StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 26 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said: I've never read so much tripe in my life. Yes stop racist people from working 'Stop racist people from working.' Congratulations, you are worse than a racist. 34 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said: were aiming for a world where we stop racists existing. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you will never achieve your aim. 32 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said: These are people who think some people are second class because of more melanin in their skin... That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it? And they can think whatever they want. Read some Orwell if you want more tripe. 26 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said: Vegans vs non vegan is an argument that has pros and cons on both sides. There are NO pros for racism. Well I disagree on that. And one day far, far into the future vegans might outnumber meat eaters which would put them in a position of power. How should such a society treat meat eaters in such a scenario, bearing in mind most vegans would not share your view there is a valid argument for meat? Shall such a society consign all meat eaters to a life on benefits with Eranio? 27 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said: Your views on this say an awful lot about your character. I certainly hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 16 minutes ago, Tombo said: Well they aren't. But that's the price of liberalism. If a man publicly declared that the next place of work to employ him will be shot up, someone would still be allowed to give him a job. If they then went and did it, where's the protection of the other employees? He shouldn't be allowed to do that. A man who publicly declared his totally unfounded view and incorrect view of black athletes should not really be working with black athletes. What if he was to convince Cyrus Christie that his intellectual ability to think tactically is limited?... ****...wait... Nobody say it... I don't understand the first part about being shot up? Is he shooting it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 14 minutes ago, Kernow said: Eating meat is worse than disliking someone because of their race? Makes total sense... From my perspective yes. One person kills or has others kill on their behalf. The other thinks bad thoughts. As I said, I'm not one of those types of vegans so I don't particularly want a debate about eating meat. So if you could just accept the axiom that people exist who think eating meat is abhorrent but have learned to accept the existence of people who practise this, regardless of your personal thoughts on that, then the point I made stands and we can continue talking about Eranio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 2 hours ago, Paul71 said: I would be interested to know if those defending him would offer the same defence to say someone like Kenny Burns if he said it in his newspaper column. Loved him as a player, not sure I would want him coaching players if he has a preconception about a player based on the colour of his skin. He actually used the words 'when its time to think they often make this type of mistake', maybe he's the one who should have stopped to think... I'd probably laugh at him for being an idiot, but I think Eranio's opinion is idiotic. The difference being that Eranio has many other redeeming features, whereas Kenny.... well. Voicing an opinion and acting on it to discriminate against a group are two very different things. If he was employed as a coach it would be time for a frank discussion and either termination or an official warning based on an investigation. What do you think Eranio and people who hold the same opinion as him learned from his termination? Do you think their views have been altered by a counter argument that largely consisted of the usual "you can't say that" as opposed to "you're incorrect, and here's why"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 4 minutes ago, StringerBell said: From my perspective yes. One person kills or has others kill on their behalf. The other thinks bad thoughts. What if the person acts on those bad thoughts, under the assumption they are right because no-one bothers to tell them otherwise, cos it's all harmless chatter? Edit: seen what you put. What if the person is in a position of influence, what then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombo Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 4 minutes ago, StringerBell said: I don't understand the first part about being shot up? Is he shooting it up? What I'm kinda getting at is that I wouldn't advocate stopping him working. I'm just saying that based on his view of the game, which happens to be racist, he wouldn't be right to work with black players in any capacity. What he said makes me doubt his ability to do the job. Say you own a café. A guy is in the paper for publicly declaring a hatred of bacon sandwiches, do you employ him if he applied for the job? Well why not, just because his view on breakfast is different to yours doesn't mean he shouldn't have the right to work? This is all speculative anyway because there's really no indication he's going to come here and coach anyone. But hypothetically, what he has said would rule him out of the job for me. Not because I'm outraged at him but because his view on black players is not conducive to working with black players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 Won't somebody think about the white racists! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gypsy Ram Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, Tombo said: What I'm kinda getting at is that I wouldn't advocate stopping him working. I'm just saying that based on his view of the game, which happens to be racist, he wouldn't be right to work with black players in any capacity. What he said makes me doubt his ability to do the job. Say you own a café. A guy is in the paper for publicly declaring a hatred of bacon sandwiches, do you employ him if he applied for the job? Well why not, just because his view on breakfast is different to yours doesn't mean he shouldn't have the right to work? This is all speculative anyway because there's really no indication he's going to come here and coach anyone. But hypothetically, what he has said would rule him out of the job for me. Not because I'm outraged at him but because his view on black players is not conducive to working with black players. Isn't it about context though? If I said that most players from Africa make bad defenders because clubs over there don't focus on the tactical aspects of training, and all of them defend like Richard Keogh, would that make me a racist? Did Eranio know the player in question was raised in Germany and came through a European based academy. Nevertheless, Eranio did apologize and stated he made a mistake and was wrong. Makes him a bigger man in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: What if the person acts on those bad thoughts, under the assumption they are right because no-one bothers to tell them otherwise, cos it's all harmless chatter? Edit: seen what you put. What if the person is in a position of influence, what then. If a person acts on their belief then they're bigotry is of secondary importance. The thing of primary importance is that they were prepared to act on their belief. They'd be somebody taking away the human rights of another, which is infinitely worse than having bad thoughts. I'd say it doesn't technically matter if the person is influential so long as they don't actively influence. There's a trust issue there though - you'd probably not vote for an outright racist in an election for example. Regarding Eranio, some people might say footballers are role models in which case they'd have a point. But I'm not one of those people. I've always been resistant to that. The only reason I think where being racist should exclude you from working was if being racist directly prevented you from performing your duties. The aforementioned Bahar Mustafa for instance is a racist and her job title is something like 'Equalities and Diversity Officer'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, StringerBell said: The only reason I think where being racist should exclude you from working was if being racist directly prevented you from performing your duties. The aforementioned Bahar Mustafa for instance is a racist and her job title is something like 'Equalities and Diversity Officer'. We live in a relatively 'multi-cultural' society. where is it that someone will be employed where their 'bigoted' views affect nor influence anyone else? He definitely needs diversity training! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abu Derby Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 Has he signed yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 1 minute ago, Abu Derby said: Has he signed yet? Yeah but Mel's sacked him already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gypsy Ram Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 13 minutes ago, StringerBell said: If a person acts on their belief then they're bigotry is of secondary importance. The thing of primary importance is that they were prepared to act on their belief. They'd be somebody taking away the human rights of another, which is infinitely worse than having bad thoughts. I'd say it doesn't technically matter if the person is influential so long as they don't actively influence. There's a trust issue there though - you'd probably not vote for an outright racist in an election for example. Regarding Eranio, some people might say footballers are role models in which case they'd have a point. But I'm not one of those people. I've always been resistant to that. The only reason I think where being racist should exclude you from working was if being racist directly prevented you from performing your duties. The aforementioned Bahar Mustafa for instance is a racist and her job title is something like 'Equalities and Diversity Officer'. Poor u. Must be tough being a single white male, with this victim mentality you constantly peddle. I'm assuming your single. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, Abu Derby said: Has he signed yet? He just needs to pass the final part of his interview. It's a multiple choice question; Who is the defender most capable of (amongst many other things) maintaining concentration for 90 minutes? a) John Stones b) David Luiz c) Vincent Kompany d) Bjorn Otto Bragstad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDeadlySaul Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 3 hours ago, StringerBell said: But I think people who eat meat are all stupid. I've learned to accept people have opinions I consider to be odious and have no desire to consign them to a life on the scrapheap because of it. The concept is called freedom of speech/expression, something you apparently think is stupid. Yes as I said to Anon, Eranio's opinion might hurt some people's feelings. That's not the end of the world. He has the freedom to be racist, Derby also have the freedom to not hire him because of it. I love Eranio, but his ignorant comment would put me off him working for Derby again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 25 minutes ago, Tombo said: What I'm kinda getting at is that I wouldn't advocate stopping him working. I'm just saying that based on his view of the game, which happens to be racist, he wouldn't be right to work with black players in any capacity. What he said makes me doubt his ability to do the job. Say you own a café. A guy is in the paper for publicly declaring a hatred of bacon sandwiches, do you employ him if he applied for the job? Well why not, just because his view on breakfast is different to yours doesn't mean he shouldn't have the right to work? This is all speculative anyway because there's really no indication he's going to come here and coach anyone. But hypothetically, what he has said would rule him out of the job for me. Not because I'm outraged at him but because his view on black players is not conducive to working with black players. Good post. If he was not capable of doing the job because of his beliefs you'd be absolutely right. If it actively prevented him from performing his duties - then it's obvious he shouldn't come. But to what extent do we know this would be the case? Maybe our black players are free speech advocates like me? Hell, maybe our black players agree with him! Not likely but you never know. If I employed Eranio I'd have to have a chat with him about it, bearing in mind we have black players. Does he stand by it? To what extent? Does he rescind his statement? (like Michael Johnson). Will any beliefs he have hinder him from performing his duties? And what reaction will the players have? But ultimately, as weird as it might sound in a world when being racist is seen as the worst thing you can possibly be (when it isn't) I actually think it would be healthy if people accepted people with ****** up views as long as they didn't act out on them or were likely to encounter vulnerable people. You make a good case for Eranio as a Derby coach being an untenable situation. But going off the deep end a bit - things can be taken beyond the point in which the ability to do the job is the be all and end all. I once had something brought up in supervision at work over an opinion I shared in the office concerning breastfeeding. I was supervising a contact between a child and abusive mother. My job was to observe the mother - everything she did well and not well. It was my job to look at her. She had flung her baby at a wall after all. She then started breastfeeding. When returning to the office I made a little joke about how awkward it was to observe somebody breastfeeding as it basically felt like it was my job to be a creep. My opinion/joke back on the office had no bearing on my ability to do my job, it was just seen as wrongthink. My manager had no business raising the issue in a supervision but she did. That's the world we live in now and I think it should be fought against. We've got people on here saying people shouldn't be working because they think the wrong thing. I mean come on people we can do better than this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 10 minutes ago, Gypsy Ram said: Poor u. Must be tough being a single white male, with this victim mentality you constantly peddle. I'm assuming your single. What victim mentality? What on earth are you on about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, TheDeadlySaul said: He has the freedom to be racist, Derby also have the freedom to not hire him because of it. I love Eranio, but his ignorant comment would put me off him working for Derby again. Indeed they do. Although I'd say to what extent would such a decision be made with PR in mind? Whilst I'm a bit libertarian-lite in the sense that I think individual companies should be able to hire who they want and for whatever reason, you realise an absolute commitment to this stance opens the door for Mel Morris to say he's not going to employ anyone because they're black and thick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDeadlySaul Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 Just now, StringerBell said: Indeed they do. Although I'd say to what extent would such a decision be made with PR in mind? Whilst I'm a bit libertarian-lite in the sense that I think individual companies should be able to hire who they want and for whatever reason, you realise an absolute commitment to this stance opens the door for Mel Morris to say he's not going to employ anyone because they're black and thick? Oh come on man there is a such a big difference and you are smart enough to realise it. Someone who is black or thick doesn't really have much choice on the matter, Eranio on the one hand went on national TV and decided with his own free will to spout off racist nonsense. Just like I wouldn't want Derby hiring thugs like Joey Barton I wouldn't be too happy seeing us to re-sign Eranio, but comparing that to a policy of not hiring people based on their ethnicity is ludicrous mate and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 1 minute ago, TheDeadlySaul said: Oh come on man there is a such a big difference and you are smart enough to realise it. Someone who is black or thick doesn't really have much choice on the matter, Eranio on the one hand went on national TV and decided with his own free will to spout off racist nonsense. Just like I wouldn't want Derby hiring thugs like Joey Barton I wouldn't be too happy seeing us to re-sign Eranio, but comparing that to a policy of not hiring people based on their ethnicity is ludicrous mate and you know it. Yeah you're right. All I'm saying is - are people free to hire who they want or not? Like I said, with an absolute commitment to that stance.... Gay cakes anyone? Its important where the lines are drawn and it can get murky trying to make sense of some of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.