the pic in your avatar isn't a women?! I'm sure that people of certain backgrounds may find it offensive. I demand you remove it immediately as it offends me.:devil: Only kidding, I actually think it's the best one I've seen on here!It could be a ladyboy.:greengrin

[blackpoolhibs]

Seems a really storm in a tea cup, all of this.

The guy that started the thread should just run it as a poll.

;)

Dont start, there's enough of those buggers here already, apart from you dave.:wink:

[Hibbyradge]

You have some of the most ridiculous comebacks. Although a lot of valid ones aswell.

Are you suggesting that the pic in your avatar isn't a women?!



I don't think my reply was ridiculous at all.

Clerrie said that my avatar demeaned women.

How can that be when it may not be a woman in the photo? Seriously.

A picture of a semi-naked girl, may demean women but surely not a pair of unidentified, disembodied ankles.

Personally, like you, I think it's a very sexy avatar. I'd be extremely "disappointed" if it turned out that it wasn't a woman, but it might not be.




I'm sure that people of certain backgrounds may find it offensive.

I agree. Members of certain religions and particularly prudish people would probably be uncomfortable with the photo although none of them could have surfed the internet for long or even looked in a high street fashion shop window.

It could be said that my avatar is very suggestive although I would argue that it's the person viewing it who is making the assumptions.

It could be a man, it could be a woman. It could be a manikin in a shop window being dressed by a shop assistant.

The knickers could be coming off or going on. It's all in your mind. :wink:

However, I've never said that football fans shouldn't cause offence. I've sang my fair share of offensive songs at rival supporters and will continue to do so.

But I don't agree with attacking someone's race, nationality, religion, sex or sexual orientation.

[Hibbyradge]

Dont start, there's enough of those buggers here already, apart from you dave.:wink:

Not bad, G, but you never were too good with at spelling. :na na:

[lapsedhibee]

However, I've never said that football fans shouldn't cause offence. I've sang my fair share of offensive songs at rival supporters and will continue to do so.

But I don't agree with attacking someone's race, nationality, religion, sex or sexual orientation. Wot about disability. Is it ok to use '******' in a pejorative way.

[Hibbyradge]

It could be a ladyboy.:greengrin

Exactly. (http://www.brightonlife.com/images/news/1077.jpg) :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Wot about disability. Is it ok to use '******' in a pejorative way.

Good shout.

Edit: To answer your specific question, I don't like to hear people use words like mong and ****** although they seem to be widespread.

[lapsedhibee]

Good shout.

Edit: To answer your specific question, I don't like to hear people use words like mong and ****** although they seem to be widespread.

And another thing, ginger hair. Being ginge is a genetic characteristic in exactly the same way that having black skin is a genetic characteristic. Ginges obviously have absolutely no choice or control in the matter, yet Stevie Fail, Mikey Mikey Stewart and Neil Lennon are frequently abused on here, not quite as "ginger *******s", but not far short of it.

[Hibbyradge]

And another thing, ginger hair. Being ginge is a genetic characteristic in exactly the same way that having black skin is a genetic characteristic. Ginges obviously have absolutely no choice or control in the matter, yet Stevie Fail, Mikey Mikey Stewart and Neil Lennon are frequently abused on here, not quite as "ginger *******s", but not far short of it.

I take your point. Where do we draw the line on what's acceptable and what's not? I guess we all have our own values and we'll make our decisions accordingly.

Although there are laws to protect people from being disadvantaged, it's not illegal to hold racist, sexist, homophobic or bigotted views or to be intolerant of disability, so folk will make their own choices. Of course, they may be well open to critisism from others.

I don't think I've ever slagged someone off for being ginger (I never really notice to be honest) but I certainly revelled in the lack of hair of some players and refs when I was younger. I don't think I insult folk about their appearance anymore though.

I suppose if folk really feel the need to insult someone, they will find a way to do so. In football, any perceived "weakness" is seized apon and used as cruelly as possible.

I actually don't know why the colour of Gordon Strachan's hair, for example, is relevant, to be honest. He's an arrogant and ignorant egotist and I will derive great pleasure when he is finally being found out at Celtic and handed his jotters, whether or not he uses Grecian 2000.

Calling him arrogant and ignorant egotist is bound to hurt more than "Ginge". Doncha fink? :dunno:

[BroxburnHibee]

And another thing, ginger hair. Being ginge is a genetic characteristic in exactly the same way that having black skin is a genetic characteristic. Ginges obviously have absolutely no choice or control in the matter, yet Stevie Fail, Mikey Mikey Stewart and Neil Lennon are frequently abused on here, not quite as "ginger *******s", but not far short of it.

My laddie has ginger hair and reading stuff like that doesn't offend me at all.

[clerriehibs]

I don't think my reply was ridiculous at all.

Clerrie said that my avatar demeaned women.

How can that be when it may not be a woman in the photo? Seriously.

A picture of a semi-naked girl, may demean women but surely not a pair of unidentified, disembodied ankles.

Personally, like you, I think it's a very sexy avatar. I'd be extremely "disappointed" if it turned out that it wasn't a woman, but it might not be.



I agree. Members of certain religions and particularly prudish people would probably be uncomfortable with the photo although none of them could have surfed the internet for long or even looked in a high street fashion shop window.

It could be said that my avatar is very suggestive although I would argue that it's the person viewing it who is making the assumptions.

It could be a man, it could be a woman. It could be a manikin in a shop window being dressed by a shop assistant.

The knickers could be coming off or going on. It's all in your mind. :wink:

However, I've never said that football fans shouldn't cause offence. I've sang my fair share of offensive songs at rival supporters and will continue to do so.

But I don't agree with attacking someone's race, nationality, religion, sex or sexual orientation.

No he didn't. I've been taking all your arguments at face value as well. Now I'll have to booger off and reconsider my opinion on that.

Don't kid us on. The avatar is a lady. And you hope it's a lovely lady. So if some other lovely lady comes on and claims it's offensive, you can't counter-claim it's not because it's indeterminate whether it's male or female. YOU hope it's a female, so if someone accuses you of having an offensive opinion, then you do. Apparently because the government says so.

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

I take your point. Where do we draw the line on what's acceptable and what's not? I guess we all have our own values and we'll make our decisions accordingly.

Although there are laws to protect people from being disadvantaged, it's not illegal to hold racist, sexist, homophobic or bigotted views or to be intolerant of disability, so folk will make their own choices. Of course, they may be well open to critisism from others.

I don't think I've ever slagged someone off for being ginger (I never really notice to be honest) but I certainly revelled in the lack of hair of some players and refs when I was younger. I don't think I insult folk about their appearance anymore though.

I suppose if folk really feel the need to insult someone, they will find a way to do so. In football, any perceived "weakness" is seized apon and used as cruelly as possible.

I actually don't know why the colour of Gordon Strachan's hair, for example, is relevant, to be honest. He's an arrogant and ignorant egotist and I will derive great pleasure when he is finally being found out at Celtic and handed his jotters, whether or not he uses Grecian 2000.

Calling him arrogant and ignorant egotist is bound to hurt more than "Ginge". Doncha fink? :dunno:

Thats something we can all relate to......

[Hibbyradge]

No he didn't. I've been taking all your arguments at face value as well. Now I'll have to booger off and reconsider my opinion on that.




Could your avatar not be construed as offensive by a significant proportion of our population, i.e. it could be seen to demean women? Whether they are right or not is an issue, but until that question is ever answered, would it not be in line with your other views to have a less 'offensive' avatar?

You're right, you didn't say it demeaned women.

You said that some people might say that.

My point is still valid.

In what way does it demean women?

Particularly as it could be a man.



Don't kid us on. The avatar is a lady. And you hope it's a lovely lady. So if some other lovely lady comes on and claims it's offensive, you can't counter-claim it's not because it's indeterminate whether it's male or female. YOU hope it's a female, so if someone accuses you of having an offensive opinion, then you do. Apparently because the government says so.

Sorry Clerrie, I'm not kidding anyone on. I don't know if it's a lady or not. It probably is, but I didn't take the picture.

[GREEN BRAZIL]

did you see the rain last night

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

You're right, you didn't say it demeaned women.

You said that some people might say that.

My point is still valid.

In what way does it demean women?

Particularly as it could be a man.



Sorry Clerrie, I'm not kidding anyone on. I don't know if it's a lady or not. It probably is, but I didn't take the picture.

Coyist, in the extreme. Very disappointing.

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

did you see the rain last night

biblical proportions. :agree:

[Keith_M]

My laddie has ginger hair and reading stuff like that doesn't offend me at all.

Funnily enough, reading about your laddie having ginger hair doesn't offend me either...



...well not much anyway

:greengrin

[lapsedhibee]

I actually don't know why the colour of Gordon Strachan's hair, for example, is relevant, to be honest. He's an arrogant and ignorant egotist and I will derive great pleasure when he is finally being found out at Celtic and handed his jotters, whether or not he uses Grecian 2000.

Calling him arrogant and ignorant egotist is bound to hurt more than "Ginge". Doncha fink? :dunno:

Fink that the reason his hair colour is mentioned is exactly the same reason that the colour of black people's skin is often mentioned even though it is of no particular relevance to the discussion. The reason being that in Edinburgh/Scotland/the UK it's a minority colour and therefore relatively unusual, and therefore an easy, effective, efficient way to identify or describe someone.

On current front page threads Mikey Mikey Stewart is described as a "ginger tosser" for (among other things) diving and Stevie Fail is described as a "greetin faced,fat,ginger tramp" for (among other things) being quoted for a vacant Dundee job. No difference whatsoever that I can see between including "ginger" in these phrases and including "black" in the phrase "black *******" shouted at opposing players. Colourist, genist, perhaps racist too since there are very few ethnic groups worldwide that include ginges.

Personally I wouldn't like to see a ban on the use of "ginger" used pejoratively, but would argue for its use to be limited to situations where a bit of wit is used. For example, "ginger whinger" is clever (because it rhymes, see) and is highly appropriately applied to both Mikey Mikey Stewart, who berates refs all game and who we all remember tripping over his face at the CIS final, and also the dwarf Strapon, who bleats about (among other things) the unfairness of ManUre having more money than Celtc.

People will say that 'ginger' in "ginger tosser" and "ginger tramp" is just a bit of banter, but it's not. It's picking on a minority for no other reason than that they are a minority. "Diving tosser" would in context perfectly adequately identify and insult Mikey Mikey and "greetin faced fat tramp" would in context perfectly adequately identify and insult Fail. (There ought to be a context, to clearly exclude eg Mikolooneytunes from the former insult.)

Untrammelled picking on a minority for their colouring - 'just a bit of banter' - will in time lead to discrimination at job interviews (this may exist already - where are you LHWM) and - just round the corner - screening out 'faulty' embryos.

Next episode: the plight of fat people, dwarves, and especially fat dwarves.

[Hibbyradge]

Coyist, in the extreme. Very disappointing.

Oh please. :bitchy:

Are you a journalist, by any chance? Your ability to sieze on individual sentences and belittle the author for them would make you perfect for that "profession".

If you want to get involved in a debate, please address the issues instead of merely attack the individuals involved for their views.

Apart from making your dislike for me personally very clear, you have provided no insights or added value to any of the discussions on this thread.

Now that's very disappointing and extremely childish.

[Hibbyradge]

Fink that the reason his hair colour is mentioned is exactly the same reason that the colour of black people's skin is often mentioned even though it is of no particular relevance to the discussion. The reason being that in Edinburgh/Scotland/the UK it's a minority colour and therefore relatively unusual, and therefore an easy, effective, efficient way to identify or describe someone.

On current front page threads Mikey Mikey Stewart is described as a "ginger tosser" for (among other things) diving and Stevie Fail is described as a "greetin faced,fat,ginger tramp" for (among other things) being quoted for a vacant Dundee job. No difference whatsoever that I can see between including "ginger" in these phrases and including "black" in the phrase "black *******" shouted at opposing players. Colourist, genist, perhaps racist too since there are very few ethnic groups worldwide that include ginges.

Personally I wouldn't like to see a ban on the use of "ginger" used pejoratively, but would argue for its use to be limited to situations where a bit of wit is used. For example, "ginger whinger" is clever (because it rhymes, see) and is highly appropriately applied to both Mikey Mikey Stewart, who berates refs all game and who we all remember tripping over his face at the CIS final, and also the dwarf Strapon, who bleats about (among other things) the unfairness of ManUre having more money than Celtc.

People will say that 'ginger' in "ginger tosser" and "ginger tramp" is just a bit of banter, but it's not. It's picking on a minority for no other reason than that they are a minority. "Diving tosser" would in context perfectly adequately identify and insult Mikey Mikey and "greetin faced fat tramp" would in context perfectly adequately identify and insult Fail. (There ought to be a context, to clearly exclude eg Mikolooneytunes from the former insult.)

Untrammelled picking on a minority for their colouring - 'just a bit of banter' - will in time lead to discrimination at job interviews (this may exist already - where are you LHWM) and - just round the corner - screening out 'faulty' embryos.

Next episode: the plight of fat people, dwarves, and especially fat dwarves.

Ah well, that puts an end to the discussion.

Was fun while it lasted.

[lapsedhibee]

Ah well, that puts an end to the discussion.

Not really, imo. Discussions like this will go on for as long there is quite clear discrimination in the way that the law treats the treatment of minority groups. Race, religion, sexual orientation are now heftily covered in current legislation. Other minorities are not covered at all. I can't imagine why it might be considered not ok to call someone a black poof, but it's considered ok to call someone a ginger dwarf. Surely the law will eventually, after a lot of debate, catch up to reflect that these types of insult are equally offensive to minorities.

And btw treating short people badly has, arguably, historically, caused much more harm than treating homosexual people badly. Quite close to home, think of the devastation that Hitler and Napoleon's ambitions wrought.

[HibbiesandtheBaddies]

Oh please. :bitchy:

Are you a journalist, by any chance? Your ability to sieze on individual sentences and belittle the author for them would make you perfect for that "profession".

If you want to get involved in a debate, please address the issues instead of merely attack the individuals involved for their views.

Apart from making your dislike for me personally very clear, you have provided no insights or added value to any of the discussions on this thread.

Now that's very disappointing and extremely childish.

Calm down Dear!

[Hibbyradge]

Calm down Dear!

Good boy!


:troll: