Let's be honest: we wouldn't draw a natural connection between Raheem Sterling's tattoo and gang violence if he was white

Violence occurring on our streets has nothing to do with Raheem Sterling, but there is a racist and classist undercurrent at play here that suggests 'people like him' do have something to do with it and therefore he, as an apparent 'representative', should be held to account

Raheem Sterling's gun tattoo on his leg has ruffled a few feathers, not least those of the tabloid press (The Sun has now covered the fact that Sterling has a gun tattoo on his calf for two days in a row on their front page, today quoting Damilola Taylor’s father in a headline that reads “Damilola dad: Say sorry for gun tattoo, Raheem”.)

Sterling said recently that the tattoo was done in memory of his father, who was shot dead when Sterling was two years old, as well as his promise to himself “to never touch a gun” after that incident. Nevertheless, it has been roundly condemned by anti-gun campaigners after its existence was covered by numerous media outlets.

And it's not the first time this has happened. It seems like it's an orchestrated campaign (have a Google of Sterling’s name and you’ll come across numerous articles criticising him for “splashing” his own cash on “bling”, buying his mother a present and even flying EasyJet.)

Sterling is a successful black footballer, a talented high earner on top of his game. It’s no secret that being black and successful at the same time can make you a target for certain parts of the establishment. If this was a middle class music artist – an Ed Sheeran type with a guitar and some songs about difficult breakups – or even a white footballer, we wouldn't be wasting our time ranting on about their tattoos. Let’s be honest: we wouldn’t so naturally draw the line between a picture of a gun on their skin and gang violence.

Some have questioned whether Sterling should have thought about his “position as a role model” before inking an assault rifle onto his skin. But let’s remember that the man himself has never said anything about glorifying or endorsing gun or knife crime. We can only take his explanation about his father – and the fact that he “shoots with that foot” – at face value, and remember that people deal with bereavement in very different ways. From a spiritual and psychological perspective, it appears like he is carrying his father’s wound with him and giving the trauma he experienced around that death visibility. Grief is often inconvenient, messy, unexpected: not everyone expresses their sadness through a simple name and date.

If a white person had a gun tattoo after such an obvious connection with their father’s death, would they be seen as endorsing violence? Or would they be seen as reacting justifiably to a violent and unexpected family death?

We have always had a classist issue with tattoos in Britain. I remember growing up myself thinking everyone who had a tattoo was a criminal, an outcast or in some way inherently wicked. That was the perception society had about people who had tattoos at the time, and it filtered down to children like me. I’ve come to see tattoos as an art form that should be embraced rather than rejected, but it took time to work past that prejudice.

Violence occurring on our streets has nothing to do with Raheem Sterling, but there is a racist and classist undercurrent at play here that suggests “people like him” do have something to do with it and therefore he, as an apparent “representative”, should be held to account. We know the actual contributors to violent crime: people pushed to the margins of society; disenfranchised groups who feel that society has nothing to offer them; poverty and hopelessness played out across generations.

Sterling offers hope to those people who feel hopeless. His success as a black footballer indicates there is light at the end of tunnel. They can make it; they can get through the doors which often can feel like they’re continually slammed in the faces of working class young men from black backgrounds. Blaming people like Raheem Sterling for our failings as a society is lazy; accepting that by his very existence he is an inspiration for people who otherwise might have been left completely disaffected is smart.

It's right for everyone to have their say about what tattoos symbolise and the responsibility of role models, but it’s time to focus on what Sterling actually does rather than what we consider he represents by a few inches of his leg. He performs on the pitch as a brilliant England footballer. He talks openly about the death of his father and he responds with maturity when publicly criticised. Perhaps we should start paying attention to what comes out of his mouth, rather than our own assumptions.