|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 9, 2020 16:40:43 GMT -5
Yesterday, a soccer match in the Champions League was abandoned because both teams walked off the pitch (field) in protest over supposed "racial abuse" heaped on the assistant coach from one team by the sideline referee (or 4th official). Here's an article at ESPN detailing (not really) the incident: www.espn.com/soccer/paris-saint-germain/story/4256997/psg-vs-istanbul-basaksehir-abandoned-due-to-alleged-racismNow, here's what actually happened (yeah, I was watching): An assistant coach for Istanbul Basaksehir--one Pierre Webo, former player from Cameroon--was acting like an ass on the sidelines because he didn't like some of the calls. The head ref heard his crap and went over to the sidelines, asking the 4th official who was saying all that shit. The 4th official pointed to Webo and said something like "that one, the black guy" (clearly to distinguish Webo from the not-black guys on either side). He said it in Romanian because he and the head ref are, in fact, Romanian. The head ref then red-carded Webo for abusing the refs. Now Webo, class act that he is, heard "negro" and threw a fit as if the official had said something like "that nigger over there" (which he didn't). And some of the players on his team--notably Demba Ba--started complaining that the ref used skin color to identify the guy acting like a douche, i.e. "you say that black guy, but you'd never say that white guy," a position that may have some philosophical justification, but isn't actually rooted in reality. Then Ba led his team off the field in protest, soon to be followed by PSG. Now Webo is being treated like a hero, like the greatest thing since sliced bread, and most every story on this talks about how he was "racially abused." Meanwhile, I suspect the ref here will never work a FIFA match again. His career is over, because he used skin color as a means of identifying someone. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 9, 2020 18:50:08 GMT -5
"that one, the black guy" (clearly to distinguish Webo from the not-black guys on either side). But Webo wasn't the only black guy there, right? In any case, while I can probably agree that saying "that black guy" isn't necessarily racist, it does strike me as a bit unprofessional. There might be certain contexts where it might be ok, but I know I wouldn't say it in a business meeting, for example. Surely it can't be that difficult to send someone off without bringing race into it, no? |
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 9, 2020 19:06:06 GMT -5
Actually, I believe he was the only black guy there on the Basaksehir bench. Here's someone--a black someone, actually--singing my song:
I don't think the ref brought race into it, at all. He simply identified the person in a simple way, a way generally accepted in fact, otherwise police couldn't look for a white male in a green shirt or a black male in a red shirt or an asian woman in no shirt.
And again, Webo was actively abusing the referees. No one is even bothering with that aspect of all this. He got a red card. Coaches don't get a lot of straight reds. He obviously crossed some lines. But FIFA in its infinite wisdom actually rescinded the red card, thus saying--essentially--that it's okay to verbally abuse the refs.
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 9, 2020 19:50:32 GMT -5
I don't think the ref brought race into it, at all. He simply identified the person in a simple way I guess I don't see these as mutually exclusive. When the police say they're looking for a black male in a red shirt, I'd say they are in fact bringing up race, but in a context where it makes sense to do so. In this particular context, it just seems unprofessional and not really necessary. I mean, correct me if you think I'm wrong about this, but I'm thinking if a referee referred to a player in this way, it would seem pretty weird. Why? Well, because you can easily just use jersey numbers, instead. Even if bringing up skin color is just a simple way to identity people, there's still no need to do it in that situation. Now, as John Barnes was pointing out, Webo didn't have a jersey number, so obviously that wasn't an option here. But he is acting like there's just no other way to talk about people. I honestly don't get it. I mean, I work in a large office in Vietnam, where almost all of my colleagues are Vietnamese. Some of my colleagues know my name, some don't. But I never hear anyone refer to me as "that white guy," or even "that American guy" (neither of which would bother me too much, to be fair). Because in a workplace setting, it just doesn't come off as very professional. And I think most people are actually aware of that and manage to avoid it, even if John Barnes thinks doing so is somehow impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Dec 9, 2020 20:24:46 GMT -5
Okay, I'm a bit lost here. Wanna make sure I understand this.
So...race is something that is an important part of everyone's identity, that affects one's "lived experiences" on a fundamental level, to the point that we (as a society) are expected to not only notice, but to bend over backwards to recognize and in many instances give deference to race in societal, political, and racial conversations, because "black lives matter" etc., etc., but if you refer to a black guy as....*checks notes*...a black guy...especially when he's the only one among a bunch of non-black guys, that's racist because you're mentioning his race and you're not supposed to notice, mention, or identify someone by their race?
Okay. Sure. Makes perfect sense. I, too, like to both have and eat my cake.
|
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 10, 2020 9:25:16 GMT -5
Exactly.
I've noted in past discussions with people on racism that I purposefully avoided identifying people by race, ethnicity, or the like when I was with my kids. I didn't want them to talk about "my black friend" or "my Jewish friend" and so on. And I was told by the racially enlightened that I was still wrong, that I couldn't be "colorblind" in this manner, that I had to acknowledge these racial differences, if not celebrate them.
Now it would seems that mentioning race is racism if and only if there is someone to play the victim. Otherwise, not mentioning race is racism.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Dec 10, 2020 9:28:12 GMT -5
As Sam Harris would say, "this is how you play tennis without the net."
|
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 10, 2020 9:32:42 GMT -5
Look at this intellectualized bullshit: www.marca.com/en/football/champions-league/opinion/2020/12/09/5fd0f842ca47413a7a8b45d6.htmlNotice how the initial claim of "racism"--wherein the 4th official used some sort of slur--has been completely abandoned, in favor of this nuanced and comparative argument, wherein it's "racism" because of an assumption that no one would have said "that white guy" in a similar situation where the offending coach was white. Crap. And again, Webo is getting a complete pass for his transgressions; people are acting like the official just walked up and referred to Webo as a black guy for no reason, whatsoever. |
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 10, 2020 20:12:59 GMT -5
I've noted in past discussions with people on racism that I purposefully avoided identifying people by race, ethnicity, or the like when I was with my kids. I didn't want them to talk about "my black friend" or "my Jewish friend" and so on. And I was told by the racially enlightened that I was still wrong, that I couldn't be "colorblind" in this manner, that I had to acknowledge these racial differences, if not celebrate them. To my mind, the phrase "mentioning race" is something that probably seems kind of benign to a lot of people. That is, if a statement can be claimed as merely "mentioning race", that might be taken as ipso facto proof that a statement isn't racist. But there are degrees, here. Personally, I don't think "my black friend" is remotely racist (nor is avoiding it), although it might be kind of weird in some contexts. (Like if you were introducing him/her to a third friend, then pointing out that they're black is probably redundant, right?  ) But then, at the other end of the spectrum, you could have something like, "Oh hey, look at all those dumb black kids over there." I have seen similar stuff like this defended on similar grounds--i.e."dumb" isn't a racial word at all and "black" is just neutral. But to me, putting it all together like that comes off as pretty damn racist (and I think a reasonable person would agree.) Where does "send that black guy off" fall on that spectrum? Well, it's gotta be somewhere in the middle, but it's also in a weird spot where I suppose some people (John Barnes) would just take it as neutral, and others (Demba Ba) wouldn't take it so well. But it does make sense to me why some wouldn't appreciate it. If I was hanging out with Demba Ba, specifically, I doubt I'd refer to him as "that black guy", since I know now that he doesn't care for it, and it's pretty easy to avoid, in any case. Yeah, I get that, and I think I can allow that FIFA was probably wrong to rescind the red card. That said, it feels a bit pointless to worry too much about whatever Webo may have said beforehand. If the ref didn't say anything racist, then that's all the defense he needs. If he did, or if there's a future case where another ref does, I don't think I'd see it as defensible on the grounds that the other person was being a d***. |
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 11, 2020 9:29:19 GMT -5
If the ref didn't say anything racist, then that's all the defense he needs. Disagree. History has clearly shown that not doing something demonstrably racist is no protection from being accused of racism. As to the rest, allowing that what he said really was problematic, really did offend others*, was it a "we're not going to play this game anymore, as long as that racist piece of shit official is still on the field"? Was Webo really a victim of "racial abuse"? OR was it more of a learning moment, where--perhaps--FIFA could have addressed concerns after the match, players could have held their tongues til then? * Truly, I'm allowing these things just for the sake of the above point. Because the truth is that I think neither Pierre Webo nor Demba Ba was offended at all. They were wound up from the match, Webo knew he fucked up and was going to get a red,so he got defensive--as humans are prone to do--and latched on to what the ref said as a means of deflecting from his bad behavior. And Demba Ba--then others--stupidly went along with the bullshit. They're assholes imo, not because of their initial reactions, but because they haven't had the decency to admit they went way too far in their bullshit accusations. And that's partly because they're getting treated like heros. |
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Dec 11, 2020 20:07:51 GMT -5
History has clearly shown that not doing something demonstrably racist is no protection from being accused of racism.
Think of it this way: if a hypothetical ref launched a serious slur at someone, would that be acceptable as long as the other party was clearly being a d***?
To me, the answer is no. So when I look at this particular case, as well, I don't think Webo's actions beforehand are much of a mitigating factor for the ref, although the argument that the ref didn't actually say/do anything super outrageous could and should be, IMO.Not sure. Ba came across as pretty genuine, IMO. (Of course, being angry doesn't automatically put you in the right.) Just speaking for myself, I'd probably be more hesitant to say someone wasn't *truly* offended in this type of scenario. Just too easy to project my own sensibilities onto someone else. (As I mentioned, I don't think I'd get too bothered if someone referred to me as "that white guy"). And it wouldn't surprise me to learn that an African man who grew up in France might have genuinely different notions about racism than I do, as a white guy who grew up in the US.
JMO, of course. |
|
)