[0rch1deam]

Originally Posted by Xela M

I've actually reported a person (for the first time on DS ) for calling Ashley Cole an "Uncle Tom" in the thread about John Terry's trial, as it's a clearly racist comment. Why "choc ice" is any different I don't really understand

It's getting in here that 'Spell Checker' just won't hack it anymore..........

[Eater Sundae]

Originally Posted by Pee

could a disparaging remark about a white person being the black sheep of the family be considered racist under any circumstance? I would argue that it could, depending on the situation, but that doesn't make the term "black sheep" itself racist.

black bastard and choc-ice are only similar in that they both make reference to colour. with the latter, the insult isn't because of colour, it's because of the difference in what they are and what they appear to be.

my point still stands. everyone is all of a sudden so outraged and finds it racist for a completely different reason, which makes no sense at all. with black bastard, black c***, n****r, p**i, c****y or any other racial insult, everyone would either find it racist for the same reason or (as happened in the other thread) not at all. in this case though, it's fairly obvious given the number of reasons being put forward that people are either just trying too hard to find a reason or just don't understand what they're talking about.

Re BIB. The core insult of both is nothing to do with colour. It is an insult. "Bastard" or "not what they appear to be". The person making the insult added a reference to colour, either by using the word "black", or using a specific term that can ONLY refer to the person's skin colour. In doing so, they have converted an insult into an insult with added racial aggravation.

Re other paragraphs.

Off the top of my head I cannot think of a situation where "black sheep" about a white person could be considered as racist, but I would be quite happy to accept that there might be such a case. As I see it, black sheep is colour/race neutral. It might become an insult with racial aggravation (like black bastard and choc-ice already are), in certain specific situations, but that would be because of the situation, not the words themselves.

I'm not convinced that the reasons that different arguments have been put forward gives any added credence to your view. I cannot speak for others, and I do not understand the majority of their arguments. I can only speak for my own view, which i think has been consistent since I started posting.

The insulter could have just made the insult. However, they chose to add a racial element to the insult. Why do YOU think they did that?

[Deep Purple]

Originally Posted by Pee

no it isn't. please learn to read.

being perceived as racist isn't the same thing as declaring something 100% racist. so again, what would your response be to those who have declared it so? do you have one, or are you only looking to contradict anything I say, as per usual? they're speaking with exactly the same certainty that I am, but I'm wrong and they aren't? makes sense...

I could ask you to do the same. I never said McPherson deemed this remark to be racist, as you said in an earlier post.

You've seen the definition of a racist incident. If someone perceives the term as racist, then it is to them.

Whether anything is done about it is a different matter.

I have been clear all along. I have said context, and intent should be the main consideration, which is not what McPherson says. That is my opinion, and I've said that many times.

You are saying that this is not a racist term. You have been positive about that in many posts. You have now said it can be in some circumstances, which is what I've said all along.

[NiteOwl12]

For those who seem to have as little mental furniture as Ferdinand, Terry and Suarez:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18847477

[IWhat does 'choc ice' mean?
John Amaechi Former NBA basketball player, psychologist and educator

"It is the idea that a black person is black only in skin colour but inside they are really white. It's a highly derogatory term. It's a dangerous term because it allows black boys especially but black people in general, to believe that there is a way of being black that is somehow distinct from being white. There are people that think if you don't wear a certain type of clothing or listen to a certain type of music you're not really black. It's a really dangerous thing. There are black boys who do less well in school because they believe by doing well there, they are acting white. To me, this is devastating for black boys and black people everywhere. It's a deeply offensive term with racial connotations." ][/i]

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Eater Sundae

Re BIB. The core insult of both is nothing to do with colour. It is an insult. "Bastard" or "not what they appear to be". The person making the insult added a reference to colour, either by using the word "black", or using a specific term that can ONLY refer to the person's skin colour. In doing so, they have converted an insult into an insult with added racial aggravation.

Re other paragraphs.

Off the top of my head I cannot think of a situation where "black sheep" about a white person could be considered as racist, but I would be quite happy to accept that there might be such a case. As I see it, black sheep is colour/race neutral. It might become an insult with racial aggravation (like black bastard and choc-ice already are), in certain specific situations, but that would be because of the situation, not the words themselves.

I'm not convinced that the reasons that different arguments have been put forward gives any added credence to your view. I cannot speak for others, and I do not understand the majority of their arguments. I can only speak for my own view, which i think has been consistent since I started posting.

The insulter could have just made the insult. However, they chose to add a racial element to the insult. Why do YOU think they did that?

he didn't add a racial element, it was already there! he's having his say about a racism trial where (in his view) a black man has lied to protect a white man against a charge of racism. it's a very specific context.

from your argument, I take it you'd have been fine with the use of the word Uncle Tom, given that it makes no reference to race? well for all intents and purposes, they mean pretty much the same thing, a black man that "betrays" his own. the view on what constitutes a "betrayal" can be racist (as in the example I've given of black people being considered sellouts for dating white people for instance), but that doesn't make the term itself racist.

[Deep Purple]

Originally Posted by NiteOwl12

For those who seem to have as little mental furniture as Ferdinand, Terry and Suarez:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18847477

[IWhat does 'choc ice' mean?
John Amaechi Former NBA basketball player, psychologist and educator

"It is the idea that a black person is black only in skin colour but inside they are really white. It's a highly derogatory term. It's a dangerous term because it allows black boys especially but black people in general, to believe that there is a way of being black that is somehow distinct from being white. There are people that think if you don't wear a certain type of clothing or listen to a certain type of music you're not really black. It's a really dangerous thing. There are black boys who do less well in school because they believe by doing well there, they are acting white. To me, this is devastating for black boys and black people everywhere. It's a deeply offensive term with racial connotations." ][/i]

That sounds a very good description of the term.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Deep Purple

I could ask you to do the same. I never said McPherson deemed this remark to be racist, as you said in an earlier post.

You've seen the definition of a racist incident. If someone perceives the term as racist, then it is to them.

Whether anything is done about it is a different matter.

I have been clear all along. I have said context, and intent should be the main consideration, which is not what McPherson says. That is my opinion, and I've said that many times.

You are saying that this is not a racist term. You have been positive about that in many posts. You have now said it can be in some circumstances, which is what I've said all along.

still wrong - my point still applies

I'm not now saying it. I've said it all along. please read.

[Deep Purple]

Originally Posted by Pee

still wrong - my point still applies

I'm not now saying it. I've said it all along. please read.

I must have missed that early on. I saw plenty of posts where you said it was not racist, and you did say it was 100% not racist.

I'm pleased you didn't mean that.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by NiteOwl12

For those who seem to have as little mental furniture as Ferdinand, Terry and Suarez:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18847477

[IWhat does 'choc ice' mean?
John Amaechi Former NBA basketball player, psychologist and educator

"It is the idea that a black person is black only in skin colour but inside they are really white. It's a highly derogatory term. It's a dangerous term because it allows black boys especially but black people in general, to believe that there is a way of being black that is somehow distinct from being white. There are people that think if you don't wear a certain type of clothing or listen to a certain type of music you're not really black. It's a really dangerous thing. There are black boys who do less well in school because they believe by doing well there, they are acting white. To me, this is devastating for black boys and black people everywhere. It's a deeply offensive term with racial connotations." ][/i]

so which part of this definition can be seen to apply to the context in which it was levelled at Cole? was the tweeter making a comment based on his dressing, music tastes, or academic achievement? of course not. like I've said countless times now, the term CAN be misappropriated by racists with a racist agenda (and I personally have never experienced it despite not dressing like a NY rapper, not talking like a dancehall artist, and being very successful academically) but that doesn't mean the term in itself is inherently racist.

[whedon247]

Originally Posted by Pee

yes. as are black ones also. the point to this...?

choc-ice basically means you are not one of us,a race traitor

no different to drivel spouted by white power organisations

what rio tweeted was racist

[Tombstone]

Am I the only person who has never heard the term 'choc ice' before?

The term used in my day was 'coconut', and was considered an insult.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Deep Purple

I must have missed that early on. I saw plenty of posts where you said it was not racist, and you did say it was 100% not racist.

I'm pleased you didn't mean that.

post 406 made it pretty clear, as did my post in the other thread

[Pee]

Originally Posted by whedon247

choc-ice basically means you are not one of us,a race traitor

no different to drivel spouted by white power organisations

what rio tweeted was racist

it's very different, in fact. supremacist groups by definition promote the idea that one group is superior to the rest. that's clearly not the case here.

Originally Posted by Tombstone

Am I the only person who has never heard the term 'choc ice' before?

The term used in my day was 'coconut', and was considered an insult.

it's the same thing, pretty much. yes it's an insult, no it isn't racist.

[whedon247]

Originally Posted by Pee

it's very different, in fact. supremacist groups by definition promote the idea that one group is superior to the rest. that's clearly not the case here.


it's the same thing, pretty much. yes it's an insult, no it isn't racist.

its promoting divisions between races

[Pee]

no. it isn't.

[Deep Purple]

Originally Posted by Pee

post 406 made it pretty clear, as did my post in the other thread

That came after many posts declaring it isn't a racist term, and your post following this quoted one again says it isn't racist.

[multisync]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

Am I the only person who has never heard the term 'choc ice' before?

The term used in my day was 'coconut', and was considered an insult.

Oh for God's sake read the bloody thread

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Deep Purple

That came after many posts declaring it isn't a racist term, and your post following this quoted one again says it isn't racist.

read my post in the other thread (it's quoted in the post you've just looked at ffs!) which was one of my very first comments (if not THE first) on this whole tweet matter. it's all there. is it a racist term? no can it be used as racist? yes....by racists. that doesn't make the original meaning of the term itself to be racist. I can repeat this for you as many times as is necessary.

[Tombstone]

Originally Posted by multisync

Oh for God's sake read the bloody thread

I was merely stating that I had not heard the term used before and that there was an alternative term used in my experience.

[visiting_wookie]

Originally Posted by Cantona07

Charge Rio then.

Let it go to court so people can avenge the Terry court case with a black guy suffering the same. Thats real equality.

rio's never really got over the fact that,after playing the race card, the purported racist,not only finished his england career..he then went and got one of the brothers to corroborate his version of events,and walked away unblemished....that's gotta hurt..but alluding to someone betraying their ethnicity..that's low,even for rio

[Eater Sundae]

Originally Posted by Pee

he didn't add a racial element, it was already there! he's having his say about a racism trial where (in his view) a black man has lied to protect a white man against a charge of racism. it's a very specific context.

from your argument, I take it you'd have been fine with the use of the word Uncle Tom, given that it makes no reference to race? well for all intents and purposes, they mean pretty much the same thing, a black man that "betrays" his own. the view on what constitutes a "betrayal" can be racist (as in the example I've given of black people being considered sellouts for dating white people for instance), but that doesn't make the term itself racist.

No. Uncle Tom, Bounty, Coconut are all similar in my eyes. Uncle Tom specifically refers to the relationship between black and white (as I understand it, I'm not on top of the derivation, TBH), it doesn't need to include the word black.

With reference to the trial. Yes it was specific to the trial and must therefore relate to race. However, in the case of choc-ice it was already "an insult with racial aggravation", it didn't need the context of the trial to make it that.

I sort of see where you're coming from, with your first paragraph, but I think you are wrong. If the original tweeter thought that Cole had lied on behalf of Terry. It might have been because Terry is his team-mate, or because he is a close friend of Terry, or it might be because Cole has some sort of subservient inferiority complex in which he thinks he must always support the white man. By using the term choc-ice, it seems as though the accuser chose the last reason.

I still come back to the comparison with, for example, black bastard.

The term "bastard" is an insult.

Adding "black" adds a racial aggravation. It makes it specific to the person's race.

Calling someone "a turncoat" is an insult.

Calling someone a "black turncoat" would add a racial aggravation in exactly the same way. Black turncoat doesn't trip off the tongue as easily as black bastard, and isn't as visually compelling as choc-ice, bounty or coconut, or hasn't got the historical significance of Uncle Tom. So, someone choosing to add racial aggravation to the insult would use one of the other tems (see Edit). But in using them there are racially aggravating the insult in exactly the same way as black bastard does.

The insulter was free to use a race-neutral term but chose not to.

(Edit. Not the "black bastard" term, just the others)

[Deep Purple]

Originally Posted by Pee

read my post in the other thread (it's quoted in the post you've just looked at ffs!) which was one of my very first comments (if not THE first) on this whole tweet matter. it's all there. is it a racist term? no can it be used as racist? yes....by racists. that doesn't make the original meaning of the term itself to be racist. I can repeat this for you as many times as is necessary.

The term black is not racist either, but can be. That is all I've said all along.

[multisync]

Originally Posted by Pee

no. it isn't.

If I went up to an ice cream seller and said Choc ice. Then yes it's unlikely to be racist.

However in the context of what the twitter wrote and Rio clearly condoned the remark in this instance it was clearly a racial slur.
The case in Bristol where the black lady got fined for calling another black councillor a coconut has set a precedent for this type of offence and I *fully expect charges to be brought firstly on Ebanks and quite likely Ferdinand.

Ferdinand’s denial won't help him either as he supposedly is fully up to speed with racial issues and hence cannot plead ignorance.


*Although I expect the CPS are shittin themselves about actually prosecuting such a vocal anti racist campaigner and expect a 'response' from his supporters if found guilty

[Deep Purple]

Originally Posted by multisync

If I went up to an ice cream seller and said Choc ice. Then yes it's unlikely to be racist.

However in the context of what the twitter wrote and Rio clearly condoned the remark in this instance it was clearly a racial slur.
The case in Bristol where the black lady got fined for calling another black councillor a coconut has set a precedent for this type of offence and I *fully expect charges to be brought firstly on Ebanks and quite likely Ferdinand.

Ferdinand’s denial won't help him either as he supposedly is fully up to speed with racial issues and hence cannot plead ignorance.


*Although I expect the CPS are shittin themselves about actually prosecuting such a vocal anti racist campaigner and expect a 'response' from his supporters if found guilty

I'd forgotten about that case, but you are right, it has shown that such a comment is racist according to the law, which McPherson gave a definition to.

I doubt this case will end up in court, and hope it doesn't, because the law really wasn't intended for this type of thing.

[celesti]

Originally Posted by multisync

Oh for God's sake read the bloody thread

You didn't read his post properly.