Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Bang up to date as always, that whole Ron Atkinson thing. In my defence, there was a programme about him last night; I’m not living in April.
First - and let’s get this out of the way, it needs to be said - the relevant question is not, “is Ron Atkinson racist?” Of course he is, yesterday's documentary just confirmed that he doesn't get it. That he has encouraged black players and has black friends is irrelevant. A man can love his wife and daughters and still be a misogynist; Ron’s rounds of golf with Carlton Palmer mean nothing. When the whole furore erupted, people queued up to say how Ron didn’t see the colour of his players, just footballers. The problem is that he should have seen their colour, identity does not come from the position one plays. I’m not keen on the “he came from a different age” excuse either. I can make some allowances for my grandmother, she holds a few views I’m – ahem – not entirely comfortable with, but she’s lived in rural Oxfordshire her whole life, didn’t have the benefits of a prolonged education, and in fairness, she vaguely judges groups rather than individuals – they are accepted on their own terms. But Atkinson is different. He has worked in the media for more than twenty years, he knows, or should know, the way the world is now and what is not the done thing.
Also, you can explain away anything if you try hard enough: BNP membership? White working class communities feeling under threat. Islamic terrorism? Response to American Imperialism/Israel-Palestine. Violent crime? Poverty/rappers/ennui. Corporations polluting? Why wouldn’t they? But listing the factors that cause an ugly opinion or act does nothing to justify them, they remain as ugly. So why are we tying ourselves in knots trying to excuse him? Atkinson, and many of his supporters, cannot bring themselves to acknowledge his racism as there is no label, bar paedophile, less welcome than “racist”. Racism is evil, Ron seems good, therefore Ron is not racist. The converse occurs too: Ron is racist, therefore he is evil, therefore he deserves everything he gets. For me the interesting questions are “how much bigotry can we live with?” and “do his beliefs have any bearing on his suitability as a commentator?” These are harder, and everyone will have a different opinion. For the record, my answers are “some” and “no, but you may not choose to listen to him anymore.”
(Staggers back in) And another thing! People won't talk about race and ethnicity out of fear of being called a racist. Whilst it is a welcome development that racial slur words are rarely heard in the public domain anymore, the attitudes behind them remain. Saying "black" rather than "nigger" just makes them harder to spot.
|
First - and let’s get this out of the way, it needs to be said - the relevant question is not, “is Ron Atkinson racist?” Of course he is, yesterday's documentary just confirmed that he doesn't get it. That he has encouraged black players and has black friends is irrelevant. A man can love his wife and daughters and still be a misogynist; Ron’s rounds of golf with Carlton Palmer mean nothing. When the whole furore erupted, people queued up to say how Ron didn’t see the colour of his players, just footballers. The problem is that he should have seen their colour, identity does not come from the position one plays. I’m not keen on the “he came from a different age” excuse either. I can make some allowances for my grandmother, she holds a few views I’m – ahem – not entirely comfortable with, but she’s lived in rural Oxfordshire her whole life, didn’t have the benefits of a prolonged education, and in fairness, she vaguely judges groups rather than individuals – they are accepted on their own terms. But Atkinson is different. He has worked in the media for more than twenty years, he knows, or should know, the way the world is now and what is not the done thing.
Also, you can explain away anything if you try hard enough: BNP membership? White working class communities feeling under threat. Islamic terrorism? Response to American Imperialism/Israel-Palestine. Violent crime? Poverty/rappers/ennui. Corporations polluting? Why wouldn’t they? But listing the factors that cause an ugly opinion or act does nothing to justify them, they remain as ugly. So why are we tying ourselves in knots trying to excuse him? Atkinson, and many of his supporters, cannot bring themselves to acknowledge his racism as there is no label, bar paedophile, less welcome than “racist”. Racism is evil, Ron seems good, therefore Ron is not racist. The converse occurs too: Ron is racist, therefore he is evil, therefore he deserves everything he gets. For me the interesting questions are “how much bigotry can we live with?” and “do his beliefs have any bearing on his suitability as a commentator?” These are harder, and everyone will have a different opinion. For the record, my answers are “some” and “no, but you may not choose to listen to him anymore.”
(Staggers back in) And another thing! People won't talk about race and ethnicity out of fear of being called a racist. Whilst it is a welcome development that racial slur words are rarely heard in the public domain anymore, the attitudes behind them remain. Saying "black" rather than "nigger" just makes them harder to spot.
|
