Craig Foster apologises to Sam Kerr for saying her crime was sackable

You cannot make this stuff up (hence why satire is dying somewhat). After, rightly, saying the Aussie football captain should be sacked if the charges against her are proven he goes on some rather unhinged rant about racism not being racism - one imagines the plod on the receiving end of her bile is thrilled to hear this :rolleyes:

*apologies for the truncated title, the word limit really screwed with the original

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/mar/10/craig-foster-apologises-to-sam-kerr-after-arguing-her-alleged-remark-to-uk-police-officer-was-racist

Reply 1

DataVenia

Volunteer Team, Clearing and Applications Advisor

21

Original post by Napp

You cannot make this stuff up (hence why satire is dying somewhat). After, rightly, saying the Aussie football captain should be sacked if the charges against her are proven he goes on some rather unhinged rant about racism not being racism - one imagines the plod on the receiving end of her bile is thrilled to hear this :rolleyes:

*apologies for the truncated title, the word limit really screwed with the original

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/mar/10/craig-foster-apologises-to-sam-kerr-after-arguing-her-alleged-remark-to-uk-police-officer-was-racist

The issue, I feel, is with the definition of "racism" which he's using, which comes straight from the Diversity Council Australia.

"Racism is when an individual or organisation with race-based societal power discriminates, excludes or disadvantages a racially-based person because of their race, colour, descent, nationality, ethnicity, religion or immigrant status."

By that definition, a individual without "race-based societal power" can never be racist. As Sam Kerr is of Indian descent, she can never, by definition, perform a racist act in Australia. In India, perhaps, but not in Australia.

Personally, I'm not a fan of that definition of the word, but that's the one he's cited in his apology.

Reply 2

Genesiss

20

hmm so if this from kerr is not racism according to some council australia definition, wonder what foster's thoughts are on 8-game suspension of nrl player Spencer Leniu for calling Ezra Mam a 'monkey'. well according to Leniu it's regular bants to call each other 'blacky', 'monkey' and 'black ****' on the field. 'one brown man saying something to another brown man' lacks that critical 'race-based societal power’ tho, so cannot be racist? nrl judiciary panel would disagree.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/mar/11/spencer-leniu-suspended-for-eight-nrl-matches-for-racist-slur-against-ezra-mam

doesn't matter tho imo cuz kerr is not being charged with 'racism'. racism (or not-racism if you're not-white i guess?) in itself is legal. what's not legal is offences under the public order act 1986, which include using threats, intentionally causing harassment, alarm/distress and disorderly behaviour, some of which kerr is being charged with (section 4a specifically). even if it’s not reported in the media, common sense says there’s more to the story than her just throwing up in a taxi and calling a cop ‘stupid white *******’, cuz it’s not that common for reports of racially-aggregated crimes to result in charges - 92% of the time they do not (source available upon request).

had kerr not brought race into it she'd, if anything, be facing lesser charges, probably a fine; however, when you demonstrate hostility towards the victim because of their actual or perceived race it becomes a hate crime (crime and disorder act 1998) so facing a tougher sentence. law gives racially motivated offences harsher punishments to 'protect' ethic minority groups, but it doesn’t give them a get-out-of-jail-free card if they are the perpetrators. imagine amending the Act to say 'this is an offence - but not if you're brown and the victim is white'?? idk if that would fly over so well.

Reply 3

Driving_Mad

17

Will the public vilify Sam Kerr and treat her like a criminal like they do with male footballers when they are accused of a crime without knowing all the details?

Original post by DataVenia

The issue, I feel, is with the definition of "racism" which he's using, which comes straight from the Diversity Council Australia.

"Racism is when an individual or organisation with race-based societal power discriminates, excludes or disadvantages a racially-based person because of their race, colour, descent, nationality, ethnicity, religion or immigrant status."

By that definition, a individual without "race-based societal power" can never be racist. As Sam Kerr is of Indian descent, she can never, by definition, perform a racist act in Australia. In India, perhaps, but not in Australia.

Personally, I'm not a fan of that definition of the word, but that's the one he's cited in his apology.

I’m not a fan of that definition either (if we’re talking about the definition of racism in general and not the definition of racism from a systemic or institutional perspective).

Anyone can be racist (in general, I’m not looking at things from a systemic or institutional standpoint) and I say this as a minority, to suggest otherwise in my opinion is poor in my opinion. I mean I see colourism/racism within my own community for example.

Craig Foster apologises to Sam Kerr for saying her crime was sackable

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you