Is it considered racist to label someone as ‘white’?
Commentary
Sam Kerr is a well-known Australian footballer and the captain of the Matildas soccer team.
The Matildas, gaining popularity as a leading female sports team, reached the semi-finals of the World Cup last year and have qualified for the upcoming Olympic Games in July/August.
However, the Matildas’ success story has been overshadowed by the news of Ms. Kerr facing trial in London over allegations of insulting a police officer in response to a taxi dispute.
The incident occurred shortly after Ms. Kerr’s exceptional hat-trick for her Chelsea team in a game.
What Happened?
Reports indicate that on Jan. 30, 2023, Ms. Kerr, feeling unwell after a night out, allegedly insulted the police officer by calling them a “stupid white bastard.”
Contradictory sources suggest she may have referred to the officer as a “stupid white PC” or a “stupid white cop.”
Related Stories
Ms. Kerr, appearing at Kingston Crown Court via video link, entered a plea of “not guilty.”
Should Kerr’s Statement Be Considered ‘Racist?’
Reflecting on the case of Ms. Kerr, several general issues come to light.
Firstly, is the statement attributed to Ms. Kerr an act of “racism?”
Racism is defined as having the intention to discriminate based on race, leading to discriminatory actions concerning accommodation, service delivery, and benefits allocation.
If the alleged statement was made, it likely wasn’t intended to deprive benefits from the police officer, making its categorization as racism questionable.
Furthermore, some argue that making derogatory remarks to a “white” police officer, rather than a “black” officer, does not constitute racism.
For instance, Aboriginal writer Veronica Gorrie suggests that while prejudice can target white individuals, it doesn’t qualify as racism due to the historical power dynamics at play.
This perspective contends that hurling insults at a “white” officer serves as a response to the discrimination faced by people of color, rather than an act of racism.
However, critics argue that this approach institutionalizes racism to combat racism, perpetuating a cycle of racial violence.
Additionally, it establishes a double standard—one for white individuals and another for black individuals—lacking logical consistency.
Fighting Racism While Upholding Free Speech
Combatting racism in all its forms entails embracing the principle of political equality, ensuring equal treatment for all individuals regardless of race, with benefits and burdens distributed impartially.
Secondly, the ongoing discourse surrounding Ms. Kerr’s legal issues has overlooked the core matter at hand: free speech. Does free speech encompass the right to offend others using abusive language?
The pertinent English legislation that criminalizes racially aggravated public order offenses can be found in section 31(1)(b) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 under the Public Order Act 1986.
The legislation targets actions causing intentional harassment, alarm, or distress.
The real question revolves around whether, in a free society, the criticized language attributed to Ms. Kerr should be defended as an expression of free speech.
For too long, legal restrictions have hindered robust debates on criminalizing speech deemed offensive and humiliating.
While hurtful remarks are inevitable in life, most individuals possess the resilience to endure such language and move forward.
If Ms. Kerr did indeed make offensive remarks, it might have involved using inappropriate and unlawful language.
Alternatively, some may argue that the expressions used by Ms. Kerr fall within the boundaries of permissible discourse in a free society that should accommodate strong critical and emotionally charged language.
Opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
