Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction

[h's dad]

Sorry, Biffer, still not with you and I do think you are stretching the elastic beyond breaking point with that argument !

Unfortunately, it's people not following or understanding the way that small abuses lead to larger abuses that build up levels of acceptance of underlying discrimination and abuse. Another way to look at it is if you're having to draw an arbitrary line of what's acceptable and what's not, then if you allow some abuse of a particular type, it's very easy to argue to move that line little by little over a long period. For example, if gypsy boy is acceptable, is gypsy :censored:? Does gypsy boy being ok mean black boy is ok? If that's ok, what about black :censored:? If you start making some of these ok and some not, you're on a downward spiral into worse abuse based on people's ethnicity or race, as it's human nature to push the barriers back a little to try to gain an advantage. And if anyone thinks the last of the ones I mentioned is ok, then they're a racist.

Sorry biffer but I really do believe there is an acceptable line. Baa baa black sheep is one side of the line and the holocaust is on the other. I do understand that some want to lump them together but they are nutters (in my opinion) whatever their race.

[Donny]

If you start making some of these ok and some not, you're on a downward spiral into worse abuse based on people's ethnicity or race ...

Biffer, if that's the case, could you please explain to me (and maybe some others) why it is apparently OK for black people to use the n-word when referring to each other but there's hell to pay if a white person uses it? Does racial abuse only work in one direction?

[Tigerbeat]

I thought this thread was discussing Joe Marler abusing a Welsh player......please try and keep the thread on the topic!

Thanks

[Skin_and_Muscle]

If you start making some of these ok and some not, you're on a downward spiral into worse abuse based on people's ethnicity or race ...

Biffer, if that's the case, could you please explain to me (and maybe some others) why it is apparently OK for black people to use the n-word when referring to each other but there's hell to pay if a white person uses it? Does racial abuse only work in one direction?

Originally it operated as a signifier of a collective past, and the word was reclaimed to mark a sense of shared identity. Since then it's just come into common usage. However, the term is still loaded with a distinction between oppressor and oppressed so if you're not 'in', it's likely to cause offence. You can say the same thing about terms like 'queer'.

Moreover, it can't be considered racial abuse if it's a common understanding that the term is not used in an abusive manner. If a white person uses that word, it's history means it's more likely to be perceived as abusive.

For instance, the word doesn't bother me. Nor does the word queer. Similarly, 'cracker' and 'breeder' don't bother me, either. However, if they were loaded with oppressive connotations, I might think differently. If enough people decided these terms caused offence, it would cross the threshold of in/decency - it's a crazy little thing called democracy.

[Iain]

I thought this thread was discussing Joe Marler abusing a Welsh player......please try and keep the thread on the topic!

Thanks

It hasn't gone off topic at any point...

[Donny]

I understand what you're saying, S&M. However, with the constantly moving goalposts, is it any wonder people get confused with what was acceptable yesterday but is deemed offensive today?

[ellis9]

So it seems Warren Gatland has said the comment was just banter and both he and Samson Lee have accepted Marlers apology. Gatland also said that 20 years ago, it would have been sorted out with fists. He also added "It's not just in sport, I think it's in all aspects of life where people get so PC and just make massive issues of things".

So Samson Lee and the Wales coach have accepted the apology and moved on as they are mature adults but still the PC brigade insist on punishment.

[biffer]

Sorry biffer but I really do believe there is an acceptable line. Baa baa black sheep is one side of the line and the holocaust is on the other. I do understand that some want to lump them together but they are nutters (in my opinion) whatever their race.

I understand that, the difficulty is that everyone's line can be in a different place, and those lines are arbitrary, not absolute. When they're arbitrary, they can be moved, and when there's a lot of movement it can lead on to other societal behaviours which can result in oppression. I'm not for a second saying that will automatically happen, it's a huge mish mash of influences and pressures, but the use of language is one of those and it's why there has to be some care and thought about what is acceptable and what isn't, and why the level of what's acceptable depends very much on the platform and exposure of any particular instance.

[biffer]

If you start making some of these ok and some not, you're on a downward spiral into worse abuse based on people's ethnicity or race ...

Biffer, if that's the case, could you please explain to me (and maybe some others) why it is apparently OK for black people to use the n-word when referring to each other but there's hell to pay if a white person uses it? Does racial abuse only work in one direction?

Originally it operated as a signifier of a collective past, and the word was reclaimed to mark a sense of shared identity. Since then it's just come into common usage. However, the term is still loaded with a distinction between oppressor and oppressed so if you're not 'in', it's likely to cause offence. You can say the same thing about terms like 'queer'.

Moreover, it can't be considered racial abuse if it's a common understanding that the term is not used in an abusive manner. If a white person uses that word, it's history means it's more likely to be perceived as abusive.

For instance, the word doesn't bother me. Nor does the word queer. Similarly, 'cracker' and 'breeder' don't bother me, either. However, if they were loaded with oppressive connotations, I might think differently. If enough people decided these terms caused offence, it would cross the threshold of in/decency - it's a crazy little thing called democracy.

People have to understand the use of language is complex and can have overtones which are unintended depending on who the speaker or listener is.

[biffer]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35816178

Gatland appears to gave drawn a line under it. Which makes me thinks so has everyone else. So by Gatland appearing to end the debate about it dos that mean, A. It's over and it's his autocratic decision to end it. B. Samson lee has agreed it was a remark and the powers that be will deal with it. C. Gatland has gone against his players wishes and thoughts and come out with this statement. Or D. Welshy08 has got himself worked over this issue, whilst looking at his Welsh dragon flag ( praying that St George doesn't slay it) and thought " how can I vent my spleen and get everyone angry?

So that means any player can call Samson Lee gypsy boy from now on in Gatland's eyes. Can they call him gypsy :censored:?

[The Boy Dave]

Does racial abuse only work in one direction?

I don't believe so, what I do believe is that we are all at the mercy of whatever mood folk are in at a particlular time.
It's like walking on hot coals and probably why everyone is so miserable and over sensitive, holed up in their castles for fear of the unknown and one little disagreement leading to world war 3.
The kids are brought up with hardly any skin whatsoever, teachers can't teach, parents can't parent and kids can't be kids.
Jobsworths everywhere!

[Dr H Flashman MBE]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35816178

Gatland appears to gave drawn a line under it. Which makes me thinks so has everyone else. So by Gatland appearing to end the debate about it dos that mean, A. It's over and it's his autocratic decision to end it. B. Samson lee has agreed it was a remark and the powers that be will deal with it. C. Gatland has gone against his players wishes and thoughts and come out with this statement. Or D. Welshy08 has got himself worked over this issue, whilst looking at his Welsh dragon flag ( praying that St George doesn't slay it) and thought " how can I vent my spleen and get everyone angry?

So that means any player can call Samson Lee gypsy boy from now on in Gatland's eyes. Can they call him gypsy ?

I would doubt it. I think it maybe Gatlands way of saying it's been dealt with in the dressing room and call it a day. Regardless of what sanctions are imposed for Marler saying it. However as none of us were in the dressing room at half time we cannot be sure what was said.

[Iain]

I don't think it's Gatland's decision to make to be honest.

[biffer]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/35816178

Gatland appears to gave drawn a line under it. Which makes me thinks so has everyone else. So by Gatland appearing to end the debate about it dos that mean, A. It's over and it's his autocratic decision to end it. B. Samson lee has agreed it was a remark and the powers that be will deal with it. C. Gatland has gone against his players wishes and thoughts and come out with this statement. Or D. Welshy08 has got himself worked over this issue, whilst looking at his Welsh dragon flag ( praying that St George doesn't slay it) and thought " how can I vent my spleen and get everyone angry?

So that means any player can call Samson Lee gypsy boy from now on in Gatland's eyes. Can they call him gypsy ?

I would doubt it. I think it maybe Gatlands way of saying it's been dealt with in the dressing room and call it a day. Regardless of what sanctions are imposed for Marler saying it. However as none of us were in the dressing room at half time we cannot be sure what was said.

My meaning is that the way Gatland has phrased it almost makes it look as if this is acceptable (banter is generally thought of as being acceptable) - so could have the effect of making some of the more half witted players think they can use the term.

[Iain]

Or children for that matter.

Using someone's ethnic origin as an insult is never acceptable.

Dusting our hands off and saying "but he accepted the apology" doesn't send the right message. It puts the onus on the victim to feel pressured into accepting it. It is right that Marler is still investigated over it, as the issue should not be in Lee's hands.

Marler should be punished, sending the message that what he said is not okay. If people are going to scoff out the old "PC gone mad" rubbish then there's nothing else I can add.