Greg Clarke

Status
Not open for further replies.


Grammar Police said:
This.

It's hard to keep up.

One week black is OK. Next week it isn't. Then it changes back.

I was speaking to the police about something I'd witnessed, I had to ask them if 'mixed race' was still an acceptable term.

Apparently not, it's now 'blended heritage' but I hadn't seen the memo.

It's probably changed again since.
Click to expand...
Do you really expect people to believe that? Though your target audience are certainly on here.
 
flusheding said:
People of colour = acceptable
coloured people = not acceptable

Basically.

Obviously this will cause a bit of a stink on social media and in the news, and there is some element of truth to him being probably past his use by date but within the context of what he is saying, it's is more like your embarrassing relative who doesn't know how to phrase things than some out and out racist.

Just like the comment about all the Asian people in the IT department at the FA. He's trying to make a point but is absolutely butchering how he is doing it and making himself look an idiot.
Click to expand...

I get ya - I didn’t watch it tbf, just read some comments on here.
 
Thurston said:
Using ‘of’ obviously makes an enormous difference. It’s not like it’s just two ways of saying exactly the same thing.
Click to expand...
Except that it literally how language and humans processing of it works. Try calling someone you don't know a cunt and then get two best friends calling each other cunts. Exactly the same word but people will take it differently depending on the context and who says it.
 
flusheding said:
Except that it literally how language and humans processing of it works. Try calling someone you don't know a cunt and then get two best friends calling each other cunts. Exactly the same word but people will take it differently depending on the context and who says it.
Click to expand...
I mean, my point is that when you have two words or expressions which amount to exactly the same thing in terms of meaning, but how they are understood and interpreted can differ based on intent - and you’ve made the idea I’m getting at here even more explicit with your example - understanding the context of usage is crucial. Far more crucial than just arguing over the semantics of a few words of the statement. The statement has to be understood as a whole.

So, given they fundamentally amount to exactly the same thing, if he uses “coloured people” while speaking in support of LGBT and rooting out bigotry, it should be abundantly clear that he’s not speaking offensively.

Whereas, he could use the ostensibly more acceptable term while saying something like, “I think people of colour are total c****” in a denigrating fashion, and the fact he’s used the acceptable term to prefix the offensive statement should make no difference in terms of evaluating the statement as a slur. See how stupid this whole thing is?
 
Last edited:
Grammar Police said:
This.

It's hard to keep up.

One week black is OK. Next week it isn't. Then it changes back.

I was speaking to the police about something I'd witnessed, I had to ask them if 'mixed race' was still an acceptable term.

Apparently not, it's now 'blended heritage' but I hadn't seen the memo.

It's probably changed again since.
Click to expand...
Deary me :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Thurston said:
I mean, my point is that when you have two words or expressions which amount to exactly the same thing in terms of meaning, but how they are understood and interpreted can differ based on intent - and you’ve made the idea I’m getting at here even more explicit with your example - understanding the context of usage is crucial. Far more crucial than just arguing over the semantics of a few words of the statement. The statement has to be understood as a whole.

So, given they fundamentally amount to exactly the same thing, if he uses “coloured people” while speaking in support of LGBT and rooting out bigotry, it should be abundantly clear that he’s not speaking offensively.

Whereas, he could use the ostensibly more acceptable term while saying something like, “I think people of colour are total c****” in a denigrating fashion, and the fact he’s used the acceptable term to prefix the offensive statement should make no difference in terms of evaluating the statement as a slur. See how stupid this whole thing is?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree in this scenario that he's fucked up but realistically him correcting himself should be the end of it. Although I suppose if other people make a point that he constantly seems to put his foot in his mouth then maybe he shouldn't be in the position that he is.
 
Forty years ago people here used to say coloured people. We now say black and asian people, it's not that hard to keep up.

In America it's different, some say people of colour as a kind of umbrella term. It's not the same thing. You could excuse someone older for misguidedly trying to be polite and using the wrong term, although it is a backdoor way of letting people who can't be arsed to think it through to do the same. Greg Clarke should know better, perhaps he thinks he already knows it all, but he should do a bit of revision for someone in his position.
 
Clarke will have to embark on a major grovelling exercise to keep his job , for this the ultimate sin
 
roker beach said:
Forty years ago people here used to say coloured people. We now say black and asian people, it's not that hard to keep up.

In America it's different, some say people of colour as a kind of umbrella term. It's not the same thing. You could excuse someone older for misguidedly trying to be polite and using the wrong term, although it is a backdoor way of letting people who can't be arsed to think it through to do the same. Greg Clarke should know better, perhaps he thinks he already knows it all, but he should do a bit of revision for someone in his position.
Click to expand...

I reckon 40 years ago we used to say black people for pretty much anyone who wasn't Caucasian or from South East Asia.
Then that became unacceptable and we started calling blacks coloured.

Roll on a few years and coloured became unacceptable!

For me its all about the context the words are used in rather than the exact words used. Its usually abundantly clear whether they are being used in a racist manner or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top