The French Football Federation’s racial quotas are such a fascinating topic, in large part because it’s such a unique demonstration of prejudice. Racism, unfortunately, is not an issue alien to the footballing world. Fascist ultras, shaven-head neo-nazis, and primate imagery are all familiar territory for football fans. But for a nation’s governing body to actively curtail the development of a specific race of players? Well that’s quite a different matter altogether.
The unified reaction on the part of the public and the media has been expectedly, and delightfully, harsh. In fact, calls for suspensions, fines, and expulsions are all indicative of a thoroughly modern footballing society, far removed from the notions of cultural superiority that colored the first few decades of the game. And yet, despite the collective desire to “stamp out racism,” I can’t help but feel that an equally important issue is being obscured.
Bananas thrown on the pitch attract media attention. Ethnic slurs used on the pitch attract headlines. But save for the most ignorant of bigots, these are largely non-issues in the sense that they don’t prompt much in the way of considered analysis. The public reaction is routine. We oppose demonstrations of racism because we ought to, because it has no place in modern society. The problem is that these moments don’t jolt us into a consideration of our own behavior, in a footballing world where racial and cultural tension underline rivalries on both the club and international level.
Take for example, the April 20th first-leg match between Real Salt Lake and Monterrey in the Concacaf Champions League Final. A match intensified by the hopes of US soccer fans to displace their southern neighbor as the region’s footballing hegemon, the internet quickly degenerated into a 4chan forum.
Note: The lack of a Twitter archive prevents me from demonstrating some of the more vile posts from the night, including your typical “Fuck those Wetbacks” and “Go back to Mexico, beaner-fucks.” Doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen; trust me, it did.1
I understand that much of it was competitive banter, but at what point does repartee become outright discrimination via stereotypes? Obviously the internet is an unrestrained marketplace, where people say things they wouldn’t dare suggest in public because they lack a fear of reprisal. But doesn’t the fact that time was taken to develop and post these thoughts imply a bit of conviction on the part of the respective posters, that they believed what they posted, even a small part?
The discrimination isn’t constrained to the incorrigible internet either. Take a trip to your local stadium. Sure, you might not see bananas thrown on the pitch, or the use of archaic terms directed towards minority players, but chances are that you might hear a term that gives you pause. Or, taken by the hyper-fandom that Brian Phillips spoke of, a word or phrase could slip from your own typically inclusive lips.
The irony lies in the fact that the world’s game naturally creates walls between the world’s peoples.
I don’t mean to advocate the sanitation of football, but there are better routes of developing and maintaining a rivalry than resorting to discrimination. So, the next time the media covers racism and discrimination in football through an expose’ on a group of thirty fascists who support a second-division club in Russia, go ahead and denounce the extremists, but take a moment to look inwards, to your personal behavior. You might find that you’re more complicit in the perseverance of discrimination than you may have thought.
You should check out these two articles on recent issues of race: important stuff.
I don’t mean to imply that only one side of fans was guilty; the discrimination was rampant on both sides, I simply chose the more widely known language. [↩]
Throwing Stones
- Maxi Rodriguez
The French Football Federation’s racial quotas are such a fascinating topic, in large part because it’s such a unique demonstration of prejudice. Racism, unfortunately, is not an issue alien to the footballing world. Fascist ultras, shaven-head neo-nazis, and primate imagery are all familiar territory for football fans. But for a nation’s governing body to actively curtail the development of a specific race of players? Well that’s quite a different matter altogether.
The unified reaction on the part of the public and the media has been expectedly, and delightfully, harsh. In fact, calls for suspensions, fines, and expulsions are all indicative of a thoroughly modern footballing society, far removed from the notions of cultural superiority that colored the first few decades of the game. And yet, despite the collective desire to “stamp out racism,” I can’t help but feel that an equally important issue is being obscured.
Bananas thrown on the pitch attract media attention. Ethnic slurs used on the pitch attract headlines. But save for the most ignorant of bigots, these are largely non-issues in the sense that they don’t prompt much in the way of considered analysis. The public reaction is routine. We oppose demonstrations of racism because we ought to, because it has no place in modern society. The problem is that these moments don’t jolt us into a consideration of our own behavior, in a footballing world where racial and cultural tension underline rivalries on both the club and international level.
Take for example, the April 20th first-leg match between Real Salt Lake and Monterrey in the Concacaf Champions League Final. A match intensified by the hopes of US soccer fans to displace their southern neighbor as the region’s footballing hegemon, the internet quickly degenerated into a 4chan forum.
Note: The lack of a Twitter archive prevents me from demonstrating some of the more vile posts from the night, including your typical “Fuck those Wetbacks” and “Go back to Mexico, beaner-fucks.” Doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen; trust me, it did.1
I understand that much of it was competitive banter, but at what point does repartee become outright discrimination via stereotypes? Obviously the internet is an unrestrained marketplace, where people say things they wouldn’t dare suggest in public because they lack a fear of reprisal. But doesn’t the fact that time was taken to develop and post these thoughts imply a bit of conviction on the part of the respective posters, that they believed what they posted, even a small part?
The discrimination isn’t constrained to the incorrigible internet either. Take a trip to your local stadium. Sure, you might not see bananas thrown on the pitch, or the use of archaic terms directed towards minority players, but chances are that you might hear a term that gives you pause. Or, taken by the hyper-fandom that Brian Phillips spoke of, a word or phrase could slip from your own typically inclusive lips.
The irony lies in the fact that the world’s game naturally creates walls between the world’s peoples.
I don’t mean to advocate the sanitation of football, but there are better routes of developing and maintaining a rivalry than resorting to discrimination. So, the next time the media covers racism and discrimination in football through an expose’ on a group of thirty fascists who support a second-division club in Russia, go ahead and denounce the extremists, but take a moment to look inwards, to your personal behavior. You might find that you’re more complicit in the perseverance of discrimination than you may have thought.
You should check out these two articles on recent issues of race: important stuff.
Busquets, a club, allegations, and silence
Racist Delirium at the French Football Federation