Well worth reading this from THFC. It's a summary of the polled results from the independent fan consultation relating to the Y word (or Yid word, it's okay to say that now isn't it?) where 11.5k supporters responded.
The % won't shock you, it's mostly positive and in favour of the word being used in the context we all understand and it also complements the heritage at play. Nothing particularly left-field is highlighted but there are concerns that regardless of context the word is found to cause offence to some - a minority (if you base it on this consultation alone).
The most pertinent passage of text in the article is the second to last paragraph:
This consultation has shown that many supporters acknowledge that the use of the word needs to be re-assessed and that, whilst our fans and the law recognise the importance of context, ultimately context is not the only consideration.
With the Crown Prosecution Service not proceeding ahead with charging the three Tottenham supporters arrested for using the word, this entire discussion belongs within White Hart Lane as something that the club and supporters work towards with a non-ambiguous conclusion in mind.
Any given word can be deemed offensive - including the word yid. The fact that the Spurs fanbase understand the context (regardless if some disagree with it) means that for now there should be an acceptance that it will continue to be used. That ought to be the shared non-ambiguous conclusion.
Over time the word might slowly begin to disappear from the stands or its offensiveness might one day subside. Either way, it's part of the clubs identity and history even if some find it an uncomfortable topic to discuss or have simply never warmed to using it or having it as a badge of honour.
The word was adapted by Tottenham supporters. It's meaning and context is our own. This variant belongs to us. To those that wish to use it. Those that don't at the very least (after almost 3 decades) should know by now that it's hardly going to disappear over night and asking those that chant it to stop is an impossibility. Maybe if the anti-Semitism didn't exist in the first place we'd not be discussing this thirty years later.
That paragraph from the club has them sitting on the fence which is understandable considering they need to be representative of all of us - even the minority - but they're doing so from a protective position as a business entity that is constantly in the public eye, at home and abroad.
To finish the article with that copy suggests that this discussion isn't quite over yet and the club are appeasing the controversy by suggesting those offended have to be considered. The minority appear to have more sway for the club than the vast majority of Jewish and non-Jewish supporters.
If I attempt to be cynical, the word yid (even with the context we know and understand) doesn't fit into the world wide branding of the club where that same context will no doubt fail to fit into foreign markets where culturally this instinctive tribal call to arms will be misunderstood by those that are not hardcore supporters. It's still misunderstood by so many in this country, so it has no chance outside of our shores.
The club changed our Latin motto because they own the copyright to it. They can't claim to own our identity as individuals or a collective. Although they have influence in controlling and conditioning. They held back the consultation data until after the CPS decision was made. They've not got our backs. It's difficult for them to do so whilst sat on that fence, protecting their brand name rather than our names and playing politics as to not upset the confused agendas of the police and others. Once more, we're secondary rather than the priority.
As for the issue of 'offence' - there are songs sang up and down the country that cite dead footballers/supporters and other niceties that some don't blink at and others deem to be bad taste. How can you possibly define what is and isn't offensive? The same % of people that dislike the word yid might be equal to the same amount of people that dislike the c-word. Where do you draw the line?
Is the club seeking to side-step the issue of context? If their end game is to eradicate its usage then it's the only path left to take.
Personally, just let it be.
The CPS don't deem it illegal to charge those that use it at a football match to describe themselves as one. In this instance, it's all about context. Spurs should continue to listen to all supporters, but slowly settle back and let us get on with supporting Tottenham Hotspur. The club should focus their efforts with the authorities/FA and anti-racism campaigners to continue to highlight genuine hate crimes that seem to be over-shadowed by the yid word debate time and time again.