AFL slams 'offensive' web page

[fairdinkum]

If the AFL wanted to make many many more people check out these pages, they've been spectacularly successful.....

What were they supposed to do?

Some twerp teenaged intern from The Age gives them a ring ands asks what they think of a webpage they have previously not even seen, and what would you have them say?

In that situation they have to condemn the page, or else risk The Age running with an 'AFL condone racist website' angle.

Gutter journalism from a once-respected media outlet.

 

[koopatroopa]

I was trying to simplify the issue for the cretins who don't seem to get it.
These cretins:

Such BS this victim mentality about eating chicken. Sure are a touchy bunch those people that like chicken but don't want to admit it

If they were talking about the fried chicken one, then fair enough, yet that's nothing exactly hurtful, so it's not vilification.

The fried chicken stuff isn't rooted in slavery. People of African descent worldwide like chicken. Just as the Chinese eat a shitload of pork. And Americans love beef.

Yeah but lets be honest here, the current AFL administration are the biggest bunch of politically correct arseholes on the face of this earth.

I'm not sure how fried chicken became a well established racist idea.

(Not a cretin)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_chicken#Racial_stereotype

Seriously, you've got to get cart and horse stuff going here.

Why would people make a meme about Majak and fried chicken unless they thought they were being "funny" and "transgressive".

The fact they did it demonstrates it is a racist idea.

Do you also cry foul and get worked up when people make jokes about Kiwis and sheep? Or the Irish and potatoes? Or the English and bad teeth? I'm guessing you don't.

And then there is this illustrious poster:

So again to clarify your position, I take it that yes, call Bob Skilton chimp because he's white and looks like a monkey, but no, don't call Eddie Betts chimp because he's black and looks like a monkey.....but if Bob Skilton was black it would no longer be ok to call him chimp.

So what your saying is that it's ok to have double standards based on the colour of a man's skin, right??

Attitudes like that are definitively devisive and do more harm than good imo.

who can't seem to see the harm in calling a black man a monkey. So I tried to spell it out for him:

How about you ask Bobby. If he said "Yes that's offensive, people used to make fun of my ears when I was in school and that hurt a lot. And my son inherited Large Ear Syndrome and was also bullied at school, before taking his own life" how would you feel?
Because that is how offensive fried chicken jokes are to most black people.

But H2H summed it up more concisely:

If you actually can't see there's any difference in a name directed at an individual with no baggage and a person carrying the weight of centuries of racial stereotyping, I don't know know how.

Yet....

Mate, you don't need to pretend we've all had the same upbringing etc in order to treat people equally.

- I choose to treat people of all races and backgrounds equally, irrespective of the different upbringings/backgrounds we may have had - if you choose to treat people differently based on race, i guess that's your perogative....but there is a word for that you know

Alright then Einstein.
Let's fire everyone in the AFL who's job relates to cultural relations. Let's disband the government bodies that have been established to help indigenous people. Let's just pretend that everyone is exactly the same.
We'll stop helping people from disadvantaged backgrounds because they should just HTFU and start being equal right? (And by equal, I assume you mean equal to you yes?)

Now lets talk about how I over-simplified an issue to try to get a point across to the lowest common denominators!


bomberclifford: Necromancer Beth is the poster who tried to equate the Irish Potato Famine with Kiwis loving sheep, and the English having bad teeth, and then tried to say that fried chicken jokes are on the same level and it's only "PC arseholes" who get worked up about any of those issues.

 

[Necromancer Beth]

bomberclifford: Necromancer Beth is the poster who tried to equate the Irish Potato Famine with Kiwis loving sheep, and the English having bad teeth, and then tried to say that fried chicken jokes are on the same level and it's only "PC arseholes" who get worked up about any of those issues.

Please stop lying and please stop twisting my words. Please stop.

 

[Puntroad]

The "Go on Izzy tell 'em... Izzy got a handball" one from The Castle would have to be one of the funniest things I've seen. Lost my s**t.

Some are really good, most are really bad.

 

[The_Wookie]

this thread can be summed up in two sentences:

Someone who disagrees with your viewpoint is a cretin.
Someone who agrees with your viewpoint is a genius.

'twas ever thus

 

[koopatroopa]

this thread can be summed up in two sentences:

Someone who disagrees with your viewpoint is a cretin.
Someone who agrees with your viewpoint is a genius.

'twas ever thus

The fact that fried chicken jokes are rooted in racism is not a viewpoint.
You know, you need to actually read a thread in order to sum it up.

 

[Jentleman Geff]

The fact that fried chicken jokes are rooted in racism is not a viewpoint.
You know, you need to actually read a thread in order to sum it up.

It's a fact, now? I don't see how the cuisine of a group of people is intrinsically racist.

Sure, if you were the kind of person who seeks being offended, you could build a myth about how chicken consumption was born out of slavery. Ignoring that it is highly unlikely that slaves owned any animals.

 

[tugga]

Some of the memes are absolute rippers.
Unfortunately 99% of the comments made about them are made by immature little punks, who haven't grown up yet.
I don't look at the comments anymore, but some of the memes are very clever.

 

[kfc1]

The irony of your username.....

Touch a nerve?

haha nice pickup on the username-to-content ratio, I didn't notice that.

Username has nothing to do with Kentucky Fried actually, although since my name is kfc1 I must be black and love fried chicken?

 

[NUFC Tiger]

It's a shame, there are some decent memes on that page but some of them are just crude and offensive. Facebook won't do anything, though they should remove the offensive meme's (or have a report function so people can notify FB of anything they find offensive). The ones that use wit or don't resort to foul language are more often than not very good

I know in England, writing offensive comments in social media (twitter, facebook etc) is now a criminal offence - I wouldn't be against something like that here (if it isn't already) - there is a difference between taking the piss and blatant racism/homophobia/sexism etc

Some of the comments people make are just disgusting. Easy to act tough behind a computer, armed with a keyboard and throw abuse at someone - chances are you wouldn't have the guts to say it to them face to face (and if you are, you're probably a lowlife).

Like many I don't like excessive political correctness but if nobody does anything to condone poor behaviour, then it becomes seen by some as being 'acceptable' and the problem grows...

 

[evo]

I think presenting the issue in that manner completely misses the point of what racial vilification is and why it is damaging, as so eloquently summarised by DoP earlier in this thread.

I reckon FD hit the nail right on the head.

 

[Jentleman Geff]

And what greater bastion of the latte left than The Age, which is apparently now hiring interns with a knack for finding nothing stories they can sensationalise with 'offense' in their headlines. The author of the article in question admits the AFL didn't even know about the AFL Memes page before being contacted and, it appears to me, is a second-year uni student in his first week as an intern at the paper.

He must be reading. He locked his blog

 

[Caesar]

I reckon FD hit the nail right on the head.

It's a false equivalency, because the harm caused by (and primary reason for objections to) racial or other types of vilification is largely predicated by the relative power situations of the vilifiers and the vilified. Something completely ignored by FD in his example.

 

[kfc1]

[latte lefty logic]

Stuff Bogans Like (such as plasma TVs, travel to Thailand/Bali, having babies at young age etc) = funny and okay, because bogans are white and, ultimately, superior so they can take the criticism.

Things black people like (such as KFC, watermelon, lofi music players) = not funny and okay, because it is wrong to pick on the inferior.

[/latte lefty logic]

I genuinely reckon this is what goes through some peoples minds (either consciously or subconsciously) when they rail against KFC jokes but think nothing of laughing at white teenage pregnancy. They genuinely reckon the black people need special protection and/or that it is okay to criticise white people because, hey, look how good they've got it by virtue of their skin.

this post sums up koopatroopa nicely.

Really, who are the racists? Is it those who think everyone should be treated equally? Or those who insist that certain people be treated differently based on the colour of their skin?

 

[kfc1]

It's a false equivalency, because the harm caused by racial or other types of vilification is predicated by the relative power situations of the vilifiers and the vilified.

This is becoming less and less the situation every day. It then becomes about the relative power situation of the individual and not based on race at all.

Apart from the woe is me/chip on shoulder brigade who will do their best to ensure equality if never reached, african-american slavery is quickly becoming about as relevant as the irish potato famine or the scottish highland clearances.

If you were a slave - fair enough. If your parents were a slave, you can understand it. Granparents, perhaps. Great-grandparents - is it really relevant anymore? If you are born into a society where you have the same rights and opportunities as any other racial background, what exactly is there to complain about?

 

[teknodeejay]

Not his Twitter account though...

http://twitter.com/#!/Davidjeans2

 

[Caesar]

If you are born into a society where you have the same rights and opportunities as any other racial background, what exactly is there to complain about?

Nothing. The trouble is that the 'if' doesn't hold true.

 

[kfc1]

Nothing. The trouble is that the 'if' doesn't hold true.

I'd be surprised if you can cite more than 1 or 2 examples of where, in Australia, US or UK, someone born in that country is subject to less than equal opportunities because of their race. You will find that it is socio-economic and locational factors are the reasons for any lack of opportunity.

 

[WoGiTaLiA]

These pretty much sum up this thread.

The basis of racism is treating someone differently because of their race, skin colour is no different to hair colour, eye colour, nose shape or foot size, it is a genetic element over which there is no control, either they are ALL fair game for humour or NONE are fair game. I'd hate to live in a society where we can't make any physical humour. Saying Majak Daw is black is a FACTUAL comment. It is only a racist comment if you yourself perceive that saying someone is black means they are inferior, only those who inherently think being black is inferior think that saying someone is black is racist.

 

[Caesar]

I'd be surprised if you can cite more than 1 or 2 examples of where, in Australia, US or UK, someone born in that country is subject to less than equal opportunities because of their race.

You're kidding yourself, surely. I could name far more than 1 or 2 examples that I have personally observed.

You will find that it is socio-economic and locational factors are the reasons for any lack of opportunity.

Socioeconomic and locational factors that for many reasons, especially historical heritage, affect certain racial groups disproportionately. Things that feed into and perpetuate racial stereotypes that affect people's attitudes and consequently the advantages afforded to people of particular backgrounds.

 

[Plugger35]

Funny how jokes about ranga footballers like Cameron Ling are deemed acceptable but any jokes about black footballers and the overly PC AFL suddenly gets up in arms.

A ranga like Ling has no more choice in the colour of his hair than a black person like Majak Daw has in the colour of his skin yet for one group jokes are considered acceptable and for the other group they aren't. Some double standards once again.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

We arent necessarily the worst at skin color descrimination.

http://colorfoundation.wordpress.com/2008/12/04/life-of-albinos-in-east-africa-threatened-a-most-bizarre-and-dramatic-consequence-of-having-a-skin-color-disease/


In fact in Africa many people have the same color skin so they need different reasons to be racist. Different tribes, ethnic groups, pygmies.

The term "Negro" was found to be offensive in the United States, because of its previous use with regards to segregation and slavery there.
The word negro is Portugese for "Black" and the original transatlantic slaves were from Portugese territories. It stems from the latin "niger". Hence they were known as Negro Slaves even though they were in an English speaking country.

Based on this history, any dark skinned person who has not had family subjected to slavery has no rational objection to any of those terms, nor to eating chicken or whatever.
Picking on them is probably bad , but probably no worse than picking on the fat guy, or the bald guy, or the redhead.

Political satirists are able to pick on "for example" Julia Gillard's big nose and red hair, but we know they have to stay clear of a certain USA president.

 

[kfc1]

You're kidding yourself, surely. I could name far more than 1 or 2 examples that I have personally observed.

I am genuinely interested in those examples.

Note that individual attitudes towards other people is not the same as institutionalised racism such as slavery, ineligibility to vote etc. which is where the 'burden of discrimination' comes from.

There will always be examples of individuals who dislike someone based on a particular characteristic - whether that be race, sexuality, religion, hair colour etc and you never ever eradicate that. That is also very very different from actual disadvantage to the victim (and I say that very loosely). The 'burden' borne by the 'victim' in this sort of situation really depends on the individual personality of the 'victim', not on their race. Some will want to play the victim, others will harden the **** up.

 

[Caesar]

I honestly don't know where to start with that post. I don't think you actually have a full understanding of what 'instutitionalised racism' actually means, for starters.

 

[kfc1]

Still interested in those examples Caesar (and happy for you to spin this off into another thread if you like)

Edit: Caesar edited his post after I replied. Happy to exchange in fuller dialogue with you rather than 1 or 2 liners.