Clarke resigns as FA chairman
Greg Clarke resigns as FA chairman following the language he used when talking to MPs about diversity.
www.bbc.co.uk
Clarke resigns as FA chairman
Greg Clarke resigns as FA chairman following the language he used when talking to MPs about diversity.www.bbc.co.uk
Bit of an odd one, this. He said "coloured" when he should have said "people of colour". If he'd have said "black" he might also have been criticised and/or forced to resign. There is now also a narrative to suggest that "BAME" is inappropriate. One day, in the near future, "people of colour" will inevitably fall out of fashion and saying it will also be inappropriate. Hopefully that doesnt happen just before one of us uses it in a work meeting and is given marching orders.
Obviously what he said wasn't malicious given that the context in which he was saying it. He even said that he had performed a lot of work in the US where "coloured" was the correct word to use and that it was his mistake. He apologized immediately.
This is quite an unpleasant example, yet again, of speech policing.
He should (imo)He's also VP of FIFA? Has to quit that?
Yep, I'm waiting for the moment when a radio DJ gets sacked for referring to Sam Smith as "he" instead of "they".Well he didn`t just stop there did he?............... from the article.
"If you go to the IT department of the FA, there's a lot more South Asians than there are Afro-Caribbean's. They have different career interests," said Clarke.
He prompted further criticism when referring to gay players making a "life choice" and a coach telling him young female players did not like having the ball hit hard at them.
In some defence he is probably tired of having to consider every single word before speaking - the brave new world we live in.....
Bet you're glad you can't get sacked for mistaking "considerate and respectful" for "marxist"Yep, I'm waiting for the moment when a radio DJ gets sacked for referring to Sam Smith as "he" instead of "they".
I just wonder how far this Marxist stuff is going to go.
The mob now decides what is "considerate and respectful". I thought the way he handled his error in speech was both of those things. Acknowledged it, explained, and apologized.Bet you're glad you can't get sacked for mistaking "considerate and respectful" for "marxist"
...easy mistake to make I guess
I might be imagining this, but I seem to remember a time, not that long ago, where 'coloured' was considered not only acceptable*, but actually the correct/preferred 'term' to use?Bit of an odd one, this. He said "coloured" when he should have said "people of colour". If he'd have said "black" he might also have been criticised and/or forced to resign. There is now also a narrative to suggest that "BAME" is inappropriate. One day, in the near future, "people of colour" will inevitably fall out of fashion and saying it will also be inappropriate. Hopefully that doesnt happen just before one of us uses it in a work meeting and is given marching orders.
Obviously what he said wasn't malicious given that the context in which he was saying it. He even said that he had performed a lot of work in the US where "coloured" was the correct word to use and that it was his mistake. He apologized immediately.
This is quite an unpleasant example, yet again, of speech policing.
Hmmm...not convinced that simply because it is not you or I who gets to decide what is considerate and respectful that "the mob" are judge Judy and executioner. Just imagine, if everyone were considerate and respectful on all sides, this whole issue would not exist!The mob now decides what is "considerate and respectful". I thought the way he handled his error in speech was both of those things. Acknowledged it, explained, and apologized.
But what I'm saying is that he was considerate and respectful when you look at the clip. Do you disagree?Hmmm...not convinced that simply because it is not you or I who gets to decide what is considerate and respectful that "the mob" are judge Judy and executioner. Just imagine, if everyone were considerate and respectful on all sides, this whole issue would not exist!
BTW....are the mob always marxists? I'm intrigued!
Unfortunately the left has removed much of its credibility in recent years by :Hmmm...not convinced that simply because it is not you or I who gets to decide what is considerate and respectful that "the mob" are judge Judy and executioner. Just imagine, if everyone were considerate and respectful on all sides, this whole issue would not exist!
BTW....are the mob always marxists? I'm intrigued!
Considerate and respectful to a point when he had to apologise for the mistakes he had made. It has to be seen against the backdrop of his history of remarks around this and other subjects, and it was one of several gaffes, some of which Essex referred to earlier, that he made in the same session. And it also needs to be seen in the context of where we are today and where football is, and particularly where the FA is, having just launched its Football Leadership Diversity Code.But what I'm saying is that he was considerate and respectful when you look at the clip. Do you disagree?
When it comes to enforced speech and matters of identity, the mob is almost always a postmodernist marxist bunch.
Well the question wasn't around "which group do you think is more offensive" so I'm not sure what Britain First has to do with this.Considerate and respectful to a point when he had to apologise for the mistakes he had made. It has to be seen against the backdrop of his history of remarks around this and other subjects, and it was one of several gaffes, some of which Essex referred to earlier, that he made in the same session. And it also needs to be seen in the context of where we are today and where football is, and particularly where the FA is, having just launched its Football Leadership Diversity Code.
It was clumsy, it caused offence and you just don't use language like that, particularly when you are chair of one of the most racially diverse organisations in the country who are trying to show everyone just how well they are leading the change to be a more representative and inclusive organisation which reflects modern society.
I'm not sure that Britain First and other such "patriotic" organisations who are so wrapped up in the battle for "our" cultural identity would take too kindly to being referred to as postmodernist marxists. I'm am pretty sure more people would find them more offensive than a bunch of people actively trying to promote diversity and tolerance in a modern multi-cultural world. It feels rather regressionist to think any other way.....but hey each to their own I guess!
None of the rest are sure what Marxism’s got to do with it either.Well the question wasn't around "which group do you think is more offensive" so I'm not sure what Britain First has to do with this.