Comment: 'Coconut' can only be an insult in the circumstances

Given the context in which Shirley Brown uttered the word "coconut" it seems inconceivable that it could be deemed as anything other than racially abusive.

Had someone said it to her, would she have accepted that it was not a racist insult?

Would she have shrugged it off as an inoffensive jibe?

Or would she have instantly understood the loaded nature of the word?

"Brown on the outside, white on the inside" is at the very least labelling someone a hypocrite.

How can anyone level such a comment without it being racially abusive?

But the report to Bristol City Council which recommends no action should be taken against Ms Brown asks us to believe just that.

Such a remark, regardless of who delivers it, is surely not merely offensive but racist.

And whatever some people will have you believe, racism is not only the preserve of white extremists.

The report which recommends no action against Ms Brown is gutless and depressing.

It is a missed opportunity to send out a clear message that using abusive words of this kind will not be tolerated, no matter whose mouth they come from.

Perhaps the councillors who consider this report should ask themselves a very simple question.

Had the person who uttered the word "coconut" been white, would the claim that it was not a racially abusive comment have been accepted?

Or is there one rule for one and a different for others here?

Councillors should look at this report and reject it for the absurd piece of lily-livered, fence-sitting that it is and throw it in the bin.

Then they should at least issue Ms Brown with a severe reprimand.