The pride jersey round.

[Red Pill]

Do I think that players should be abused, shamed, and excluded? No.

I believe the constant labeling of players ( who chose not to wear the Jersey) by many posters including yourself on the forum as homophobic which means:
“having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people”
Is essentially a form a shaming and exclusion. As you say opinions have consequences.
Accusing a player for a form of hate for choosing not to wear a jersey promoting a type of sexuality does not mean that the players hate or even dislike gay people. This is in my mind abhorrent.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Yes, I agree as a society we should do something ...

What's the something then?

 

[Woodsie]

What's the something then?

Sorry, above my pay grade ... what do you think is the solution ?

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Sorry, above my pay grade ... what do you think is the solution ?

That's the thing though....you seem to think yourself qualified to condemn one idea (after giving it an significant amount of thought) but to think of anything else, even as a thought experiment is too hard? It kind of gives the impression that you have a preference on the outcome here.
(and I've already provided one in a previous post....they aren't hard to think of)

 

[Woodsie]

That's the thing though....you seem to think yourself qualified to condemn one idea (after giving it an significant amount of thought) but to think of anything else, even as a thought experiment is too hard? It kind of gives the impression that you have a preference on the outcome here.
(and I've already provided one in a previous post....they aren't hard to think of)

Looking at the Manly fiasco ... and it wasn't hard to conclude that heavy handed approach wasn't part of a solution ... not a lot of significant thought required. ... Are you suggesting that it was a good approach?

But let's go back .... for you to ask for a solution, requires that you believe there is a problem. Please articulate for me what you see the problem as ... so I can better ponder a solution.

 

[Red Pill]

That's the thing though....you seem to think yourself qualified to condemn one idea (after giving it an significant amount of thought) but to think of anything else, even as a thought experiment is too hard? It kind of gives the impression that you have a preference on the outcome here.
(and I've already provided one in a previous post....they aren't hard to think of)

There are plenty of ways to help ensure better outcomes for people with non heterosexual sexual preferences ( which they can not control) . I actually think delegating it to football players is lazy.
More focus on providing more education both children as well as parents providing more outside support ( outside the family unit) for kids. More education in the workplace ( which is happening now)

 

[manlyfan76]

The Pope is one person. There may be people (who are of certain faiths) who think what he says is the law as according to god. There are many more of myriad faiths for whom he has no relevance. Myself I think he changed his views because the catholic church has dwindling numbers and they needed to soften up to bring back the masses.

Regardless people have differing opinions, and we can respect those opinions, or more importantly the right to have those opinions, even if we cannot agree with those opinions.

“I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (Voltairre)

Pope, Anglican, Presbyterian leaders denounce anti-gay laws​

Pope Francis, the head of the Anglican Communion and the top Presbyterian minister have spoken out on LGBTQ rights"

Well more than one person.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Looking at the Manly fiasco ... and it wasn't hard to conclude that heavy handed approach wasn't part of a solution ... not a lot of significant thought required. ... Are you suggesting that it was a good approach?

No, and I've stated that it was far worse than a "good approach" multiple times. The club were the main one's at fault here IMO.

But let's go back .... for you to ask for a solution, requires that you believe there is a problem. Please articulate for me what you see the problem as ... so I can better ponder a solution.

I was commenting on your post:

Yes, I agree as a society we should do something

So...I'll throw it back to you
Or is there not a problem (that the pride round was presumably attempting to address?)

 

[Woodsie]

No, and I've stated that it was far worse than a "good approach" multiple times. The club were the main one's at fault here IMO.

I was commenting on your post:

So...I'll through it back to you
Or is there not a problem (that the pride round was presumably attempting to address?)

Good try ... but if you want to set yourself up as an arbitrator of my solutions ... you really need to articulate exactly what the problem I am to solve is ... to allow me to do it myself, may simply result in me missing a point due to any subconscious bias I may have.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Good try ... but if you want to set yourself up as an arbitrator of my solutions ... you really need to articulate exactly what the problem I am to solve is ... to allow me to do it myself, may simply result in me missing a point due to any subconscious bias I may have.

Lol. The problem to which you stated that, as a society, we should so something. Lol it was only a couple of posts ago:

Yes, I agree as a society we should do something ...

So it feels like you were just posting this to say "sure, something should be done" so you could then end the conversation and maybe don't really think there is an underlying problem.
Again, this leads me to think that you're putting far more effort into shooting down one potential solution than actually caring about the issue. And, I'm not saying you have to...just don't pretend you do care just to feel like you've won an argument.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

How could I ever take you seriously?

Why would I care? However I do care when you say I “make up untrue claims about other posters” and am "willing to lie”. Which goes back to this exchange:

Like we know you support the anti-vaxers.

BTW,Please share evidence of me supporting anti-vaxers? I don’t support then at all

closed thread More Covid Discussion, around post#312 and others, you consistently argue in support anti-vaxxers rights to spread their various mistruths, even reposting some of them yourself.

Yet despite pointing you to the evidence you wanted, you have continued to allege that I lied about this.

So today I posted the screenshot. It speaks for itself. Exhibit 1, see post # 229 above

I must say I know very little about Jordan Petersen but I’d be surprised if he wasn’t disappointed in your approach to all this. Bluster? An attempt to blow smoke by talking of “fantasy” … “nut job” … “dogmatic priest” etc) in a futile attempt to distract attention from what is now an overwhelming blatantly obvious open-and-shut case.

Don’t you’d think Jordan would prefer you to stand up straight like a man? Own it. Stick to your guns.

He might suggest you reply more like this:

“Yes I now see that one claim was found false. And I did post it, and it was a claim anti-vaxxers were making, so I was hasty in accusing you of lying about this.

"Nevertheless, while I am definitely no anti-vaxxer myself, I did and absolutely do support their right to make decisions about their bodies, for example. This is consistent with my strong belief in freedom of choice. And the right to free speech”



Don’t you agree, something like that could have at least given us a platform to continue a discussion?

 

[Woodsie]

No, and I've stated that it was far worse than a "good approach" multiple times. The club were the main one's at fault here IMO.

I was commenting on your post:

So...I'll through it back to you
Or is there not a problem (that the pride round was presumably attempting to address?)

Good try ... but if you want to set yourself up as an arbitrator of my solutions ... you really need to articulate exactly what the problem I am to solve is ... to allow me to do it myself, may simply result in me missing a point due to any subconscious bias I may have.

Lol. The problem to which you stated that, as a society, we should so something. Lol it was only a couple of posts ago:

So it feels like you were just posting this to say "sure, something should be done" so you could then end the conversation and maybe don't really think there is an underlying problem.
Again, this leads me to think that you're putting far more effort into shooting down one potential solution than actually caring about the issue. And, I'm not saying you have to...just don't pretend you do care just to feel like you've won an argument.

You will never know ... unless .. for the 3rd time ... you tell me what you see as the problem .

Once you do this .. I will give a solution my best shot.

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Good try ... but if you want to set yourself up as an arbitrator of my solutions ... you really need to articulate exactly what the problem I am to solve is ... to allow me to do it myself, may simply result in me missing a point due to any subconscious bias I may have.


You will never know ... unless .. for the 3rd time ... you tell me what you see as the problem .

Once you do this .. I will give a solution my best shot.

All good. I think you've done enough to make my point for me

 

[Woodsie]

All good. I think you've done enough to make my point for me

Damn ... I was making notes in anticipation ...

 

[Andrew..]

I think the N.R.L should shoulder some responsibility. If they showed a little flexibility and allowed players the choice of wearing something like alternate socks or even a sleeve patch for one round per year then perhaps we could find some kind of compromise.
I am sure there may be some purists who find this suggestion objectionable but I honestly can't think of a better alternative at this point in time.

 

[Red Pill]

Why would I care? However I do care when you say I “make up untrue claims about other posters” and am "willing to lie”. Which goes back to this exchange:






Yet despite pointing you to the evidence you wanted, you have continued to allege that I lied about this.

So today I posted the screenshot. It speaks for itself. Exhibit 1, see post # 229 above

I must say I know very little about Jordan Petersen but I’d be surprised if he wasn’t disappointed in your approach to all this. Bluster? An attempt to blow smoke by talking of “fantasy” … “nut job” … “dogmatic priest” etc) in a futile attempt to distract attention from what is now an overwhelming blatantly obvious open-and-shut case.

Don’t you’d think Jordan would prefer you to stand up straight like a man? Own it. Stick to your guns.

He might suggest you reply more like this:

“Yes I now see that one claim was found false. And I did post it, and it was a claim anti-vaxxers were making, so I was hasty in accusing you of lying about this.

"Nevertheless, while I am definitely no anti-vaxxer myself, I did and absolutely do support their right to make decisions about their bodies, for example. This is consistent with my strong belief in freedom of choice. And the right to free speech”



Don’t you agree, something like that could have at least given us a platform to continue a discussion?

You over the last few months also have lost your marbles. Are you experimenting with psychedelics or something like that?
I honestly hope the footy season sets you straight. Btw this is not the first time you have projected hyper nonsense like this my way. Is this your new tactic to use psychedelic jibber as a form of attack.?

 

[Red Pill]

@SeaEagleRock8 in regards to your antivaxxer delusions in respect to me I stumbled across a thread in the soap box area. I think you must have your wires crossed with this poster who I will not name ( they do however seem to align with your ideology.) As I said before in a earlier post I think you are losing your grip mate. It appears in the below like usual you were adding your bias into things and were a little unfair on the poor chap…

“@SeaEagleRock8 I was going to do a private conversation but don't seem to be able to.
I was alerted that I had posting privileges removed for continued / repeated posting of anti Vax links. I am a little bemused by this because the YouTube video was not anti Vax ( YT are pretty strict on that), Russel Brand even says he has no opinion one way or other in the video and the bit was not about vaccines anyhow. It was talking about what may be happening in society on a bigger scale which seemed to fit the discussion that is being had on ST.”
I'm also not sure what other links the "repeated" part refers to as I don't post anti Vaccine stuff and I don't preach anti Vaccine to anyone online or other

Sorry if you are not aware of the situation I just presume you were across it because of your post around a similar time.”

 

[lsz]

Yes, I agree as a society we should do something ... I just don't think forcing them to wear a T-shirt against workplace laws and their religous beliefs and alienating the very people you wish to convert ... to be the best approach ... and smuggly watch while they are abused, threatened, shamed and excluded ... helpful.



Yes, and a yes vote was achieved by education and consultation .... individuals didn't have their employers forcing them into actions against their rights or beliefs ...

So, if my employer asked me to wear a pride t-shirt .. and I said no thank you, it's not my go .. what consequences do you feel I should suffer ?

If we legislate on it then yes I do. In the meantime we need to try make steps try change things.

I understand your position on civil liberties. I acknowledge how difficult this is to navigate. I also acknowledge this will make some people feel alienated for their beliefs (which needs to be handled as best as possible but can not be avoided)

I am asking you again what should we do?

 

[lsz]

I believe the constant labeling of players ( who chose not to wear the Jersey) by many posters including yourself on the forum as homophobic which means:
“having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people”
Is essentially a form a shaming and exclusion. As you say opinions have consequences.
Accusing a player for a form of hate for choosing not to wear a jersey promoting a type of sexuality does not mean that the players hate or even dislike gay people. This is in my mind abhorrent.

Honest question

How else should we view their actions? If it is against their beliefs (the jersey was about inclusion of all) would this not be homophobia?

 

[Woodsie]

If we legislate on it then yes I do. In the meantime we need to try make steps try change things.

I understand your position on civil liberties. I acknowledge how difficult this is to navigate. I also acknowledge this will make some people feel alienated for their beliefs (which needs to be handled as best as possible but can not be avoided)

I am asking you again what should we do?

In 1975, South Australia was the first Australian State to decriminalise homosexual sex. But it wasn't until 1997 that Tasmania became the last state to decriminalise. A gap of 22 years ..

Then 20 years later Australia approves same sex marriage ...

This week the Mormon church said it will support the bill for same sex marriage in the states ..
This week the Pope came out in support of Gay rights and de-criminalisation ..
This week the Head of the Presbyterian Church spoke in support of Gay rights ..

Things are changing ... and ingrained social issues change slowly .. slower than you prefer ... but change for the better they will.

All the above has occurred without the necessity of depriving people of their civil liberties ... and through the continued education of people .. the process will continue, and gain pace of itself ... the coming to the party by the Pope and other religious leaders is evidence of this .... and without the need for draconian authoritarianism ..