The FA must reform its approach to anti-racism in the wake of the Cavani incident
The full truth is lost in translations and between understandings of culture
The misconduct punishment Edinson Cavani faced for using the word “negrito” on Instagram was flawed not in its quality or quantity, but in the change — or lack-thereof — it affected in the fight against racism.
If it was a genuine effort from the English FA to make football more inclusive, it failed. It was more destructive than helpful. By not having published the written reasons, which are more than sensible and fair, behind Cavani’s punishment immediately upon sanctioning him, the FA did their damage. Now, but for a few interested nerds, no one will read them. Anti-racism policies should be implemented consistently but with the same level of nuance that is embedded in racism itself, to help create the conversations on race we should be having. That is the point of the BLM movement — it is not to scold anyone who uses a certain word.
Whether we like it or not, for communities in Uruguay and Argentina it is normal to call someone “negro”, whether it be a cultural or linguistic norm. The punishment the forward received for his post, a three-match ban and a 100,000 pound fine, does not address this reality, nor will it whether intended or not do anything meaningful to change this cultural norm in South America.
First, the context. In the Southern Cone most people are of Spanish or Italian descent. Or, to put it more bluntly, we’re overwhelmingly white. Only recently has there been immigration from Haiti and Africa. For generations now, that overwhelmingly white European culture has denied that Black Argentineans and Uruguay exist, although less so in the former. Even our former president Carlos Menem allegedly once said “In Argentina Blacks do not exist, that is a Brazilian problem.” Argentina, abolished slavery a decade before the United States and more than three decades before its lusophone neighbor. Uruguay’s population is around 8% Black.
As Uruguay and Argentina’s Language Academies said in Cavani’s defence, “among friends, between parents and children, one often hears … gordito, negri, negrito … In fact, a person so addressed is not necessarily overweight … or dark-skinned.” That is true, and clearly true as he thanked his friend via Instagram saying “gracias, negrito”. Baiano, a former Brazilian right-back for Boca Juniors who is Black once said, that it was not he but more often Carlos Tévez — aka “El Apache” — who was called “negro” by their teammates. But that’s not always the case.
In the absence of a significant Black community, “negro” is also used as a classist othering term, if not just as an insult, describing people of lower socioeconomic status who tend to have indigenous ancestry, too. Of course, they are not Black as Black is understood in a Western racial conception, in Britain or the United States or even in Brazil, a neighbor with an established afro descendent population. Similarly, Argentinians and Uruguayans with Lebanese, Syrian or other Arab descent are incorrectly nicknamed “Turco” (or “Turk”). The same is true for those called “Chino” — David Silva and Carlos Luna for instance — for their indigenous or Asian ancestry.
The ugly truth is that whether these nicknames are intended to be affectionate or used as slurs, at their core, they hinge on the othering, caricaturing, diminishing or subjugation of human beings. The FA says in its rulebook that it is opposed to “reference, whether express or implied to colour and/or race and/or ethnic origin”. And so, the FA’s punishing of Cavani is not incorrect. Cavani’s use of the word “negrito” does have its roots in racism, whether he was aware of that or not. Regardless of context or intention, reality dictates truth. There is no line to draw beyond which racism is acceptable. Slavery was once legal, or seen as normal, too.
Still, the discipline process in Cavani’s case has been destructive in an attempt to be progressive. His punishment and the FA’s decision seems to completely ignore this cultural nuance of his use of the word and branded as racism is a particularly flippant omission given that the Premier League is a global brand that is wildly popular in South America. And, as the ruling body of the world’s top league by any measure, the FA has communicated to the world, with a British standard, overlooking a linguistic reality, what is right and wrong.
Indeed, the lack of explanation from the FA prompted a defensive response from South America, including from the Uruguayan footballers association and Conmebol.
The decision seems an attempt to uphold, or at least be consistent with the pageantry the league espoused around Black Lives Matter to its international audiences since this season restarted. It is in fact a clear misunderstanding of how to hold conversations around anti-racism. If the FA is to truly work to eradicate racism, xenophobia, prejudice and hate from the sport, it must respond to cases such as Cavani’s with the nuance they necessitate, and not by leaning on broad rules and bans handed down by faceless, nameless Independent Regulatory Commission it appoints.
Fair punishment or not, the FA could not ignore the issue. How can anyone make the right call when Cavani clearly meant no harm? It is tone-deaf, in the least, for a top flight footballer who has lived his adult life throughout Europe, yes. But even in the post-David Beckham world of football, when players became public figures and celebrities, to what extent are players expected to know their audience? Which of them are expected to act internationally?
That’s not to say that Cavani should have been let off completely. Although, it is clear that he was using the term affectionately, regardless of his lack of awareness of how “negrito” hurts people outside of his race and culture, the FA are right to require him to undergo a course in anti-racism, which should at least serve to acculturate him to the FA’s and a global culture’s expectations. But it should also explain why the case is not as simple as it first appears. And if in its search for righteousness, the FA is to truly commit to eradicate racism, xenophobia, prejudice and hate from the sport and work to do so in our cultures, it should at minimum the same two-hour face-to-face online education course Cavani will receive, to all league and non-league players and carry on working this process into the grassroots of the sport.
Ultimately, terms such as “negrito” and “turco’’ are part of everyday life in Argentina and Uruguay and are not intended as racist slurs. Yet, the status quo is not always right, and it is the questioning of the status quo that brings about progress. One may question whether the FA is the correct body to change that culture, especially given Britain’s colonialist past.
