Are England's black football players actually mixed race?

DonDaddyD

pastey_boy wrote:

What about the surroundings you grow up in ? Surely a mixed race person growing up in all black surroundings would see themselves as black and the opposite person would be more inclined to say they are mixed race.

What if the mixed race person has grown up in all white surroundings and has been called black all their life?

I think the point is that that shouldn't be the case and they should - both privately and publicly - be able to engage and have acknowledged both of their parents ethnicity.

notsoblue

I think its all pretty subjective to be honest. People get called black, or other based largely on their features and skin colour. My dad is mixed race and in Trinidad he's called red or mixed, and in Europe (by white people) he's considered black. A friend of mine is half white Cypriate, half black Jamaican and grew up in a largely Jamaican neighbourhood in London where he was not considered dark enough to be called black by his peers, but would still be considered black elsewhere.

There really is no point in sweating over definitions in this way, they're all subjective. For all the talk about specifically how many drops of black or white blood you have in your heritage, it doesn't mean a great deal. How you were raised, and which culture you identify with probably matters more.

I suspect the people mentioned in the OP were referred to as "Black" in the media just for brevity.

cookeeemonster

DonDaddyD wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

most of the mixed race people mentioned on this thread associate themselves as black

Substantiate this. Could be that Rio et al have been called black all their lives that is what they refer to themselves as. I've never heard them refer to any ethnic group. I'm going on what the media calls them and what I know them to be.

To be honest I cant link to any specific article that I've read (why would I remember something like that?) but a quick google finds Rio Ferdinand leading a breakaway union called "The Federation of Black Players" http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2221557/Rio-Ferdinand-leads-Federation-Black-Players-breakaway-group.html

It's open to all ethnicities but he has chosen 'black' rather than a more generic all encompassing word (its just a working title though to be fair)

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with any of your points by the way i'm just pointing out that few if any mixed race players seem to make an issue of this - and if they did then maybe things would change. (if i'm wrong and they have then my apologies)

You gotta understand racial politics is a minefield these days for your average white liberal let alone the more ignorant types and so I doubt anyone would dare speak too loudly for fear of the backlash from black organisations - even if that fear is misguided.

I still think mixed race players need to be the ones to put this in the spotlight if they feel that it's an issue they feel strongly about, and good luck to them if they do

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

pastey_boy wrote:

What about the surroundings you grow up in ? Surely a mixed race person growing up in all black surroundings would see themselves as black and the opposite person would be more inclined to say they are mixed race.

What if the mixed race person has grown up in all white surroundings and has been called black all their life?

I think the point is that that shouldn't be the case and they should - both privately and publicly - be able to engage and have acknowledged both of their parents ethnicity.

I don't think that ethnicity is really a big deal to most white people in the UK. Thats probably why both parent's ethnicity isn't 'engaged' and 'acknowledged'.

Paulie W

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

pastey_boy wrote:

What about the surroundings you grow up in ? Surely a mixed race person growing up in all black surroundings would see themselves as black and the opposite person would be more inclined to say they are mixed race.

What if the mixed race person has grown up in all white surroundings and has been called black all their life?

I think the point is that that shouldn't be the case and they should - both privately and publicly - be able to engage and have acknowledged both of their parents ethnicity.

I don't think that ethnicity is really a big deal to most white people in the UK. Thats probably why both parent's ethnicity isn't 'engaged' and 'acknowledged'.

Unless you're of Scottish, Irish or Welsh descent then it become important!

tailwindhome

Look

You're either Irish or you're not.

Everything else is irrelevant.

pastey_boy

I refer to myself as a hybrid and as we all know, hybrids are the future.

rjsterry

DonDaddyD wrote:

The players are getting abused because of the colour of their skin and this wrong.

I think referring to them or not referring to them as black in British media has little to do with the racial abuse they receive. They are abused on the basis of their skins complexion.

What I believe is that referring to them as black, when they clearly are not, is wrong in and of itself. It, for me, stems from deep rooted racial prejudice. I.e. the offspring of a black slave/second class citizen and a white person would be considered black and with that carried limited social standing. Yes those social and class barriers may have been mostly knocked down but the logic and connotations still appear to be there.

What makes someone white, black or Asian? Or better yet, you have a child with a black or white person (so if you're white you've had a child with a black person or visa versa) is that child black, white or mixed race?

I think this just highlights that the word black is not really sufficient to describe someone's ethnicity or genetic heritage. You can certainly see why terms like Afro-Carribean and African-American have arisen, but even these start to fall down when you look closely at them. Which is it? Cultural or genetic or a mixture of the two?. Which of your 4 grandparents, or 8 great grandparents do you choose to define yourself by? Do you take an average and end up with somewhere in the mid-Atlantic? What if you have plenty of African heritage, but it doesn't obviously manifest itself in your appearance?

And just to illustrate the point made earlier about racist abuse being based on appearance alone, a close friend from Mexico has had the word "Paki" shouted at him. Who knows, maybe they were not very good at geography.

BigJimmyB

Slight hijack, but....does anyone else think Rio's choc ice (re-)tweet was racist?

He's making a big issue (and rightly so, although it should be aimed at the FA not Kick It Out) of the lack of action against racsim in sport, but using 'choc ice' to assert that someone is 'white on the inside' implies (to me anyway) that he/she is saying 'white is bad' and Ashley is some kind of defector/outcast from his black (mixed heritage) brothers.

Here's the tweet:

"Looks like Ashley Cole's going to be their choc ice. Then again he's always been a sell out. "Shame on him."

Rio's response/retweet:

"I hear you fella! Choc ice is classic! hahahahahahha!!"

And in response to reactions to this tweet:

"And if I want to laugh at something someone tweets....I will! Hahahahaha! Now stop getting ya knickers in a twist!"

My response to this is that you can't have it both ways. Here's the FA Satement on the (re-)tweet:

"Manchester United's Rio Ferdinand has been fined £45,000 after an independent regulatory commission found proven a charge of improper conduct in relation to a comment posted on Twitter.

"The commission decided that the comment was improper and brought the game into disrepute. In addition, the commission found that the breach included a reference to ethnic origin, colour or race."

His £45k fine (no ban) has drawn much less attention than his brothers situation....

It all seems a bit pot/kettle (sorry, pun intended) to me....

Thoughts?

cyclingprop

Imagine if mixed race terminology involved conjunctions of the individual racial terms, for instance white and asian might become "whasian", asian and black might become "asiack" and black and white might become "blite".

No?

notsoblue

pastey_boy wrote:

I refer to myself as a hybrid and as we all know, hybrids are the future.

Hybrid Vigour

DonDaddyD

Paulie W wrote:

I think you're wrong to suggest that the term 'black' is a product of deep-rooted prejudice. I think historically it was a term claimed and used by people of African or Caribbean descent regardless of whether they had 'white blood' at some stage of their history to reflect their shared experience (of racism) and a shared heritage that was much less visible than that of their 'white' ancestors. In the US there was a strong intellectual movement that argued anyone who had African or Caribbean ancestry, however small a part that might be, should be seen as black - at its extreme this involved academics claiming that Shakespeare was black largely based on how he looked in some of his 'pictures'.

I'm not sure that before slavery African or Caribbean people referred to themselves as black. Are you? But that wasn't my point, I'm just curious about your first assertion.

Even so, dismissing a mixed-race person as black I do see as a product of deep-rooted prejudice, not conscious mind. It's similar to my GF's Grandma calling me and my unborn child 'coloured' because "its what we called them in my day".

I did not know this. Have you got a source for this? I'm not being arsey, I want to learn more.

Jeremy Paxman - TV show on the British empire touched on it and I've read a few books, which I will dig out. My reference is primarily based during the ending of slavery (which doesn't have a definitive date) and in the Caribbean.

I still think you are focusing on the more minor issue.

I am, I know. It is in part that we know the major issue to be wrong but seem willing to accept the misrepresentation as right. I see that in and of itself as wrong and part of the problem - not the biggest part but part of it non-the-less.

Anonymous

So what do you call someone who is mixed race, but not white skinned? Does it matter where from? I have a Bangladeshi friend who says he wants to be called brown, I was chatting to a girl who I would consider 'black' in the pub last night, but she was actually not as black as other people I would call black, so perhaps I am a lazy, casual racist?

In the end I think I said 'non-white'. She laughed at whatever lame joke I was making so I think it went down ok

cookeeemonster

BigJimmyB wrote:

Slight hijack, but....does anyone else think Rio's choc ice (re-)tweet was racist?

He's making a big issue (and rightly so, although it should be aimed at the FA not Kick It Out) of the lack of action against racsim in sport, but using 'choc ice' to assert that someone is 'white on the inside' implies (to me anyway) that he/she is saying 'white is bad' and Ashley is some kind of defector/outcast from his black (mixed heritage) brothers.

Here's the tweet:

"Looks like Ashley Cole's going to be their choc ice. Then again he's always been a sell out. "Shame on him."

Rio's response/retweet:

"I hear you fella! Choc ice is classic! hahahahahahha!!"

And in response to reactions to this tweet:

"And if I want to laugh at something someone tweets....I will! Hahahahaha! Now stop getting ya knickers in a twist!"

My response to this is that you can't have it both ways. Here's the FA Satement on the (re-)tweet:

"Manchester United's Rio Ferdinand has been fined £45,000 after an independent regulatory commission found proven a charge of improper conduct in relation to a comment posted on Twitter.

"The commission decided that the comment was improper and brought the game into disrepute. In addition, the commission found that the breach included a reference to ethnic origin, colour or race."

His £45k fine (no ban) has drawn much less attention than his brothers situation....

It all seems a bit pot/kettle (sorry, pun intended) to me....

Thoughts?

I'd forgotten about this. I was offended as it implies there is something inherently wrong with being white...it's deeply racist in fact. If you said the same thing about a black person then you'd get a 4/8 game ban and a £220,000/£40,000 fine (in football circles that is)

EKE_38BPM

DonDaddyD wrote:

I'm not sure that before slavery African or Caribbean people referred to themselves as black. Are you? But that wasn't my point, I'm just curious about your first assertion.

I would have assumed that before slavery, Africans would have referred to themselves by what tribe they were from. Apart from traveling to fight in wars, people didn't travel much, so they would have been in their own group all the time and wouldn't have to refer to themselves other than by their own or family name.

DonDaddyD wrote:

EKE wrote:

I did not know this. Have you got a source for this? I'm not being arsey, I want to learn more.

Jeremy Paxman - TV show on the British empire touched on it and I've read a few books, which I will dig out. My reference is primarily based during the ending of slavery (which doesn't have a definitive date) and in the Caribbean.

Every day is a school day.

DonDaddyD wrote:

EKE wrote:

I still think you are focusing on the more minor issue.

I am, I know. It is in part that we know the major issue to be wrong but seem willing to accept the misrepresentation as right. I see that in and of itself as wrong and part of the problem - not the biggest part but part of it non-the-less.

If Rio et al are not making an issue of it, why are you?
I'm sure that if questioned directly about, Rio et al will not hide either parent's ethnicity and would say something along the lines of being called black is just shorthand which, though incorrect, is not something to fuss about. I shouldn't put words in their mouths though.

Edited to fix my bad quoting.

EKE_38BPM

BigJimmyB wrote:

...Here's the FA Satement on the (re-)tweet:

"Manchester United's Rio Ferdinand has been fined £45,000 after an independent regulatory commission found proven a charge of improper conduct in relation to a comment posted on Twitter.

I didn't know about this.
So, Rio got fined more for a Tweet than Lazio did for their fan's abuse of the Spurs players?

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

There really is no point in sweating over definitions in this way, they're all subjective. For all the talk about specifically how many drops of black or white blood you have in your heritage, it doesn't mean a great deal. How you were raised, and which culture you identify with probably matters more.

This is a good thing you have written.

spen666

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

This post does not surprise me.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

pastey_boy wrote:

What about the surroundings you grow up in ? Surely a mixed race person growing up in all black surroundings would see themselves as black and the opposite person would be more inclined to say they are mixed race.

What if the mixed race person has grown up in all white surroundings and has been called black all their life?

I think the point is that that shouldn't be the case and they should - both privately and publicly - be able to engage and have acknowledged both of their parents ethnicity.

I don't think that ethnicity is really a big deal to most white people in the UK. Thats probably why both parent's ethnicity isn't 'engaged' and 'acknowledged'.

Substantiate this? Ethnicity is a big deal to some regardless of race right down to choosing sexual partners. To some it doesn't matter. But the point is that if someone is not black, why call them so unless you are making an assumption based on their skin colour and when it has been established that they are not of that ethnicity (be it directly or indirectly) why continue to do so?

CookeeeMonster wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

most of the mixed race people mentioned on this thread associate themselves as black

Substantiate this. Could be that Rio et al have been called black all their lives that is what they refer to themselves as. I've never heard them refer to any ethnic group. I'm going on what the media calls them and what I know them to be.

To be honest I cant link to any specific article that I've read (why would I remember something like that?) but a quick google finds Rio Ferdinand leading a breakaway union called "The Federation of Black Players" http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2221557/Rio-Ferdinand-leads-Federation-Black-Players-breakaway-group.html

It's open to all ethnicities but he has chosen 'black' rather than a more generic all encompassing word (its just a working title though to be fair)

No the Daily Mail are saying he is setting up a 'Federation of Black Players' and probably named it thus. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012 ... yers-union

I still think mixed race players need to be the ones to put this in the spotlight if they feel that it's an issue they feel strongly about, and good luck to them if they do

I agree, I'm just pointing it out and discussing it. On a personal level I have already had people ask where my son is from, I make the point of saying England. I'm often greeted with a sigh and then they ask where I am from and I say "England".

tailwindhome

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

Not only that, but;

Some girls do

Some girls don't

bails87

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

This post does not surprise me.

Ah, playing the 'playing the racism card' card.

http://enemiesofreason.co.uk/2011/01/22 ... card-card/

daviesee

DDD - The answer to your original question is - Yes.

Can we move on now or are you just bored?
I'm out.

rjsterry

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

This post does not surprise me.

He's not wrong, but I'm not sure it moves the discussion on.

A couple of points:
When you say before slavery, I assume you mean in the Triangle Trade sense. Slavery is obviously as old as the hills and is not limited to any one ethnic group. The idea of second class citizens is also nothing new.

Also, does anyone have an official or personal definition of "black"? It has always seemed like one of those things that everyone is sure they know, until you ask them to write it down. If nobody is sure what the definition is, then how can we say that people are/are not black, let alone whether that is a positive, negative or neutral statement.

cookeeemonster

DonDaddyD wrote:

No the Daily Mail are saying he is setting up a 'Federation of Black Players' and probably named it thus. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012 ... yers-union

so I felt bad about linking to the daily fail as it is...serves me right

DonDaddyD

BigJimmyB wrote:

Slight hijack, but....does anyone else think Rio's choc ice (re-)tweet was racist?

He's making a big issue (and rightly so, although it should be aimed at the FA not Kick It Out) of the lack of action against racsim in sport, but using 'choc ice' to assert that someone is 'white on the inside' implies (to me anyway) that he/she is saying 'white is bad' and Ashley is some kind of defector/outcast from his black (mixed heritage) brothers.

Tough one, for me. I don't see Cole as a black person in the first place so was surprised to hear him referred to as such and surprised to hear Rio call him as such. Perhaps Rio just meant he was a sellout regardless of being white or black. It is rooted in racism yes. It was wrong and a dreadful term. I'd have beaten Rio up personally (footballers can get away with these things).

I would have assumed that before slavery, Africans would have referred to themselves by what tribe they were from. Apart from traveling to fight in wars, people didn't travel much, so they would have been in their own group all the time and wouldn't have to refer to themselves other than by their own or family name.

African's did travel for the purpose of exploration and commerce (to the Middle East, Asia and Southern Europe) as well as War. Egypt wasn't the only Empire in Africa, you could argue it was the greatest - surviving some 5000years.

If Rio et al are not making an issue of it, why are you?

I'm just discussing it because its something that interests me and something I think is wrong. You know I was racially abused at work once, I wasn't going to say anything but my Manager did, he was white. He was posed the same question and his response "because it is wrong".

coriordan wrote:

I was chatting to a girl who I would consider 'black' in the pub last night, but she was actually not as black as other people I would call black, so perhaps I am a lazy, casual racist?

In the end I think I said 'non-white'. She laughed at whatever lame joke I was making so I think it went down ok

Did you get to third base?

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

I don't think that ethnicity is really a big deal to most white people in the UK. Thats probably why both parent's ethnicity isn't 'engaged' and 'acknowledged'.

Substantiate this? Ethnicity is a big deal to some regardless of race right down to choosing sexual partners. To some it doesn't matter. But the point is that if someone is not black, why call them so unless you are making an assumption based on their skin colour and when it has been established that they are not of that ethnicity (be it directly or indirectly) why continue to do so?

Well put it this way, I don't think ethnicity is as big a deal to white people, the ethnic majority in the UK as it is to ethnic minorities here. Race just isn't as personally relevant. If your family is all one race, and you grow up in an area where the vast majority of people are the same race as you, and you work and live with people who are mostly the same race then race won't be be a big deal. Obviously in a multicultural city like London things will be different. But most of the UK isn't like London. In my time living in the UK I've lived in rural Shropshire, and Bath, two areas in which there really are very few non-whites, let alone blacks. I was the only non-white in my sixth form for example.

This is in contrast to a very very mixed race country like Brazil or Trinidad where your race is probably the first thing people notice about you because thats the first thing they notice about you and its pretty likely to be different from theirs. I've noticed that my Trini family makes far far more references to race than my English family who barely ever comment on it at all. Personally, I'm always pretty interested in people's ethnic background, specifically if they're mixed race, and my sisters are the same. Thats what I'm basing my perception on.

But of course your perception will be different because you're black, and you live in London. It will most likely be the first thing people notice about you because its not the norm in the UK. As an ethnic minority in this country (though not all parts of it) race will be very relevant to you.

As for the relevance of ethnicity to choosing sexual partners, thats a massive can of worms.

notsoblue

rjsterry wrote:

He's not wrong, but I'm not sure it moves the discussion on.

For sure, he's not wrong. But the likelihood of the scenarios he brings up are massively exaggerated, and its the subtext...

spen666

TailWindHome wrote:

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

Not only that, but;

Some girls do

Some girls don't

Apparently

some girls are bigger than others
Some girls mothers are bigger than other girls mothers

DonDaddyD

rjsterry wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

This post does not surprise me.

He's not wrong, but I'm not sure it moves the discussion on.

A couple of points:
When you say before slavery, I assume you mean in the Triangle Trade sense. Slavery is obviously as old as the hills and is not limited to any one ethnic group. The idea of second class citizens is also nothing new.

Also, does anyone have an official or personal definition of "black"? It has always seemed like one of those things that everyone is sure they know, until you ask them to write it down. If nobody is sure what the definition is, then how can we say that people are/are not black, let alone whether that is a positive, negative or neutral statement.

I'm not sure what nonsense Spen is on about today, in principle it is correct how it relates to the thread I don't know. Unless of course he is saying that it is right to ignore the fact that a group of people are being misrepresented.

Your couple of points:
Before slavery = the period of time known as the 'African slave trade', I think this ranges between 1450 - 1850 (give or take a decade). So yes, triangle trade.

If you were deemed black towards the end of that period but were also 'free' you were still a second class citizen. During this period there were quite a few mixed raced people who attempted to pass themselves as white because of this. There were also some born to slaves who were given freedom due to their visual closeness to being white.

Definition of black has changed many times in the dictionary. In terms of ethnicity - a person who is directly from African (the ethnicity not the Country) or Caribbean (same as before) descent. The reason I put those brackets in is because you could be a 6th generation white African. Its confusing.