Theres a few

[pauld]

Surely singing about wanting to F**k the Pope is more of a fetish thing?

[Don Rogers Shop]

It is not bigoted either i am catholic but do not like the pope so fuck him and the Ira can fuck off aswell

[janaage]

I'm Catholic and the Pope's fine, no comment on the Irish issue.

[pauld]

It is not bigoted either i am catholic but do not like the pope so fuck him and the Ira can fuck off aswell

I was in you yesterday. Picking up some gloves for little'un

[BANGKOK RED]

It is not bigoted either i am catholic but do not like the pope so fuck him and the Ira can fuck off aswell

I was in you yesterday. Picking up some gloves for little'un

 :shock:  :shock:

[Don Rogers Shop]

It is not bigoted either i am catholic but do not like the pope so fuck him and the Ira can fuck off aswell

I was in you yesterday. Picking up some gloves for little'un

What big hands he has

[reeves4england]

You still hear the "F**k the Pope/IRA" song every now and gain (once a season). And also other racist shit. Though didn't hear any last season.

Thankfully it's a small minority that are stuck in the 80's.

I do have double standards though, I have sang the anti-welsh/northerner song . Is that different? Probably not if you think about it. Which is probably the problem with most, we don't think.

Not sure about that last bit. In some ways it is similar, but to a large extent it is very much said in jest. Anybody who chants something racist at a football match is much mor elikely to actually mean it.

I guess its like the whole anti-ginger thing. I've been sat next to people who've slagged off ginger players on opposing teams and then turned round to me and say they're only joking (tails at Franchise for instance!!!). I'm not sure it would be accepted at all if it was people shouting abuse at black players

[Batch]

I know what you mean, and I don't mean to come over all wish washy PC, but is abuse because someone's hair is a different colour any different than abuse because of someones skin colour? Not really, but one is socially less acceptable than the other.

And it's all to do with the context it said in IMHO. Abuse is abuse. Look at Birdy's thread, I call my mate a fat c*nt all the time, and vice versa. But we don't really mean it. But a different situation - by a stranger - and it's different.

I had a point somewhere - oh yeah, that some of those doing the monkey sounds probably think they are just putting off the opposition and are stupid enough to believe it's just a bit of fun too.

[Jamiesfuturewife]

Not sure about that last bit. In some ways it is similar, but to a large extent it is very much said in jest. Anybody who chants something racist at a football match is much mor elikely to actually mean it.

I guess its like the whole anti-ginger thing. I've been sat next to people who've slagged off ginger players on opposing teams and then turned round to me and say they're only joking (tails at Franchise for instance!!!). I'm not sure it would be accepted at all if it was people shouting abuse at black players

That tails is such a hooligan!

[Phil_S]

I think it depends on how it's said. To describe someone as black, white, Ginger haired, fat or thin is not in my opinion abusive at all. It is a statement of fact/ decrptive term. In fact I think that the Pc brigade are being abusive by trying to outlaw the term "black" as a descriptive phrase as if it were osmething to be ashamed of.
It is more abusive to be called a bast*ard than any of the above. If I were for example called a white bast*rd the implication that I was born out of wedlock shouldn't these days be construed as an insult, but would be more insulting than being told what colour I am.
The monkey chants though are a different ball game because they imply that someone is not human, a patent untruth.