Nationality's Special Status?

[aptpupil]

I'm hoping for a serious debate on this one...

Why is it okay, in the context of a sporting event, to "support" a competitor on the grounds of his nationality, but not okay to support him on grounds of his ethnic grouping, his religion, or his sexual orientation?

For example, and bearing in mind that I am from Scotland...

Let's suppose that there is a boxing match between a white, Christian, heterosexual Scotsman and a black, Moslem, homosexual American (an unlikely combination, but only an example to highlight my argument )

If I were to say that I was supporting boxer A because he was Scottish and the other guy wasn't, nobody would bat an eyelid. However, if I said that I was supporting boxer A because he was white and the other guy was black, I'd be classed as a bigot. Likewise, if I gave my reason as being that boxer A was Christian and the other guy was a Moslem, or if I gave my reason that boxer A was heterosexual and the other guy was a homosexual, I would be similarly accused.

So, why does nationality have this "perfectly acceptable" clause that religion, colour and sexual orientation don't have?

[Srbo]

I'm hoping for a serious debate on this one...

Why is it okay, in the context of a sporting event, to "support" a competitor on the grounds of his nationality, but not okay to support him on grounds of his ethnic grouping, his religion, or his sexual orientation?

For example, and bearing in mind that I am from Scotland...

Let's suppose that there is a boxing match between a white, Christian, heterosexual Scotsman and a black, Moslem, homosexual American (an unlikely combination, but only an example to highlight my argument )

If I were to say that I was supporting boxer A because he was Scottish and the other guy wasn't, nobody would bat an eyelid. However, if I said that I was supporting boxer A because he was white and the other guy was black, I'd be classed as a bigot. Likewise, if I gave my reason as being that boxer A was Christian and the other guy was a Moslem, or if I gave my reason that boxer A was heterosexual and the other guy was a homosexual, I would be similarly accused.

So, why does nationality have this "perfectly acceptable" clause that religion, colour and sexual orientation don't have?

Says who ?
In the States or England, somebody says that he/she is from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq - you don`t think there would be an eyefull ?
Or in Serbia - somebody says " I`m American "...or Croatian, or from Bosnia - you don`t think people are gonna judge them exactly on nationality, nevermind religion, colour or sexual preffernce ?

It`s all the same, believe me.

People simply like to judge, on whatever grounds they can.

[aptpupil]

Srbo

That's missing the point I'm trying to raise, which is this...

If I give support to someone because he is the same nationality as me, then nobody would criticise me for that. However if I give him that support because he is the same religion as me, or the same colour, or the same sexual orientation, I'd have a whole army of people telling me that those are not legitimate reasons for supporting him.

Why does this situation exist?

[catnoel]

This will change when we start changing our thinking. When we start looking at people as people rather than white, gay, christian, female,. When we start looking at characteristics like : good, caring, honest,or evil, rotten etc. I have many friends from many different "groups". The thing they all have in common is that I can see a little bit of "God" in them. They all are good people!!!

[Srbo]

Srbo

That's missing the point I'm trying to raise, which is this...

If I give support to someone because he is the same nationality as me, then nobody would criticise me for that. However if I give him that support because he is the same religion as me, or the same colour, or the same sexual orientation, I'd have a whole army of people telling me that those are not legitimate reasons for supporting him.

Why does this situation exist?

Drew, I don`t think I missed the point - if that was true, like you say, would millions and millions of white Americans vote for Mr Obama ?

Would millions and millions of heterosexual people buy Elton John records ?

Would millions and millions of white and Christian people stand behind Muhammad Ali who is a muslim and black ?

People judge anyway, nationality has little to do with it.

Just my opinion.

[Lencho_of_the_Apes]

Allow me to step back a little bit from the specific details of your hypothetical situation, eh?

In many cases, supporting someone on the basis of religion, color (I mean 'colour', sorry) or sexual preference implies condemning the person whose religion, color or preference is different from your own. Similarly, supporting someone on the basis of nationality can sometimes imply a condemnation of people from countries foreign to your own.

That attitude of condemnation is called bigotry.

I'll suggest that a majority of the people who support a sportsman for his nationality can do so without feeling the hostility toward other countries that sometimes is a feature of nationalism... and that people who see you supporting a sportsman are aware that that support is usually innocent of negative features.

Now, why is this question important to you? I suspect that you're trying to find wiggle room to justify prejudices that you hold. Could that be the case?

We all float down here.

[Nutty Bavarian]

It unfortunatley exsist soley because humanity as a whole has to a have some sort of conflict within itself. It's been the same way for all of our recorded history.

"Men are at war with one another because each man is at war with himself."
Francis J.G. Meehan

All we can do is hope that people can change. Being politically correct and giving more attention to group of people for any reason will cause conflict for others. It's just a sad defect in the human nature. No ryhme or reason just fact. But there's always hope

[Samantha_]

Maybe, it's what someone perceives the nationality represents. To Srbo's point it could be that someone has an ill-conceived vision of what people in a particular country are like ... and lump everyone in the country under that category.

To aptpupil's point-maybe, the person that comes from a country also has a vision of what people in their country represent. For example, America equals freedom or just that, for better or worse, it's the land the person comes from, knows, and loves.

Ethnocentricity is, in part, the idea of viewing the world from the point of view you know. That's not an easy perception for many people to step outside of and view the rest of the world as equally valid.

IMHO

[sam peebles]

I think it's because nationalism is looked at as a good thing, whereas racism--for the most part--is not. Maybe there will come a day when John Lennon's dream is realized, and there will be no countries or borders (no religion either), and we will all wear the same silver spacesuits and the aliens will finally let us join the Galactic Federation, but I imagine that will be a far way off.

Nationalism and racism are similar in that they both divide people by similarities and differences, but I will say that nationalism can be beneficial for a society (history has also shown us what this can lead to if not take in moderation). What's wrong with being proud of your country, your motherland, your home team?

I know people, who in their company, it would not make you a pariah to root against someone simply because they are gay, or muslim, or black. Quite the opposite. Racism is hardly extinct in the world, and certainly not endangered in America, despite Obama's election win.

[aptpupil]

"I suspect that you're trying to find wiggle room to justify prejudices that you hold. Could that be the case?"

Ouch! Quite a statement from someone who has never communicated with me before nor knows anything about me.

Actually, if a Scotsman held a boxing world title and it was announced that he would be defending it against an American boxer that I'd never heard of, then the Scotsman would get my support without me even having a clue as to his opponent's colour, religion or sexual orientation, so I certainly don't view those things as any reason to support/oppose any sportsman.

I'm as guilty as the next person of giving support to my fellow-countrymen almost purely on the shared nationality. I am merely interested to know why people feel comfortable with support being given for this reason, but not for reasons of sexuality, colour or religion.

But I'm not actually endorsing the idea of bias that derives from any of those considerations.