Yiddo!
 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...s-chants-spurs

WTF? We are the Yids.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Yid Army. :)

Re: Yiddo!
 

It's an interesting thought that anyone would try to get them to stop it? I have been to lots of Spurs matches (don't understand a thing, but went out with someone who did, and then our Company got a box at Spurs) and was amazed at some of the chants, they were so fast and funny...and not so politically correct! Most 'old' teams for anything, be it ice hockey or football (cricket?) would have started with some form of religious affiliation wouldn't they?

Re: Yiddo!
 

I don't know about most but I don't think it's uncommon. Celtic and Rangers are obvious examples.

Re: Yiddo!
 

David Badiel had this to say on it:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...race-hate-word

No idea personally. It is true that within some groups (homosexuals and blacks, for example) the in-group are able to use former-derogatory terms in an ironic-proud way that the out-group is unable to use. It seems slightly hypocritical, but I suppose there is a logic somewhere.

Re: Yiddo!
 

A tricky debate.

When Spurs fans use it it is non offensive. It does however bring the worst out of other fans who try to taunt on the jewish connection. This does not bother Tottenham fans but it does bother David Badiel when the person sitting next to him is taunting jews because he is one.

All that being said they are trying to dumb down football crowds to the mundane atmosphere of a North American sports arena. I hope it does not get that far.

Re: Yiddo!
 

If he doesn't want to be a crowd that enjoys racist taunts, he should stop supporting Chelski.

Re: Yiddo!
 

The few American sports matches I've been to, most people seem more interested in their cheesy nachos and hot dogs than they do with what's going on the pitch.

Re: Yiddo!
 

It is a bit tricky isn't it... It feels as though words like "nigger" and "queer" have now acquired a far greater impact due to the sort of linguistic prohibition that's been applied to them in recent times. I now wince when hearing these terms used in almost any context, whereas growing up in the 70s these words and others were so ubiquitous as to be virtually meaningless (to a white, heterosexual anyway).

I don't wish to use the terms myself, but sometimes wonder, if by making these words sacred, as we seem to have done, have we just made them all the more powerful?

Re: Yiddo!
 

Undoubtedly those words were not meaningless to those whom the words described, and that has led to the quasi-prohibition. Having said that, listen to any rap or hip-hop and you do wonder what all the fuss is about!

"Queer" has nowhere near the derogatory impact it used to have, as evidenced for instance by the TV program "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" and indeed the word "gay" has for all intents been divorced from its original meaning.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Yid is not being reclaimed in the manner of nigger or queer. Yid has evolved and no longer means only "Jew" but also "Tottenham supporter, probably Jewish", Jermaine Defoe, for example, is a yiddo but he's not Jewish. If one wanted to refer to the fact of someone being Jewish in a mildly derogatory fashion one might use "binnie" of "fourbe".

This piece amused me, especially the description of Brian May:

http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-deb...otic-bandwagon

Re: Yiddo!
 

Oh dear, Brian May, and he was doing do well, guitar legend of the rock world, completed his PhD in astronomy from Imperial, and then he decides to apply all that talent to a relative non-issue like badgers.

No idea about Yids or Yiddery or football for that matter. Football chanting is an issue only slightly above badgers in importance IMO.

Re: Yiddo!
 

In retrospect maybe I should have written "certain words or phrases" instead of choosing two actual terms off the top of my head, as I suppose everyone has their own particular hierarchy of offensiveness and taste when it comes to such things.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Is "ginge" an offensive term or simply a statement of fact? :confused:

Re: Yiddo!
 

As ever, it is not the words that are used that are offensive, it is the intention behind them.

Making monkey noises at black players is definitely not on. However, during a derby game calling Millwall fans knuckle draggers, Brighton fans gayboys, Palace fans stripey nigels, Spurs fans yids or Man U fans w*nk*rs is pretty much OK in my view. It is just banter, nobody believes it is true (OK, maybe not the case for Man U), it is just to wind the other fans up. It is also largely consensual. You know what you are going to get at a football match. In some games I have been to the banter between fans was much more entertaining that the football.

Re: Yiddo!
 

heavily agree with this post

One of my teams chants references "We hate Killie, black bastards", with "black" being a term used in the SW of Scotland to describe a foul dirty person as opposed to referencing their skin colour - in return, they chant "darkie bastards" as traditionally the team wears black jerseys with white in them

some fans suggested that its offensive to chant these and that they change both to "dirty bastards" but the song has been sung since 19canteen, its hardly likely to change now!

Re: Yiddo!
 

And hissing?

Re: Yiddo!
 

When the Mrs. was having the ultrasound to check whether Jones minor had everything where it should be, I asked the lady doing it was there any way she could check to make sure he wasn't ginger... She pretended not to hear me and only spoke to my wife for the rest of the appointment. :(

Re: Yiddo!
 

:rofl:

Re: Yiddo!
 

Only a ginger can call another ginger, ginger...
(if you haven't seen it check out Tim Minchin's 'Prejudice" on you tube.:rofl:)

Re: Yiddo!
 

I'm sensing double standards here. Pretty sure some if the pro users have previously posted against the use of racist/ethic/religion based insults'.

'Yids' is offensive so don't use it. Hiding behind an excuse of 'we didn't mean any offense' doesn't make it right and continuing once you know that people are offended is, well, just wrong.

Re: Yiddo!
 

I can't understand your logic here at all.

It appears to be that you believe that name calling is fine so long as you agree with the noun being used, failing which it is racist, sexist, sexual orientationist, etc.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Where will it all end though? I think the UK is going down a really sad path in its attempt to legislate against offensive speech. I believe that free speech should be free speech even if its offends.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Offensive to whom? Did you read the Jewish Chronicle blog post linked up-thread? The author suggests that, in the context of a football chant, "yiddo" and "yid" are effectively terms of endearment used to describe Jews and non-Jews alike who support or play for Spurs.

I worry when organizations like the FA take offence on other people's behalf, when it is not at all obvious that those on whose behalf they're acting are actually feeling offended at all.

Of course it all depends on context. All words depend on context - that is one of the beauties of language, but one that can turn ugly if misunderstood. A Chelsea fan chanting "yid" and making gas-chamber hissing noises is obviously, and disgustingly, unacceptable. But a Spurs fan yelling "Yiddo" when Jermain Defoe scores a goal? Who is that offending, exactly?

The FA needs to understand this. Making some words taboo isn't the answer: cjones made the point well earlier that it just gives them additional power when used or misused. Euphemism and circumlocution will always find a way round a social taboo anyway - go to any school playground and you'll see that in action. For example, I remember when it became politically incorrect to refer to physically handicapped people (especially sufferers of Cerebral Palsy) as spastics, and instead the news media began referring to "special needs." It was a matter of only a few months before the playground insult of choice migrated from "spazz" to "special." Kids are cruel, but they have an innate understanding of the power and flexibility of language.

Re: Yiddo!
 

In the end it's all about tone and intent, not simply the word itself. Anyone that bothered with the word Limey or Jock? Generally not.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Offensive speech or engendering hate? Where is the line though? I agree that free speech is essential but, but are some words just too powerful to be used? What about the situation, someone might be happy to join in a crowd calling Yids or Niggers but brave enough to do so individually? I think not.

What's the difference between this and those guys turning up as KKK and slave at the Legion?

Re: Yiddo!
 

Mr. Baddiel

Re: Yiddo!
 

Primarily a Chelsea supporter, incidentally a Jew, he's not well placed to speak on behalf of the offended.

Re: Yiddo!
 

But he's a dirty bit of chav scum. :thumbdown:

Re: Yiddo!
 

I thought he was the offended

Re: Yiddo!
 

He did claim to be.
It probably doesn't hurt if you get paid to write newspaper articles too.

Re: Yiddo!
 

In this instance Baddiel seems to have fallen into the trap of taking offence on behalf of somebody else. The chants weren't directed at him; those they were directed at were not offended. Why is it his self-appointed task to dictate what other people should take offence at? I find that offensive.:sneaky:

Re: Yiddo!
 

I read the JC article and Baddiel's and found Baddiel more persuasuveM much as I think he is. A slimy toad. He is Jewish and n avid football supporter which to my mind makes him well placed to comment.

Re: Yiddo!
 

Is that the same as the media, and other groups, taking offence at Lt Wales's statement to his "Paki friend"?

Re: Yiddo!
 

IT's not that far away, imo. THe opinion of pretty much everyone who understands soldiery was that the whole incident was rather overamplified. If (as seemed to be the case) the individual concerned was not offended by his nickname, what right does anyone else have to take offence on his behalf? Particularly in the context of a close-knit group like a troop or platoon of soldiers, who live and work in close proximity and rely on each other for their very survival, nicknames that seem derogatory or inappropriate to outsiders are worn almost as a badge of honour within the group.

There's absolutely no doubt that racism, and racial abuse of a verbal and physical nature, occur in the armed forces to an unacceptable degree. But nobody except the self-righteous (and oh so hypocritical) media thought that this was an incidence of that. I recall reading this guardian article at the time and thinking it had hit about the right tone.

"I am offended because you used a word that I don't like, when you weren't addressing me, and I was unaware both of the context and of the opinion of the person you were addressing" seems to me a rather weak position from which to argue.

Re: Yiddo!
 

His avid support of Chelski disqualifies him, he's like a black member of the BNP:


http://www.thstofficial.com/latest-n...d-baddiel.aspx

Re: Yiddo!
 

That's a pretty powerful piece, i think i am on the fence now. It's still a little worrying, wikll tgis argument become the Spurs defence for calling some os Yid?

(pun not intended but i like it)

Re: Yiddo!
 

Good response from the fan.

Re: Yiddo!
 

"wikll tgis"? Is that Yiddish?

Re: Yiddo!
 

I am not going to disagree with anything you have said. We both know that others will.