Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
The NFHS already solved the issue for it's officials.
NFHS rule 10-4-1(d)NOTE-- "The NFHS disapproves of any form of taunting which is intended or designed to embarrass, ridicule or demean others under any circumstances including on the basis of race, religion, gender or national origin".
I can't see anything in there saying any particular race is exempt from that rule. If the taunting involves race, religion, gender or national origin, it's prohibited.
|
That is what I said? Could you find the words in this thread where I stated anything about anyone being exempt? I think I said that many people from many different backgrounds do not agree on the usage of certain words. I know that someone could avoid the word in question and offend me greatly by using other words. And folks like you have told me to not get upset over or that I was over-reacting. I guess if you feel the only way to offend someone is by using a very specific term with a historical connotation. I know that if the word "boy" was used by certain individuals that would offend me just as much if not more than being called the word you are so focused on in this post. But that just shows that officiating is about judgment and intent, not just words. I can tell you that people that live in certain parts of the country or are a certain age look at these things differently. I know my Mom who went to Florida A&M an historically Black University (how is there such a university) feels one way about a certain word and another family member that she is related to feels another way about the very same word that is much younger. The bottom line is that we all bring our own personal values and philosophies to the officiating table. I have heard others have no problem being called by their first name by a bunch of kids and I would be very offended or against that kind of interaction. We all are not the same and we all are not going to be the same.
Peace