How Do You Think The Club Should Deal With Leigh Griffiths?

Agreed. We as a society do that. Nevertheless the definition of racism is much clearer and so it is easy to tell whether Griffith's behaviour falls under that definition. It does.

It would depend on who was saying it and the context in which they were doing so. Griffiths isn't mates with Skacel and was singing a song explicitly intended to insult him. The context here is also very clear. It's racism, mate. I'm sure you know that.

I like your current avatar btw.

 

is singing about dean sheils having one eye discrimination against the blind or partially sighted or a personal insult
griffiths shouldnt have been acting the * celtic should fine him for acting the * ,but the sfa and police getting involved to try and pin some racially motivated charge on him when the song is meant as a personal insult is * ridiculous
also you would think the clowns that support hibs have no understanding of the origins of their own club as to be using the term refugee in a derogatory way

 

It's an insult because no one is assuming any negative characteristics follow from him being partially-sighted. The situations aren't the same. Now if fans were singinging that Dean Sheils was (say) unemployed (with the unspoken understanding that this was because he had one eye), that would be an equivalent situation and would indeed be nasty discrimination against the blind or partially sighted.

Think about it. "That Dean Shiels is on * benefits, * benefits, * benefits..." (to same tune): doesn't that intuitively feel much worse than calling him a one eyed *, mate?

 

I understand where you're coming from, I really do, but the main point I'm trying to get across is that regardless of what kind of discrimination people want to label this as, it's a form of completely unacceptable discrimination.

If we can focus on that as the main point we'll be a lot closer to actually dealing with the situation, rather than arguing among ourselves over technicalities.

I fear the discussion is all for nothing though, as I believe the club will only sack him if the situation affects the reputation of the club in a financial sense.

 

It is, Dáibhí, it is; but then his defenders are only going to ask why this particular form of discrimination is unacceptable and you're then in for a fun time explaining Quantum Phyics to a chimpanzee. The good thing about calling it racism is that anybody who takes the time to look at the definition can easily see that this case falls under that definition. Only by refusing to look and insisting that racism is only about skin colour can his defenders deny this. To be fair, a lot of them have done just that. :smiley-laughing002: Maybe it's not such a big advantage after all.

 

i think to point out he has one eye is to descriminate as it implies having two is better.unless rudi skachel is actually a refugee (???) i cant see how calling him a * refugee is discrimination as opposed to an insult

 

Just googled this guy and there's no mention of him having one eye. I'm confused now, maybe I misunderstood. Why do you call him a one-eyed *? I thought you were taunting someone who actually had one eye.

 

Everything being even, if someone cannot grasp why Griffith's comments were discriminatory and unacceptable then they aren't worth arguing with.

It's considered discriminatory because it's an insult based on a stereotype from that particular part of the world.

If you called someone of middle-Eastern origin a "* terrorist", would you consider that discriminatory and unacceptable? Or would it be just a mere insult unless the person you're saying it to is an actual terrorist?

 

Ok, he does have one eye. I stand by my original statement. Taunting Dean Shiels (while I'm not condoning it) for having one eye is not the same as calling Skacel a refugee. Most people (especially a sportsman like Shiels) would agree that it is better to have two eyes. Calling Skacel a refugee because of his nationality is employing a negative (and untrue!) stereotype about a group of people in order to insult a member of that group and as such would be equivalent to singing about Shiels being on benefits or similar.

 

Good point.

Edit: Dáibhí. I've just realised your second point (directed at oh bhoy) completely undermines your first (directed at me)!

 

The Dean Shiels situation would be a form of discrimination, that much is true. The level of unacceptability would vary from person to person.

Is it more unacceptable to discriminate against someone based on their racial or national background than it is to do so based on someone's appearance or disability?

Is being victimised because of the colour of your skin more unacceptable than being discriminated against for a physical impairment?

 

I don't class the term jock racist,i do and have taken offence as i've grown up to the term being used in my direction and have taken exception when over hearing it though..

In most cases from all different classes,working and upper class it's used from those with a real dislike and or hatred for scottish people/scotland in general!

 

I think the point is that the Dean Shiels thing doesn't stereotype an entire group (the partially sighted), it taunts him for something unfortunate about his body. It's similar (but nastier) to taunting someone for being short, fat or bald etc (I pick these three because I'm short and fat and have recently noticed my hair is starting to thin a bit on the top of my head ).
As I say, if people were singing something like he's on benefits, that would be a different, much worse matter and equivalent to the Skacel song.

 

And equally as untrue?

 

It's offensive to the Cyclops of this world. Shameful act of discrimination that is.

 

I don't actually know whether the negative stereotype about disabled people being on benefits is one hundred percent untrue or not, nor do I think it matters. It's demonstrably true that many of them are not on benefits and anyway, if disabled people in this country struggle to find work, that is our failing as a society not theirs. The Skacel thing is all the more ridiculous because the Czech Republic is a developed country with a higher standard of living than we have; but the song would have been just as wrong if it were about someone from a country that did have a lot of refugees fleeing its borders due to famine (like Ireland in the middle of the 19th Century), war or whatever.

 

Celtic have been a big club with strong family friendly ethics and have been respected throughout the football world .
Recently ,the actions or the alleged actions of Leigh Griffiths has put pressure on Celtic's reputation . In times like this it is valuable to look at how another respectable club in nearby England when one of their longest serving players brought disgrace not only on himself but the family friendly virtues that his club Manchester United held . Ryan Giggs did not only cheat on his wife but also his brother and also his brother's wife . Not content to destroy their lives , he also bullied a young Welsh speaking girl whom he also had * with by using his financial wealth to bully her into not been able to speak about his sexual powers or lack of them . If Giggs had been a young professional footballer trying to made his mark as a pro footballer , he would probably been dismissed . Surely Giggs continuous cheating on wife and brother, would be in the eyes of most decent people than the possible singing jokingly of a Scakel is a fu...refugee which some people seemed to have heard and others hearing the same video didn't . Which is worse example for youngsters and teenagers .
United punishment was to renew Giggs contract and recently make him interim manager .

 

I couldn't give a * about Man U or Ryan Giggs.

 

Giggs shags Imogen Thomas. Griffiths calls Rudi Skacel a refugee.

One should be condemned. The other should be shaken firmly by the hand.



I will admit though, it was extremely low to do what he did to his brother and for that, he is rightly labelled a back stabbing *.