Which comment and how did it in any way allude to a stereotype?h's dad wrote:My perception of a comment made about attitudes to others. When we're all digging deep...biffer wrote:Where did I use any English stereotype?h's dad wrote: It is my genuine opinion that your comment can be stretched beyond reason to be construed as an attack on an English stereotype and and can be deemed offensive in a similar degree to the term used by Marler in the context that it was used and which has been stretched beyond reason.
Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
The social authority principle - respect is due Biffer!The problem I have with this is you only thinking about harm to the individual. You also have to look at harm done more widely to a group of people.
There is a broader definition of harm (beyond the individual) which includes societal harm. Since I have JS Mill's book to hand:
The rules covering racism, sexism, homophobia etc fall into the category of causing societal harm, which is why they are proscribed by every sporting body. The same principle covers freedom of speech; we have the freedom to say what we please (even if it offends others), but not the freedom to incite others to violence.The maxims are, first, that the individual is not accountable to society for his actions, in so far as these concern the interests of no person but himself. Advice, instruction, persuasion, and avoidance by other people if thought necessary by them for their own good, are the only measures by which society can justifiably express its dislike or disapprobation of his conduct. Secondly, that for such actions as are prejudicial to the interests of others, the individual is accountable and may be subjected either to social or to legal punishments, if society is of opinion that the one or the other is requisite for its protection.
Causing offence isn't sufficient to justify intervention. So even if Marler was called a 'Posh English @#@#', that doesn't fall into the misconduct category (it also shows they have never met the bloke!). Neither would a response such as 'Common Welsh @#@#'. Both comments might be deemed offensive or upsetting and be condemned for language, but not misconduct in terms of “insulting and/or discriminatory by reason of race or ethnic origin”. His ban was inevitable and not too bad (4 weeks reduced to 2), the fine (IMHO) is disproportionately harsh. It's the RFU and the six nations that come out of this badly.
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
JS Mill, higher authority than anyone else so far...kend wrote:The social authority principle - respect is due Biffer!The problem I have with this is you only thinking about harm to the individual. You also have to look at harm done more widely to a group of people.
There is a broader definition of harm (beyond the individual) which includes societal harm. Since I have JS Mill's book to hand:
The rules covering racism, sexism, homophobia etc fall into the category of causing societal harm, which is why they are proscribed by every sporting body. The same principle covers freedom of speech; we have the freedom to say what we please (even if it offends others), but not the freedom to incite others to violence.The maxims are, first, that the individual is not accountable to society for his actions, in so far as these concern the interests of no person but himself. Advice, instruction, persuasion, and avoidance by other people if thought necessary by them for their own good, are the only measures by which society can justifiably express its dislike or disapprobation of his conduct. Secondly, that for such actions as are prejudicial to the interests of others, the individual is accountable and may be subjected either to social or to legal punishments, if society is of opinion that the one or the other is requisite for its protection.
Causing offence isn't sufficient to justify intervention. So even if Marler was called a 'Posh English @#@#', that doesn't fall into the misconduct category (it also shows they have never met the bloke!). Neither would a response such as 'Common Welsh @#@#'. Both comments might be deemed offensive or upsetting and be condemned for language, but not misconduct in terms of “insulting and/or discriminatory by reason of race or ethnic origin”. His ban was inevitable and not too bad (4 weeks reduced to 2), the fine (IMHO) is disproportionately harsh. It's the RFU and the six nations that come out of this badly.
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
I seem to have had a post from our little reductio ad absurdum removed biffer. I really don't know why.biffer wrote:JS Mill, higher authority than anyone else so far...kend wrote:The social authority principle - respect is due Biffer!The problem I have with this is you only thinking about harm to the individual. You also have to look at harm done more widely to a group of people.
There is a broader definition of harm (beyond the individual) which includes societal harm. Since I have JS Mill's book to hand:
The rules covering racism, sexism, homophobia etc fall into the category of causing societal harm, which is why they are proscribed by every sporting body. The same principle covers freedom of speech; we have the freedom to say what we please (even if it offends others), but not the freedom to incite others to violence.The maxims are, first, that the individual is not accountable to society for his actions, in so far as these concern the interests of no person but himself. Advice, instruction, persuasion, and avoidance by other people if thought necessary by them for their own good, are the only measures by which society can justifiably express its dislike or disapprobation of his conduct. Secondly, that for such actions as are prejudicial to the interests of others, the individual is accountable and may be subjected either to social or to legal punishments, if society is of opinion that the one or the other is requisite for its protection.
Causing offence isn't sufficient to justify intervention. So even if Marler was called a 'Posh English @#@#', that doesn't fall into the misconduct category (it also shows they have never met the bloke!). Neither would a response such as 'Common Welsh @#@#'. Both comments might be deemed offensive or upsetting and be condemned for language, but not misconduct in terms of “insulting and/or discriminatory by reason of race or ethnic origin”. His ban was inevitable and not too bad (4 weeks reduced to 2), the fine (IMHO) is disproportionately harsh. It's the RFU and the six nations that come out of this badly.
Re this little bit of Mill and Marler, society's opinion does not seem to be totally clear, in fact there is something of a schism. I would also point out that Mill excluded the giving of offence (never mind when it's taken by people that it's not aimed at) and also that he was a strong proponent of free speech.
I am neither clever enough to understand nor stupid enough to play this game
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
That's kind of the point - it's not about offence. It's about prejudice, or more accurately the potential to encourage prejudicial behaviour in wider society, which is what Mill refers to above. If you engage in behaviour which makes society more prone to prejudicial behaviour, you are doing societal harm and as such the behaviour is unacceptable.
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 1282
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:56 pm
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
Many thanks for the 66% validation!rocktop51 wrote:If so it's a misapprehension - two of them are correct, not sure about the posh.tigercaspian wrote:Does any one know if there is any truth in the rumour that Marler was called a "posh English ***t" just before the incident?
I love the way this thread refuses to die - just when you think it's finished, someone blows on the embers. And how erudite too - John Stuart Mill.....brilliant...... !
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
Spot on biffer. J.S. Mill accords with the Law too!
Valhalla I am coming!
-
- Super User
- Posts: 2093
- Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 10:49 am
- Location: St Julien Les Rosiers, Le Gard.
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
My head hurts.
I could agree with you...but then we'd both be wrong.
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
I know what you mean Phil, mine started hurting about three weeks ago. One very interesting fact, to me at least, is that we are well into the 2nd day since ellis asked welshy, who started all this and fanned the embers of racism into a fire, if calling him welshy was in fact a racist act.......
Come on welshy, the tumbleweed is blowing down the street as we await your answer.
Come on welshy, the tumbleweed is blowing down the street as we await your answer.
Opportunities always look bigger going than coming.
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
Again that misses the point by focussing on personal offence rather than wider societal damage.GS wrote:I know what you mean Phil, mine started hurting about three weeks ago. One very interesting fact, to me at least, is that we are well into the 2nd day since ellis asked welshy, who started all this and fanned the embers of racism into a fire, if calling him welshy was in fact a racist act.......
Come on welshy, the tumbleweed is blowing down the street as we await your answer.
Re: Job Marler racially abusing a Welsh player? No Sanction
I'm confused! What's this personal offence and wider societal damage cobblers? Surely if something is racist, it's racist?!