I don't really understand what all the fuss is about to be honest. If you support the taking the knee then feel free to clap while it takes place. If you don't agree with it then simply ignore it. It only lasts for a few seconds so i don't understand why some are getting so wound up by it.
I think in the mind of the eternally offended the "c word" is somehow sexist.
There is a real irony in this.
... I don't get it...
A thread about opposing racism where someone defends sexist language.
I still don’t get how it’s sexist language?!? If I call someone a dick, cock or prick is that sexist language? Genuinely wanting to be enlightened.
Sexist to men
But how is it sexist? I genuinely don’t understand. I’ve been called a pussy’ole numerous times at work but never pulled up anyone up for using sexist language. Being a bit rude maybe.....
I think in the mind of the eternally offended the "c word" is somehow sexist.
There is a real irony in this.
... I don't get it...
A thread about opposing racism where someone defends sexist language.
I still don’t get how it’s sexist language?!? If I call someone a dick, cock or prick is that sexist language? Genuinely wanting to be enlightened.
Sexist to men
But how is it sexist? I genuinely don’t understand. I’ve been called a pussy’ole numerous times at work but never pulled up anyone up for using sexist language. Being a bit rude maybe.....
There’s enough on the internet about sexist language to sink a battleship. Just Google and read. In the same way that certain racial terms have been put out of use there are sexist slurs that also need to be put out of use. I was told in no uncertain times in the late 70s that cunt is a reclaimed word and have never used it in anyway since, as well as other words, terms and phrases which are insulting to women or other groups in society. I don’t and won’t apologise for this or think it is laughable so to do. It’s about respect for people. Some will never change, will sneer and laugh at attempts to challenge how language is used to dehumanise sections of society. That doesn’t mean their use of certain terms isn’t hurtful and demeaning.
Yes. BLM is an organisation with extreme views that many, such as myself will not condone and they have chosen that as their vehicle of choice, along with all of its violent baggage. Their choice. They don't get to choose how people react to that; it is an individual's right to call it how they see it.
Your point about KIO is interesting, but surely something can be done about that? Choosing to go the way they have and clumsily importing a divisive, intolerant and violent movement wholesale from a different country with different cultural issues will have consequences; I would have hoped that they would have considered that. It also begs the question that although it is less fashionable and edgy, KIO is much more inclusive and has a simple message. I think that it is sad that they decided to bin it, rather than reshape it into something more effective, which would of course take a lot of effort, but would still be achievable.
This thread overall seems like a bit of a reflection of society currently; the same old same old - people have a position and they stick to it and dismiss any opposing arguments/evidence out of hand.....and round in circles we go.
It's like the culture wars writ large; two sides shouting at each other, each convinced that they are correct, neither giving an inch.
Interesting that there are so many arguments back and forth ignoring the problem of online abuse and what to do about it; and the overall consensus here is.....nothing. What's the definition of madness?
We can revisit this thread when the same thing happens again at the World Cup, then
It’s a movement not an organisation. I’d say people who oppose it have extreme views, because they’re opposing an anti-racist movement.
But each to their own, eh.
Yeah, who could possibly have a problem with a few dead kids, shopkeepers and bystanders and cities going up in flames when there is some top level virtue signalling opportunities to be had on social media?
Yes. BLM is an organisation with extreme views that many, such as myself will not condone and they have chosen that as their vehicle of choice, along with all of its violent baggage. Their choice. They don't get to choose how people react to that; it is an individual's right to call it how they see it.
Your point about KIO is interesting, but surely something can be done about that? Choosing to go the way they have and clumsily importing a divisive, intolerant and violent movement wholesale from a different country with different cultural issues will have consequences; I would have hoped that they would have considered that. It also begs the question that although it is less fashionable and edgy, KIO is much more inclusive and has a simple message. I think that it is sad that they decided to bin it, rather than reshape it into something more effective, which would of course take a lot of effort, but would still be achievable.
This thread overall seems like a bit of a reflection of society currently; the same old same old - people have a position and they stick to it and dismiss any opposing arguments/evidence out of hand.....and round in circles we go.
It's like the culture wars writ large; two sides shouting at each other, each convinced that they are correct, neither giving an inch.
Interesting that there are so many arguments back and forth ignoring the problem of online abuse and what to do about it; and the overall consensus here is.....nothing. What's the definition of madness?
We can revisit this thread when the same thing happens again at the World Cup, then
It’s a movement not an organisation. I’d say people who oppose it have extreme views, because they’re opposing an anti-racist movement.
But each to their own, eh.
Yeah, who could possibly have a problem with a few dead kids, shopkeepers and bystanders and cities going up in flames when there is some top level virtue signalling opportunities to be had on social media?
Out of interest, what are your views on the need for social reform to bring about less race-based inequality?
I don't really understand what all the fuss is about to be honest. If you support the taking the knee then feel free to clap while it takes place. If you don't agree with it then simply ignore it. It only lasts for a few seconds so i don't understand why some are getting so wound up by it.
My one question is, how can anyone not agree with it?
My 2 questions. What do you think the appropriate ban is for a fan to call a player a ******* ******? 2nd question what do you think the appropriate ban is for a player to call another player a ******* ******? If you want me to and admin agree I will fill in the missing blanks.
Yes. BLM is an organisation with extreme views that many, such as myself will not condone and they have chosen that as their vehicle of choice, along with all of its violent baggage. Their choice. They don't get to choose how people react to that; it is an individual's right to call it how they see it.
Your point about KIO is interesting, but surely something can be done about that? Choosing to go the way they have and clumsily importing a divisive, intolerant and violent movement wholesale from a different country with different cultural issues will have consequences; I would have hoped that they would have considered that. It also begs the question that although it is less fashionable and edgy, KIO is much more inclusive and has a simple message. I think that it is sad that they decided to bin it, rather than reshape it into something more effective, which would of course take a lot of effort, but would still be achievable.
This thread overall seems like a bit of a reflection of society currently; the same old same old - people have a position and they stick to it and dismiss any opposing arguments/evidence out of hand.....and round in circles we go.
It's like the culture wars writ large; two sides shouting at each other, each convinced that they are correct, neither giving an inch.
Interesting that there are so many arguments back and forth ignoring the problem of online abuse and what to do about it; and the overall consensus here is.....nothing. What's the definition of madness?
We can revisit this thread when the same thing happens again at the World Cup, then
It’s a movement not an organisation. I’d say people who oppose it have extreme views, because they’re opposing an anti-racist movement.
But each to their own, eh.
Yeah, who could possibly have a problem with a few dead kids, shopkeepers and bystanders and cities going up in flames when there is some top level virtue signalling opportunities to be had on social media?
Except there weren't "cities going up in flames", the protests last year were remarkably peaceful, but Trump, Fox and its ilk lied because there all support white supremacists.
We're repeatedly told we shouldn't judge all football supporters by the worse elements of football "support", but racists still like to judge everybody who is anti-racist by the worse excesses of a tiny minority, many of whom aren't even BLM supporters, but right wing agent-provocateurs.
I'd wager good money far more peaceful protesters were killed and injured by right wing nut jobs driving their cars into them and by completely OTT policing (unmarked snatch squads in Seattle and Portland for example) then innocent by-standers killed or injures by genuine protestors.
I've signed it, however given that it seems easy for people to get into grounds without tickets, perhaps we need to petition for greater security on the entry into stadia, otherwise banning people will be futile.
Have you ever seen someone sneak into the Valley? Wembley the other night was atrocious, but with that many people I can understand why security failed.
I don't really understand what all the fuss is about to be honest. If you support the taking the knee then feel free to clap while it takes place. If you don't agree with it then simply ignore it. It only lasts for a few seconds so i don't understand why some are getting so wound up by it.
My one question is, how can anyone not agree with it?
My 2 questions. What do you think the appropriate ban is for a fan to call a player a ******* ******? 2nd question what do you think the appropriate ban is for a player to call another player a ******* ******? If you want me to and admin agree I will fill in the missing blanks.
You can go ahead and explain how this point would lead to somebody disagreeing with players taking the knee without filling in the blanks
'There were four shootings at the Chop in a 10-day period towards the end of June, two of which were fatal. The first shooting happened in the early hours of 20 June, killing 19-year-old Horace Lorenzo Anderson and injuring a 33-year-old man. A second shooting the next day left a 17-year-old boy injured, and another person was wounded in a third shooting two days later. In the fourth shooting, on 29 June, a 16-year-old boy was shot and a 14-year-old boy was left critically injured. Allegations of sexual assault and mental health crises within the zone began to be reported, too.
Although protesters insisted the violence wasn't directly connected to Chop, the atmosphere in the community began to change.
Some officials who had previously been supportive of the protest zone began to sour, too. Mayor Durkan walked back her "summer of love" comments, and at the end of June announced that the zone would be dismantled, claiming the movement's message had "been undermined by violence". On 1 July, Chop reached a violent end.'
Just one example - largely peaceful, no doubt. Just a bit of collateral damage, I suppose. Still, it was probably Trump with a sniper rifle, eh?
Lots of assumptions in your post; you just 'know' that you're right, don't you? To true believers things are always black and white. Religious zealots are the same the world over, even if the nature of the religion changes...
'There were four shootings at the Chop in a 10-day period towards the end of June, two of which were fatal. The first shooting happened in the early hours of 20 June, killing 19-year-old Horace Lorenzo Anderson and injuring a 33-year-old man. A second shooting the next day left a 17-year-old boy injured, and another person was wounded in a third shooting two days later. In the fourth shooting, on 29 June, a 16-year-old boy was shot and a 14-year-old boy was left critically injured. Allegations of sexual assault and mental health crises within the zone began to be reported, too.
Although protesters insisted the violence wasn't directly connected to Chop, the atmosphere in the community began to change.
Some officials who had previously been supportive of the protest zone began to sour, too. Mayor Durkan walked back her "summer of love" comments, and at the end of June announced that the zone would be dismantled, claiming the movement's message had "been undermined by violence". On 1 July, Chop reached a violent end.'
Just one example - largely peaceful, no doubt. Just a bit of collateral damage, I suppose. Still, it was probably Trump with a sniper rifle, eh?
Lots of assumptions in your post; you just 'know' that you're right, don't you? To true believers things are always black and white. Religious zealots are the same the world over, even if the nature of the religion changes...
What has this got to do with a petition to ban racists from football? Remember in the 1930s the Nazi Party used to compile endless lists of terrible things the Jews were supposed to have done, ending up with claims that they ate children.
Trump endorsed the QAnon nutters who claimed Hilary Clinton and her friends were paedophiles who drink children’s blood.
'There were four shootings at the Chop in a 10-day period towards the end of June, two of which were fatal. The first shooting happened in the early hours of 20 June, killing 19-year-old Horace Lorenzo Anderson and injuring a 33-year-old man. A second shooting the next day left a 17-year-old boy injured, and another person was wounded in a third shooting two days later. In the fourth shooting, on 29 June, a 16-year-old boy was shot and a 14-year-old boy was left critically injured. Allegations of sexual assault and mental health crises within the zone began to be reported, too.
Although protesters insisted the violence wasn't directly connected to Chop, the atmosphere in the community began to change.
Some officials who had previously been supportive of the protest zone began to sour, too. Mayor Durkan walked back her "summer of love" comments, and at the end of June announced that the zone would be dismantled, claiming the movement's message had "been undermined by violence". On 1 July, Chop reached a violent end.'
Just one example - largely peaceful, no doubt. Just a bit of collateral damage, I suppose. Still, it was probably Trump with a sniper rifle, eh?
Lots of assumptions in your post; you just 'know' that you're right, don't you? To true believers things are always black and white. Religious zealots are the same the world over, even if the nature of the religion changes...
This stuff is so weird.
Anything to justify disliking a 5 second anti-racism symbol.
I bet if they chose instead to sit on the floor, you'd have the same nonsense about how sitting down is actually a symbol that supports North Korea.
'There were four shootings at the Chop in a 10-day period towards the end of June, two of which were fatal. The first shooting happened in the early hours of 20 June, killing 19-year-old Horace Lorenzo Anderson and injuring a 33-year-old man. A second shooting the next day left a 17-year-old boy injured, and another person was wounded in a third shooting two days later. In the fourth shooting, on 29 June, a 16-year-old boy was shot and a 14-year-old boy was left critically injured. Allegations of sexual assault and mental health crises within the zone began to be reported, too.
Although protesters insisted the violence wasn't directly connected to Chop, the atmosphere in the community began to change.
Some officials who had previously been supportive of the protest zone began to sour, too. Mayor Durkan walked back her "summer of love" comments, and at the end of June announced that the zone would be dismantled, claiming the movement's message had "been undermined by violence". On 1 July, Chop reached a violent end.'
Just one example - largely peaceful, no doubt. Just a bit of collateral damage, I suppose. Still, it was probably Trump with a sniper rifle, eh?
Lots of assumptions in your post; you just 'know' that you're right, don't you? To true believers things are always black and white. Religious zealots are the same the world over, even if the nature of the religion changes...
This stuff is so weird.
Anything to justify disliking a 5 second anti-racism symbol.
I bet if they chose instead to sit on the floor, you'd have the same nonsense about how sitting down is actually a symbol that supports North Korea.
Nothing is ever good enough.
Kick it Out should start an alternative anti racism gesture to use before matches. It would be interesting to see if all the objections then stopped, or not.
'There were four shootings at the Chop in a 10-day period towards the end of June, two of which were fatal. The first shooting happened in the early hours of 20 June, killing 19-year-old Horace Lorenzo Anderson and injuring a 33-year-old man. A second shooting the next day left a 17-year-old boy injured, and another person was wounded in a third shooting two days later. In the fourth shooting, on 29 June, a 16-year-old boy was shot and a 14-year-old boy was left critically injured. Allegations of sexual assault and mental health crises within the zone began to be reported, too.
Although protesters insisted the violence wasn't directly connected to Chop, the atmosphere in the community began to change.
Some officials who had previously been supportive of the protest zone began to sour, too. Mayor Durkan walked back her "summer of love" comments, and at the end of June announced that the zone would be dismantled, claiming the movement's message had "been undermined by violence". On 1 July, Chop reached a violent end.'
Just one example - largely peaceful, no doubt. Just a bit of collateral damage, I suppose. Still, it was probably Trump with a sniper rifle, eh?
Lots of assumptions in your post; you just 'know' that you're right, don't you? To true believers things are always black and white. Religious zealots are the same the world over, even if the nature of the religion changes...
This stuff is so weird.
Anything to justify disliking a 5 second anti-racism symbol.
I bet if they chose instead to sit on the floor, you'd have the same nonsense about how sitting down is actually a symbol that supports North Korea.
Nothing is ever good enough.
Kick it Out should start an alternative anti racism gesture to use before matches. It would be interesting to see if all the objections then stopped, or not.
There could be a plethora of anti-racist gestures prior to kick off and you’d still get complaints from the Neanderthals with hate in their marrow.
maybe they could just do the Nescafé gesture to the fans
Any suggestion that the gesture should be changed and only then will we be alright with it, is part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.
We don't get to tell other people what issues they face and we don't get to tell them how they express them. Cancelling or denying like that is an illustration of outside prejudice, confirming, rather than mitigating the real lived experience.
But, blimey, if they're going to change the gesture, the Nescafé shuffle aimed at the racists would be perfect!
I would love it if they called their bluff and did something like a hand on the heart gesture. For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
But it doesn’t have anything to do with you. Ask the footballers if they think it’s submissive maybe? They’re the ones that matter, not you, with all due respect.
Again, endless excuses for disliking what is simply an anti racist gesture.
I would love it if they called their bluff and did something like a hand on the heart gesture. For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
But it doesn’t have anything to do with you. Ask the footballers if they think it’s submissive maybe? They’re the ones that matter, not you, with all due respect.
Again, endless excuses for disliking what is simply an anti racist gesture.
Exactly this. Ask any one of this what we think the best gesture would be and we might all come up with something different. The act is what the footballers have decided is appropriate and they have told us why they are doing it so you support it or don't, but you don't boo it. There is something sinister about doing that.
I would love it if they called their bluff and did something like a hand on the heart gesture. For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
But it doesn’t have anything to do with you. Ask the footballers if they think it’s submissive maybe? They’re the ones that matter, not you, with all due respect.
Again, endless excuses for disliking what is simply an anti racist gesture.
Fair enough. Not saying it should happen, I don't think anyone here was genuinely suggesting it should be changed...
I support taking the knee, but I would never do it, because it is submissive (in my mind), and as much as that might upset some people, I am entitled to my opinion.
It's not like I'm some moron booing it, sometimes on here it feels like the same sad bastards sniffing around for blood.
Comments
I still don’t get how it’s sexist language?!? If I call someone a dick, cock or prick is that sexist language? Genuinely wanting to be enlightened.
But how is it sexist? I genuinely don’t understand. I’ve been called a pussy’ole numerous times at work but never pulled up anyone up for using sexist language. Being a bit rude maybe.....
In the same way that certain racial terms have been put out of use there are sexist slurs that also need to be put out of use. I was told in no uncertain times in the late 70s that cunt is a reclaimed word and have never used it in anyway since, as well as other words, terms and phrases which are insulting to women or other groups in society. I don’t and won’t apologise for this or think it is laughable so to do. It’s about respect for people.
Some will never change, will sneer and laugh at attempts to challenge how language is used to dehumanise sections of society. That doesn’t mean their use of certain terms isn’t hurtful and demeaning.
What do you think the appropriate ban is for a fan to call a player a ******* ******?
2nd question what do you think the appropriate ban is for a player to call another player a ******* ******?
If you want me to and admin agree I will fill in the missing blanks.
We're repeatedly told we shouldn't judge all football supporters by the worse elements of football "support", but racists still like to judge everybody who is anti-racist by the worse excesses of a tiny minority, many of whom aren't even BLM supporters, but right wing agent-provocateurs.
I'd wager good money far more peaceful protesters were killed and injured by right wing nut jobs driving their cars into them and by completely OTT policing (unmarked snatch squads in Seattle and Portland for example) then innocent by-standers killed or injures by genuine protestors.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/16/this-summers-black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelming-peaceful-our-research-finds/
What do you see as the connection here?
Have a good day.
Although protesters insisted the violence wasn't directly connected to Chop, the atmosphere in the community began to change.
Some officials who had previously been supportive of the protest zone began to sour, too. Mayor Durkan walked back her "summer of love" comments, and at the end of June announced that the zone would be dismantled, claiming the movement's message had "been undermined by violence". On 1 July, Chop reached a violent end.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53218448
Just one example - largely peaceful, no doubt. Just a bit of collateral damage, I suppose. Still, it was probably Trump with a sniper rifle, eh?
Lots of assumptions in your post; you just 'know' that you're right, don't you? To true believers things are always black and white. Religious zealots are the same the world over, even if the nature of the religion changes...
Remember in the 1930s the Nazi Party used to compile endless lists of terrible things the Jews were supposed to have done, ending up with claims that they ate children.
Anything to justify disliking a 5 second anti-racism symbol.
I bet if they chose instead to sit on the floor, you'd have the same nonsense about how sitting down is actually a symbol that supports North Korea.
Nothing is ever good enough.
There could be a plethora of anti-racist gestures prior to kick off and you’d still get complaints from the Neanderthals with hate in their marrow.
For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
We don't get to tell other people what issues they face and we don't get to tell them how they express them. Cancelling or denying like that is an illustration of outside prejudice, confirming, rather than mitigating the real lived experience.
But, blimey, if they're going to change the gesture, the Nescafé shuffle aimed at the racists would be perfect!
I support taking the knee, but I would never do it, because it is submissive (in my mind), and as much as that might upset some people, I am entitled to my opinion.
It's not like I'm some moron booing it, sometimes on here it feels like the same sad bastards sniffing around for blood.