"Dirty Negro"=Not Racist (Italian legal BS)

[Master of Ossus]

Know. Now.

ROME (Reuters) - Calling a foreigner a "dirty negro" in Italian is not necessarily a racist insult, Italy's highest court has ruled.

The verdict, relating to a case where a group of Italian men punched and insulted some women from Colombia, caused deep unease at a time when Italy is struggling to contain racism.

The court on Monday ruled in favor of one of the men, who argued he was not being racist when he launched the assault with the words: "Sporche negre -- cosa ci fanno queste negre qua?" ("Dirty negroes -- what are these negroes doing here?")

Most Italians would have no doubt that calling someone a "dirty negro" was a racist insult. The term is seldom heard and is considered no more acceptable in Italy than it would be in Britain or the United States.

However, an insult should be judged racist "only if it is motivated by real hatred," or is likely to cause racial hatred in others or lead to "discriminatory behavior for reasons of race, ethnicity, nationality or religion," the court ruled.

On the other hand, the crime of racism is not constituted by expressions of "generic dislike, intolerance or rejection based on race, ethnicity or religion," which appeared to fit the case in question, the court said.

Politicians across the political spectrum criticized the ruling and said it could not have come at a worse time.

RACIST SOCCER CHANTS

Soccer matches around Italy began late on Sunday as players unfurled banners saying "No To Racism" in response to an episode on November 27 when Marc Zoro, Ivory Coast defender for Messina in Serie A, the top division, threatened to walk off the pitch because of racist chants from Inter Milan fans.

"This judicial interpretation is astonishing," said Green Party lawmaker Paolo Cento.

Luigi Bobbio, of the conservative National Alliance party, said the verdict was the result of "a subtle poison (that) has seeped into our jurisprudence: originality at all costs."

The supreme court is no stranger to controversial judgments.

In recent years it has ruled that "an isolated and impulsive" pat on a woman's bottom at work did not constitute sexual harassment, and returned a verdict that a woman could not have been raped because she was wearing skin-tight jeans.

Carlo Fucci, the vice president of Italy's national association of magistrates, warned that the court's ruling "could blunt the weapons that can be used against racism."

As part of the campaign against racism, all but one of the parties on Milan's city council this week appealed to the mayor to grant Zoro Milan's most prestigious award, a golden statue of its patron saint, Ambrogio.

The populist Northern League party, which is often accused of racism, dissociated itself from the appeal.

[Ubiquitous]

Ah yes, the Italians. So idiotic that they chant racist abuse at football matches. AGAINST THEIR OWN FUCKING PLAYERS!

Same goes for the Spanish as well. Dumb fuckers - but you have to blame the authorities for not doing enough as well. Over here if you hear racism at a ground there is a freephone number you can use to report it and the racist will be banned for life!

Guess they just haven't caught up to the rest of us yet.

[HemlockGrey]

On the other hand, the crime of racism is not constituted by expressions of "generic dislike, intolerance or rejection based on race, ethnicity or religion," which appeared to fit the case in question, the court said.

What? Isn't that, you know, the very definition of racism?

[Lord Zentei]

On the other hand, the crime of racism is not constituted by expressions of "generic dislike, intolerance or rejection based on race, ethnicity or religion," which appeared to fit the case in question, the court said.

What? Isn't that, you know, the very definition of racism?

What? You were expecting, you know, logic?

[Durandal]

Ah yes, the Italians. So idiotic that they chant racist abuse at football matches. AGAINST THEIR OWN FUCKING PLAYERS!

Same goes for the Spanish as well. Dumb fuckers - but you have to blame the authorities for not doing enough as well. Over here if you hear racism at a ground there is a freephone number you can use to report it and the racist will be banned for life!

Guess they just haven't caught up to the rest of us yet.

Yeah, declaring one group of people inferior to your own isn't racist at all.

[fgalkin]

But I thought that Europe was the most progressive place on Earth! Vastly superior to the Bible-humping American savages.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[CaptainChewbacca]

But I thought that Europe was the most progressive place on Earth! Vastly superior to the Bible-humping American savages.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Bible THUMPing, thank you.

[Eris]

But I thought that Europe was the most progressive place on Earth! Vastly superior to the Bible-humping American savages.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Bible THUMPing, thank you.

Have you ever been to South Carolina or Georgia before? Bible-humping is not far off from the truth.

And I'm not too terribly surprised that Italy's having race problems. They haven't managed to get their country beaten into shape since Mussolini was in power. If only he weren't such a warmonger...

[fgalkin]

But I thought that Europe was the most progressive place on Earth! Vastly superior to the Bible-humping American savages.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Bible THUMPing, thank you.

Bible HUMPing. That is, the act of loving the Bible so much, you might as well be humping it.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Fire Fly]

Quick cultural interjection:

-neri (the plural of nero=black) is the Italian equivalent of nigger
-negre (the plural of negro=black) is the equivalent of, well, just black, as in black people

What the guy said, "Sporche negre -- cosa ci fanno queste negre qua?" ("Dirty negroes -- what are these negroes doing here?") was to the affect of:

"Dirty black people -- what are these black people doing here?"

Note: I'm not saying it wasn't inflamatory, just giving a public announcement. Its the difference of "damn black people" and "damn niggers." So, you might be able to better understand why the Italian Supreme Court ruled as such.

[fgalkin]

Quick cultural interjection:

-neri (the plural of nero=black) is the Italian equivalent of nigger
-negre (the plural of negro=black) is the equivalent of, well, just black, as in black people

What the guy said, "Sporche negre -- cosa ci fanno queste negre qua?" ("Dirty negroes -- what are these negroes doing here?") was to the affect of:

"Dirty black people -- what are these black people doing here?"

Note: I'm not saying it wasn't inflamatory, just giving a public announcement. Its the difference of "damn black people" and "damn niggers." So, you might be able to better understand why the Italian Supreme Court ruled as such.

So how does it make it any less racist? "Them filthy blacks! What the fuck are they doing here?" sounds pretty damn racist to me, even in they didn't use "nigger."

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Hendrake]

Quick cultural interjection:

-neri (the plural of nero=black) is the Italian equivalent of nigger
-negre (the plural of negro=black) is the equivalent of, well, just black, as in black people

What the guy said, "Sporche negre -- cosa ci fanno queste negre qua?" ("Dirty negroes -- what are these negroes doing here?") was to the affect of:

"Dirty black people -- what are these black people doing here?"

Note: I'm not saying it wasn't inflamatory, just giving a public announcement. Its the difference of "damn black people" and "damn niggers." So, you might be able to better understand why the Italian Supreme Court ruled as such.

1) So what? They are both as racist as they get. And don't forget the physical assault, motivated by the victims' ethnicity. That's as racist as it can possibly get. And the court's motivation of rejection is the very definition of racist.

2) Both terms are considered very disgusting. It's true, "neri" is more inflammatory than "negri" (the male form of "negre") but both are racist insults.

3) Just another thing to make me ashamed of being Italian...

[His Divine Shadow]

Ah yes, the Italians. So idiotic that they chant racist abuse at football matches. AGAINST THEIR OWN FUCKING PLAYERS!

Same goes for the Spanish as well. Dumb fuckers - but you have to blame the authorities for not doing enough as well. Over here if you hear racism at a ground there is a freephone number you can use to report it and the racist will be banned for life!

Guess they just haven't caught up to the rest of us yet.

As someone pointed out, this is a very ironic statement. Also that sounds pretty horrible that you can ban people for thinking in a certain way.

[Xon]

On the other hand, the crime of racism is not constituted by expressions of "generic dislike, intolerance or rejection based on race, ethnicity or religion," which appeared to fit the case in question, the court said.

What? Isn't that, you know, the very definition of racism?

It is onething to express "generic dislike, intolerance or rejection based on race, ethnicity or religion," but I guess they consider acting on those expressions far more important.

Also racism has fuck all todo with ethnicity or religion.

[Ubiquitous]

Ah yes, the Italians. So idiotic that they chant racist abuse at football matches. AGAINST THEIR OWN FUCKING PLAYERS!

Same goes for the Spanish as well. Dumb fuckers - but you have to blame the authorities for not doing enough as well. Over here if you hear racism at a ground there is a freephone number you can use to report it and the racist will be banned for life!

Guess they just haven't caught up to the rest of us yet.

As someone pointed out, this is a very ironic statement. Also that sounds pretty horrible that you can ban people for thinking in a certain way.

I am not going to apologise for mocking the Italians, Spanish and other countries that do nothing [or at least very little] to tackle racism. They are supposed to be enlightened, first world nations - there is simply no excuse for racism which is basically state-supported with this judgement in the Italian case.

The difference is that I am critisising the Italians and all other racists for something they can actually change - namely their bigoted attitudes. Black people cannot change the fact that they were born with a difference skin colour to the mainstream. Apologism won't take away the fact that not enough is being done to tackle this blight on society - just watch any Juventus game and see the far right 'ULTRA' fans chant monkey noises every time they touch the ball.

As for being 'horrible' that someone can be banned for being a racist ... if someone stands up at a game and shouts out 'GET THAT LAZY BLACK OF THE PITCH' what would you have done to him? Ejection from the game is the least they should get.

[His Divine Shadow]

Well yes they should be ejected for behaving improperly at the game, that is true. I was just reacting to the idea of people being banned for being racists, it seemed as if you can ban someone for simply being racist, even if he is not actually being disruptive. That just smacks too much of nanny-stating/thought-police to me, I might have understood you incorrectly however and it might just be a matter of ejecting people who are being disruptive.

[Rye]

Ah yes, the Italians. So idiotic that they chant racist abuse at football matches. AGAINST THEIR OWN FUCKING PLAYERS!

Same goes for the Spanish as well. Dumb fuckers - but you have to blame the authorities for not doing enough as well. Over here if you hear racism at a ground there is a freephone number you can use to report it and the racist will be banned for life!

Guess they just haven't caught up to the rest of us yet.

Yeah, declaring one group of people inferior to your own isn't racist at all.

Well no, it's not, since race isn't defined by nationality and you reduced the concept further than you should've done. It's largely defined by the gene frequencies that tend towards group-specific averages over large areas (Africa, Indo-Europe, East Asia, South Pacific Islands, America) and correspond to the groups we have culturally identified as races. At least, that's how I had the concept explained to me yesterday.

[Ubiquitous]

Well yes they should be ejected for behaving improperly at the game, that is true. I was just reacting to the idea of people being banned for being racists, it seemed as if you can ban someone for simply being racist, even if he is not actually being disruptive. That just smacks too much of nanny-stating/thought-police to me, I might have understood you incorrectly however and it might just be a matter of ejecting people who are being disruptive.

Yes people are only ejected if they are openly racist, e.g. shouting racism at players/fans. It used to be a massive problem in the 70's/80's and thus extreme measures were required. Italy and Spain need to take a look at what happened here if they truely want to solve their racism problem.

Of course, if someone is a racist and doesn't cause any trouble then they can watch the game. Memebers of far right groups aren't banned without first causing trouble at the game, for example.

[wolveraptor]

What the fuck? At the very least, this would consitute molestation. If I go around punching women and asking what the hell they're doing here, it would be expected that the authorities stop me, even if I use no racially charged terms whatsoever.

[Anguirus]

In recent years it has ruled that "an isolated and impulsive" pat on a woman's bottom at work did not constitute sexual harassment, and returned a verdict that a woman could not have been raped because she was wearing skin-tight jeans.

WTF?

I find this even more shocking than the racism ruling. That's deeply, deeply disturbing. It's one thing (and certainly awful) when a jury full of idiots says something like this, but a SUPREME COURT?

[Rogue 9]

In recent years it has ruled that "an isolated and impulsive" pat on a woman's bottom at work did not constitute sexual harassment, and returned a verdict that a woman could not have been raped because she was wearing skin-tight jeans.

WTF?

I find this even more shocking than the racism ruling. That's deeply, deeply disturbing. It's one thing (and certainly awful) when a jury full of idiots says something like this, but a SUPREME COURT?

Honestly, the definition of harassment means that a single incident cannot fall under it; harassment is by definition persistent.

[Anguirus]

^ I'm talking about the RAPE ruling, primarily.

"[The Italian Supreme Court] returned a verdict that a woman could not have been raped because she was wearing skin-tight jeans."

[AniThyng]

^ I'm talking about the RAPE ruling, primarily.

"[The Italian Supreme Court] returned a verdict that a woman could not have been raped because she was wearing skin-tight jeans."

Was that the one where the judge said something to the effect of "the jeans are very hard to remove, therefore it could not have been non-consensual"?

[Akhlut]

^ I'm talking about the RAPE ruling, primarily.

"[The Italian Supreme Court] returned a verdict that a woman could not have been raped because she was wearing skin-tight jeans."

Was that the one where the judge said something to the effect of "the jeans are very hard to remove, therefore it could not have been non-consensual"?

Yeah, that's the one.

[Anguirus]

That link doesn't work for me. Still sounds awfully sketchy, but I guess the first article did a poor job of describing the rape case.