What's new

Y-word consultation update

mawspurs

Staff
Jun 29, 2003
35,069
17,740
At the beginning of August, the Club commenced its consultation with fans on their use of the Y- word. We received more than 23,000 responses and we can now share the results...

Source: Official Site
 

rupsmith

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2006
1,714
2,328
Absolutely brilliant. An exercise done with sensitivity and care in an informed, well researched, collaborative manner. A matter that if handled in any way even perceived as crossing boundaries can cause a range of reactions.

Brilliantly well done Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. A reflection of the modern day organisation that Daniel Levy has developed us into.
 

Metalhead

But that's a debate for another thread.....
Nov 24, 2013
25,351
38,294
Absolutely brilliant. An exercise done with sensitivity and care in an informed, well researched, collaborative manner. A matter that if handled in any way even perceived as crossing boundaries can cause a range of reactions.

Brilliantly well done Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. A reflection of the modern day organisation that Daniel Levy has developed us into.
Fantastic. It is a very sensitive subject and as much as I do believe that the intent is as important as the word, I would never feel comfortable using the N or P words in the same situation or indeed in any context. That being said, I don't feel uncomfortable with the word being used in that context but I would understand others who are Jewish (or indeed not) being offended.
 

JC-Rule

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2005
1,993
1,285
I think the club did a good job here, but I note they didn't conclude what should happen now either way.

After the consultation are they advocating that the club will be prohibiting, permitting or promoting the term?
 

Gassin's finest

C'est diabolique
May 12, 2010
37,355
87,827
An excellent and measured approach to the subject. Better than the current trend of either reactionary ban, or even worse, complete inaction.
 

spud

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2003
5,850
8,794
I've only quickly skimmed the report, but this jumped out at me:
"Almost half of all respondents would prefer to see supporters choose to chant the Y-word less or stop using it altogether"

"This consultation has shown that a particular number of our supporters are offended by the term and almost half of all respondents indicated a clear desire to see fans use the Y-word less or stop altogether."

It's obvious that 'almost half' will be taken as a justification for gradually clamping down on the use of the word because a 'particular number' of our fans are offended by it. 'Almost half' will gently metamorphose into 'a majority', which will then become 'overwhelming support' for such action.
 

LeSoupeKitchen

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2011
3,102
7,621
I've only quickly skimmed the report, but this jumped out at me:
"Almost half of all respondents would prefer to see supporters choose to chant the Y-word less or stop using it altogether"

"This consultation has shown that a particular number of our supporters are offended by the term and almost half of all respondents indicated a clear desire to see fans use the Y-word less or stop altogether."

It's obvious that 'almost half' will be taken as a justification for gradually clamping down on the use of the word because a 'particular number' of our fans are offended by it. 'Almost half' will gently metamorphose into 'a majority', which will then become 'overwhelming support' for such action.

Agree - the phrasing "almost half" is a statement.

I noted that Kick It Out and the police got involved with chanting based on the offensive term "rent boy". I hope we'll see a stronger response by police to any hissing sounds and anti-Semitic chants from now on.
 

hughy

I'm SUPER cereal.
Nov 18, 2007
31,842
56,935
I think the club did a good job here, but I note they didn't conclude what should happen now either way.
It's clever not directly condoning or condemning the use of the word, like they have done previously.
 

Blake Griffin

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2011
14,133
38,225
i don't get why anyone would say they'd prefer to see it chanted less, surely you either think it's ok or it isn't. do those people suggest we have a cap on how many times it's sung during a game?
 

Lenn0n

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2011
244
342
We spend too much time worrying about the Y 'word' (and others for that matter) and not the intent when it is used. When Spurs fans chant "We are the Yid Army" no offence is meant. The song is directed at the group singing i.e. themselves. No third party 'should' be offended.

Please don't think from these comments that I would support any racist activity - I don't. I would see racism as being about discrimination, marginalisation, lack of equal opportunity, humiliation, oppression. However It's very lazy to focus on the 'word' - and assume that is the villain.

Football fans actively direct the most hurtful abuse at the opposition, and frequently the referee? So for example "The referee is a wanker" is a frequent, directly personal and vociferously chant. There is real intent to offend a third party? Is this not worse?

PS although I think it is generally 'lazy' to focus on words rather than intents, I would applaud Tottenham for doing some interesting research - not lazy at all.
 

spud

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2003
5,850
8,794
i don't get why anyone would say they'd prefer to see it chanted less, surely you either think it's ok or it isn't. do those people suggest we have a cap on how many times it's sung during a game?
How dare you apply intelligence to this! Don't you realise that it's an emotive issue and should therefore be dealt with entirely emotionally?
 

spud

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2003
5,850
8,794
I'm going to state my views on this. Not because I think for a minute that anybody will be interested, or agree with me, but just because I want to get it off my chest.

First, this exercise by the club is obviously, as it says, an attempt to gauge supporters' opinion. But it is also a PR exercise to show the world (and our increasing fan base) that the club is inclusive and sensitive to issues that may cause offence. What will now happen is that we will hear again all of the arguments that we have heard countless times before and the club will eventually 'take note of' prevailing opinion' and 'request' that we don't use "the Y-word'.

The reason that this whole thing pisses me off is because of the hypocrisy involved. Let me give you two examples.

The "N-word" is rightly outlawed by all right-thinking members of all societies. All racist insults should be. Yet black people of a certain age regularly use it with each other; it is common currency. It is not (generally) an insult when they do so, but - to coin a phrase - a 'badge of honour'. This is the same context in which we use "the Y-word". Both blacks and Spurs fans were subject to abuse by others using these words, and we use "the Y-word" in the same way that these black people use "the N-word". The extent of the two uses is obviously not comparable, but the same principle exists. Why then is there no debate about whether black people should so address each other? Surely what is right for the use of one word is right for the use of the other?

The second example features the Hypocrite-In-Chief, the third-rate comedian desperately using this issue to regain some currency: Mr. David Baddiel. He whines incessantly about how terrible it is for Spurs fans to chant 'yiddo' or 'yid army' yet never makes mention of fans of his beloved Chelsea hissing at us or lustily performing 'Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz'. When the insignificant talentless wanker (is that offensive? I'm so sorry) addresses that, then he might begin to deserve to be taken seriously.

I completely understand that if you address a jew as a 'yid' then he or she will be offended. Rightly so. Jews have been persecuted for centuries and this form of address has been a part of that for a very long time. I would never use the word pejoratively and believe that anybody who deos deserves to have the shit kicked out of him. However, we use it about ourselves. It was a defence mechanism that has become a 'badge of honour'. If anybody is offended by it then, like Baddiel, they are either seeking things to be offended by or purposely using the issue for their own benefit.

Now that the club has once again propelled this into the public consciousness we will once again hear all of the same arguments by all of the same people. This cycle will continue, on and off, until the "Y-word" is officially banned by the club and stewards begin to eject fans who use it.
 

stonecolddeanaustin

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2011
1,623
2,598
I'm going to state my views on this. Not because I think for a minute that anybody will be interested, or agree with me, but just because I want to get it off my chest.

First, this exercise by the club is obviously, as it says, an attempt to gauge supporters' opinion. But it is also a PR exercise to show the world (and our increasing fan base) that the club is inclusive and sensitive to issues that may cause offence. What will now happen is that we will hear again all of the arguments that we have heard countless times before and the club will eventually 'take note of' prevailing opinion' and 'request' that we don't use "the Y-word'.

The reason that this whole thing pisses me off is because of the hypocrisy involved. Let me give you two examples.

The "N-word" is rightly outlawed by all right-thinking members of all societies. All racist insults should be. Yet black people of a certain age regularly use it with each other; it is common currency. It is not (generally) an insult when they do so, but - to coin a phrase - a 'badge of honour'. This is the same context in which we use "the Y-word". Both blacks and Spurs fans were subject to abuse by others using these words, and we use "the Y-word" in the same way that these black people use "the N-word". The extent of the two uses is obviously not comparable, but the same principle exists. Why then is there no debate about whether black people should so address each other? Surely what is right for the use of one word is right for the use of the other?

The second example features the Hypocrite-In-Chief, the third-rate comedian desperately using this issue to regain some currency: Mr. David Baddiel. He whines incessantly about how terrible it is for Spurs fans to chant 'yiddo' or 'yid army' yet never makes mention of fans of his beloved Chelsea hissing at us or lustily performing 'Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz'. When the insignificant talentless wanker (is that offensive? I'm so sorry) addresses that, then he might begin to deserve to be taken seriously.

I completely understand that if you address a jew as a 'yid' then he or she will be offended. Rightly so. Jews have been persecuted for centuries and this form of address has been a part of that for a very long time. I would never use the word pejoratively and believe that anybody who deos deserves to have the shit kicked out of him. However, we use it about ourselves. It was a defence mechanism that has become a 'badge of honour'. If anybody is offended by it then, like Baddiel, they are either seeking things to be offended by or purposely using the issue for their own benefit.

Now that the club has once again propelled this into the public consciousness we will once again hear all of the same arguments by all of the same people. This cycle will continue, on and off, until the "Y-word" is officially banned by the club and stewards begin to eject fans who use it.

I think there is a clear difference between the two. The n word has only ever been about black people - the only people that could be offended by the use of the word were black people so it's their word to use if they choose so.

The y word is not about spurs, it's primarily about Jews with it also being used about spurs fan for a brief (relatively speaking) amount of time due to the club's Jewish links. It's not spurs' word to use in the same way the n word is.

Imo if anything like say 25% of Jewish spurs fans find its usage offensive then it needs to stop as the original point for its usage has almost been lost if that's the case.
 

LeSoupeKitchen

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2011
3,102
7,621
I think there is a clear difference between the two. The n word has only ever been about black people - the only people that could be offended by the use of the word were black people so it's their word to use if they choose so.

The y word is not about spurs, it's primarily about Jews with it also being used about spurs fan for a brief (relatively speaking) amount of time due to the club's Jewish links. It's not spurs' word to use in the same way the n word is.

Imo if anything like say 25% of Jewish spurs fans find its usage offensive then it needs to stop as the original point for its usage has almost been lost if that's the case.

It would be great if they released the actual numbers rather than percent.

I've tried to unpick the headline figure of 35% of Jewish respondents consider it offensive (who do not not use the term in a footballing context):

23,000 respondents of which 11% are Jewish = 2,530 Jewish respondents
34% of Jewish respondents do not chant the term = 860 people
35% of Jewish respondents who do not chant the term find it offensive = 300 people which is 12% total of Jewish respondents

That's obviously still a significant number but is better assessed as a total rather than percentage. Factor in people like @NayimFTHL who pretended to be offended when in fact they just hate being associated with Jews, then there could be a few respondents that said they were offended and Jewish for all the wrong reasons.
 

JC-Rule

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2005
1,993
1,285
I'm going to state my views on this. Not because I think for a minute that anybody will be interested, or agree with me, but just because I want to get it off my chest.

First, this exercise by the club is obviously, as it says, an attempt to gauge supporters' opinion. But it is also a PR exercise to show the world (and our increasing fan base) that the club is inclusive and sensitive to issues that may cause offence. What will now happen is that we will hear again all of the arguments that we have heard countless times before and the club will eventually 'take note of' prevailing opinion' and 'request' that we don't use "the Y-word'.

The reason that this whole thing pisses me off is because of the hypocrisy involved. Let me give you two examples.

The "N-word" is rightly outlawed by all right-thinking members of all societies. All racist insults should be. Yet black people of a certain age regularly use it with each other; it is common currency. It is not (generally) an insult when they do so, but - to coin a phrase - a 'badge of honour'. This is the same context in which we use "the Y-word". Both blacks and Spurs fans were subject to abuse by others using these words, and we use "the Y-word" in the same way that these black people use "the N-word". The extent of the two uses is obviously not comparable, but the same principle exists. Why then is there no debate about whether black people should so address each other? Surely what is right for the use of one word is right for the use of the other?

The second example features the Hypocrite-In-Chief, the third-rate comedian desperately using this issue to regain some currency: Mr. David Baddiel. He whines incessantly about how terrible it is for Spurs fans to chant 'yiddo' or 'yid army' yet never makes mention of fans of his beloved Chelsea hissing at us or lustily performing 'Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz'. When the insignificant talentless wanker (is that offensive? I'm so sorry) addresses that, then he might begin to deserve to be taken seriously.

I completely understand that if you address a jew as a 'yid' then he or she will be offended. Rightly so. Jews have been persecuted for centuries and this form of address has been a part of that for a very long time. I would never use the word pejoratively and believe that anybody who deos deserves to have the shit kicked out of him. However, we use it about ourselves. It was a defence mechanism that has become a 'badge of honour'. If anybody is offended by it then, like Baddiel, they are either seeking things to be offended by or purposely using the issue for their own benefit.

Now that the club has once again propelled this into the public consciousness we will once again hear all of the same arguments by all of the same people. This cycle will continue, on and off, until the "Y-word" is officially banned by the club and stewards begin to eject fans who use it.

If this message or sentiment was coming from a Jewish person or from the Jewish community it would carry much more weight, as someone has mentioned prior (in jest I believe, but he touched on the issue) this is all about emotions.

As black man, if I heard two black men greeting each other by saying "what's up my n*" it would get probably get a pass, for the reason you highlight

However, If I heard the same two folks greeting each other by saying "what's up my FBC*" then this would generate an emotional response internally that would be difficult to rationalise or explain.

And so with that, we need to hear from Jewish folks on this one.

Are you Jewish? No offence intended I was just curious.


It's all emotive
 

guiltyparty

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2005
9,023
13,524
Absolutely brilliant. An exercise done with sensitivity and care in an informed, well researched, collaborative manner. A matter that if handled in any way even perceived as crossing boundaries can cause a range of reactions.

Brilliantly well done Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. A reflection of the modern day organisation that Daniel Levy has developed us into.

It comes to no conclusion though, does it? Why's that brilliantly well done? The club has effectively been forced to do this.
 

guiltyparty

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2005
9,023
13,524
I'm going to state my views on this. Not because I think for a minute that anybody will be interested, or agree with me, but just because I want to get it off my chest.

First, this exercise by the club is obviously, as it says, an attempt to gauge supporters' opinion. But it is also a PR exercise to show the world (and our increasing fan base) that the club is inclusive and sensitive to issues that may cause offence. What will now happen is that we will hear again all of the arguments that we have heard countless times before and the club will eventually 'take note of' prevailing opinion' and 'request' that we don't use "the Y-word'.

The reason that this whole thing pisses me off is because of the hypocrisy involved. Let me give you two examples.

The "N-word" is rightly outlawed by all right-thinking members of all societies. All racist insults should be. Yet black people of a certain age regularly use it with each other; it is common currency. It is not (generally) an insult when they do so, but - to coin a phrase - a 'badge of honour'. This is the same context in which we use "the Y-word". Both blacks and Spurs fans were subject to abuse by others using these words, and we use "the Y-word" in the same way that these black people use "the N-word". The extent of the two uses is obviously not comparable, but the same principle exists. Why then is there no debate about whether black people should so address each other? Surely what is right for the use of one word is right for the use of the other?

The second example features the Hypocrite-In-Chief, the third-rate comedian desperately using this issue to regain some currency: Mr. David Baddiel. He whines incessantly about how terrible it is for Spurs fans to chant 'yiddo' or 'yid army' yet never makes mention of fans of his beloved Chelsea hissing at us or lustily performing 'Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz'. When the insignificant talentless wanker (is that offensive? I'm so sorry) addresses that, then he might begin to deserve to be taken seriously.

I completely understand that if you address a jew as a 'yid' then he or she will be offended. Rightly so. Jews have been persecuted for centuries and this form of address has been a part of that for a very long time. I would never use the word pejoratively and believe that anybody who deos deserves to have the shit kicked out of him. However, we use it about ourselves. It was a defence mechanism that has become a 'badge of honour'. If anybody is offended by it then, like Baddiel, they are either seeking things to be offended by or purposely using the issue for their own benefit.

Now that the club has once again propelled this into the public consciousness we will once again hear all of the same arguments by all of the same people. This cycle will continue, on and off, until the "Y-word" is officially banned by the club and stewards begin to eject fans who use it.

I agree on one point: this is just another step along for the word being banned. Anyone who thinks that isn't where this ends up has their eyes closed. Spurs, the brand, is trying to rid itself of this PR nightmare, as, particularly at the moment, anti-semitism is a huge political football and for the club to grow globally, it needs to be rid of the term.

However, I disagree with you likening it to the N-word. As others have said, most Spurs fans are not Jewish. Just 11% of those interviewed above identified as Jewish. Spurs fans may have historically 'owned' the word as a mark of solidarity, but it is absolutely not their decision on whether it is offensive as it was never directed at them personally, they were only ever borrowing the term. They have not had to have any of the hardship and persecution that goes along with the term (sorry, being shouted at by boned-headed opposition supporters does not qualify).

Again, I agree with you a bit on Baddiel - his focus on Spurs using it, and completely avoiding Chelsea's history for racism, is hypocrisy of the highest order. But still, he has more right than you, unless you are Jewish, to declare it offensive.

I am very conflicted on this, as the Y-word, for me, is inextricably linked with going to watch Spurs. It was literally our club nickname growing up as far as I was concerned. The smashing the back of the stand, Zulu-like, with the Yids chant was my favourite memory as a child at White Hart Lane. I didn't actually know what it meant outside of a Spurs context for years, I thought it was just a term for our supporters.

That said, I am coming round to the fact that, in the modern day, us using it really doesn't stand up to criticism.
 

Capocrimini

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2005
2,125
1,873
Unfortunatley I think we should stop using the Y word in games. If it is an offensive term used to address Jewish people I dont see how anyone can argue against it. I respect that most people chanting Yid army do not have any hate or racism behind the use of the word, but its not up to them.
 
Top