|
||||||||
FA being held back by "elderly white men" errm racist, sexist, ageist? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
|
FA being held back by "elderly white men" errm racist, sexist, ageist?
Whilst I appreciate the motivation for change, does anybody else think that the wording neatly captures 3 isms that would be utterly unacceptable in similarly describing almost any other demographic, apart from mainly "middle aged white men" I've said it before in relation to white middle aged men, that I do object to such derogatory language being used to describe a certain section of society, regardless of their shortcomings. If the individuals concerned had expressed a need for new faces and fresh blood, that would have been different, as it wouldn't be insulting one group by express implication. If I was there, I'd be tempted to say "you got a personal issue with elderly white men? Some of the wisest most decent people I know, are the aforesaid elderly, white men" link Quote:
Five former Football Association chief executives have launched an extraordinary attack on the governing body’s antiquated structure, declared a group of mainly “elderly, white men” are holding it back and the Premier League is being allowed all of the game’s money and power but none of the responsibility to police it.
In a letter to MP Damian Collins, chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee which may now trigger an embarrassing House of Commons vote of no confidence in the FA, David Bernstein, David Davies, Greg Dyke, Alex Horne and David Triesman say the 25 life presidents on the unwieldy 123-strong FA Council are “all elderly white men who do not represent anyone but block even the most minor of changes.” |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,540
|
They don't "have an issue" with middle aged white men. What they're saying is that there's something wrong if the FA's board of management is made up entirely of middle aged white men at the exclusion of all other groups.
Where's the diversity? Why is there no one on the board to represent the interests of people outside that fairly narrow group? |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
|
Quote:
They don't "have an issue" with middle aged white men. What they're saying is that there's something wrong if the FA's board of management is made up entirely of middle aged white men at the exclusion of all other groups.
Where's the diversity? Why is there no one on the board to represent the interests of people outside that fairly narrow group? If it was all elderly black men, they wouldn't have used that term. Or all middle aged white women. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,540
|
The implication is that the board is not representative. Where is the derogatory language that you're referring to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
|
Quote:
The implication is that the board is not representative. Where is the derogatory language that you're referring to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
|
Quote:
The one that says you wouldn't say "There's too many young black women running things"
If there have been many ethnic, and female applicants for these posts, and they have been turned down for those reasons, then there would be an argument, but I'm not sure there has. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Yes I heard this earlier and thought it sounded very weird.
I wondered why they mentioned them being white. Very odd. I suppose mentioning their age itself wouldn't have been great, but it would probably have gone over most peoples heads, but when they phrased it 'elderly white men' that sounded really off. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Leicester
Posts: 2,964
|
TBH the ex FA chairman who have made these comments seemed pretty clueless when it came to football, Dyke comes over more like a politician.
I get the impression they want the FA to have more power, over both the football league and premier league |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,540
|
Perhaps those who are calling for a bit more diversity on the FA board are hoping to avoid this sort of thing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-38275894 The Football Association have issued the following advice to get more girls involved in the sport: Girls should be offered "colourful, nice smelling" bibs and pink whistles. Advertise in places where girls go i.e. coffee shops or on the back of toilet doors. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
They don't "have an issue" with middle aged white men. What they're saying is that there's something wrong if the FA's board of management is made up entirely of middle aged white men at the exclusion of all other groups.
Where's the diversity? Why is there no one on the board to represent the interests of people outside that fairly narrow group? As football has traditionally been populated by mostly white men at around the time these men were young, it makes absolute sense that the people moving up the ranks over time would mostly be white and older now. Why wouldn't that happen? Why would it be diverse in terms of ethnicity? For that to happen it may require more non-white people to actually want to pursue a career in the FA. And why is it important to represent the interests of people outside that fairly narrow group? All they'd be concerned about are the interests surrounding football and running it as an organisation for the interests of football. It's not a charity or something. I don't know why there's such an obsession to try to push certain identity groups into certain jobs. Because what's more important is for individuals to pursue what they want to do in life. It's not anyone's duty to make everything exactly equal and fulfill quota percentages. It's ridiculous. The only problem arises if somebody who is non-white wants to pursue a certain career but is prevented from doing so based on the colour of their skin. In which case the law is on their side. If there's no evidence of that occurring then I don't see a valid complaint. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,342
|
But I thought we were all the same and that anyone could do anything regardless of age, gender, race, religion, sexuality etc so what does it matter?
When they come out with stuff like this they're saying the above is untrue, that white people think a certain way, black people another way, brown yet another. Old people think one way, the young another. Men one way, women another. It's saying that everyone is limited to only having a certain spectrum of ideas which are all dependent on how or when you happened to be born, and that you're incapable of having the same ideas of those born differently to you. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,716
|
Quote:
Perhaps those who are calling for a bit more diversity on the FA board are hoping to avoid this sort of thing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-38275894 The Football Association have issued the following advice to get more girls involved in the sport: Girls should be offered "colourful, nice smelling" bibs and pink whistles. Advertise in places where girls go i.e. coffee shops or on the back of toilet doors. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Retford
Posts: 20,450
|
Depends on the hiring practices at the FA. If they deliberately went for "elderly white men" purely on the basis of certain characteristics to the detriment of everyone else, then that is anti-egalitarian, anti-meritocratic and out of order.
If, however, it comes down to the FA allowing anyone regardless of gender, skin colour, age, race and so forth to apply for executive roles and only "elderly white men" applied for those positions, that would be something quite different. Promote such roles by all means but excluding "elderly white men" from such roles because of their age, gender or skin colour is just as anti-egalitarian, anti-meritocratic and out of order as the first scenario. Worse still, the picture being painted in the radio report I heard earlier suggested this call to purge the FA of "elderly white men" seems coincidentally timed and attempted to be linked to the recent sexual abuse scandal by coaches that has rocked football as of late. This whiffs of more identity politics and virtue signalling by people pushing the "equality of outcome" agenda which will see certain groups of people being discriminated against because of their gender, age and skin colour. Reverse sexism, ageism and racism is still sexism, ageism and racism. Which is ironic considering how the FA wants to (rightly) kick racism out of football, but wishes to implement racist hiring policies under equality of outcome principles. |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,716
|
Quote:
Depends on the hiring practices at the FA. If they deliberately went for "elderly white men" purely on the basis of certain characteristics to the detriment of everyone else, then that is anti-egalitarian, anti-meritocratic and out of order.
If, however, it comes down to the FA allowing anyone regardless of gender, skin colour, age, race and so forth to apply for executive roles and only "elderly white men" applied for those positions, that would be something quite different. Promote such roles by all means but excluding "elderly white men" from such roles because of their age, gender or skin colour is just as anti-egalitarian, anti-meritocratic and out of order as the first scenario. Worse still, the picture being painted in the radio report I heard earlier suggested this call to purge the FA of "elderly white men" seems coincidentally timed and attempted to be linked to the recent sexual abuse scandal by coaches that has rocked football as of late. This whiffs of more identity politics and virtue signalling by people pushing the "equality of outcome" agenda which will see certain groups of people being discriminated against because of their gender, age and skin colour. Reverse sexism, ageism and racism is still sexism, ageism and racism. Which is ironic considering how the FA wants to (rightly) kick racism out of football, but wishes to implement racist hiring policies under equality of outcome principles. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hebrides
Posts: 28,135
|
Quote:
Whilst I appreciate the motivation for change, does anybody else think that the wording neatly captures 3 isms that would be utterly unacceptable in similarly describing almost any other demographic, apart from mainly "middle aged white men"
I've said it before in relation to white middle aged men, that I do object to such derogatory language being used to describe a certain section of society, regardless of their shortcomings. If the individuals concerned had expressed a need for new faces and fresh blood, that would have been different, as it wouldn't be insulting one group by express implication. If I was there, I'd be tempted to say "you got a personal issue with elderly white men? Some of the wisest most decent people I know, are the aforesaid elderly, white men" link You just have to wonder what the implication of this statement was ? It suggests a great deal more. Are they racist ? Are they part of a cover up for historical reasons? Are they in denial? Is there a collective guilt ? I agree there needs to be a real investigation and major changes made. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 68,941
|
I see your point blueblade but I simply think they're trying to open football to wider segments of society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
But I thought we were all the same and that anyone could do anything regardless of age, gender, race, religion, sexuality etc so what does it matter?
When they come out with stuff like this they're saying the above is untrue, that white people think a certain way, black people another way, brown yet another. Old people think one way, the young another. Men one way, women another. It's saying that everyone is limited to only having a certain spectrum of ideas which are all dependent on how or when you happened to be born, and that you're incapable of having the same ideas of those born differently to you. You hardly see much in the way of these people actually trying to find out what people actually want to do with their lives. I would think that if you'd asked people before this what would they like to do as a career, working for the FA wouldn't even have been on their radar as a potential career choice. It's one of those weird careers where it's mostly populated by people who have always been closely tied to the world of football. But now it seems that they want to actually make non-white people get into a career they couldn't care less about. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
|
Quote:
Depends on the hiring practices at the FA. If they deliberately went for "elderly white men" purely on the basis of certain characteristics to the detriment of everyone else, then that is anti-egalitarian, anti-meritocratic and out of order.
If, however, it comes down to the FA allowing anyone regardless of gender, skin colour, age, race and so forth to apply for executive roles and only "elderly white men" applied for those positions, that would be something quite different. Promote such roles by all means but excluding "elderly white men" from such roles because of their age, gender or skin colour is just as anti-egalitarian, anti-meritocratic and out of order as the first scenario. Worse still, the picture being painted in the radio report I heard earlier suggested this call to purge the FA of "elderly white men" seems coincidentally timed and attempted to be linked to the recent sexual abuse scandal by coaches that has rocked football as of late. This whiffs of more identity politics and virtue signalling by people pushing the "equality of outcome" agenda which will see certain groups of people being discriminated against because of their gender, age and skin colour. Reverse sexism, ageism and racism is still sexism, ageism and racism. Which is ironic considering how the FA wants to (rightly) kick racism out of football, but wishes to implement racist hiring policies under equality of outcome principles. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,216
|
Quote:
I see your point blueblade but I simply think they're trying to open football to wider segments of society.
It's not fair to promote a desire for diversity and change by deliberately insulting the one demographic which remains the only undefended target for discrimination. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
I see your point blueblade but I simply think they're trying to open football to wider segments of society.
Who says it isn't already open to wider segments of society? Maybe, just maybe, people tend to be interested in other careers. I see no purpose to trying to make people do certain jobs based on the criteria of the colour of their skin. It doesn't mean that the job will be performed any better than somebody who's currently doing the job now. Rather than assuming that these 'elderly white men' have done something wrong, they should actually look into if there actually is a problem where people have been denied entry into the career. Not saying that hasn't happened, but they should be approaching it from this position rather than assuming that there's a problem because they looked at the colour of people's skin and their age and they didn't like the headcount. There seems to be a sickness in society at the moment where seemingly intelligent people appear to be falling over themselves to get other people to give them a big pat on the back for appearing to be so virtuous and saintly. It must be an ego thing. The more I think about it the more horrible it seems. Most if not all of these 'elderly white men' may have done absolutely nothing wrong at all, but it's being implied that they are not good people because of their skin colour and their age. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,990
|
Yeah, BBC news kept repeating it this morning and my first impression was that it was pretty racist imo. Bet they wouldn't be repeating it like that if it was "elderly black men", there would rightfully be outrage if they did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,017
|
Surely they've seen the irony in a bunch of elderly white men saying that the FA is being held back by a different group of elderly white men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
...which is fine and I welcome that, but they can't lecture others about racism, for example, when they're deliberately using racist language themselves... and that's before we get to the ageism and sexism....
It's not fair to promote a desire for diversity and change by deliberately insulting the one demographic which remains the only undefended target for discrimination. It's the idea that they are are stating this as fact which isn't even being questioned. The people in the FA who they are talking about are being presented as guilty before they are judged to be innocent....because of their age and their skin colour. I also don't believe that these critics believe in diversity at all. Not really. They insist that everybody thinks like them. That's not diversity. They're not even the champions of equality they think they are either, because they're treating people differently based on their age, skin colour, and gender. All that should really matter is that if a younger non-white woman applied for a job within the FA then they are treated in the application process like any other applicant based on their skills and abilities. Not on what colour, age and gender they are. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 68,941
|
Quote:
What makes them think they have the right to do that?
Who says it isn't already open to wider segments of society? Maybe, just maybe, people tend to be interested in other careers. I see no purpose to trying to make people do certain jobs based on the criteria of the colour of their skin. It doesn't mean that the job will be performed any better than somebody who's currently doing the job now. Rather than assuming that these 'elderly white men' have done something wrong, they should actually look into if there actually is a problem where people have been denied entry into the career. Not saying that hasn't happened, but they should be approaching it from this position rather than assuming that there's a problem because they looked at the colour of people's skin and their age and they didn't like the headcount. There seems to be a sickness in society at the moment where seemingly intelligent people appear to be falling over themselves to get other people to give them a big pat on the back for appearing to be so virtuous and saintly. It must be an ego thing. The more I think about it the more horrible it seems. Most if not all of these 'elderly white men' may have done absolutely nothing wrong at all, but it's being implied that they are not good people because of their skin colour and their age. I don't see the big deal. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
Who is saying these white elderly men have done anything wrong? It's simply a natter of being a little more diverse.
I don't see the big deal. ![]() The way somebody looks doesn't make them more diverse. It's about what people think and what they are like as individuals which makes them diverse. Why is it assumed that for the sake of argument a black man and a white man are more diverse than two white men? The colour of their skin tells us little about what they are like inside and to what extent the way they think and their opinions differ. It's a big deal because these people are taking superficial characteristics and using them as criteria to judge people by. This is how most of us have been brought up to not treat people. They're implying that there's something faulty with these elderly white men, and even suggesting that's why the national team are failing....with absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back this claim up. If the FA is failing then that is their problem to deal with, not for somebody else to dictate to them how to deal with matters. Unless they are doing something criminal of course. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:52.




