[MojoMaster]

Originally Posted by kana

Btw, what is the feeling on the other ex-Chelsea black players who sent statements of support for John Terry (Drogba, kalou, Bosingwa etc) and ex-managers like Jose. More race traitors and racism apologists or just stating the truth as they see it rather than joining the mob.

Are you trying to suggest that Jose is black?

[JoTaylor]

Originally Posted by kana

Btw, what is the feeling on the other ex-Chelsea black players who sent statements of support for John Terry (Drogba, kalou, Bosingwa etc) and ex-managers like Jose. More race traitors and racism apologists or just stating the truth as they see it rather than joining the mob.

Splitting hairs but Drogba didn't sign it.

"Apart from Drogba, the most notable signatures missing were those of Nicolas Anelka, Flourent Malouda and Gary Cahill"

[kana]

Originally Posted by MojoMaster

Are you trying to suggest that Jose is black?

No, he'd go under 'apologist'

[kana]

Originally Posted by JoTaylor

Splitting hairs but Drogba didn't sign it.

"Apart from Drogba, the most notable signatures missing were those of Nicolas Anelka, Flourent Malouda and Gary Cahill"

Missed Drogba not signing, but there were still quite a few though only A Cole was called as a witness. Swap him out for Bertrand. What flavour of 'race traitor' are they and is there a committee that decides?

[JoTaylor]

Originally Posted by kana

Missed Drogba not signing, but there were still quite a few though only A Cole was called as a witness. Swap him out for Bertrand. What flavour of 'race traitor' are they and is there a committee that decides?

I'm not part of this 'discussion'. I just remembered there being a comment about Drogba not signing it when JT was a part of his Foundation or something.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Rosie Thorn

Just so I'm clear - is it the same as coconut? My ex-husband certainly thought that coconut was a racist insult. He was never called a coconut for being married to a white woman but mavis b sausage has said that her husband was.

I know you have said on other threads that you don't claim to speak for all black people and I'm not trying to be contentious but maybe people's views on racism are coloured (no pun intended) by their own experiences. My ex never really experienced racism by white people but because he was educated, had a lot of white friends and worked in a 'white' job (insurance) he received a lot of abuse from certain elements of the black community. As he said, they were targeting him due to his race so therefore they were racial abuse (it used to really upset him).

if you remember, I also said the following in the other thread

Originally Posted by Pee

That's fair enough. I don't really know how to explain it any better, but those terms while definitely insulting, most certainly aren't racist. Sure, they get misappropriated by people with a racist agenda (it used to be commonly used to describe a black person with a white partner, for instance) but that's because they themselves are racist or ignorant.

can such terms be used in a racist way? absolutely....by ignorant people and racists. is someone "wrong" for dating outside of their race? of course not, and it would be racist to insult someone because of that. but the origin of the terms themselves are not racist.

black people (and again, I can't claim to speak for all) tend to see things in terms of race/colour more than anyone else, and have developed a persecution complex over the years. there's a very obvious and justifiable reason for that, the causes and effects of which are still very relevant today. one can argue about the rights and wrongs of harbouring such sentiments, but without an understanding of why and how these things occur, it makes for an uninformed argument. the use of words like "traitor" may seem outdated to some in 2012, but they date back to a time when black people were sold into the hands of their captors by other black people, and over the years and generations such terms (whether rightly or wrongly) have come to symbolise those who are seen to, in a figurative sense at least, betray their own. Cole is not being called a "choc ice" because he took the stand for Terry, he's being called one because in the opinion of his accuser (and obviously Ferdinand also) he lied for Terry and in doing so helped him beat a racism charge.

as I say, we tend to see things in terms of colour far more than anyone else. if you feel this is bad, there are far worse insults directed at those that we feel "hold us back" by propagating negative stereotypes (such as the Lenny Henry example I gave earlier) or reinforcing them (any one of the thousands of black youths that fall into the wrong crowd, a lot of rappers and other ignorant black folk in the public eye, etc). it's not racism, it's a combination of a whole myriad of factors such as the afore-mentioned persecution complex, seeking acceptance, socio-economic factors, etc

[Pee]

Originally Posted by kana

bit lofty, "defending racism" by testifying on behalf of the white guy?
You do realise that no one other than John Terry can confirm what was actually said and in what context as no one else has come out and said they actually heard the words.

Does "defending racism" trump perjury? Should Ashley Cole in an effort to not "defend racism" have said whatever would make him less of a "race traitor"?
Going further, why didn't Anton just say he heard what was said? Surely his lack of hearing is some form of defending racism as well?

The John Terry trial going to court was a farce as they knew there was no one who would contradict John Terry's statement on the words used and the context before they got to trial. There was no new evidence or surprise witnesses. He was pretty much "the evidence" and if they knew up front they couldn't prove it was said as an insult, why let it go so far?

Everyone can have an opinion on what might have happened, but it is pretty much just that.

no-one, other than those involved, know all the facts involved with the case. everyone else has formed an opinion, based on what they've seen, heard, and believe they know. the belief many hold (and not just black people either) is that Cole lied to protect Terry. that is what I referred to as defending racism. no-one is saying he should've lied, people believe he has lied.

I'm not really sure what to make of your other questions, as you seem to have misunderstood what I said

[TRIPS]

Cole is not being called a "choc ice" because he took the stand for Terry, he's being called one because in the opinion of his accuser (and obviously Ferdinand also) he lied for Terry and in doing so helped him beat a racism charge.

The term Choc ice can be used in many circumstances, arguing it was used because people believe he lied/never lied are technicalities.
I am sure someone could use the word in many different situations but the intent is the same.,it said to annihilate and divide.
accusing someone of betraying their colour is as racist as it comes, isn't that what racism boils down to, favouring their own race for no other reason than Colour.

[Rosie Thorn]

Originally Posted by Pee

if you remember, I also said the following in the other thread

can such terms be used in a racist way? absolutely....by ignorant people and racists. is someone "wrong" for dating outside of their race? of course not, and it would be racist to insult someone because of that. but the origin of the terms themselves are not racist.

black people (and again, I can't claim to speak for all) tend to see things in terms of race/colour more than anyone else, and have developed a persecution complex over the years. there's a very obvious and justifiable reason for that, the causes and effects of which are still very relevant today. one can argue about the rights and wrongs of harbouring such sentiments, but without an understanding of why and how these things occur, it makes for an uninformed argument. the use of words like "traitor" may seem outdated to some in 2012, but they date back to a time when black people were sold into the hands of their captors by other black people, and over the years and generations such terms (whether rightly or wrongly) have come to symbolise those who are seen to, in a figurative sense at least, betray their own. Cole is not being called a "choc ice" because he took the stand for Terry, he's being called one because in the opinion of his accuser (and obviously Ferdinand also) he lied for Terry and in doing so helped him beat a racism charge.

as I say, we tend to see things in terms of colour far more than anyone else. if you feel this is bad, there are far worse insults directed at those that we feel "hold us back" by propagating negative stereotypes (such as the Lenny Henry example I gave earlier) or reinforcing them (any one of the thousands of black youths that fall into the wrong crowd, a lot of rappers and other ignorant black folk in the public eye, etc). it's not racism, it's a combination of a whole myriad of factors such as the afore-mentioned persecution complex, seeking acceptance, socio-economic factors, etc

Thanks Pee - it was a genuine question (I really do want to understand the issue). I don't actually remember you saying that bit - I thought I'd read every single post but I obviously missed that one.

I do totally get what you're saying but I wonder if RF is informed enough to understand all this. (Rio fans don't jump on me over this.) He could still have used it meaning it to be a racist insult because he thought that's what it was. I still believe that he was stirring and had a pretty good idea of the trouble he was about to cause. But we'll never actually know and I don't think the police should be involved.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by TRIPS

The term Choc ice can be used in many circumstances, arguing it was used because people believe he lied/never lied are technicalities.
I am sure someone could use the word in many different situations but the intent is the same.,it said to annihilate and divide.
accusing someone of betraying their colour is as racist as it comes, isn't that what racism boils down to, favouring their own race for no other reason than Colour.

If the suggestion is that Cole should've lied in order to support Ferdinand, then yes. But that's clearly not the case, so...no.

This is all very simple if you stop looking for something that just isn't there. Who exactly was the tweeter looking to annihilate or divide? Who was he being racist or racially offensive to? This argument isn't supported by any real logic

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Rosie Thorn

Thanks Pee - it was a genuine question (I really do want to understand the issue). I don't actually remember you saying that bit - I thought I'd read every single post but I obviously missed that one.

I do totally get what you're saying but I wonder if RF is informed enough to understand all this. (Rio fans don't jump on me over this.) He could still have used it meaning it to be a racist insult because he thought that's what it was. I still believe that he was stirring and had a pretty good idea of the trouble he was about to cause. But we'll never actually know and I don't think the police should be involved.

I must admit, I'd not considered that possibility, and though I think it's unlikely it still is possible I guess.

[TRIPS]

Originally Posted by Pee

If the suggestion is that Cole should've lied in order to support Ferdinand, then yes. But that's clearly not the case, so...no.

This is all very simple if you stop looking for something that just isn't there. Who exactly was the tweeter looking to annihilate or divide? Who was he being racist or racially offensive to? This argument isn't supported by any real logic

Cole and Ferdinad are irrelevant,it's not about finding an excuse for anyone,
the point in question is,the word Choc ice,racist.
yes i have no doubt.
I am making a complicated subject less so by logic.
intent. many are arguing the word is not insulting yet ignore the reason it is being said. to force people to take sides based on colour..annihilate and divide, if you believe this to be true then even though people may not realise it they are inciting racism.
I honestly believe a word like this would not be out of place in Love thy neighbour

[Pee]

We're going to have to just disagree on this one then, I'm afraid. It isn't racist.

[TRIPS]

Originally Posted by Pee

We're going to have to just disagree on this one then, I'm afraid. It isn't racist.

OK Pee, no problem. i have no doubt it is.

[Big Boy Barry]

Ferdinand is blatantly stupid to use terms with racial applications mere days after a trial revolving around alleged racist abuse. There's also the absurdity of painting Ashley Cole as effectively an Uncle Tom merely because he didn't support the accuser who happens to be the same race. Ferdinand needs to either engage his brain, or stop tweeting entirely if he isn't capable or willing of thinking before doing so.

[Jokanovic]

Originally Posted by MojoMaster

Didn't think you could get much more public than Twitter these days to be fair.

If you mean "in person", I really don't think Rio would have anything to be worried about with Ashley Cole, lol.

He would not dare make that comment in public, how daft are you.

[Xela M]

Coconut, choc ice, Uncle Tom - all racist terms. To suggest otherwise is simply ridiculous. However, should the police be involved? NO!

[Pee]

They're not racist terms.

[Anika Hanson]

Originally Posted by Pee

They're not racist terms.

I agree.

[the chimp]

Originally Posted by Anika Hanson

I agree.

You're both wrong then.

[Richie1001]

Originally Posted by Pee

They're not racist terms.

I don't know if this has been covered (apologies if so), but I'm struggling to understand why not?

If I'm correct the phrase "choc ice" for example is saying someone may be black on the outside but white on the inside. Is that not a racist slur? Either by saying someone isn't really black or by saying it's somehow worse to be white?

I may have missed the point and that's cool, but that's just my understanding at the moment. It doesn't really have much to do with the actual tweet I guess, more just trying to understand the meaning behind the phrase.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by the chimp

You're both wrong then.

they're not racist terms. it's really simple.

[Pee]

Originally Posted by Richie1001

I don't know if this has been covered (apologies if so), but I'm struggling to understand why not?

If I'm correct the phrase "choc ice" for example is saying someone may be black on the outside but white on the inside. Is that not a racist slur? Either by saying someone isn't really black or by saying it's somehow worse to be white?

I may have missed the point and that's cool, but that's just my understanding at the moment. It doesn't really have much to do with the actual tweet I guess, more just trying to understand the meaning behind the phrase.

Hi Richie, have a read through my previous posts in this thread, and I'll try to explain anything that still isn't clear when I have a bit more time.

[Richie1001]

Originally Posted by Pee

Hi Richie, have a read through my previous posts in this thread, and I'll try to explain anything that still isn't clear when I have a bit more time.

Cool - will do.

[the chimp]

Originally Posted by Pee

they're not racist terms. it's really simple.

Its unbelievably simple that they are, I can't believe anybody is even trying to argue otherwise.