Abstract
This is the first empirical study to explain the contested uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ in English football fan culture. A pertinent socio-political issue with important policy and legal implications, we explain the different uses of ‘Yid’, making central the cultural context in which it is used, together with the intent underpinning its usage. Focusing upon Kick It Out’s The Y-Word campaign film (which attempted to raise awareness of antisemitism in football by advocating a ‘zero tolerance’ policy approach to ‘Yid’), the complex relationship of Tottenham Hotspur with Judaism is unpacked. The origins of this complexity stem from Tottenham traditionally attracting Jewish fans due to nearby Jewish communities. As a consequence, Tottenham is perceived as a ‘Jewish’ club and their fans have suffered antisemitic abuse from opposing supporters who have disparagingly referred to them as ‘Yids’. In response, Tottenham fans have, since the 1970s, appropriated and embraced the term by identifying as the ‘Yid Army’. Critical analysis of fan forum discourse suggests that many Tottenham fans thought The Y-Word film failed to sufficiently understand or demarcate between the multiple meanings and intentions associated with use of ‘Yid’ as both an ethnic epithet and term of endearment. We call for an appreciation of the nature of language that acknowledges the fluidity and temporality of linguistic reclamation and ‘ownership’ in future policies to combat antisemitism.
This is the first empirical study to explain the contested uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ – the slang Jewish ethnonym 1 – in English football fan culture. The article provides an analysis of the findings from an initial study examining reactions to the euphemistically titled The Y-Word (2011) campaign film from Kick It Out (British football’s equality and inclusion campaign group). The Y-Word promoted a ‘zero tolerance’ policy approach to the term in English football fandom as it sought to raise awareness about what it called ‘the other racism’: antisemitism (Baddiel, 2011). This study provided the catalyst for an on-going research project to understand the complex relationship that fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club have with the Jewish faith and, consequently, with antisemitism.
The origins of this relationship stem from Tottenham Hotspur having traditionally attracted Jewish fans due to its geographical location in north London, with nearby Hasidic Jewish communities that settled there in the 1930s as they fled persecution in Europe (Clavane, 2012; Holmes, 1979; Lipman, 1990). 2 In a recent survey of season ticket holders by Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (2014), 9.97% of the 11389 respondents self-declared that they were Jewish. North London neighbours and arch-rivals Arsenal also have a significant Jewish following, yet it is Tottenham that is internationally recognised as a ‘Jewish club’ (Clavane, 2012; Efron, 2006; Williams et al., 1984).
This has led to Tottenham fans becoming regular targets of antisemitic abuse by opposition fans, especially those associated with London rivals, Chelsea, West Ham and Millwall (Hytner, 2012; Kessel, 2007; Scott, 2007; Williams et al., 1984). 3 This abuse has included the ethnic epithet ‘Yid’ and references to the Holocaust/Shoah through songs and chants, together with hissing sounds, simulating the noise of the Nazi gas chambers. In the 1970s, many Tottenham supporters – Gentiles and Jews – began to respond to this victimisation by appropriating the word ‘Yid’ as a mark of in-group solidarity and camaraderie (Efron, 2006; Poulton, 2013). Since then, more and more Tottenham fans (both non-Jewish and Jewish) have embraced the term and variations such as ‘Yiddo’ and the sobriquet ‘Yid Army’ as a self-referent and badge of honour in an apparent attempt to deflect the antisemitic abuse and help defuse its power as an insult through their own songs and chants. These are now a cornerstone of Tottenham fan culture.
The use of ‘Yid’ is controversial, with many conceiving of it as a ‘race hate’ word (Baddiel, 2011, 2013; Chakraborti and Garland, 2009; Herbert, 2012). Yet, for a significant proportion of Tottenham fans, this taboo word is regularly and widely used with pride and as a term of endearment to express their support for the team. Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (2014) surveyed their season ticket holders to gauge opinion on their use of ‘Yid’ following on-going public debate since the launch of The Y-Word film, which has even involved comment from PM David Cameron (Baddiel, 2013; Herbert, 2012; Pollard, 2013; Poulton, 2013). Seventy-four per cent of non-Jewish respondents and 73% of Jewish respondents were in favour of fans being allowed to use the word (total number of respondents: 11389). 4
The public debate escalated after the arrest of three Tottenham fans in October 2013, charged with a racially aggravated public order offence for chanting the term ‘Yid’ inside Tottenham’s White Hart Lane stadium (Cloake, 2014; Gurden, 2014; Peisner, 2014). On the eve of their criminal trial in March 2014, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) ‘discontinued’ the test case. Their reasons were two-fold: the standard of proof needed for conviction and the context in which the word was used. Baljit Ubhey, the Chief Crown Prosecutor, explained the CPS’s policy U-turn:
As part of the review, the context of the use of the words alleged in this case was reconsidered, and we have decided that, although the same words used in other contexts could in theory satisfy the criteria for ‘threatening, abusive or insulting’, it is unlikely that a court would find that they were in the context of the three particular cases in question. We have therefore concluded that there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. (Cited in Davis, 2014)
These developments render the use of ‘Yid’ in football fan culture a highly pertinent socio-political issue for academic enquiry, especially given the legal and policy implications.
Consequently, the aim of our research is to explain the different uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ in English football fandom and, in particular, to understand Tottenham’s association with Judaism and the usage of ‘Yid’ by the club’s fans. We make central the cultural context in which the term is used, together with the intent underpinning the usage of ‘Yid’, since epithets and slurs are defined and shown to be determined by context of use and not simply lexical form (Allan and Burridge, 2006). The significance of the complexity and contextual specificity of linguistic discourse underlined by McCormack (2011), together with Brontsema’s (2004) concept of linguistic reclamation, is used to explain the contested usage. In doing so, we address an omission in the currently brief body of work on antisemitism in football (Back et al., 2001; Kassimeris, 2008; Williams et al., 1984) and contribute to wider sociological debates in the sub-disciplines of race and ethnicity, religion and language, as well as sport.
Our study unpacks the contested use of the ‘Yid’ in football fandom and the intricacies of the relationship of Tottenham Hotspur’s fan culture with the Jewish faith through an analysis of Tottenham fan discourse collected from Internet message board comments about The Y-Word (2011) campaign film. We found that many Tottenham fans felt The Y-Word film did not adequately address their club’s relationship with the Jewish faith and failed to sufficiently understand or demarcate between the different uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ as both a derogatory epithet and term of endearment. Tottenham fans believed that they were wrongly targeted by the filmmakers, arguing that the antisemitism of opposition fans should be the Kick It Out campaign’s policy focus. Some Tottenham fans also resent apparent efforts to censor their fandom.
Raising awareness of the ‘other racism’ in football fandom
A large body of work has addressed the structural elements of racism in football, including discussions on the nuances of racist fan behaviour (Back et al., 1999, 2001; Cleland and Cashmore, 2013; Garland and Rowe, 2001; Hylton, 2010). A related dimension of racism in football is religious prejudice or intolerance since, as Meer and Noorani (2008: 196) note, ‘Jews and Muslims define themselves – and are defined by others – through reference to race and religion’. While Millward (2008a) provides an insightful discussion of Islamophobia in English football fandom, little academic attention has been given to antisemitism. Back et al. (2001), Williams et al. (1984) and Kassimeris (2008) only provide very brief discussions. Outside of sport studies, there is little acknowledgement of the issue; for example, there is no mention in Meer’s (2013) special issue of Ethnic and Racial Studies on antisemitism and Islamophobia.
The socio-historical manifestations of antisemitism in Britain are complex (see Holmes, 1979; Kushner, 2013; Lipman, 1990) and we recognise antisemitism as paradigmatic of racism in wider Europe (Goldberg, 2006); it is most commonly manifest in Britain today as cultural racism (Kushner, 2013; Meer and Noorani, 2008). Chakraborti and Garland (2009) report that there is a discernible rise in the number of antisemitic incidents in the UK (as well as wider Europe, the USA and Canada), suggesting that anti-Jewish sentiment may be embedded in the cultural fabric of many societies. This has been compounded by the geo-political situation in Palestine.
In the context of football, antisemitic discourse towards Tottenham fans has been anecdotally reported from the post-war years onwards. This is despite – or perhaps in spite – of ‘the role of Jews in English football’s transformation from a working-class pursuit… to a global entertainment industry’ (Clavane, 2012: xvi). Antisemitism in English football became heightened during the 1970s and 1980s when far-right groups like the National Front infiltrated and recruited from football fans (Williams et al., 1984) and football-related disorder was at its most acute. A song heard during this time – and that features in The Y-Word – from sections of West Ham and Chelsea fans in particular, was:
Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz!
SIEG HEIL!
Hitler’s gonna gas ‘em again!
You can’t stop them, The Yids from Tottenham,
The Yids from White Hart Lane.
5
However, some of the opponents’ songs and chants – for example, ‘Does your Rabbi know you’re here?’ (Clavane, 2012) – and others that mock Jewish rituals, such as dietary practices and circumcision, or stereotypical traits like thriftiness, might be considered part of the traditional ‘banter’ that underpins British football culture, rather than malevolent racialised othering with pernicious intent (Cleland and Cashmore, 2013). Back et al. (2001: 105) highlight an ‘all too easy conflation of racism with people who possess deviant, evil, personal pathologies’; they stress: ‘it is important to position racism with very ordinary lives and develop a more nuanced idea of how racism can co-exist with respectability and the banal routines of football fandom’.
Indeed, it is important to acknowledge that not all racist discourses are linked to extreme forms of fandom perpetrated by some hooligan or Ultra groups (Back et al., 1999). For example, Back et al. (2001: 111) outline how fan racism is often expressed rhetorically through humour and play and ‘not always couched within abusive forms of “hate speech” or harassment’. They argue that ‘a creative and playful dimension to the expression of racist sentiments… enables racist assertions and stereotypes to be normalised… in a legitimate way’.
In this connection, Millward (2008a) – writing in relation to Islamophobic racism on football fan forums – illustrates how cultural prejudice often precedes a genuine religious intolerance in the context of football, with most fans objecting not to the religion itself, but rather expressing views that have become ‘normalised’ in sport and simply wishing to express their feeling of rivalry and hatred for opposing teams, often through ‘jokes’ and stereotypes. This forms part of the ‘cultural performance’ and ‘impression management’ found within football fandom (Pearson, 2012). In this way, football provides a distinct arena – both in the stadium itself, as well as a wider discursive space – in which certain fan behaviours and language are not always really meant. While centrally related to the expression of rivalry, this can sometimes take on racist forms.
Back et al. (2001) emphasise the importance of understanding fan racism as a form of ‘ritual’ and explain how the nature of fan racism takes several forms. Some of these situated and nuanced forms assist our understanding of antisemitism in football. Of relevance to this discussion is how racist abuse in football grounds occurs in intermittent bursts: ‘often, although not always connected with high profile games or charged confrontations with rivals’ (Back et al., 2001: 107). This helps explain the antisemitic abuse directed towards Tottenham fans by Premier League and London rivals, Chelsea and West Ham (see Hytner, 2012; Kessel, 2007; Scott, 2007). Back et al. (2001: 109) also note how racist verbal abuse takes a variety of expressive forms or ritual styles: ‘collective songs and chants use racial meanings to express club identity and are combined with racist epithets producing complex racially exclusive representations of group identity’. This can occur when away fans visit cities with large south Asian populations and sing ‘You’re just a town full of Pakis’.
This also helps to explain opposition fans’ use of ‘Yid’ and songs that express antisemitic sentiments towards Tottenham fans like ‘Adolf Hitler, he’s coming for you!’, together with hissing noises and Nazi salutes – as evident from West Ham fans (Hytner, 2012). Sometimes more than one racial epithet is used to intensify the insult; Scott (2007) reported West Ham fans singing ‘I’d rather be a Paki than a Jew’ at Tottenham fans. While Back at al. (2001) note that verbal racist abuse at football rarely escalates into physical violence, occasionally physical attacks occur. For example, Tottenham fans were ambushed and assaulted by Ultra gangs giving Nazi salutes and shouting ‘Juden!’ in Rome, Italy (November 2012), and Lyon, France (February 2013), while playing in the Europa Cup (Hytner, 2012).
The Y-Word film concept was developed as an attempt to tackle the issue of antisemitism in British football by Jewish comedian David Baddiel and his brother, television producer Ivor Baddiel, following a disagreement with a fellow Chelsea fan at Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge stadium. Upon hearing news that Tottenham were losing elsewhere, a group of Chelsea fans started chanting ‘Yiddos!’ Then one fan began singing ‘Fuck the Yids’ followed by ‘Fuck the Jews’ (Wardrup, 2011). This incident inspired the Baddiels’ film project for Kick It Out, which is central to this study. 6 At the time of writing, the film has received over 148,000 views on YouTube. It features professional footballers including Frank Lampard (Chelsea and England), Ledley King (Tottenham and England), Gary Lineker (former Tottenham player, now sports presenter) and Zesh Rehman (the first British Asian to play in the English Premier League), who deliver a message of ‘zero tolerance’ of the ‘Y-word’, which is compared to the ‘N-word’ and ‘P-word’. The film includes footage of fans chanting ‘Yiddo! Yiddo!’ and singing ‘Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz’, but is unclear which club they are associated with.
Campaigning intermittently on the issue for over a decade, Baddiel (2002, 2013) outlined his intended message of The Y-Word:
The film is not intended to censor football fans. It’s simply to raise awareness that the Y-word is – and has been for many, many years – a race hate word. It’s our belief that some football fans may not even realise this, and the film is designed therefore to inform and raise debate. (Wardrup, 2011)
However, the film received a mixed reception in the British mainstream and Jewish media, with not everyone accepting Baddiel’s preferred meaning. While The Y-Word drew applause from Jewish sportswriter and Tottenham fan, Norman (2011), Furedi (2011) – sociologist and also Jewish Tottenham fan – described the film as ‘a patronising assault on Tottenham Hotspur fans’ pride and identity’. Jewish Chronicle columnist Gerald Jacobs (2011) argued: ‘“Yids” chanted at Tottenham by home supporters is not the same as “Yids” chanted by the Baddiels’ fellow Chelsea fans known for their emetic “gas-chamber” hissing’.
Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (2011), commenting on the launch of The Y-Word film, acknowledged that ‘it has merit’, but also sought to emphasise their fans’ use of ‘Yid’ in contradistinction to opposition fans:
Historically the ‘Y word’ chant has been adopted by Spurs fans as a ‘call to arms’ in order to own the term and thereby deflect anti-Semitic abuse… The defining principle has always been whether or not the term is being used in a manner and in a tone which is deliberately intended to cause offence.
This statement implicitly acknowledges the concept of ‘linguistic reclamation’, that is, ‘the appropriation of a pejorative epithet by its target(s)’ (Brontsema, 2004: 1), which is discussed below. There are parallels here with the reclamation of other ethnic, racial and gender slurs and the particularly controversial ‘nigger’/‘nigga’ by sections of the black community, particularly in black music, dance and film (Asim, 2007; Kennedy, 2002). Writing in relation to the use of ‘nigger’ by racists vis-à-vis those from the black community, Motley and Craig-Henderson (2007: 8) observe:
[W]hen used by out-group members to address a member of a targeted group, the message recipient may interpret ethnic epithets as threatening or insulting. However, when used by an in-group member in conversation with another in-group member, the word may be viewed as a term of endearment or, in some cases, an expression of respect.
What is different in relation to Tottenham fans is that Jews (and indeed ‘pro-Jewish’ Gentiles) have never previously appropriated antisemitic epithets such as ‘kike’, ‘Hebe’ or ‘Ikey’ to describe themselves in order to subvert racism. Tottenham fans’ reclamation and use of ‘Yid’ will be further explained below through critical analysis of the fan forum discourse obtained through the empirical research.
Method
We analysed fan discourse about The Y-Word film and use of ‘Yid’ in football fandom more broadly from two Internet message boards. Millward (2008b) argues that fan message boards are both a legitimate data source and a basis of investigation for sociologists of popular culture. These platforms allow fans to air their views and debate subjectively important issues pertaining to football matters, as well as wider socio-cultural and political concerns (Cleland, 2013; Cleland and Cashmore, 2013; Millward, 2008a, 2008b). While there is some scepticism towards this methodology, Millward (2008b: 303) is a great advocate of the use of Hine’s (2000) ‘virtual ethnography’ as a data-collection strategy:
… fan discourse is created without researcher intervention and is ready for collection with the click of the mouse-button. This is particularly interesting given that discourse and narratives are recognized as legitimate ways of interpreting individual and collective identities.
Other sociologists of sport have also employed this approach for yielding rich ‘live’ discourse and providing the opportunity to observe, record and analyse subtle and explicit messages in an unobtrusive way (Clavio, 2008; Cleland, 2013; Cleland and Cashmore, 2013; Gibbons and Dixon, 2010). These scholars appreciate that there are a number of potential weaknesses with the approach, as we do.
Firstly, we acknowledge that there is an in-built bias against those who are not members of the selected forums, which skews the sample. We also recognise that very little is known about forum members because demographic data is limited: this allows for trolls and multiple username posters, even on closed/invite-only forums (Pearson, 2012). Even ‘genuine’ fans can hide behind the anonymity of a non-identifying username, which may encourage them to feign a particular stance, play devil’s advocate or engage in hyper-masculine interactions. As Millward (2008b: 306) warns, ‘it is possible that e-zine supporters may be producing measured “cyber identities” in the hope of impressing their fellow fans’. Given these methodological issues, we remain cautious about the statements that are made, as the participants’ online behaviour might not translate into their offline life (Cleland, 2013). Notwithstanding this, we endorse Gibbons and Dixon’s (2010) belief that, with increasing numbers of fans using forums to voice their opinions, discuss issues and reinforce their social identities, online fan interactions are a valuable resource to further our understanding of the complexities of football fandom.
Data was collected from two unofficial Tottenham fan message boards. They are referred to as Forums 1 and 2 to protect anonymity of their users. We employed a purposive sampling strategy, using only forum threads pertaining to The Y-Word film, uses of ‘Yid’ and other related ‘threads’ from 14 April 2011 (when the film was released) to the end of the 2010/2011 football season in mid-May. Forum 1 is ‘open’ in the sense that anyone (including occasional opposition fans) can easily register and post comments. Most users seemed to regularly attend matches and the majority appeared (from their usernames at least) to be men, but not all. In contrast, Forum 2 requires two existing members to propose the induction of a new member and so is ‘closed’. This means that some members know each other and might be more prone to posting to impress or endorsing/condoning comments to avoid ‘losing face’. All seemed to be male and regular match-goers and some were known by one of the authors to have a history of involvement in football-related disorder. Indeed, access to this forum was gained because one of the authors is a member. Neither author actively participated in discussion threads pertaining to this covert study. British Sociological Association guidelines were adhered to.
The aim of this research was not to expose individuals’ beliefs, but to explain different understandings of the uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ in football fan culture and thoughts on Tottenham’s association with Judaism, as well as the structural reasons why this Jewish identity exists. Once the data had been collected, our analysis sought to discover any patterns, commonalities or differences across the posts. We collected a total of 89 posts from Forum 1 and 73 from Forum 2. In the following results section, we present a representative sample of the fan discourse from each forum. All data is reproduced as it was written online (i.e. complete with any grammatical or typographical errors, expletives and language that some may consider offensive) and posters’ real/screen names are withheld to protect their identity and replaced with numbers (e.g. Fan 1).
Findings: fan reactions to The Y-Word
The release of The Y-Word film in April 2011 stimulated much debate in the media and in football fan culture, particularly within Tottenham fan networks, over not just the film’s content and message, but the wider issues of the uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ and manifestations of antisemitism in football fandom. This section explains these issues through a discussion of the results obtained from analysis of the fan discourse acquired from the forums. There were some noticeable differences between Forums 1 and 2 in terms of the views of posters and language used. There was a more sophisticated level of debate on Forum 1, with a diversity of viewpoints, whereas responses on Forum 2 were more uniform and ranged from incredulity to indignation, reflecting the apparent demographic of users outlined above.
Forum 1
The following thread from Forum 1 gives an indication of initial fan reactions to The Y-Word:
Fan 1: i mean i get that people saying ‘nigger’ coz they are black or ‘paki’ coz they are brown is not an excuse and is STILL unacceptable but is ‘yid’ really a commonly used derogatory term for jews? In my personal experience it’s pretty much reserved for spurs fans… Not racist – just football. Fan 2: Yes, yid is a derogatory term for a Jew. Fan 3: They won’t be satisfied until they can control the way you think. Fan 4: It’s a Spurs thing, there’s nothing even remotely Jewish about it anymore. Some sects of Judaism use the word as a polite way of greeting a stranger anyway.
A number of issues and arguments are raised here. Fan 1 demonstrates an ignorance of the wider socio-historic meaning of ‘Yid’ – believing it to be solely a football label to define Tottenham fans and so ‘not racist’ – and therefore any knowledge of the appropriation of the word by Tottenham fans in the 1970s. Of course, if this level of ignorance is displayed by a Tottenham fan, it could prevail among opposition fans who may use ‘Yids’ as a referent to Tottenham without pernicious intent. However, most other posters appeared aware of the negative associations with the term, as articulated by Fan 2. Fan 3 opens up a line of thought that was more prevalent on Forum 2, implying that ‘the authorities’ are looking to ‘control’ fans through censorship of traditional ‘banter’ (see King, 2002; Pearson, 2012; Waiton, 2012). While Fan 4 implies knowledge of the term ‘Yid’ having Jewish connotations, this post also lays claim to the term as a ‘Spurs thing’, illustrating the secularisation of the term, which has been diluted of its Jewish meaning in some quarters. Fan 4 also points to the Yiddish meaning of the term, that of a friendly salutation. Joining the thread later, Fan 5 challenged the post that stated ‘Yid’ was a ‘derogatory term’, and pointed to the multiple use and meanings:
Nope. It’s far more complex than that. Try: http://www.yid.com a Jewish dating site. Or http://www.austinmama.com/yidkids.htm a kids clothing line… Or what about when someone speaking Yiddish uses the term ‘yid’? Is it always pejorative? The answer is no.
Another poster quoted and commented upon Tottenham Hotspur Football Club’s (2011) official statement on The Y-Word and the intent underpinning their fans’ usage, cited earlier:
Quote: … The defining principle has always been whether or not the term is being used in a manner and a tone which is deliberately intended to cause offence. This is surely the crux of the matter. If black people use ‘the n word’ to refer to themselves and asian people use ‘the p word’ to refer to themselves then I can see no reason why we Spurs fans can’t refer to ourselves by using ‘the y word’.
Here the fan makes parallels with other racial epithets that have been reclaimed to justify Tottenham’s use of ‘Yid’. The post continued: ‘In all cases, the target of the offensive word uses the “badge of honour” principle to adopt the offensive term and use it as a rallying call. Whether or not we (Spurs fans) are jewish, we are the target of abuse’. This fan inadvertently highlights a key difference between the ‘reclamation’ of other racial and ethnic epithets and Tottenham fans use of ‘Yid’: many of them are not actually Jews. Rather, they are ‘Jew-friendly’ Gentiles who historically adopted a quasi-Jewish identity as members of the ‘Yid Army’ to express solidarity with the abused. This was articulated by Fan 6, who argued:
I think Spurs fans have done exactly the right thing by ‘owning’ the term Yid and diffusing the ability of opposing fans to use it hurtfully. I would never condone using terms of racial abuse, but I do believe that being too ready to be outraged plays into the hands of would-be abusers – it empowers them! Spurs fans have been smart.
These sentiments were shared by the majority of posters on Forum 1, who endorsed the reclamation of ‘Yid’ by Tottenham fans with the aim of neutralising its use as an epithet. Fan 7 offered an alternative perspective:
I understand that Spurs fans took on the name Yids to take away the power of the word and a lot of Jewish people were supporting the club at the time and still do. However, if we had a large African supporter base and called ourselves N*****s the argument looks quite tenuous. The issue is, are Spurs fans, by calling themselves Yids, improving or exacerbating issues of racial discrimination, regardless of intent? Opposing fans in response to our chanting of ‘Yiddo’ etc sing more anti-Jewish songs/chants. Are we escalating racial discrimination rather than defusing it?
Replying to Fan 7 in agreement, Fan 8 praised The Y-Word film: ‘I’ve been saying this on this forum for years. Just seems that most people on here don’t care, as they’re not Jewish. I thought the film was great and hopefully the message will get through to a few more people’. This opposition to the use of the ‘Yid’, although one presented by less than a handful on the forum, mirrors the views of David Baddiel (2013) (Edwards, 2012; Wardrup, 2011) and Ivor Baddiel (2011) in believing that Tottenham fans’ continued usage perpetuates Tottenham’s Jewish identity and, as a consequence, helps to sustain antisemitism. The Baddiels (2011, 2013) also make the same parallel with the ‘N-word’. Other fans disagreed and shrugged off any deeper linguistic meaning of ‘Yid’ in football fandom: ‘The words themselves become meaningless and funny’. One fan dismissively posted: ‘I think that some people are just a little too precious and are seeing problems where none lie’. Another quipped: ‘Surely there are better things to make a film about’.
In contrast, other posts provided more measured and thoughtful reflection, with many emphasising the context in which and intent with which Tottenham fans use the term ‘Yid’. A fan with ‘Yiddo’ in their username wrote:
It all comes down to context in regard to whether the word ‘yid’ is racist. If it’s being chanted with references to the holocaust or directed at a Jewish person who isn’t a Spurs fan (like David Baddiel was) then it is going too far and should be clamped down.
Another fan, in their consideration of the intent behind Tottenham fans’ use of ‘Yid’, raised the issue of the same fans singing a song with racist lyrics towards the Togolese Real Madrid (and former Arsenal) striker, Emmanuel Adebayor
7
(Hytner, 2011):
I think that there are two elements to this. Firstly the intention of the person chanting, singing whatever. Secondly the perception of the intended audience. You might think that singing about someone’s father ‘washing elephants’ is amusing, a bit of banter. The recipient might find it deeply offensive. Spurs fans referring to themselves as ‘Yids’ clearly cannot be racist in intent. Other fans referring to Spurs fans as ‘Yids’ could be racist in intent, although the Spurs fans having ‘owned’ the words are unlikely to regard it as such. Hissing noises are clearly racist and are taken as such.
That Adebayor formerly played for Arsenal is significant because racist abuse is used as a heightened expression of rivalry and can also take ‘player-specific’ forms in situated contexts: ‘racial otherness and national difference are used against high-profile players as a means to counteract the threat they pose’ (Back et al., 2001: 115). This post led to a further discussion of what forum members believed constituted ‘racism’:
Fan 9: making hissing noises is plain old racial abuse. I was at West Ham away this season and they were doing it and no one did anything to stop it. I think they will still be doing it in 50 years time unless they start to categorise it in the same bracket as say throwing a banana onto the pitch. Fan 10: To throw a banana on a pitch is just pitifully mindless. To relish in peoples murder in gas chambers or wishing they contract a tragic disease (Campbell / Lord of the Dance) is IMHO much worse.
Here Fan 10 highlights another example of a Tottenham fan song aimed at Arsenal then Portsmouth defender, Sol Campbell (a former Tottenham player), which has been condemned as homophobic and (by some) also racist (see Allirajah, 2008; Tatchell, 2008 for counter-arguments).
It appeared that few of those posting on Forum 1 were actually Jewish, but instead adopted a quasi-Jewish identity: ‘I’m not Jewish and forever a Yid!’ One observed: ‘I’m sure most Spurs fans class themselves as yid, even though most are non-Jewish’. Another articulated the point that ‘Yids’ is a jovial reference point for opposition fans, with no intent to cause harm or be antisemitic, explaining that, ‘Whenever my Arsenal-supporting friends (some of whom are Jewish) call Spurs “the Yids” or me a “Yiddo” they are not using it as derogatory against Jews but rather as banter’. This illustrates Millward’s (2008a) observation about the how cultural prejudices are normalised in football through ‘jokes’ and stereotypes. Several fans echoed the fact that opposition fans ‘call us Yids just like we call them Gooners or Scousers’.
The fans in Forum 1 generally seemed to support The Y-Word in principle, but some questioned the content and message: for example: ‘I think that the Baddiel film is worthy but unsubtle and unsophisticated’. While the majority of comments relating to the film were positive, many of these highlighted the antisemitic discourse that Tottenham fans receive from their opponents. Fan 11 advocated ‘mass arrests on every occasion when opposition fans hiss, or sing songs like the one in the film – that might be a good place to take this campaign’. Most on Forum 1 acknowledged that whilst The Y-Word was directed at Tottenham fans – and that this was misguided in their opinion – the film was needed in order to effectively inform opposition supporters that antisemitic singing/chanting is unacceptable. However, one fan was not convinced, believing that Tottenham fans were being censured:
Just watched the film on YouTube. I thought it was going to be a debate about the use, but no it’s just having a go and calling it racist. How long have we used the term Yiddo as reference to Spurs fans? Since the 70s? If anyone can’t tell the difference between what is meant to be offensive and what is meant to be a shout showing our support and links to the Jewish community then more shame them.
This sentiment – arguing that the ‘Yiddo’ chant is implicitly used as a badge of honour or call to arms – was also echoed in Forum 2. Responding to this post, another fan challenged the content of The Y-Word film:
Yeah, there’s something wrong about this video. I doesn’t feel very coherent/believable. They seem to suggest the word ‘yid’ causes neo-nazi chanting or is inextricably linked to it. It doesn’t feel like a very effective/appropriate response to casual nazism. Making the word ‘yid’ an issue is probably not going to effect the underlying problem.
This post reflected a common feeling on the forum that Tottenham fans were being wrongly targeted by the filmmakers. Another fan wrote: ‘It would seem the main problem is Chelsea’, adding a web-link to a newspaper that reported several high-profile recorded incidents of antisemitic abuse, mainly at Stamford Bridge following the appointment of Avram Grant (an Israeli Jew) as Chelsea manager (Kessel, 2007). 8 Several fans emphasised the fact that The Y-Word’s creator, David Baddiel, was a Chelsea fan.
Forum 2
That David Baddiel was a Chelsea fan was also a contentious issue on Forum 2, which was characterised by a more defensive and sometimes aggressive tone in response to what they perceived was their persecution by Baddiel and ‘the authorities’ who they saw as threatening to censor and control expressions of their fandom. The forum thread was initiated by a post providing a link to Tottenham Hotspur Football Club’s (2011) statement on The Y-Word film, with the comment: ‘You couldn’t make it up if you tried’, accompanied by a ‘Jewish’ emoticon wearing a kippa (skullcap) with beard and sidelocks, ringing his hands. This prompted the following exchange:
Fan 2: when are people going to stop having a go at what we sing? First the campbell song then the adebayor song now us singing yids. They should fuck right off. Fan 3: its the blueprint for a better Britain. Just ask that cunt Livingstone.
It is interesting to note the sarcastic reference to British social policy by Fan 3, who also makes reference to the left-wing Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. This is indicative of the right-leaning political content of some Forum 2 exchanges. Many Forum 2 members felt Tottenham were under attack from the ‘PC [Politically Correct] brigade’, as one poster articulated, and resented authoritarian attempts to further ‘sanitise’ the football stadium (King, 2002; Millward, 2008a; Pearson, 2012). These sentiments reflect what Waiton (2012) describes as the ‘criminalisation’ of football fans in an ‘age of intolerance’. Fan 4 similarly bemoaned, ‘The world has gone PC mad. Most people with a bit of common [sense] know when someone is being racist as opposed to what is being referred to here’. Fairclough (2003: 25) explains how some forms of cultural and discursive intervention are labelled as ‘PC’ because they ‘smack of the arrogance, self-righteousness and puritanism of an ultra-left politics’.
Resentment of David Baddiel was highly prevalent and vitriolic on Forum 2. Typical of this was: ‘Fuck Baddiel and anyone who buys into his complete bollocks’ and ‘Baddiel is a fully paid up, prawn sandwich chomping Chelscum fan. Its so he can attack us and dress it up as a “social issue” and hide behind a race card’. The issues of race and racism were also raised by Fan 5, who argued that Baddiel’s comedy career had included self-mockery at his own Jewishness and the racialised ridicule of others:
what i dont get is david baddiel!! ulterior motives possibly! he was never funny but he’s playing devils advocate here. suddenly wants everybody to know about the ‘y’ word because he’s apparently been racially abused at chelsea (not the first ffs) but have a look at his past work absolutely taking the piss out of jews/yids/heebs etc.
Fan 5 added three links to YouTube. The first was to a sketch from Baddiel’s 1990s television comedy show Fantasy Football with Frank Skinner, which was replete with Jewish stereotypes, including references to Jewish Tottenham fans. The second link was to a trailer of The Infidel (2010) – written by Baddiel – an identity crisis comedy about a Muslim who discovers he is adopted and Jewish; the character is a Tottenham fan. The third link was to another Fantasy Football sketch where Baddiel and Skinner mock the ‘pineapple’ hairstyle of dreadlocked footballer, Jason Lee. Fan 6 agreed with this post and expressed similar views: ‘Spot on mate. That chelsea cunt baddiel at it again. Bloke needs straightening out – cunts been using being Jewish his whole career happily taking the piss out of anyone and everyone including – then has the cheek to call us racists’. This perspective was illustrated further in another thread entitled ‘Fucking Hell!’ in which fans expressed their indignation at The Y-Word film and Tottenham Hotspur for endorsing the film:
Fan 7: Funny how the club don’t ban it in the club shop when bods want it [‘Yid’] printed on the back of their shirts. Fan 8: Should and will we eventually be banned from chanting it? Has it served its purpose, and have Spurs fans made their point? Should non jews like me consider the wider implications of chanting this word and think of the bigger picture and the modern world and it’s ways, and how appropriate it is to chant it in today’s society before I do? Should I change my log in name? Nah fuck it. YIDIO YIDIO YIDIO p.s If any of you think the answer to any of the above questions is yes, then you are probably a gooner and should fuck off right away. Fan 9: No cunt should sing or shout fuck all, keep quiet and let them know what its like with no atmosphere. Fan 10: That’s the way it’s going mate. Got a feeling that I’ll be ejected from my seat next week… Wankers the lot of them. Fan 11: Granted, the abusive yid chanting from other fans can cause offence… Any cunt with any sense knows that when chanted by our lot the context in which it is expressed is not intended to be offensive. Some of these cunts need to realise that and get a life. Fan 12: Yids! Yids! Yids! Yids! Yids!
There are a number of pertinent issues raised in this exchange. Firstly, the importance of cultural context is again highlighted. Secondly, there is not a single supportive comment for The Y-Word, nor Tottenham Hotspur’s endorsement of the film. Forum 2 users focused their attention on who was responsible for attempts to eradicate the use of ‘Yid’ in football fandom. This echoes the resentment and resistance of other fans towards perceived attempts at social control that have, for some, come as a consequence of the ‘gentrification’ and commercialisation of football (King, 2002; Pearson, 2012). Few blamed Tottenham Hotspur for their stance in endorsing the film, but pointed to revenue generated through printing on replica shirts. Some chose to attack fellow Tottenham fans who take offence to the term ‘Yid’. Fan loyalty was called into question by Tottenham Fan 8, with Tottenham Fan 11 calling for people to ‘get a life’, trivialising other fans’ discomfort at the use of the term at matches. Such hostility towards fans whose views contrast with theirs is typical of the nature of the ‘old-school’ supporter that uses Forum 2, as are the attacks on the ‘PC Brigade’.
Unlike on Forum 1, discussion of the antisemitism of opposition fans towards Tottenham was very limited; Fan 13, who declared himself Jewish, was one of just a couple who highlighted this:
Have to say as a four-by-two [Jew] myself I don’t have a problem with the yid chant. Its evolution came from other teams chanting antisemitic stuff against Jewish and non-Jewish spurs fans. Using it has weakened that and in my family of spurs fans we use it as a term of affection ie Papa yid, baby yid, brother yid etc. So i have no problem with it and no intention of stopping using it.
Here Fan 13 outlines how ‘Yid’ is used as a term of endearment among Jews and Tottenham fans. The same poster then appeared to deflect the issue of antisemitism by suggesting Baddiel’s film was unnecessary and addressing the wrong race-related issues in football:
Now if Baddiel wants to contribute something positive he should campaign to support the development of black players into managers and the development of Asian players. Both are relevant issues. Honestly what a waste of time worrying about us chanting yiddos.
The post ended with an emoticon character wearing a shtreimel (large black hat) with beard and sidelocks, waving an Israeli flag. Others responded with ‘agreed’ and chants of ‘Yiddo! Yiddo!’ and ‘Yid Army’. This typified the sense of incredulity and scorn regarding the making of The Y-Word film present on Forum 2.
Discussion: the changing use of language
When seeking to understand how particular words are used, it is vital to recognise that the meanings of words change. Efron (2006: 237) explains the ‘multiplicity of meanings, intents, goals and rituals associated with the overall phenomenon’ of using ‘Yid’ in English football fandom through Eco’s (1976) semiotic concept of ‘rhetorical code-switching’, whereby the values associated with a word are subverted and alternated by the insider–outsider groups. Similarly, the value reversal of the term ‘Yid’ by Tottenham fans can be understood as a form of ‘linguistic reclamation’. Rejecting the simple binary of support or opposition for linguistic reclamation, Brontsema (2004: 15) argues that there are at least three identifiable goals of such reclamation: (1) value reversal (to transform the negative value into a positive one); (2) neutralisation (to nullify its force); (3) stigma exploitation (whereby the stigma is purposefully retained as a confrontational, revolutionary call).
McCormack (2011) makes central the changing nature and multiplicity of language with regard to homosexually-themed discourse. He contends that ‘gay’ has multiple meanings in contemporary society, including referring to sexual identity and being passé or rubbish. Importantly for our purposes, McCormack (2011) problematises linguistic reclamation as dependent upon intent and reception and argues that cultural context is central to understanding these meanings. His premise is that because the effects of homosexually-themed language vary in their intensity and damage, it is necessary to distinguish them: ‘the intent to wound is a determining factor in the effect of discourse’ (McCormack, 2011: 922).
This principle can be applied to aid understanding of the different uses of ‘Yid’ in English football fan culture by in-group and out-group members, by placing an emphasis on the intent underpinning its usage and highlighting the unique context of Tottenham Hotspur. When Tottenham fans refer to themselves or their team as ‘Yids’, they are either doing so with positive intent – using it as form of linguistic reclamation to mark identification and camaraderie with the in-group – or because a generational shift has rendered the word simply synonymous with Tottenham. There is no intent or desire to offend or insult any member of the Jewish community. This was acknowledged by the CPS when they dropped the charges against three Tottenham fans (Davis, 2014; Gurden, 2014).
Opposition fans (out-group members) may use ‘Yid’ in three ways. Firstly, ‘Yid’ can be used in a football context to refer to Tottenham fans as a point of reference, in the same way that Arsenal fans are referred to as ‘Gooners’ or fans of Liverpool and Everton as ‘Scousers’; most clubs have such monikers. In this sense, there is no intent to offend. Secondly, however, this intent can change depending on intonation and the use of aggressive prefixes. Sometimes the intent is an expression of rivalry, but not necessarily considered by the perpetrator (nor target) as ‘antisemitic’ or ‘racist’. Importantly, fans can only exchange ‘banter’ about ‘Tottenham Yids’ if they espouse pro-Jewish attitudes.
In other contexts, the use of racial epithets and intensifiers may be more consciously intended to be racist and cause offence. As Back et al. (2001) note, racist verbal abuse in football is nuanced and situated and as such can be manifest in different expressive forms and ritual styles. The final way in which opposition fans use ‘Yid’ is found in the most extreme form of antisemitic discourse and behaviour, characterised by hissing, songs about the Holocaust/Shoah and physical attacks on Tottenham fans for ‘being Jewish’ (whether or not they actually are), which is underscored by genuine religious and racial intolerance and malevolent intent.
Conclusion
Central to our explanation of the different uses of ‘Yid’ in football fandom is the complexity of linguistic discourse, specifically the cultural context in which the word is used, together with the intent underpinning its usage. Focusing upon The Y-Word campaign film as a catalyst for our research, we have unpacked the intricacies of the relationship of Tottenham Hotspur and its fan culture with Judaism and antisemitism. As we have detailed, Tottenham fans have experienced antisemitism from opposing supporters, who have used ‘Yid’ as an epithet to disparagingly refer to them. Incidents of antisemitic abuse and indeed physical attacks on Tottenham fans continue to this day because of their widely perceived ‘Jewish’ identity. Consequently, Tottenham fans have, since the 1970s, appropriated and embraced the term, which for them has taken on a different subcultural meaning.
We find that there were – and remain for some Tottenham fans – different intentions behind this linguistic reclamation of ‘Yid’: value reversal (to transform the negative into a positive); neutralisation (to expunge its injurious meaning and so render it ineffective); stigma exploitation (to highlight the stigma). Our evidence also indicates that some Tottenham fans (perhaps younger generations) are de-sensitised to the socio-historical meanings associated with ‘Yid’ and do not associate it with Judaism, nor realise it can be used as a racial epithet. For them it is simply a football term and, in the words of one fan, a ‘Spurs thing’.
We also find that many Tottenham fans felt The Y-Word film did not adequately address Tottenham’s complex relationship with the Jewish faith and failed to sufficiently understand or demarcate between the multiple meanings and intentions associated with the use of ‘Yid’. Many Tottenham fans on the forums complained that they were wrongly targeted, with some resenting The Y-Word’s advocacy of a ‘zero tolerance’ policy approach on the use of ‘Yid’ in football fandom and perceived efforts to control their expressions of support for their club. This resentment has intensified in response to further attempts to censure Tottenham fans since the film’s release, notably from the Society of Back Lawyers (Herbert, 2012) and The Football Association (2013), which has fuelled public and media debate, particularly over the freedom of speech, with polemic stances evident (Baddiel, 2013; Cloake, 2014; Gurden, 2014; Peisner, 2014).
In September 2013, the national governing body of English football, The Football Association (2013), issued an unprecedented policy statement warning football fans that those using the term ‘Yid’ were liable for criminal prosecution and a Football Banning Order (Poulton, 2013). While The Football Association’s warning was backed by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and London’s Metropolitan Police, it was challenged by PM David Cameron and the Community Security Trust (Poulton, 2013). Despite the Prime Minister’s comments – maintaining ‘There’s a difference between Spurs fans self-describing themselves as Yids and someone calling someone a Yid as an insult’ (Pollard, 2013) – three Tottenham fan arrests came just weeks later. Throughout the 2013/2014 season, Tottenham fans articulated their views with defiant choruses of ‘We’re Tottenham Hotspur! We’ll sing what we want!’ followed by their chant of ‘Yid Army!’ at matches. This could be read as a further form linguistic reclamation through stigma exploitation.
This article contributes to sociological debates pertaining to race and ethnicity, religion, language and sport as the first empirical study of the different uses and meanings of ‘Yid’ in English football fandom. While our findings are based on an initial study on The Y-Word film, further analysis of fan discourse from a wider range of message boards, biographical interviews with Tottenham fans and interviews with key stakeholders is on-going. This research data will contribute to a much more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the uses and intents of ‘Yid’ in football fandom. This requires an acknowledgement of the intricate nature of language and the fluidity and temporality of linguistic reclamation and ‘ownership’. For as Brontsema (2004: 7) argues: ‘One usage does not disallow others; one group’s pejorative use of a word does not prevent another group – indeed, its targets – from using it in new contexts and with differing intentions’.
To date, Kick It Out, David Baddiel (2002, 2013), the Society of Black Lawyers (Herbert, 2012) and The Football Association (2013) have all arguably failed to recognise that words constantly change and evolve through their avocation of a ‘zero tolerance’ policy. New words are created, old ones die or can take on new meanings, just as new words can develop old meanings. This is dependent on cultural context and the intent behind the use of language, which the CPS implicitly acknowledged when they finally dropped the criminal cases against the three Tottenham fans. Hence, it could be argued that Tottenham fans are justified in their appropriation and continued use of ‘Yid’ as an expression of their fandom. The Y-Word (2011) film was misguided and wrongly targeted Tottenham fans. We recommend that future policies to combat antisemitism in football focus upon the real perpetrators of antisemitic discourse and behaviour, not Tottenham fans, who are the victims.
Footnotes
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.