The Euro2020 Thread

[egg]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

They are singling out the ones that didn't score in the penalty shoot out. The colour of their skin is not mentioned. 

I think the point being made is that Rashford and Sancho were singled out on the mural, but that their skin colour wasn't mentioned, but the perception being given is that the mural defacing was racist. If this "joke" isn't racist, why the distinction between that and the mural. It is a valid point. 

[East Kent Saint]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

It’s insulting black men. Why isn’t it racist? Why are they singling out black players?

It is a joke , the reference to the English players who missed their penalties is the joke because they might miss Blackadder as part of a firing squad. I conclude therefore that it isn't in itself racist . Mr WUM .

[Turkish]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

They are singling out the ones that didn't score in the penalty shoot out. The colour of their skin is not mentioned. 

Colour of skin wasn't mentioned on the Rashford graffiti either.

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, East Kent Saint said:

It is a joke , the reference to the English players who missed their penalties is the joke because they might miss Blackadder as part of a firing squad. I conclude therefore that it isn't in itself racist . Mr WUM .

So it's alright to make jokes about black people then, as long as we dont mention skin colour. Got it.

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

I think the point being made is that Rashford and Sancho were singled out on the mural, but that their skin colour wasn't mentioned, but the perception being given is that the mural defacing was racist. If this "joke" isn't racist, why the distinction between that and the mural. It is a valid point. 

bingo. 

[Whitey Grandad]

11 minutes ago, Turkish said:

So it's alright to make jokes about black people then, as long as we dont mention skin colour. Got it.

Good. Now you've got it.

Not making jokes about black people when you would have made a joke about a white person is discriminatory. The sooner we can treat all people as equals the better. The more that the colour of a person's skin is raised the more that differentiation and discrimination will continue.

[Whitey Grandad]

19 minutes ago, egg said:

I think the point being made is that Rashford and Sancho were singled out on the mural, but that their skin colour wasn't mentioned, but the perception being given is that the mural defacing was racist. If this "joke" isn't racist, why the distinction between that and the mural. It is a valid point. 

I would argue that the defacing of the mural is not of itself a racist act. I know nothing about the motives of the perpretators so I cannot jump to a prejudgment. I condemn the act for what it is, not because of what I might think the motives behind it to be.

15 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Colour of skin wasn't mentioned on the Rashford graffiti either.

So why bring it up?

[aintforever]

I haven't seen a picture of it but the plod reported it as a 'racially aggravated act of vandalism' so that is why it has been reported as such. I guess if you are that concerned about wether what was written was actually racist you best ask the Greater Manchester Police. I don't think there is much doubt they have been on the end of some racist abuse through twitter etc, not surprised at the usual apologists though. We can all read between the lines.

 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I haven't seen a picture of it but the plod reported it as a 'racially aggravated act of vandalism' so that is why it has been reported as such. I guess if you are that concerned about wether what was written was actually racist you best ask the Greater Manchester Police. I don't think there is much doubt they have been on the end of some racist abuse through twitter etc, not surprised at the usual apologists though. We can all read between the lines.

 

What exactly do you mean by that? 

[Turkish]

38 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Good. Now you've got it.

Not making jokes about black people when you would have made a joke about a white person is discriminatory. The sooner we can treat all people as equals the better. The more that the colour of a person's skin is raised the more that differentiation and discrimination will continue.

Agreed. So you agree that the constant references to skin colour either with things like BLM, positive discrimination aren't helping either. 

[Turkish]

5 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I haven't seen a picture of it but the plod reported it as a 'racially aggravated act of vandalism' so that is why it has been reported as such. I guess if you are that concerned about wether what was written was actually racist you best ask the Greater Manchester Police. I don't think there is much doubt they have been on the end of some racist abuse through twitter etc, not surprised at the usual apologists though. We can all read between the lines.

 

It said Rashford shit in a bucket and Fuck Sancho. Is that racial abuse or not?

[Turkish]

36 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

I would argue that the defacing of the mural is not of itself a racist act. I know nothing about the motives of the perpretators so I cannot jump to a prejudgment. I condemn the act for what it is, not because of what I might think the motives behind it to be.

So why bring it up?

Because i'm unsure why two separate things, neither of which mention colour, are being treated differently. They single out the same people, they dont mention skin colour, yet one is laughed off a joke whilst the other is being vilified as racist abuse with BLM protests 

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Because i'm unsure why two separate things, neither of which mention colour, are being treated differently. They single out the same people, they dont mention skin colour, yet one is laughed off a joke whilst the other is being vilified as racist abuse with BLM protests 

Different people. There is no logic in such matters.

[East Kent Saint]

57 minutes ago, egg said:

I think the point being made is that Rashford and Sancho were singled out on the mural, but that their skin colour wasn't mentioned, but the perception being given is that the mural defacing was racist. If this "joke" isn't racist, why the distinction between that and the mural. It is a valid point. 

You can’t make that comparison unless you have seen the graffiti so it is not a valid comparison. The Mural was defaced , some of the graffiti was painted over and the rest had plastic sheet taped over it . The graffiti was reported by various news outlets as racist so people thought that it was . Some on here have posted what they think is said which doesn’t appear to be racist just offensive. So if it was reported as racist but wasn’t in fact racist then then it isn’t racist and neither , IMO is the Blackadder joke .
 

[Whitey Grandad]

8 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Agreed. So you agree that the constant references to skin colour either with things like BLM, positive discrimination aren't helping either. 

I agree, they are reinforcing prejudices. All discrimination is wrong.

[Turkish]

Just now, East Kent Saint said:

You can’t make that comparison unless you have seen the graffiti so it is not a valid comparison. The Mural was defaced , some of the graffiti was painted over and the rest had plastic sheet taped over it . The graffiti was reported by various news outlets as racist so people thought that it was . Some on here have posted what they think is said which doesn’t appear to be racist just offensive. So if it was reported as racist but wasn’t in fact racist then then it isn’t racist and neither , IMO is the Blackadder joke .
 

Who decides what is and isn't racist? 

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, East Kent Saint said:

You can’t make that comparison unless you have seen the graffiti so it is not a valid comparison. The Mural was defaced , some of the graffiti was painted over and the rest had plastic sheet taped over it . The graffiti was reported by various news outlets as racist so people thought that it was . Some on here have posted what they think is said which doesn’t appear to be racist just offensive. So if it was reported as racist but wasn’t in fact racist then then it isn’t racist and neither , IMO is the Blackadder joke .
 

Form two days ago,

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/marcus-rashford-greater-manchester-police-greater-manchester-euro-england-b945320.html

The words, in themselves are not racist and without knowing the motives no conclusions can be made.

[Wade Garrett]

This does seem to give a platform for the brainless racist scum of the far right.

It is also about the immaturity of some idiots who can’t ever handle England losing a big game.

Try supporting Saints you wankers.  You would be hardened to it by now.

[Jimmy_D]

4 hours ago, egg said:

Thanks for that, decent response.

I query where reinforcing the message that racist  behavior is socially unacceptable take us. As you say, normal people know that already, thus the only purpose could be to drill the message home to those that don't get it. That, in reality, involves a shift in mindset in those kind of people and is taking the knee etc really going to do that? I just don't see it but this approach looks like its here to stay and hopefully you're correct.

On your first part, these idiots are absolutely looking for a reaction. They're doing it to cause offence, upset, distress - that's the whole purpose of harassment and abuse. They know that they're succeeding, and on a huge scale. Your view is different to mine and I respect that, but I feel that the constant focus is a double edged sword.

  

Changing most racists’ minds won’t come from a public message and awareness being raised, but if the people around them, their friends and family, have their awareness raised, and as a result are more willing to call them out on it instead of before ignoring it and remaining silent, that’s where a genuine difference can be made, for some people at least. Some it won’t change their views, but it will make them more unwilling to spread those views.

Additionally, people growing up more than ever before are hearing racism being opposed. That makes a huge difference to young people that in the past would have heard racist views and everyone remain silent about it. It makes it matter to them. This one in particular will never stop being relevant.

Lastly, being on the receiving  end sucks. It’s felt hopeless and lonely for a long time, when it happens and they’ve seen people remain silent, or claim it’s not a problem, that we’ve already done enough. Seeing people actively make an effort to oppose racism and take it seriously makes a huge difference to that, regardless of what some racist trolls might think of it.

[Whitey Grandad]

16 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I haven't seen a picture of it but the plod reported it as a 'racially aggravated act of vandalism' so that is why it has been reported as such. I guess if you are that concerned about wether what was written was actually racist you best ask the Greater Manchester Police. I don't think there is much doubt they have been on the end of some racist abuse through twitter etc, not surprised at the usual apologists though. We can all read between the lines.

 

Oh really? Where did you find that quote? The GMP are treating it as a 'racist incident' despite not knowing who did it nor why. You might like to ask why they came to that conclusion.

[SKD]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Oh really? Where did you find that quote? The GMP are treating it as a 'racist incident' despite not knowing who did it nor why. You might like to ask why they came to that conclusion.

The abuse was directed only at the 2 Manchester United players, no mention of saka and absolutely nothing racial about it.

It doesn’t take a genius to realise that perhaps it was a city or Liverpool fan rather than some right wing nationalist.

Were essentially at a point where any criticism of a person of colour is now considered a racial act. Common sense in The world has gone, completely gone. 

 

[SKD]

It’s actually sad and depressing that the actions of a tiny minority is and has been given more publicity than England reaching their first final in 55 years. 

The overreaction to this and the idiots breaking into Wembley, is crazy. I’ve seen people in the media saying that they are scared to go to an England game again (as if this is a regular thing and the overwhelming majority of games here weren't peaceful and a success). 

Those who seek division between us are absolutely lapping this up. 

 

[Whitey Grandad]

8 minutes ago, SKD said:

The abuse was directed only at the 2 Manchester United players, no mention of saka and absolutely nothing racial about it.

It doesn’t take a genius to realise that perhaps it was a city or Liverpool fan rather than some right wing nationalist.

Were essentially at a point where any criticism of a person of colour is now considered a racial act. Common sense in The world has gone, completely gone. 

 

 

3 minutes ago, SKD said:

It’s actually sad and depressing that the actions of a tiny minority is and has been given more publicity than England reaching their first final in 55 years. 

The overreaction to this and the idiots breaking into Wembley, is crazy. I’ve seen people in the media saying that they are scared to go to an England game again (as if this is a regular thing and the overwhelming majority of games here weren't peaceful and a success). 

Those who seek division between us are absolutely lapping this up. 

 

I agree. This is the sadder aspect to all this. Instead of uniting the country these repsonses only seem to have made matters worse.

[Mustapha Fag]

2 minutes ago, SKD said:

It’s actually sad and depressing that the actions of a tiny minority is and has been given more publicity than England reaching their first final in 55 years. 

The overreaction to this and the idiots breaking into Wembley, is crazy. I’ve seen people in the media saying that they are scared to go to an England game again (as if this is a regular thing and the overwhelming majority of games here weren't peaceful and a success). 

Those who seek division between us are absolutely lapping this up. 

 

Not often I agree with you, but I do feel the publicity is feeding the flames in some ways.

There is a massive over reaction to those breaking through barriers, why would an isolated incident stop you going again? Media are lapping up these stories,  throwing out the headlines and certain sections of the public are full arm waving outrage screaming again.

[aintforever]

14 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Oh really? Where did you find that quote? The GMP are treating it as a 'racist incident' despite not knowing who did it nor why. You might like to ask why they came to that conclusion.

https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/greater-manchester/news/appeals/2021/july/police-are-investigating-after-a-mural-in-withington-has-been-vandalised/

None of the reports I can find say exactly what was written, not sure it really matters TBH wether the abuse comes via twitter or graffiti, no one is denying he was the victim of racist abuse as many of our players have been week in week out.

[Turkish]

Just now, aintforever said:

https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/greater-manchester/news/appeals/2021/july/police-are-investigating-after-a-mural-in-withington-has-been-vandalised/

None of the reports I can find say exactly what was written, not sure it really matters TBH wether the abuse comes via twitter or graffiti, no one is denying he was the victim of racist abuse as many of our players have been week in week out.

Why are people, yourself included, assuming it was racist abuse when some people dont know what was written?

Edited 15 July, 2021 by Turkish

[Whitey Grandad]

21 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Form two days ago,

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/marcus-rashford-greater-manchester-police-greater-manchester-euro-england-b945320.html

The words, in themselves are not racist and without knowing the motives no conclusions can be made.

 

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

https://www.gmp.police.uk/news/greater-manchester/news/appeals/2021/july/police-are-investigating-after-a-mural-in-withington-has-been-vandalised/

None of the reports I can find say exactly what was written, not sure it really matters TBH wether the abuse comes via twitter or graffiti, no one is denying he was the victim of racist abuse as many of our players have been week in week out.

If you go to the link that I posted just above you can see the actual wording and in this context it does matter.

The reaction seems to be:

Rashford has been abused. Rashford is a black man. Therefore any abuse of rashford must be of a racist nature. Such responses are demeaning to a fine young man of excellent character.

I have no doubt that he has received racial abuse many times but from the defacement of the mural cannot be interpreted as such a thing.

[aintforever]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Why are people, yourself included, assuming it was racist abuse when some people dont know what was written?

I have no idea what was written on the mural or wether it was racist, the police clearly think it was. The players clearly have received racist abuse on twitter though, as many have in the past.

[egg]

24 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

You can’t make that comparison unless you have seen the graffiti so it is not a valid comparison. The Mural was defaced , some of the graffiti was painted over and the rest had plastic sheet taped over it . The graffiti was reported by various news outlets as racist so people thought that it was . Some on here have posted what they think is said which doesn’t appear to be racist just offensive. So if it was reported as racist but wasn’t in fact racist then then it isn’t racist and neither , IMO is the Blackadder joke .
 

The grafitti in the mural was "Rashford shit in a bucket" and "Fuck Sancho". 

That is unpleasant but not racist. My issue is a) the dishonest misrepresentation of the defacing, and b) people's willingness to assume its racist without asking what was actually written. 

The other stuff I've seen posted on here from social media is blatantly racist and I hope that the perpetrators are dealt with. 

[Whitey Grandad]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Why are people, yourself included, assuming it was racist abuse when some people dont know what was written?

It's called jumping to conclusions, or confirmation bias. 

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, aintforever said:

I have no idea what was written on the mural or wether it was racist, the police clearly think it was. The players clearly have received racist abuse on twitter though, as many have in the past.

That's your assumption, not the actual case.

[SKD]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Why are people, yourself included, assuming it was racist abuse when some people dont know what was written?

The word before ‘bastard’ isn’t clear, but I’ve seen reports of it being either ‘bucket’ or ‘basket’. 
 

Either way, not racist. 

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

They are singling out the ones that didn't score in the penalty shoot out. The colour of their skin is not mentioned. 

So is it just your bog standard, non-racist, abuse / bullying then and is that more acceptable because skin colour isn't mentioned?

[aintforever]

Just now, SKD said:

The word before ‘bastard’ isn’t clear, but I’ve seen reports of it being either ‘bucket’ or ‘basket’. 
 

Either way, not racist. 

How do you know there is not other graffiti not visible in that pic?

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, SKD said:

The word before ‘bastard’ isn’t clear, but I’ve seen reports of it being either ‘bucket’ or ‘basket’. 
 

Either way, not racist. 

They drew a cock and balls too, so sexist as well

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I have no idea what was written on the mural or wether it was racist, the police clearly think it was. The players clearly have received racist abuse on twitter though, as many have in the past.

Why do they and others think it was racist? You can give your view as well now you've seen it, SKD kindly posted the imagine.

[aintforever]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

Why do they and others think it was racist? You can give your view as well now you've seen it, SKD kindly posted the imagine.

I couldn't see any racist wording in that pic, that doesn't mean there wasn't any racist graffiti on the wall.

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I couldn't see any racist wording in that pic, that doesn't mean there wasn't any racist graffiti on the wall.

If there was any more they didn't bother covering it up and it's invisible. So despite the claims do you agree that it wasn't racist?

Edited 15 July, 2021 by Turkish

[SKD]

5 minutes ago, aintforever said:

How do you know there is not other graffiti not visible in that pic?

Because there’s not. Unless they were using a biro or invisible paint. Take a look for yourself. 

[Whitey Grandad]

6 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

So is it just your bog standard, non-racist, abuse / bullying then and is that more acceptable because skin colour isn't mentioned?

I never said that it was and I have condemned the action. but to assume that it was racist is no better.  Since skin colour wasn't mentioned then why do you bring it up in your question?

[aintforever]

1 minute ago, SKD said:

Because there’s not. Unless they were using a biro or invisible paint. Take a look for yourself. 

Nothing shows up very well on a black background, could easily be some smaller graffiti there.

[SKD]

Just now, aintforever said:

Nothing shows up very well on a black background, could easily be some smaller graffiti there.

If In doubt assume it’s racist. Right, got it. 
 

[Turkish]

Just now, aintforever said:

Nothing shows up very well on a black background, could easily be some smaller graffiti there.

[aintforever]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

If there was any more they didn't bother covering it up and it's invisible. So despite the claims do you agree that it wasn't racist?

There has clearly been some bits painted over as well, you can tell by the shiny paint.

[Turkish]

Just now, SKD said:

If In doubt assume it’s racist. Right, got it. 
 

Why though? That's what i dont get, what are people seeing that makes them assume it's racist?

[Badger]

2 minutes ago, Turkish said:

If there was any more they didn't bother covering it up and it's invisible. So despite the claims do you agree that it wasn't racist?

Maureen Lipman in her role from Coronation St makes a hasty getaway with tins of aerosol paint in a shopping bag..

[Weston Super Saint]

12 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I have no idea what was written on the mural or wether it was racist, the police clearly think it was. The players clearly have received racist abuse on twitter though, as many have in the past.

Nowhere in your statement from GMP does it state the police think it was racially aggravated.  It states they were called to 'reports' of racially aggravated damage, not that they think that is what it was.

Similarly, they could be called to 'reports' of a murder, but when they get there the 'dead' person gets up like Jesus on Easter Monday. 

You are making assumptions based on your own prejudices...

[Turkish]

Just now, aintforever said:

There has clearly been some bits painted over as well, you can tell by the shiny paint.

Much as you seem to be hoping there is, there is zero evidence of any racism is there. 

[Jimmy_D]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

Why though? That's what i dont get, what are people seeing that makes them assume it's racist?

The police will be investigating whether it was racially motivated because the context means it’s possible it was.

They’ll most likely find there isn’t evidence to say it was, unless they catch the person that did it somehow and find they’ve got a history for it.

I don’t get why that particularly matters though, it’s not like one incident of abuse not being racially motivated makes all the stuff that was racially motivated magically go away.

[aintforever]

1 minute ago, SKD said:

If In doubt assume it’s racist. Right, got it. 
 

I havn't assumed anything, you are the one assuming there is not small graffiti.