Don’t be coming on here talking sense.

Well that's some intellectual gymnastics; well played.

I'm sure that I have offended people at times - but I'm pretty sure I haven't offended them on the basis of a protected characteristic; which is not actually that difficult to do - if you don't have those thoughts, you don't say them out loud.

As an example - I work with people of many nationalities, including Europeans. I have had many conversations with them recently, about their experience of Brexit Britain - all without saying something as crass, offensive and racially charged as Mr Argyle is alleged to have done.

You're not wrong about context and nuance, but I fail to see how you can be so certain of Argyle's intent?

"Like most reasonable people I hate Muslims, except the ones I've met who are fine!"

I have to agree.
Of course you can accidentally offend someone but racism and sexism are pretty clear now. If you comment on someone's colour and draw some conclusion based on it, in any way, especially if you don't know them, you are being stupid at best and deserve to be challenged about it.

There is no way Argyle does not know that questioning whether a black person is allowed to go to a particular place, based on his colour is a bad thing, unless he's been living in a cave since the 1950s.

Just to weigh in with my two ha'porth:

Ha'porth 1: communication isn't necessarily what you say, it's what the recipient understands. Consequently, however much the Toronto owner may have meant what he said as a joke and felt justified in laughing it off and fobbing of the recipient with a beer token, the measure of racism/hate speech/unacceptable behaviour rests with the recipient alone. If he feels aggrieved, then the Toronto owner is at fault and should accept all blame/consequences.
Ha'porth 2: I live in a country where, under law, any dissemination of hate speech (including, most importantly for this country, racist comments) will, if proven, result in sanction for the perpetrator AND any organisation with which the perpetrator is linked publicly. So, if an employee of mine uses racist language in public and his/her FB profile says he works for my organisation, he/she will get 1) a hefty fine and 2) absolutely crucified in the court of public opinion in addition to which my organisation will be fined and may as well shut of shop immediately, such will be the backlash. Not sure of the law in other countries, but I sorta of get it that individuals and their organisations are linked.
Not trying to be contentious, but DA has been really crass, has compounded it by trying to claim he wasn't being any more crass than the value of a beer, and has brought himself and his organisation into disrepute by association.

[size=200DO THEY ALLOW BLACK PEOPLE IN SWINTON[/size

Please......stop claiming that he's Not racist. He may not knowingly be a racist, but he friggin' well is....it may be because his mates are, it may be because his mummy didn't love him.....it may be because he didn't get picked for the first XV at school, but his attitude is exclusive and exclusive based on, in this case, skin colour........he didn't stumble and fall by accident, he made a comment "without thinking" and that is the true definition of character.....saying what you think and not what your expected to say....he is a racist!

To play devil's advocate...

If I say "Do they allow homosexuals in Saudi Arabia?" does that make me homophobic?

I've simply changed the group (which was not a discriminatory phrase) and the place.

Is the phrase used not more a slur on the people of Swinton being less progressive (not a serious one), just like the follow up one?

I think when we take the emotion out of the equation, it's actually a fascinating discussion.

What do you think Argyle's intent was out of interest?

That role, more often than not, is assumed by those who wish to aologise for soeone who doesn't deserve their support.....but let's continue



No. It makes you someone who is asking a question about the laws of a sovereign state and that state's opinion of a minority group.


No. Swinton isn't a country with it's own laws and either being Black or Gay is not a choice


No.....It was a racist comment. Do they allow gay People in Swinton would have been exactly the same......thank christ there wasn't a black Gay there.


No it's not. It's not a topic we should discuss at all!

I am a second Generation Irish Catholic, born in London but raised in Dublin, now living in New Zealand. I have been shot once, stabbed 3 times, bought and sold many pubs, I have buried a wife who died too young, have 2 great Kids and a beautiful granddaughter. I own 5 businesses and have had a successful life thus far and I look forward to a retirement where I can drive across the globe in a bus that I have converted to be a mobile home......these are the things that define me......Not the colour of my skin!
Race and racism is not up for discussion. It is not a grey area.......it is, to put it bluntly a black and white issue!

What defines race and racism certainly is up for discussion.

Nice life story. I'm not sure the relevance?
I am a 32 year old primary school teacher with a mixed race partner, a 2 week old mixed race daughter, 2 black step children and a Maltese dog (not sure the relevance of the dog, but she's cute).
I deal with many issues daily, including hearing the race card thrown around when, upon investigation, no racism at all has occurred. Of course it should be discussed. It is not black and white at all, and people like you creating this fear of discussing things is part of a different problem.

How am I, a teacher, many to educate on what racism is and isn't if I cannot discuss it with people (especially children in my class)?

Unlike you, I can't say with any certainty.

I'd suggest that he was either being boorish and crass to someone whom he perceived to be less powerful than him - and who's offence was worth no more to him than the price of a beer; or he was trying to start an intellectual discourse about the experience of a black immigrant in a post-industrial northern town. If it was the former, he's a racist who deserves to be vilified; if it was the latter, he failed miserably and behaved like a racist who deserves to be vilified.

Either way, this kind of stuff needs to be challenged - only by calling out the unequal treatment of women, ethnic minorities, LGBQT people and others, will we arrive at a society which is genuinely equal; which seems to me to be a very low bar to aspire to.

Argyle is clearly an intelligent man, but he must have mush for brains to come out with a comment like that.
Sometimes people can get over sensitive about these things, but in this instance he has no excuse whatsoever.
I see that quite rightly he has finally stepped down from his post.
Had he been an employee, he would have been sacked on the spot.
Rugby league has a proud tradition of being inclusive. Lets keep it that way.

The sad thing is Canada is one of the most tolerant countries in the world.
I can't think it has gone down well in that country having a fledgling sport start an issue that is very much against their ethos.
We are probably lucky the sport isn't bigger yet as we would have suffered far more in people's perception than we are now.

I'm happy that we are debating it as education is probably the biggest weapon against racism but it saddens me that so many still don't get why it is wrong.

BTW I'm a middle aged, fat, bald white guy from Yorkshire. I have never experienced racism first hand but I do know what it is like to be labelled as something because of someone's immediate perception. We've come a long way from the racist tv of the 70s and the acceptance of jokes about it but we still have a long way to go.

Where did I say with certainty? I, just like you in the next paragraph, have just offered my own opinion on what I thought. Hence why I said "I took it as..."


Which of course is your opinion which you are entitled to.


I agree that it needs calling out, and I agree there certainly needs to be consequences for it (which are proportionate to the level of prejudice displayed).
I don't think calling it out is the answer to prevention though. Only through education will you stop this, and education starts with talking about it and discussing it. What is racism? Why are certain terms racist? How do people feel when it's said?

You also said:



Which is of course your opinion, which you are entitled to; my question was about how you had formed that opinion?



Thanks.



I won't argue about the need to educate - but I also firmly believe that this type of behaviour can be deselected from society if enough decent and right-thinking people make it clear that it's not acceptable; peer pressure is powerful. I went to the pub to watch football with my 19 year old son and a group of his mates the other week - someone in the pub yelled a racist slur at an opposition player on the TV and, without exception, the group of lads called it out and made it clear that it wasn't ok; the guy came over, held his hands up and apologised, then went home. That seemed powerful to me - and given that the racist was not likely to be attending any educational establishment, is the only type of lesson he's going to be getting.

Don't worry, the RFL have fined argylle £7,500 that should stamp it out

Because it was in a social situation around a group of people and he was laughing and (by the sounds of it) drinking. It sounds like he's tried to have a laugh and gone in a direction he shouldn't have.
When called out on it, I wouldn't have been surprised if he thought it was a retort akin to something saying "ooh, that was a bit naughty."

Like I say, I'm only trying to picture the situation and I could be way off. I just don't see the situation as this direct and aggressive attack on Kenga designed to belittle him that others are seeing. Like I say, I took it as a (very poor) attempt to joke about Swinton as a backwards place.

I could be way off. As could others. None of us were there.


Like you just said, education doesn't just fine from education establishments.

I think there's a big difference between someone who has knowingly and intentionally tried to offend, and someone who has been ignorant in what they've said. My opinion is certainly of the latter.

I don't spend too much time trying to find excuses to downplay the situation; whatever his intent was, he has revealed himself as (at least) casually racist, and I'm glad that the player has called it out. Maybe he'll think more carefully about how he expresses himself in future?



Somewhat - although I guess what matters is the opinion of the victim - not yours or mine; and the player in question has made his views pretty clear.

None of us were there, we don't know anything more than what we have read in the press, and yet so many on here are confident enough to label him a racist and then want to shut down anyone who suggests they may be jumping to conclusions.

I've been listening to Savage Garden for about 15 years, i dont listen to anything else.

P.s, the ad at the bottom of my page is for world of books, bet yours isn't eh?

Cheers lads, have a fab day

Another poster speaking sense, please hand in your brain and report to room 101.

We know that the player has released a statement about what was said - and that Mr Argyle has not contested that version of events; and stood down from his position, as a self-imposed sanction.

I don't see anyone shutting anyone down - just talking; that's still ok isn't it?

You'll be telling us next you're having Jambalaya and Philly Gumbo for tea.

Enjoys an Australian pop band, and smugly buys books online therefore eats gumbo and jambalaya. Good one lad, go back to bed.

UP THE COUGARS!

The RFL and their disciplinary procedures are another issue altogether!
Can't think of one single person that things they do that job well.