New Morrissey statement, and comment from Love Music Hate Racism

[bitterpill777]

I'll say it again - before this particular quote i could defend everything he'd previously said/sang

My case is not to say Morrissey is racist - but that the remark was racist - and hearing him say racist things (for the first time) makes my heart sink - and i do still like him...

Right that's it. I'm going to kill myself.

 

[smiler]

Morrissey criticised some Chinese people's inhumane treatment of animals.
Yes, it's hard to support his choice of the word, but it's not a racist remark.

Problem is your perception.

Morrissey criticised some Chinese people's inhumane treatment of animals. - yes we all agree on this.

but crumbs..... he also said "Its hard not to feel the Chinese are a subspecies"

please tell me exactly why you think "it's hard to support his choice of the word" if you don't think its racist to say that sort of thing?

It isn't about perception at all - i completely agree with you it is hard to support his choice of the word - in fact i can't support it at all

and yes its possible that he isn't a racist and that he just said a racist thing - my "problem" however is he said a racist thing

 

[smiler]

Right that's it. I'm going to kill myself.

lol - don't do it

 

[bitterpill777]

lol - don't do it

It's too late.

 

[Dave]

Morrissey criticised some Chinese people's inhumane treatment of animals. - yes we all agree on this.

but crumbs..... he also said "Its hard not to feel the Chinese are a subspecies"

please tell me exactly why you think "it's hard to support his choice of the word" if you don't think its racist to say that sort of thing?

It isn't about perception at all - i completely agree with you it is hard to support his choice of the word - in fact i can't support it at all

and yes its possible that he isn't a racist and that he just said a racist thing - my "problem" however is he said a racist thing

1. You're changing his quote.
2. We know he is not racist.
3. Regarding "hard to support his choice of the word" possibly because the word can so easily be willfully misunderstood. We have two things happening. One is that it sounds like he is talking about a lot of people, the people of China, as if they all share the same character. (This happens here regularly about Americans and you don't hear anyone shouting about racism.)
The second problem is that "sub-species" is so easily read as "subhuman." Forget the Nazis. Look at England's history if you want to see anthropology used to justify imperialism.
But subspecies does not mean "subhuman." It does mean a group with different characteristics. A subset is a part of a set. It is not another lesser set. It's still part of the larger set. Subhuman would be a completely different reading.
4. It's not racist, and you have some sort of investment in believing it is. Chinese is not a race. "Racist" is the go-to word. True racism exists, and diluting it is an affront to the memory of all who have suffered from it and all who cope with it today. Morrissey's issue with the Chinese is not based on race.

 

[smiler]

1. You're changing his quote.
2. We know he is not racist.
3. Regarding "hard to support his choice of the word" possibly because the word can so easily be willfully misunderstood. We have two things happening. One is that it sounds like he is talking about a lot of people, the people of China, as if they all share the same character. (This happens here regularly about Americans and you don't hear anyone shouting about racism.)
The second problem is that "sub-species" is so easily read as "subhuman." Forget the Nazis. Look at England's history if you want to see anthropology used to justify imperialism.
But subspecies does not mean "subhuman." It does mean a group with different characteristics. A subset is a part of a set. It is not another lesser set. It's still part of the larger set. Subhuman would be a completely different reading.
4. It's not racist, and you have some sort of investment in believing it is. Chinese is not a race. "Racist" is the go-to word. True racism exists, and diluting it is an affront to the memory of all who have suffered from it and all who cope with it today. Morrissey's issue with the Chinese is not based on race.

1. - okay here is the quote "You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies."
2. - okay but he does say racist things
3. - okay lets go with "subset" (and i think you are being generous) this particular subset is different to the main group because all those in it (The Chinese) are cruel to animals. (in Morrissey mind this is surley not a positive defining characteristic that would put the subset on a par with the rest of us) - the trouble is that "subspecies" can also mean subordinate or less than human - which would appear to be what he means here
4. - According to the United Nations conventions, there is no distinction between the term racial discrimination and ethnicity discrimination.

 

[bitterpill777]

1. - okay here is the quote "You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies."
2. - okay but he does say racist things
3. - okay lets go with "subset" (and i think you are being generous) this particular subset is different to the main group because all those in it (The Chinese) are cruel to animals. (in Morrissey mind this is surely not a positive defining characteristic that would put the subset on a par with the rest of us) - the trouble is that "subspecies" can also mean subordinate or less than human - which would appear to be what he means here
4. - According to the United Nations conventions, there is no distinction between the term racial discrimination and ethnicity discrimination.

Well I tried to kill myself but ended up just skinning myself alive. Smiler mate, put your clip board away and your pacamac back in your satchel. Your position is getting evermore pitiful. I'm offering you my hand. Please take it, this is getting embarrassing. You have painted yourself into a very dark and lonely corner. You are clinging on to single words for dear life. But these words don't mean anything on their own. That's how language works. Please let go. Get out a bit more. Live a little.

 

[Media Whore]

All I know is this; you're all incredibly boring.

Whethere he is or he isn't, if the statement is or it isn't, does it really matter enough for you to waste as much time as you have debating it on a internet messageboard? Ffs, live a little.

 

[CrookedLittleVein]

All I know is this; you're all incredibly boring.

Whethere he is or he isn't, if the statement is or it isn't, does it really matter enough for you to waste as much time as you have debating it on a internet messageboard? Ffs, live a little.

This is the least interesting contribution so far. High five!

 

[Dave]

All I know is this; you're all incredibly boring.

Whethere he is or he isn't, if the statement is or it isn't, does it really matter enough for you to waste as much time as you have debating it on a internet messageboard? Ffs, live a little.

You know I love you, too, Media Whore.

(a long time ago I wrote a song called Media Whore)

 

[Qvist]

Unfortunately we now have that idiot in the White House. And we see the results, which are, sadly, far worse than even us Obama-bashers had predicted. November can't come soon enough......

Amazing. Do you have any idea what slamming the same politician at length in every conceivable arena (including in discussions with no relation whatsoever to that subject such as this one) makes you appear as? No, of course you don't.

 

[Qvist]

Like it or not there is still a cloud over Morrissey in many peoples minds regarding racism - the NME are yet to be sued - why?

Because they retracted their remarks and publicly apologised. In other words, because they admitted they were wrong and did voluntarily what a court verdict in Morrissey's favor would have impelled them to do. There was nothing left for Morrissey to sue them for, other than money.

Always useful to get the facts straight before starting to draw speculative inferences.

As for the lingering cloud, that simply illustrates that if someone throws mud at you, however unfairly, it tends to stick. Do you think anyone has actually made a really convincing case that Morrissey, despite clear avowals to the contrary and repeated financial support of anti-racism events, is a racist? Because if not, that cloud is in your mind, and it isn't Morrissey's fault if you lack sufficient faculty for independent judgment to dispel it. And if not, it doesn't actually matter how many times someone repeats old allegations as if they hadn't already been dispelled. If you see acase for worry, fine, I'm listening, but please do try to base it on something a little better than this. Say hello to your friends from me and ask them if they have something to go on other than their no doubt infallible intuition.

cheers

 

[Cornflakes]

Because they retracted their remarks and publicly apologised.

That's not actually true.

 

[Worm]

That's not actually true.

Disingenuous, don't you think? The apology to which Qvist referred came from Word Magazine, which reprinted the NME's claims. I can't find any information about what happened with the NME suit, exactly, but I do know that Word's defeat was considered a blow to the NME's case for obvious reasons. Anyone who knows what happened should fill us in.

The Defendants never intended the article to have the meanings suggested above and wish to make absolutely clear that they disassociate themselves entirely from any such inferences that might be drawn from the article. The Defendants accept that it would be absurd to accuse Mr Morrissey of being a racist or of espousing racist views. They equally accept that Mr Morrissey is not a hypocrite, in relation in particular to the views he has expressed in the past in relation to British cultural identity.

The Defendants accept that Mr Morrissey is well known as a keen supporter of anti-racist groups and the Defendants wish to make absolutely clear that they never intended the article to suggest that Mr Morrissey was anything other than a sincere supporter of anti-racism initiatives.

The Defendants wish to take this opportunity to apologise to Mr Morrissey for any offence or distress that he may have been caused by the closing paragraphs of the article and are happy to make the position clear."

Caroline Kean, Solicitor for the Defendants:

"My Lord, on behalf of the Defendants, I confirm everything my Friend, the Claimant's solicitor, has said.

The Defendants offer their sincere apologies to the Claimant. They hope that by making this Statement, the matter will be clarified once and for all and the record will have been set straight."

Read The Full Brief​

EDIT: Morrissey's comment:

“I am obviously delighted with this victory and the clearing of my name in public where it is loud and clear for all to hear. The NME have calculatedly tried to damage my integrity and to label me as a racist in order to boost their diminishing circulation.

“Word magazine made the mistake of repeating those allegations, which they now accept are false and, as a result, have apologised in Open Court. I will now continue to pursue my legal action against the NME and its editor until they do the same.”

 

[MILVA]

1. You're changing his quote.
2. We know he is not racist.
3. Regarding "hard to support his choice of the word" possibly because the word can so easily be willfully misunderstood. We have two things happening. One is that it sounds like he is talking about a lot of people, the people of China, as if they all share the same character. (This happens here regularly about Americans and you don't hear anyone shouting about racism.)
The second problem is that "sub-species" is so easily read as "subhuman." Forget the Nazis. Look at England's history if you want to see anthropology used to justify imperialism.
But subspecies does not mean "subhuman." It does mean a group with different characteristics. A subset is a part of a set. It is not another lesser set. It's still part of the larger set. Subhuman would be a completely different reading.
4. It's not racist, and you have some sort of investment in believing it is. Chinese is not a race. "Racist" is the go-to word. True racism exists, and diluting it is an affront to the memory of all who have suffered from it and all who cope with it today. Morrissey's issue with the Chinese is not based on race.

I'm referring to what The Guardian quoted as his statement: "You can't help but feel that the Chinese are a subspecies"

It might be interesting to try to establish the reference point for "subspecies", i.e. the "superspecies". There could be a few options.

Let's call the superspecies "Hominoids". In that group, you have four subspecies: homo sapiens (sapiens) (= "men"); the chimp, the bonobo (or pygmy chimp) and the gorilla. Four subspecies, that have indeed different characteristics and a (slightly) different DNA. In that reading, Chinese and non-Chinese are part of the same "subspecies" of Hominoids, namely "Homo sapiens". And in that reading, Morrissey's could have meant "You can't but feel that the Chinese are homo sapiens, a subspecies of Hominoids - just like the non-Chinese; actually just like me!". Not a very polarizing exclamation - but then this is just a thought experiment.

Second case. Let's call the superspecies Morrissey would be referring to the one of "Homo Sapiens (sapiens)". In that sense, his statement then would imply that the Chinese are a subspecies of the HS(S). That is a valid option as well. But the non-Chinese would be on the same level, again, as the Chinese "subspecies". He thus could have meant "The Chinese are a subspecies of homo sapiens! - Just like I am a subspecies of Homo sapiens." Hardly explanatory, and it begs the question: on what grounds do the Chinese form a subspecies of homo sapiens? On the basis of their treatment of animals? That would imply that a certain behavioral trait is actually inherent in a specific group and uniquely defines that group. In such a view, seal-clubbing Canadians could also very well be labeled "subspecies" by Morrissey. And even those who care for animals would then form a "subspecies". Yes, more and more generalizations...

The third option would be to consider the superspecies "Apes", and in that category define subspecies "Asians", "Anatomically modern Africans" and "Neanderthals", at around 100,000 years ago. Only the "anatomically modern Africans" developed further into what we presently consider "homo sapiens sapiens" (Cro Magnon type), the other two becoming extinct. Modern Chinese can thus not be considered direct descendants of the "Asian" subspecies of 100.000 years ago - so that doesn't work.

No matter what reading you want to have, none of these options strike me as particularly meaningful, thought provoking or interesting. And that's the saddest part of the whole affair.

Morrissey-interviews used to be sharp. Now they're blunt.

 

[Eraserhead]

Reading the line out of context makes it sound like a rascist comment. We all know what he is saying. He is making the point that the way Chinese treat animals is beyond any degree of reasonable human behaviour. It's irritating that one slip of the tongue in regard to a politically sensitive issue such as race in today's world sends everyone stupid.

 

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

All this.
As we all know (and love), in some parts of his brain, Morrissey remains the 15 year old obstreperous Stretford letter-writer. In this case he was just searching for the ultimate pejorative epithet, as a reaction to actions he considers utterly obscene. Inhumane? Inhuman? Subhuman? Subspecies? Bingo.
And before someone says he's not a stroppy teen he's a 51 year old intelligent poet (f.u Simon); We're all capable of reverting to our youth now and again, aren't we? When the passions stir...
I'm unsure as to how much of the subsequent brouhaha Morrissey could have planned. It would appear to have been a throwaway remark in the midst of a fairly testy 'interview' with someone who was clearly not a trained journalist. Armitage barely referred to it in the course of the interview, and certainly didn't challenge him on it. 'The Guardian' appears to have wanted to make more of it than the poet they stupidly sent to interview Morrissey. (You can just imagine the meetings can't you? )
But the pictures are smashing.
And, yeah, it is getting very boring, very quickly. All the usual suspects crawling out of the woodwork, etc...

I think you'd have to be a member of a subspecies or something to think that Morrissey makes these comments to sell records. If Morrissey wanted to sell records he would do things a lot differently. Does controversy like this even sell records? I really doubt it. (does anyone buy records?) If anything the average casual Morrissey fan is going to be turned off. And imaging if all you knew of him was “The gates of England are flooded. The country’s been thrown away”, and this "subspecies" thing. You think that would cause you to buy the record?

If he wanted to sell the record he would talk about whoever is at number one on the charts right now. That would get publicity without risk of backlash.

So you must either think he's not too bright about the business of being a pop star or that he has deliberately sabotaged his career. I think he's done the latter numerous times.

I think people still don't understand how strongly he feels about animal rights because if they did, then nobody would be even slightly surprised by this latest comment. It wasn't just to get a reaction, he meant it. He's always been utterly consistent about animal welfare.

I was at that Oxford gig when he called out the vivisectionists, and he was truly outraged (but poised). He's not just a celebrity who gets their picture taken with kitties, no: he's at war (and he's not alone). To the radical animal rights people, the uproar over this comment is proof that the world just does not get it yet. He was condemning people for their acts, not because of where they were from.

Not true. Critics seem to think because he used the word "subspecies" that he regards Chinese or those of Chinese descent as a lesser type of human being...Viva democracy.

(Edited for length, but you're right)

Isn't this all just a matter of a thick and stupid childlike, subhuman, subspecies all grouping together and saying: "Ooh, he said something wrong", and trying their level best to make as much fuss as they can about it. It's pathetic playground politics and I wonder if a single person was actually offended by Morrissey's comment. And really, who cares if they were? What so wrong with feeling offended anyway. We're all so terrified of offending anyone these days. And the world is an even duller place because of it. If Morrissey's comments were deemed to be insighting racial hatred then there would be a point but they are obviously not. Anyone with more than half a brain cell to brag about can see that there is nothing wrong with these comments and within the context they were said we know exactly what he was meaning to say. So why are there 'people' out there trying to make a big deal out of it? It's like a mob of children in a playground shouting "fight, fight, fight..." in an attempt to... well they've succeeded. The world is full of F***ing idiots.

Precisely.

There is no race, ethnicity or national affiliation that is out of Morrissey's line of fire. You could give Morrissey a list of nationalities/races, and he would provide you a litany of what is wrong with each and every one of them (particularly from an animal rights perspective): the Chinese - unspeakably cruel animal skinners; the Canadians - heartless seal-clubers; Americans - fat, greedy sub-intellectuals, etc, etc. He's a misanthrope in the truest sense of the word. Some of my favorite artists/writers seldom had anything nice to say about anyone - it goes with the territory.

When it comes to humanity's crimes, we're all guilty, it's just a matter of degree. Morrissey has said this often enough, but no one wants to believe him (or so it seems).

I have nothing to add because as far as I'm concerned it's old news and I have no intention of repeating myself on my views further, but you're all completely correct. Also, I agree that Neil McCormick said it best (linked for those that didn't see it).

f***ing hell smiler you are such a pedantic bore. I can just hear you repeating: "the remark was racist, the remark was racist..." with your adams apple high in your throat, your little clipboard and newly sharpened pencil.
Haven't you ever uttered a remark which could be construed as racist or sexist (or intelligent)? I have, quite often in fact. It doesn't make me any of these things. What matters is the context it was said in. And in this case weather it was meant to, or possibly could insight racial hatred. And, in this case it clearly was not. So stop crying and just tell your Morrissey hating mates to f*** off. Why do you care how they think about what they are incapable of understanding anyway? So f***ing what if someone, somewhere in Sidcup gets offended while knitting a tea cosy. Let them feel it. We need to every once in a while in order to know who we are. These lynch mob, bandwagons are for desperate people, disconnected with the world, who feel a need and longing for something to identify with. They (you) just want to join in. The people complaining about Morrissey's comments are not hurt themselves, they are acting on behalf of other people who they imagine may be hurt by them. It's very patronising. This so called 'row' is a Guardian construct created for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, like most of the media, they have dumbed down in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Just imagine what would happen to the world if we were all forced to do the opposite. So the dumbest of us wouldn't be constantly force fed this shit. We would instead be forced to scratch our heads a little and think a bit. How would a world like this be I wonder?

Well I tried to kill myself but ended up just skinning myself alive. Smiler mate, put your clip board away and your pacamac back in your satchel. Your position is getting evermore pitiful. I'm offering you my hand. Please take it, this is getting embarrassing. You have painted yourself into a very dark and lonely corner. You are clinging on to single words for dear life. But these words don't mean anything on their own. That's how language works. Please let go. Get out a bit more. Live a little.

Bitterpill, why aren't you around more often?

 

[Vauxhall95]

It's not a game. If you have good points, you have good arguments. When you don't have good arguments and try to deal with that by pretending it's a game and simultaneously casting aspersion on the character of those you're discussing with, there's a word for that: Cop-out. You see it quite a lot, but rarely as embarassingly obvious as here.

If it's not a game, and you take this Forum, this man, and his music with such sincerity then you possess a level of naivete which is truly frightening. Am I casting aspersions and playing a game! You're right, just like Morrissey did in this latest dust up in the press. He casted aspersions on Chinese people but he did so to garner publicity. A game, a well played duplicatable, there's a history of this from him g-a-m-e. I guess he's a "cop out."

WAIT! Not a game, yeah - it's life or death! We're really debating the big issues here. WAIT! It's impossible to debate any issues here.

Follow me, to you:

GOD = PERFECTION
MORRISSEY = GOD
MORRISSEY = PERFECTION

Anything I write, any argument, any video footage of Morrissey machine gunning baby lambs would not in any way shape or form cause you to stop for a split second and question your undying devotion to the man.

Again, please don't let me get in the way of your, "What's his favorite ice cream poll..." BECAUSE THIS NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED! If he goes into a Baskin-Robbins chaos could be unleashed. What if he gets a double scoop? Oh God, this is really fun thinking about all the didn't flavor combinations he could order. Heaven forbid a mortal man actually has flaws and we can discuss those while at the same time appreciating him on a separate thread. Too complex for ya? Yeah, that's what I thought.

On your knees, as you were...

 

[Qvist]

If it's not a game, and you take this Forum, this man, and his music with such sincerity then you possess a level of naivete which is truly frightening. Am I casting aspersions and playing a game! You're right, just like Morrissey did in this latest dust up in the press. He casted aspersions on Chinese people but he did so to garner publicity. A game, a well played duplicatable, there's a history of this from him g-a-m-e. I guess he's a "cop out."

WAIT! Not a game, yeah - it's life or death! We're really debating the big issues here. WAIT! It's impossible to debate any issues here.

Follow me, to you:

GOD = PERFECTION
MORRISSEY = GOD
MORRISSEY = PERFECTION

Anything I write, any argument, any video footage of Morrissey machine gunning baby lambs would not in any way shape or form cause you to stop for a split second and question your undying devotion to the man.

Again, please don't let me get in the way of your, "What's his favorite ice cream poll..." BECAUSE THIS NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED! If he goes into a Baskin-Robbins chaos could be unleashed. What if he gets a double scoop? Oh God, this is really fun thinking about all the didn't flavor combinations he could order. Heaven forbid a mortal man actually has flaws and we can discuss those while at the same time appreciating him on a separate thread. Too complex for ya? Yeah, that's what I thought.

On your knees, as you were...

Not, of course, that any of this has the slightest relation to anything I've written.

What I did write was that you're making yourself rather transparently ridiculous by participating in the discussion, and then suddenly dismissing it as a pointless game. Immediately after leaving yourself flat-footed through backfiring arguments.

An impression that can of course only be vastly reinforced by your above, hopefully mushroom-induced, exercise in stream of unconsciousness writing.