Boo Boys

[Whitesince63]

Christ, can’t we just get over this now? They are going to do it so maybe apathy, no booing and no clapping might make them consider either stopping or changing it?

[ErnestTurnip]

I didn't realise we even did it yesterday.

 Like Traf said it's over that quickly if you're even slightly distracted you'll miss it. Actually it might be Mrs Turnip who says that but it applies in both situations.

[RONNIE PHILLIPS]

It's pretty much like players crossing themselves or offering up prayers before they enter the pitch, seems a bit ott to many but makes feck all difference to the game itself. 

[DaveTheRave]

12 hours ago, Casino said:

6 games in your life and you seem to think anybody cares what you think

At least he as an excuse now why he won't be adding to that impressive number of games attended.

[paulhanley]

Freedom of expression is freedom of expression. If you want to take the knee, take the knee. If you want to applaud people taking the knee - applaud. If you want to boo people taking the knee because you think its yet another example vacuous virtue-signalling - boo it. 

Telling people to stop booing is at its core an attempt to silence an opinion and an expression. Which is poor but not untypical of the general mindset of those who deify the knee taking gesture.

[RUREADY2ROLL]

To be honest I couldn’t care at all yesterday; didn’t boo and didn’t clap. Very few did boo but I still don’t see the point of it

[RoadRunnerFan]

1 hour ago, paulhanley said:

Freedom of expression is freedom of expression. If you want to take the knee, take the knee. If you want to applaud people taking the knee - applaud. If you want to boo people taking the knee because you think its yet another example vacuous virtue-signalling - boo it. 

Telling people to stop booing is at its core an attempt to silence an opinion and an expression. Which is poor but not untypical of the general mindset of those who deify the knee taking gesture.

Booing is at its core an attempt to silence an opinion and an expression. Which is poor but not untypical of the general mindset of those who profess freedom of speech but really just want to be free to offend those they see as 'other.'

Edited August 8, 2021 by RoadRunnerFan

[paulhanley]

17 minutes ago, RoadRunnerFan said:

Booing is at its core an attempt to silence an opinion and an expression. Which is poor but not untypical of the general mindset of those who profess freedom of speech but really just want to be free to offend those they see as 'other.'

Sometimes people's views annoy others. Its one thing being annoyed and arguing back - its quite another to take offence and seek to silence that opposing point of view. 

That is all part of the challenge of living somewhere with freedom of speech. The trouble with people who screech about "diversity" is that they want anything but diversity when it comes to opinion .... and they show this via the tantrums they have when they come across someone/a group of people who challenge their narrow world view. 

Challenge to taking the knee and the other assorted rag-bag of virtue-signalling is not going away. You're going to have to live with it.

[Duck Egg]

The players have said several times that its a gesture against racism.  I thought society had reached a point where it was agreed that racism is a bad thing?

Personally, I'm of the opinion that if someone boos a gesture against racism, then its a fair assumption that they're a racist and therefore a prick. If that makes me a snowflake, a virtue signaller, a screecher, well I'll live with it.

[RONNIE PHILLIPS]

38 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

Sometimes people's views annoy others. Its one thing being annoyed and arguing back - its quite another to take offence and seek to silence that opposing point of view. 

That is all part of the challenge of living somewhere with freedom of speech. The trouble with people who screech about "diversity" is that they want anything but diversity when it comes to opinion .... and they show this via the tantrums they have when they come across someone/a group of people who challenge their narrow world view. 

Challenge to taking the knee and the other assorted rag-bag of virtue-signalling is not going away. You're going to have to live with it.

I hear you're a racist now Father Hanley 🤣

[DavidLeesMullet]

5 minutes ago, RONNIE PHILLIPS said:

I hear you're a racist now Father Hanley 🤣

"it's the feckin' Greeks he's after, they invented gayness" 😂😂😂

As I see it denying somebody the right to counter-protest is as bad as denying somebody the right to protest in the first place.

Its the usual leftist ploy "We agree with free speech as long as we agree with what you're saying, otherwise we will demonise you until you change your mind"

Edited August 8, 2021 by DavidLeesMullet

[paulhanley]

32 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

The players have said several times that its a gesture against racism.  I thought society had reached a point where it was agreed that racism is a bad thing?

Personally, I'm of the opinion that if someone boos a gesture against racism, then its a fair assumption that they're a racist and therefore a prick. If that makes me a snowflake, a virtue signaller, a screecher, well I'll live with it.

And there we have it in a nutshell. The kind of warped thinking that leads to such anger and frustration with wokery.

These days its not enough to be against something (like racism) You have to prove time and again that you are against it and signal your virtue. It was not too dissimilar in the USSR and other repressive societies where different views of the world were not tolerated. Being a member of "the party" was not enough. You had to effusively and publicly praise the party and its leadership time and again, otherwise you came under suspicion of being subversive. 

If that's the kind of sinister society you wish to live in you are very welcome. I'm sure they'd welcome your approach in North Korea. Saddam Hussain would have quite liked your method - you'd have been great in one of those staged gatheringa in front of the TV cameras where people protested their undying loyalty to their great leader to avoid the firing squad.

It may not surprise you to learn that millions of us do not want this type of society. This is not the way in a democracy with freedom of speech and freedom of expression. 

In this instance its ... "if you don't agree with me, that automatically makes you a racist" and should be excluded from debate. You've used the words yourself. It is truly disturbing. And where else does it lead?

[Leyther_Matt]

55 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

The players have said several times that its a gesture against racism.  I thought society had reached a point where it was agreed that racism is a bad thing?

Personally, I'm of the opinion that if someone boos a gesture against racism, then its a fair assumption that they're a racist and therefore a prick. If that makes me a snowflake, a virtue signaller, a screecher, well I'll live with it.

Makes sense to me. If the players concerned see it as a gesture worth continuing then that's good enough for me. Absolutely no need to over analyse it.

[Tonge moor green jacket]

6 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

And there we have it in a nutshell. The kind of warped thinking that leads to such anger and frustration with wokery.

These days its not enough to be against something (like racism) You have to prove time and again that you are against it and signal your virtue. It was not too dissimilar in the USSR and other repressive societies where different views of the world were not tolerated. Being a member of "the party" was not enough. You had to effusively and publicly praise the party and its leadership time and again, otherwise you came under suspicion of being subversive. 

If that's the kind of sinister society you wish to live in you are very welcome. I'm sure they'd welcome your approach in North Korea. Saddam Hussain would have quite liked your method - you'd have been great in one of those staged gatheringa in front of the TV cameras where people protested their undying loyalty to their great leader to avoid the firing squad.

It may not surprise you to learn that millions of us do not want this type of society. This is not the way in a democracy with freedom of speech and freedom of expression. 

In this instance its ... "if you don't agree with me, that automatically makes you a racist" and should be excluded from debate. You've used the words yourself. It is truly disturbing. And where else does it lead?

Aye.

Been through this so much now, and suffice to say the subtlety of the argument that taking the knee is devisive is lost on so many. No shades of grey, just black and white.

 

I mentioned it previously, but I caught a brief minute or two of talksport a few weeks back, during which Simon Jordon was discussing this very subject.

The documentary the bbc did was also interesting, particularly Mings' contribution.

I don't mind Jordan, because even if you don't agree with him, he's capable of putting forward a well constructed point, unlike so many others.

In this instance, his understanding of how so many feel and eloquent speaking summed it up in a nutshell. 

Worth a listen, but doubt it would be available anywhere.

[paulhanley]

3 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Aye.

Been through this so much now, and suffice to say the subtlety of the argument that taking the knee is devisive is lost on so many. No shades of grey, just black and white.

 

I mentioned it previously, but I caught a brief minute or two of talksport a few weeks back, during which Simon Jordon was discussing this very subject.

The documentary the bbc did was also interesting, particularly Mings' contribution.

I don't mind Jordan, because even if you don't agree with him, he's capable of putting forward a well constructed point, unlike so many others.

In this instance, his understanding of how so many feel and eloquent speaking summed it up in a nutshell. 

Worth a listen, but doubt it would be available anywhere.

 

Its an easy thing to call out and expose as deeply sinister - but the trouble is the people doing it are so pickled in their own virtue that even those statements of the obvious sail above their heads. And on they go - knowing they are right and that everybody who disagrees is therefore automatically a racists/sexist/homophobe/transphobe and all the rest. That's where the subtlety is lost. As I say they prattle about diversity - but they themselves are they are anything but.

[mickbrown]

It does seem those that extol freedom of speech the loudest are really asking for freedom from consequences

Edited August 8, 2021 by mickbrown

[Duck Egg]

17 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

In this instance its ... "if you don't agree with me, that automatically makes you a racist" and should be excluded from debate. You've used the words yourself. It is truly disturbing. And where else does it lead?

Amidst that bizarre response Paul, that last nugget stood out.  You've put quotation marks around some words and then say I've used the words myself! Can I introduce you to the scroll function on your phone that will help show I said no such thing ?!

I'm of the assumption that somebody booing an anti racism gesture is probably racist.  That's because I can't think of any other reason why anyone would boo it and their own players making the gesture. I do hope that's OK with the politburo 

[London Wanderer]

30 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

And there we have it in a nutshell. The kind of warped thinking that leads to such anger and frustration with wokery.

These days its not enough to be against something (like racism) You have to prove time and again that you are against it and signal your virtue. It was not too dissimilar in the USSR and other repressive societies where different views of the world were not tolerated. Being a member of "the party" was not enough. You had to effusively and publicly praise the party and its leadership time and again, otherwise you came under suspicion of being subversive. 

If that's the kind of sinister society you wish to live in you are very welcome. I'm sure they'd welcome your approach in North Korea. Saddam Hussain would have quite liked your method - you'd have been great in one of those staged gatheringa in front of the TV cameras where people protested their undying loyalty to their great leader to avoid the firing squad.

It may not surprise you to learn that millions of us do not want this type of society. This is not the way in a democracy with freedom of speech and freedom of expression. 

In this instance its ... "if you don't agree with me, that automatically makes you a racist" and should be excluded from debate. You've used the words yourself. It is truly disturbing. And where else does it lead?

And there we have it in a nutshell. Those booing the players taking the knee are just terrified of living in a totalitarian dictatorship. Visions of Stalin, Kim Jong-un and firing squads plague their minds every time they see Matt Gilks drop to the floor in pure fear of the woke elite. 

For what it's worth I haven't heard anyone on here tell someone they can't boo. Only see folk question it. I'd also agree that it's narrow minded to assume someone is a racist if they've booed. But comparing all this to some of the most repressive societies in history is taking it to another level.  

Edited August 8, 2021 by London Wanderer

[paulhanley]

2 minutes ago, Duck Egg said:

Amidst that bizarre response Paul, that last nugget stood out.  You've put quotation marks around some words and then say I've used the words myself! Can I introduce you to the scroll function on your phone that will help show I said no such thing ?!

I'm of the assumption that somebody booing an anti racism gesture is probably racist.  That's because I can't think of any other reason why anyone would boo it and their own players making the gesture. I do hope that's OK with the politburo 

What's bizarre is you've never met me. Yet you assume I am a racist. 

People are sick to the back teeth with wokery and virtue-signalling.  We've had years and years of it. This is another example of it - along with the slavish support it receives. Did it ever occur to you that it might be against this backdrop that people are protesting against?

Of course  from the mountain top of virtue you've put yourself on - where you are able to pronounce as to whether people are racist or not - that type of subtlety gets lost.

But anyway - I'm clearly a racist, so my views don't count. End of debate really as far as you are concerned isn't.

[paulhanley]

7 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

And there we have it in a nutshell. Those booing the players taking the knee are just terrified of living in a totalitarian dictatorship. Visions of Stalin, Kim Jong-un and firing squads plague their minds every time they see Matt Gilks drop to the floor in pure fear of the woke elite. 

For what it's worth I haven't heard anyone on here tell someone they can't boo. Only see folk question it. I'd also agree that it's narrow minded to assume someone is a racist if they've booed. But comparing all this to some of the most repressive societies in history is taking it do another level.  

I admit it. I'm terrified of living in a totalitarian dictatorship.

[jmjhb]

The only one throwing a tantrum is the guy not going because the players are taking the knee

[Tonge moor green jacket]

12 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

It does seem those that extol freedom of speech the loudest are really asking for freedom from consequences

No it doesn't.

Not one iota.

If that speech is hate filled and aimed at causing disruption then it should be dealt with.

If the speech isn't, but it is nevertheless treated as such and allegations made, then those instigating such accusations themselves become the ones extolling hate.

Not specifically a race issue, just an societal problem borne out of too much social media, and not enough genuine social interaction. 

[jmjhb]

Players in the dressing room: 

"I hear DLM isn't going any more because we're taking the knee, shall we stop, lads?

...

...

"Nah"

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Just now, jmjhb said:

Players in the dressing room: 

"I hear DLM isn't going any more because we're taking the knee, shall we stop, lads?

...

...

"Nah"

?

[mickbrown]

3 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

No it doesn't.

Not one iota.

If that speech is hate filled and aimed at causing disruption then it should be dealt with.

If the speech isn't, but it is nevertheless treated as such and allegations made, then those instigating such accusations themselves become the ones extolling hate.

Not specifically a race issue, just an societal problem borne out of too much social media, and not enough genuine social interaction. 

It does in my opinion.

Certainly seems that way to me at the moment