The sum of us: Rugby league hero Steve Mortimer proud of his son's gay union

[Woodsie]

@Rex Thank you for your frank response, and explanation for spirited debate.
It became fairly clear to me that the path you were taking was less logical and more ingenius than your usual high standard.

My apologies to @SeaEagleRock8 but his reply irritated me, and my response, in hindsight may, may have been over reactive.

I also thought, and still believe that Thorpe is in an elite group of our best ever sportspeople. I also respect and admire his accomplishments and wish him every happiness. And I also believe that he is carrying on like a porkchop.

Cockhead was Ricardo's word, I just laughed at it, and agreed with him/her/it/them.

I wish you would afford the same non-judgemental standards, and anti-finger pointing abuse team work phillosopy you champion to those that have gang vilified @Ralphie .OR is it ok when you do it.

I direct this comment to no one personally, and I generally dislike cliches but, how often is it that those that profess tolerance are most intolerant of others opinions.

And again by judging "my rant" as "inaccurate" and "abusive" you underline the hypocrisy of your position. To quote you "What right do you have to judge others"

And again to raise the issue of prejudice against gays into your reply is a cheap trick seeing as our arguments have never been about the gay issue.

I do however support you for standing up for a mate and look forward to a long and rewarding future both agreeing with and arguing with you.

GO MANLY!

 

[voicefromthehill]

Well I don't love Woodsie, he insulted me just for posting and he couldn't even spell intelligent coreclty. The big Scottish bampot

I hope you were being ironic in spelling correctly incorrectly

 

[Wombat Legacy]

If I needed your approval Wombat Legacy then your little rant may concern me. It doesn't. I worked out your agenda and methods long ago. Everything you accuse me of you display in spades in your postings, the above one being a good example. It is called hypocrisy.

You think that belittling people with your constant PC accusations, kum-ba yah accusations shows your intelligence? It just shows you've lost the plot. That you cannot argue through logic. That you've run out of thoughts. That you're out of your depth.

Instead of labelling everyone who challenged TC's arguments as PC, you could take a little time, and think about substance rather than superficialities, and then contribute some actual thought.

When you proactively show real compassion - not attaching your "compassion" to a self-defence strategy, designed to make the defence more credible - then I will recognise that compassion. Your "compassion" prior to this little self-defence strategy was to actively support those attacking gays, and actively poo-poo those on the other side as being merely PC. Nice try.

You should have waited 24 hours to respond-that was lame given your deluded ideals of grandeur regarding your superior oratory skill set. Footy time Rexy Poo-put your poison cue in the rack and enjoy the game.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

My apologies to @SeaEagleRock8 but his reply irritated me, and my response, in hindsight may, may have been over reactive.

Accepted (I'm of Scottish descent too)
But watch your step

 

[Woodsie]

Well I don't love Woodsie, he insulted me just for posting and he couldn't even spell intelligent coreclty. The big Scottish bampot

oh now you have really upset me. bampot indeed! Seeing as you mispelt correctly. Does that me I am not intelligent and you are not correct.

You do like me just a little don't you?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Yes, an extremely little.

 

[Shoe1]

I met Turvey in 2014. A really top bloke, gave me lots of time and had good insight into just how good Jamie Lyon is. I met his son too, but I think a different one to the bloke that got married. Turvey was volunteering his time for the jets at the time. Good luck to them.

 

[Captain Moondog]

The drunker I get the funnier this thread becomes.......these people aren't like me so I don't like them........and of course I'm the arbiter of all that's correct.........meet you at the Lindt cafe.

 

[Rex]

You should have waited 24 hours to respond-that was lame given your deluded ideals of grandeur regarding your superior oratory skill set. Footy time Rexy Poo-put your poison cue in the rack and enjoy the game.

I'll pay that one Womby poo. Good comeback. Of course it would've been more powerful stopping at the first line, rather than engaging in more self-descriptions.

 

[Rex]

@Rex
I wish you would afford the same non-judgemental standards, and anti-finger pointing abuse team work phillosopy you champion to those that have gang vilified @Ralphie .OR is it ok when you do it.
GO MANLY!

That’s what this thread is really all about, isn’t it? Gang vilification. It is ugly isn’t it?

In these dramas, it can be said there’s the persecutor, the victim and the rescuer. And the roles keep changing. And at one level that seems to be playing out here.

Am I being judgemental of Ralphie? To really know that you’d need to move beyond appearances and get inside my experience. I don’t blame Ralphie at all for his vilification of gays. He doesn’t even see he’s doing it. He just believes his thoughts. He believes he’s doing the right thing. I do wish Ralphie the best.

And when we attack others with conditioned ill-will, particularly what we perceive as easy targets, we attack ourselves. You may see differently, but that is what I see. That is why I challenged you on your attack on Thorpie, and why I challenge Ralphie on his attack on gays. My challenge is aimed at bringing to the surface the motivations and the impacts. Without bringing them to the surface, growth and change are unlikely to happen. Am I immune from the same things I see in others? Of course not. It is part of the human condition.

Others will seek to smooth the waters, and that is good. Or lighten things with humour or distractions. Those sorts of things can all be helpful. And, in my view, it can also help to expose what is hidden, and to be disruptive of old patterns.

You may notice the people I butt heads with are emotionally activated. They need a target for venting their emotions at, and I don’t mind if they choose me. I welcome it.

For example, when Wombat Legacy calls people PC, I read that he is clearly emotionally activated. It is his signal that he can’t hold in his emotions and needs to blurt them out with an attack. So I challenged him with the aim of letting him attack me. My aim is to bring to the surface what is hidden. And when you attacked Thorpie, and then SER8, I perceived you were emotionally activated, so I put challenges to you, and was happy for you to attack me in the interest of bringing to the surface whatever needed to be brought to the surface. Until we are open to our various and innumerable imperfections, in my view, we are prisoners to our emotions. And only when we are no longer emotional prisoners can we see there are no imperfections.

Now you and/or others may currently perceive all that as bs. And that is fine.

 

[Chip and Chase]

 

[lsz]

Andrew Webster today
Rainbow round to stamp out homophobia is good – but how about some real change, Mr Turnbull


This weekend, players across the four main football codes and netball will wear rainbow laces to show their support against homophobia.

It's called the "Rainbow Round of Sport", and the likes of Johnathan Thurston, Robbie Farah and Nathan Peats from the NRL, Matt Toomua from the Brumbies, Alex Brosque from Sydney FC, and many other sportspeople and teams are lending their name to the cause.

Superb stuff. The last standing taboo in sport is homophobia. Something as simple as rainbow laces isn't tokenistic. It sends an important message, not least to the young sportspeople who might be grappling with who they are.

But all the rainbow laces in the world, all the hashtag campaigns and all the footy codes ticking the box that says, "We're cool with the gays!" can progress things only so far.

Real change needs to happen in Canberra. It needs to start with the prime minister. Time to make same-sex marriage happen, Mr Turnbull.

That will send a stronger message about equal rights to all Australians, no matter which sport they follow, than rainbow laces.

In August 2014, I stood on the balcony at the back of Government House in Sydney and shared a beer with Mr Turnbull, who was yet to reach the highest office in the country – the prime ministership, not captain of the Australian Test side – but was strongly tipped to eventually get there.

We were at the launch of the Bingham Cup, the World Cup of gay rugby, and the way he spoke gave reason to believe change was coming. In Malcolm we trusted.

Mr Turnbull, as many in the LGBTI community will tell you, has been a strong advocate for equality. He's been a strong supporter of the Sydney Convicts in particular.

When the Bingham Cup was over, he took out a full page advertisement in the Sydney Star Observer.

"The Bingham Cup was a great triumph not just for the Sydney Convicts, but in the campaign to end homophobia in sport," he oozed.

We like Malcolm. Malcolm is awesome.

Then Mr Turnbull became prime minister and his strong views on equality were suddenly overtaken by his strong desire to play the greatest game of all – politics.

In March last year, he wanted a "free vote" in the Parliament on the issue. Now, with the Coalition's ugly conservative right barking at the fence, he wants an expensive and divisive plebiscite after the next federal election.

Not awesome, Malcolm.

Sport – and particularly footy – has been slow to come to the party on equality and diversity.

Sharing experiences helps change attitudes, much more than the media departments of big sporting codes shovelling out media releases trumpeting their support when in reality some needed to be dragged to the table behind.

The more dialogue and debate, the more we know about each other.

In the last month, we've heard some important stories.

If you haven't read Daniel Lane's story in the Sun-Herald of Canterbury legend Steve Mortimer and his gay son Matt, you should.

"I hope any father who is having trouble accepting their son is gay will read about our relationship and realise you need to allow for your child to be who they really are, and just as importantly to respect them for who they are," Steve said.

Then came a piece this week from former Herald colleague Greg Growden for ESPN about Simon Dunn, who was ostracised, humiliated and then bashed but is now a member of the Australian bobsleigh team.

"You would never now hear the derogatory N-word spoken on a sporting field. You often hear the F-word though," he says, referring to the word "faggot". "The only person who I know who said something about it and stood up to it on the sporting field has been David Pocock."

And then, of course, there's Big Del.

A month ago, in the marshalling area at Hyde Park before the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, with the NRL about to enter a float for the first time, Kangaroos and Queensland winger Wendell Sailor was mobbed for photos and selfies.

For this footy writer, who covered much of the big fella's career, it was impossible to ignore the significance.

Right on cue, Del started flexing his biceps before eventually being outgunned by the Harbour City Bears.

The reason to celebrate pride, to talk about pride, to wear rainbow laces to symbolise pride, is because there is still a long way to go.

Some sobering numbers: of the 53 member countries of the Commonwealth, 42 retain laws that criminalise adult, private, consensual sexual conduct involving persons of the same sex. That's 2 billion people.

A Rainbow Round of Sport is a small but admirable step. But it needs elected officials to take the biggest strides to make genuine change.

Your run, Mr Turnbull. Time to take up the ball.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/rainbow...r-turnbull-20160330-gnuliq.html#ixzz44XfBickk
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

 

[Woodsie]

The secure have no difficulty accepting differences in self and others. We still hav

Your words yet you personally seem to have a great deal of difficulty accepting the difference between you and Ralphie. Does this mean you are insecure? It must, you said it.

ps. I will look forward to your 500 word answer that will totally ignore the point, digress, raise 4 new topics and have at least 5 references to how you are a more enlightened and tolerant form of human.

This was my first reply to you in response to your assertion to Ralphie of "What right do you have to disapprove, are you God"

I said
"We all have the right even obligation to disapprove.
I disapprove of people who practice female genital mutilation.
I disapprove of racists.
I disapprove of both misogynists and rapid feminists.
I disapprove of rapists
I disapprove of women bashers'
I disapprove of people that would force their religion or culture on you at gun point.
I disapprove of lots of things.
To me the argument is not if someone has the right to disapprove, it is on what they disapprove of.
The day we stop disapproving is the day we cease to be an intelligent life-form."

In all your lengthy writings you have yet to state the simple fact. Do you agree. Because that is what all this is about, does someone have the right to disapprove, you said no, I say yes.

In your latest response you have elevated Ralphie's "I disapprove" to the level of "villification of Gays" and my Thorpie acting like a cockhead to "an assault on Thorpie .

In your single minded desire to either win an argument or hear yourself quote whole pages from Psychology for dummies you have become totally irrational.

PPS I look forward to your 500 word essay justifying how "I disapprove" really is vilification. Not easy but I am sure your ego and google will manage.

You say "You may notice the people I butt heads with are emotionally activated. They need a target for venting their emotions at, and I don’t mind if they choose me. I welcome it."

No Rex, you not only welcome it you actively seek to create it. Your passive aggressive nature and longing to prolong the exchanges serves some narcissistic need to be superior. A superior intellect, a superior humanitarian, a wiser, kinder and more evolved human, who understands our weaknesses and only wishes to educate us.

I don't believe it to be a coincidence that in all your 1000's of words, you haven't once given any insight to your true feelings, it all appears to be a cynical academic exercise.

I will say this, agree or disagree with Ralphie, he was honest, open, and is completely sincere in his beliefs. And that makes him a pretty good human in my books.

 

[highlandeagle]

TC voices an opinion-the PC throng gather to tell TC how wrong he is-TC articulates his beliefs and values-the throng are not accepting of this-TC holds his ground-just another day on ST....all we need now is some self righteous prick to come swinging in with his physco babble words of wisdom....oh wait, he has already contributed 9 pages of dribble

It's so hypocritical that those who demand tolerance and acceptance of a particular viewpoint are so intolerant of those that aren't!!

 

[bones]

It's so hypocritical that those who demand tolerance and acceptance of a particular viewpoint are so intolerant of those that aren't!!

It's not about accepting a viewpoint, it's about accepting people for who they are. Accepting them for the way they were born and had no control over. Not accepting someone for being gay is no different to not accepting someone for the colour of their skin.

 

[Wombat Legacy]

It's not about accepting a viewpoint, it's about accepting people for who they are. Accepting them for the way they were born and had no control over. Not accepting someone for being gay is no different to not accepting someone for the colour of their skin.

Stop twisting things to suit your own agenda. Are you gay bones? Or do you just wish you were

 

[Wombat Legacy]

Your words yet you personally seem to have a great deal of difficulty accepting the difference between you and Ralphie. Does this mean you are insecure? It must, you said it.

ps. I will look forward to your 500 word answer that will totally ignore the point, digress, raise 4 new topics and have at least 5 references to how you are a more enlightened and tolerant form of human.

This was my first reply to you in response to your assertion to Ralphie of "What right do you have to disapprove, are you God"

I said
"We all have the right even obligation to disapprove.
I disapprove of people who practice female genital mutilation.
I disapprove of racists.
I disapprove of both misogynists and rapid feminists.
I disapprove of rapists
I disapprove of women bashers'
I disapprove of people that would force their religion or culture on you at gun point.
I disapprove of lots of things.
To me the argument is not if someone has the right to disapprove, it is on what they disapprove of.
The day we stop disapproving is the day we cease to be an intelligent life-form."

In all your lengthy writings you have yet to state the simple fact. Do you agree. Because that is what all this is about, does someone have the right to disapprove, you said no, I say yes.

In your latest response you have elevated Ralphie's "I disapprove" to the level of "villification of Gays" and my Thorpie acting like a cockhead to "an assault on Thorpie .

In your single minded desire to either win an argument or hear yourself quote whole pages from Psychology for dummies you have become totally irrational.

PPS I look forward to your 500 word essay justifying how "I disapprove" really is vilification. Not easy but I am sure your ego and google will manage.

You say "You may notice the people I butt heads with are emotionally activated. They need a target for venting their emotions at, and I don’t mind if they choose me. I welcome it."

No Rex, you not only welcome it you actively seek to create it. Your passive aggressive nature and longing to prolong the exchanges serves some narcissistic need to be superior. A superior intellect, a superior humanitarian, a wiser, kinder and more evolved human, who understands our weaknesses and only wishes to educate us.

I don't believe it to be a coincidence that in all your 1000's of words, you haven't once given any insight to your true feelings, it all appears to be a cynical academic exercise.

I will say this, agree or disagree with Ralphie, he was honest, open, and is completely sincere in his beliefs. And that makes him a pretty good human in my books.

Why do you bother with this idiot-I prefer to just laugh at the grandstanding fool

 

[Rex]

Your words yet you personally seem to have a great deal of difficulty accepting the difference between you and Ralphie. Does this mean you are insecure? It must, you said it.

At the deepest level, I see no difference at all – none, zero, zilch - between Ralphie and me. If I was born in Ralphie’s place and had his experiences and life, I have no reason to think I’d be one iota different.

There’s a fundamental, basic logical error behind your entire argument. You’ve equated acceptance with agreement. Why have you done this? I can only speculate.

I totally accept Ralphie. I wish him well. I am not in the least bit upset by his presence in the world and I welcome his presence. I accept his postings, and I feel the pain behind them. I don’t agree with his postings on this topic and see his attitudes are harmful to gays, and to himself, and to those around him. And I speak my mind - like you are doing now. Would you have me do any different?

Is that difficult to comprehend Woodsie – that you can accept someone and not agree with them? Ralphie invited himself into this conversation, he engaged when he wanted to, and he chose when he left. He’s an adult. It seems you have extreme compassion for Ralphie – and feel the need to rescue him - perhaps because you share his views? – and you display little compassion for people he harms with his attitudes.

I am wondering why you’ve taken off with such extreme emotional intensity here. You did this weird extreme emotional reaction thing when SER8 challenged you in a pretty low-key way. Is this what you normally do when challenged? You certainly didn’t have similar emotional intensity supporting gay rights – and in fact reading between the lines of your postings gave hints that your stance is something quite to the contrary – which is behind why I challenged you - so I’m bemused. Will you come clean and clearly state where you stand? Or are jokes and outrage all you do?

In all your lengthy writings you have yet to state the simple fact. Do you agree. Because that is what all this is about, does someone have the right to disapprove, you said no, I say yes.

I have already clearly and succinctly replied to your posting on judgements - which you have apparently not bothered to read or digested. The first response was very short and clear. I'll put it in new words for you:

There is a world of difference between making discernments (judgements) and blame (judgements). One is an essential life skill, the other is negativity in action. Is that too wordy or complex for you?

In your latest response you have elevated Ralphie's "I disapprove" to the level of "villification of Gays" and my Thorpie acting like a cockhead to "an assault on Thorpie .

Yes because that’s what I see they are. You can disagree, you can have a different view, but that is what I see.

Ralphie’s stance is belief without enquiry - that gay behaviour is immoral – he can’t - or won’t - provide any reasons why, he just indicates that he believes it is. And this (widespread) belief in immorality has direct, tangible, negative consequences in how gays are mistreated.

Your stance that you purportedly admire Thorpie – on the surface - seems to me to be utter b*sh*t designed to make you look credible. In my view it was gutless of you to defame Thorpie in a forum where he doesn’t even have an opportunity to respond. But that is your prerogative - to be gutless - and defame someone who cannot respond. I am wondering if your friends all wonder if you similarly defame them and call them names behind their back? If I was in your inner circle, I would, if that is how you do what you do here.

I don't believe it to be a coincidence that in all your 1000's of words, you haven't once given any insight to your true feelings, it all appears to be a cynical academic exercise.

You have a problem when I am succinct. You have a problem when I expand at your request. You have a problem no matter what.

If you can’t gather my feelings from what I have said, then you’re not even trying. I feel for the pain inflicted on gays. I feel for the pain of the people inflicting that pain. I know both types of pains – at a visceral level - very well. I have seen first hand, close up, the pain coming from insensitive comments, like yours, first hand. And beyond the pain, I feel deeply, deeply sad about it all.

 

[Mac Man]

So anyway about the thread title Gay Union.... I didn't know they played that down at Oxford Street?

And again despite me throwing a funny line in there... I damn well loved Ian Roberts one of my favourite Manly Players. I didnt care less if he was gay but damn he was a good footballer!

 

[Rex]

Why do you bother with this idiot-I prefer to just laugh at the grandstanding fool

No - you clearly prefer to grandstand with foolish statement like these.