The Clarke Carlisle-led documentary that aired on BBC Three tonight posed the question Is Football Racist?, and in attempting to answer this question it looked at areas of the game where racism is perhaps not so obvious. Throughout the programme Carlisle was presented with theories of sub-conscious, covert, passive racism - to use just three of the descriptions used - and in doing so touched on the subject of ethnic stereotypes used in judging athletes (a topic I touched on in a previous post about Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III and their relative evaluations). However, the most fascinating part of the documentary for me was the debate about the use of the word "yid" by fans of Tottenham Hotspur - a topic that I have much familiarity with - as it reminded me of the ongoing debate surrounding the name of the NFL's Washington Redskins.
There are differences, of course. Tottenham have never officially endorsed the use of the Y-word, unlike the name Redskins which is the key theme of Washington's branding and identity. Concurrent with that is the fact that Tottenham's use of the term came as an attempt of re-appropriating what was widely known to be a racial slur, constantly aimed at the club's supporters due to the team's large Jewish following. The idea of re-appropriating a new, positive meaning or image for the word is a defence often used by those in support of Washington's continued use of their name. The problem with this, as David Baddiel, a prominent Jewish comedian, points out in the documentary, is that in both cases the term is being used by demographics in which the appropriate group is in the minority. It's all well and good claiming to be "taking the word back", but what gives a non-Jewish Tottenham fan or a non-Native American Redskins fan the right to do so? It is easy to claim solidarity when it suits, but I'm sure that many of these fans wouldn't align themselves with Jewish or Native Americans on other issues in different walks of life. Furthermore, many would point to the prevalence of the N-word in hip-hop culture as an example of re-appropriation. This is forgetting that some of the most prominent African Americans comedians, with huge cultural impact, in Richard Pryor and Chris Rock have both publicly denounced its use in the past, amongst others. The simple truth is that by keeping the word alive and in people's minds, you are never going to rid it of its negative connotations.
Tottenham have taken steps to try and eradicate the use of the term, through short films and notices in the match-day programme, and seem to believe that if you educate the fans enough on the true nature of the term that it will eventually be dropped. However, Washington appear unwilling to negotiate on their use of their nickname. This is particularly disappointing as there are several instances throughout American sport where institutions have been able to be somewhat progressive on this issue without altering the team's identity: Miami (Ohio) University changed their athletic teams' nickname from Redskins to RedHawks, as well as other examples where universities have agreements and/or permission from the tribes they take their name from, which is the case with the Florida State Seminoles, the Illinois Fighting Illini and the Central Michigan Chippewas, among others. It will never be easy to force through cultural change, but in standing out on an issue and being progressive the process can leap forward several steps.
No comments:
Post a Comment