| Club Statement on 14:57 - Jan 14 with 2104 views | DorsetDale |
| Club Statement on 23:41 - Jan 13 by dancdale |
'You clearly live in a land of special people and clouds that give out marshmellows and every cloud delivers good news.'
No, same one as you. Good contribution to the debate though.
'I envy your idealistic incompitent world where nobody judges or hates - it would be great if it were real - but its not. '
You're agreeing with me. The world is not as it should be in these matters and you'd like it to be different. Then why argue with me in speaking out to, in a small way, attempt to change things. (Not sure of the misuse and misspelling of 'incompitent' though)
'Prejudice will exist at all levels forever'
Probably, do we just accept it then? It can be, and has been, changed for the better- is this wrong?
'Context, implication and intention are totally in the eye of the beholder'
No, this is incorrect.
'I would guess my understanding is fairly good'
Your postings have implied a poor understanding of several of the terms and concepts we have discussed.
'A terrorist is only a terrorist until they win - then they are a freedom fighter - bollox of course - but you will love that quote'
Not heard it, who said it? Maybe you mean the more common "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"? But still- no, I dont love it, bit of cliched hyperbole, though perhaps does have some relevance as an example in the perspectivism/absolutism element to our debate. Again it is intention, context, reason etc that actually allows a discernible truth to be achieved.
|
'Context, implication and intention are totally in the eye of the beholder'
No, this is incorrect."
Utter nonsense.
I live in an area that is at a guess 99% white. However, one of my son's mates is black (they even shared a flat until my son could no longer afford it). The lad's name is Nigel and his nickname from early chidhood has been Nigs.
No doubt if you heard me in the street saying "alright Nigs" I'd be misconstrued as being derogatory in some way.
Don't come back with any bollox about his nickname having sub-conscious double-speak either. Kids at an early age don't see colour.
I used to see the world through the same PC specs you wear (one of R17's "lefties" if you will) untill I understood it's just another way the elitist rulers have invented to further divide us. Now don't get me wrong, some forms of verbal abuse are not to be tolerated but FFS lets not forget, it's sticks and stones that break bones not words.
|  |
| YOU do not have the right to give someone else permission to tell me what I can and can't do. |
|  |
| Club Statement on 16:19 - Jan 16 with 1926 views | downunder |
dancdale. if you are, as has been stated by other posters, a socialist left winger, then I thank you, as you and your type (especially politicians) contributed to the reasons I left my country of birth for pastures new. I was, once, proud to be English, proud of our heritage, victories and Churchillian spirit. We (my family, and several other Rochdale families) have moved on.
Anyway, its a free country, you can say anything you want.
Oh! Hang on, no you can't.
|  | | |
| Club Statement on 16:33 - Jan 16 with 1894 views | 442Dale |
People leave the country because others post long explanations on a subject? |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 16:48 - Jan 16 with 1857 views | dalenumber2 |
"it's sticks and stones that break bones not words."
I have always thought this saying is so wrong. I have seen plenty of examples of live that have been made utterly miserable by the words of others. |  | | |
| Club Statement on 20:29 - Jan 16 with 1758 views | dancdale |
DorsetDale:
You state it 'utter nonsense' that it is incorrect to say 'context, implication and intention are totally in the eye of the beholder'
You then give an example of a situation where an onlooker (through his beholding eye) may have thought you were being racist- but that the actual context (reason for the nickname), intention (to friendly greet by a nickname), and implication (recognised by recipient as being friendly greeting)- meant that in fact it wasn't a racist act.
The logic of my point is that there exists a singular, non-subjective, true reality as to whether something is racist or not, regardless of how it may be interpreted. Despite declaring my view utter nonsense, it is apparent through your example you actually agree with me.
(However, to say the shortening of Nigel to the rare/unique, non-phonetic nigs, rather than the normal nige- and for it to be a pure co-incidence that he was black, is unlikely/naive.)
downunder:
I dont consider myself as a socialist or definable as left wing. I have spoken here only on the issue of racism- something which is wrong and should be called out regardless of political beliefs. Or do you disagree? Do you think it ok to make derogatory/negative/abusive statements or action based on race, in which case say so, as theres not much point in debating the lesser points. If not then you largely agree with me, and the only difference seems to be that rather than taking action against what is wrong you think it should be tolerated?.
Rather than just trying to deride me without addressing any of the points, why not explain your position.
With regards to 'Great' Britain, I agree there is a great deal to be proud of, much of it based on the principles of social justice and significantly powered through immigration. There is also a great deal to be ashamed of. You dont really explain exactly what, and why people like me, made you leave- you just seem to think you can make some sort of point by saying it.
Generally:
I've made only 3 points in this thread-
-That racism is wrong, that is not just the same as other 'name calling' and that it shouldnt be tolerated.
-That it is possible to determine whether something is racist or not regardless of personal views, explaining it is possible to use 'racially sensitive' words, even those such as n1gger and paki without being racist. (A entirely non-'PC' viewpoint)
-That there isnt some great wave of over-sensitive or untrue allegations going on.
Does anyone really disagree with any of the above points? Even if you think there to be further questionable nuances involved, do you really think 'bash the anti-racist' as a worthy cause for your time?
There are instances where 'political-correctness' has gone too far, although these are a lot less than is made out. However, when it does so it moves out of being anti-racism, I dont believe it possible to go 'too far' in disapproving of racism.
Too many use the popularised approval of eschewing politically-correctness as excuse to continue being racist. [Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
|  | | |
| Club Statement on 20:35 - Jan 16 with 1737 views | 442Dale |
I'm off to live in Summer Bay. | |
| |
| Club Statement on 20:38 - Jan 16 with 1726 views | SuddenLad |
| Club Statement on 20:35 - Jan 16 by 442Dale |
I'm off to live in Summer Bay. |
Can you pick me up on the way.....................  |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Club Statement on 20:43 - Jan 16 with 1713 views | dancdale |
| Club Statement on 20:35 - Jan 16 by 442Dale |
I'm off to live in Summer Bay. |
Nah, too many abbo's for my liking. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Club Statement on 21:31 - Jan 16 with 1636 views | TalkingSutty |
| Club Statement on 20:29 - Jan 16 by dancdale |
DorsetDale:
You state it 'utter nonsense' that it is incorrect to say 'context, implication and intention are totally in the eye of the beholder'
You then give an example of a situation where an onlooker (through his beholding eye) may have thought you were being racist- but that the actual context (reason for the nickname), intention (to friendly greet by a nickname), and implication (recognised by recipient as being friendly greeting)- meant that in fact it wasn't a racist act.
The logic of my point is that there exists a singular, non-subjective, true reality as to whether something is racist or not, regardless of how it may be interpreted. Despite declaring my view utter nonsense, it is apparent through your example you actually agree with me.
(However, to say the shortening of Nigel to the rare/unique, non-phonetic nigs, rather than the normal nige- and for it to be a pure co-incidence that he was black, is unlikely/naive.)
downunder:
I dont consider myself as a socialist or definable as left wing. I have spoken here only on the issue of racism- something which is wrong and should be called out regardless of political beliefs. Or do you disagree? Do you think it ok to make derogatory/negative/abusive statements or action based on race, in which case say so, as theres not much point in debating the lesser points. If not then you largely agree with me, and the only difference seems to be that rather than taking action against what is wrong you think it should be tolerated?.
Rather than just trying to deride me without addressing any of the points, why not explain your position.
With regards to 'Great' Britain, I agree there is a great deal to be proud of, much of it based on the principles of social justice and significantly powered through immigration. There is also a great deal to be ashamed of. You dont really explain exactly what, and why people like me, made you leave- you just seem to think you can make some sort of point by saying it.
Generally:
I've made only 3 points in this thread-
-That racism is wrong, that is not just the same as other 'name calling' and that it shouldnt be tolerated.
-That it is possible to determine whether something is racist or not regardless of personal views, explaining it is possible to use 'racially sensitive' words, even those such as n1gger and paki without being racist. (A entirely non-'PC' viewpoint)
-That there isnt some great wave of over-sensitive or untrue allegations going on.
Does anyone really disagree with any of the above points? Even if you think there to be further questionable nuances involved, do you really think 'bash the anti-racist' as a worthy cause for your time?
There are instances where 'political-correctness' has gone too far, although these are a lot less than is made out. However, when it does so it moves out of being anti-racism, I dont believe it possible to go 'too far' in disapproving of racism.
Too many use the popularised approval of eschewing politically-correctness as excuse to continue being racist. [Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
|
Hard to disagree with that. |  | | |
| Club Statement on 21:40 - Jan 16 with 1610 views | DorsetDale |
| Club Statement on 20:29 - Jan 16 by dancdale |
DorsetDale:
You state it 'utter nonsense' that it is incorrect to say 'context, implication and intention are totally in the eye of the beholder'
You then give an example of a situation where an onlooker (through his beholding eye) may have thought you were being racist- but that the actual context (reason for the nickname), intention (to friendly greet by a nickname), and implication (recognised by recipient as being friendly greeting)- meant that in fact it wasn't a racist act.
The logic of my point is that there exists a singular, non-subjective, true reality as to whether something is racist or not, regardless of how it may be interpreted. Despite declaring my view utter nonsense, it is apparent through your example you actually agree with me.
(However, to say the shortening of Nigel to the rare/unique, non-phonetic nigs, rather than the normal nige- and for it to be a pure co-incidence that he was black, is unlikely/naive.)
downunder:
I dont consider myself as a socialist or definable as left wing. I have spoken here only on the issue of racism- something which is wrong and should be called out regardless of political beliefs. Or do you disagree? Do you think it ok to make derogatory/negative/abusive statements or action based on race, in which case say so, as theres not much point in debating the lesser points. If not then you largely agree with me, and the only difference seems to be that rather than taking action against what is wrong you think it should be tolerated?.
Rather than just trying to deride me without addressing any of the points, why not explain your position.
With regards to 'Great' Britain, I agree there is a great deal to be proud of, much of it based on the principles of social justice and significantly powered through immigration. There is also a great deal to be ashamed of. You dont really explain exactly what, and why people like me, made you leave- you just seem to think you can make some sort of point by saying it.
Generally:
I've made only 3 points in this thread-
-That racism is wrong, that is not just the same as other 'name calling' and that it shouldnt be tolerated.
-That it is possible to determine whether something is racist or not regardless of personal views, explaining it is possible to use 'racially sensitive' words, even those such as n1gger and paki without being racist. (A entirely non-'PC' viewpoint)
-That there isnt some great wave of over-sensitive or untrue allegations going on.
Does anyone really disagree with any of the above points? Even if you think there to be further questionable nuances involved, do you really think 'bash the anti-racist' as a worthy cause for your time?
There are instances where 'political-correctness' has gone too far, although these are a lot less than is made out. However, when it does so it moves out of being anti-racism, I dont believe it possible to go 'too far' in disapproving of racism.
Too many use the popularised approval of eschewing politically-correctness as excuse to continue being racist. [Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
|
It appears I mis-understood you to an extent for which I apologise.
I did however state that the lad got the name at an early age when kids simply don't "see" colour.
I also agree with you regarding downunder. | |
| YOU do not have the right to give someone else permission to tell me what I can and can't do. |
| |
| Club Statement on 22:59 - Jan 16 with 1546 views | NotEyreClue |
| Club Statement on 20:29 - Jan 16 by dancdale |
DorsetDale:
You state it 'utter nonsense' that it is incorrect to say 'context, implication and intention are totally in the eye of the beholder'
You then give an example of a situation where an onlooker (through his beholding eye) may have thought you were being racist- but that the actual context (reason for the nickname), intention (to friendly greet by a nickname), and implication (recognised by recipient as being friendly greeting)- meant that in fact it wasn't a racist act.
The logic of my point is that there exists a singular, non-subjective, true reality as to whether something is racist or not, regardless of how it may be interpreted. Despite declaring my view utter nonsense, it is apparent through your example you actually agree with me.
(However, to say the shortening of Nigel to the rare/unique, non-phonetic nigs, rather than the normal nige- and for it to be a pure co-incidence that he was black, is unlikely/naive.)
downunder:
I dont consider myself as a socialist or definable as left wing. I have spoken here only on the issue of racism- something which is wrong and should be called out regardless of political beliefs. Or do you disagree? Do you think it ok to make derogatory/negative/abusive statements or action based on race, in which case say so, as theres not much point in debating the lesser points. If not then you largely agree with me, and the only difference seems to be that rather than taking action against what is wrong you think it should be tolerated?.
Rather than just trying to deride me without addressing any of the points, why not explain your position.
With regards to 'Great' Britain, I agree there is a great deal to be proud of, much of it based on the principles of social justice and significantly powered through immigration. There is also a great deal to be ashamed of. You dont really explain exactly what, and why people like me, made you leave- you just seem to think you can make some sort of point by saying it.
Generally:
I've made only 3 points in this thread-
-That racism is wrong, that is not just the same as other 'name calling' and that it shouldnt be tolerated.
-That it is possible to determine whether something is racist or not regardless of personal views, explaining it is possible to use 'racially sensitive' words, even those such as n1gger and paki without being racist. (A entirely non-'PC' viewpoint)
-That there isnt some great wave of over-sensitive or untrue allegations going on.
Does anyone really disagree with any of the above points? Even if you think there to be further questionable nuances involved, do you really think 'bash the anti-racist' as a worthy cause for your time?
There are instances where 'political-correctness' has gone too far, although these are a lot less than is made out. However, when it does so it moves out of being anti-racism, I dont believe it possible to go 'too far' in disapproving of racism.
Too many use the popularised approval of eschewing politically-correctness as excuse to continue being racist. [Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
|
The majority would agree with your three points.
With regards to people citing political correctness as a means of justifying their racism, I really wish they were all that eloquent!
I usually just hear, 'Well they're not white so I hate them..' and the classic, 'Dey tuk err jerbs!' (hope you get that reference)
|  |
| The modern pioneer of mealy mouthed bollocks. |
| |
| Club Statement on 20:33 - Jan 17 with 1417 views | downunder |
| Club Statement on 20:43 - Jan 16 by dancdale |
Nah, too many abbo's for my liking. |
Do native Australians take the word "Abbo" as rascist?
DISCUSS. | | | |
| Club Statement on 20:50 - Jan 17 with 1398 views | BartRowou |
| Club Statement on 20:33 - Jan 17 by downunder |
Do native Australians take the word "Abbo" as rascist?
DISCUSS. |
I think that's what you're supposed to say. Something to do with irony.
I'd rather talk about the shnow. |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 21:08 - Jan 17 with 1367 views | BlueDutch |
| Club Statement on 20:50 - Jan 17 by BartRowou |
I think that's what you're supposed to say. Something to do with irony.
I'd rather talk about the shnow. |
The colour of snow at least is not an issue. (Unless its yellow) |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 21:17 - Jan 17 with 1360 views | 442Dale |
| Club Statement on 21:08 - Jan 17 by BlueDutch |
The colour of snow at least is not an issue. (Unless its yellow) |
Lucky snow.
| |
| |
| Club Statement on 22:30 - Jan 17 with 1316 views | dingdangblue |
| Club Statement on 21:17 - Jan 17 by 442Dale |
Lucky snow.
|
Not if you get a mouthful of it. |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 11:58 - Jan 18 with 1256 views | AtThePeake |
Sorry to drag this sorry thread back up to the top but I've had no internet for a few days and this has been playing on my mind.
Whilst I agree that the attitude etc. of the players at the club at the minute is nothing short of disgraceful and changed do need to be made in that area, I think a few on this thread were over-reacting to the thought of the club being portrayed as a racist club in the eyes of the nation.
But has anyone mentioned this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18040974
How many people on here heard of or recall this?
Goes to show that a few are over-reacting on that side of things (that the club will be portrayed as a racist club in the media etc etc.) |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 13:04 - Jan 18 with 1228 views | Toffeemanc |
| Club Statement on 11:58 - Jan 18 by AtThePeake |
Sorry to drag this sorry thread back up to the top but I've had no internet for a few days and this has been playing on my mind.
Whilst I agree that the attitude etc. of the players at the club at the minute is nothing short of disgraceful and changed do need to be made in that area, I think a few on this thread were over-reacting to the thought of the club being portrayed as a racist club in the eyes of the nation.
But has anyone mentioned this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18040974
How many people on here heard of or recall this?
Goes to show that a few are over-reacting on that side of things (that the club will be portrayed as a racist club in the media etc etc.) |
Have to admit I don't ever remember this one so it would seem you have a point regarding the clubs reputation. Maybe in the case of the incident in our game it has received more media/press coverage due to the fact that it happened in a game taking place on the opposition clubs designated Anti racism day which clearly makes a great story for the press.
That report also suggests to me that the FA are uniform in their punishments on this issue as the player got the same playing ban as Luis Suarez got.
If the case against our player is proved can you imagine our team without him for 8 games? That is really worrying and given our current form could easily be the difference that sees us dropped into a possible relegation battle. |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 13:15 - Jan 18 with 1205 views | SuddenLad |
| Club Statement on 13:04 - Jan 18 by Toffeemanc |
Have to admit I don't ever remember this one so it would seem you have a point regarding the clubs reputation. Maybe in the case of the incident in our game it has received more media/press coverage due to the fact that it happened in a game taking place on the opposition clubs designated Anti racism day which clearly makes a great story for the press.
That report also suggests to me that the FA are uniform in their punishments on this issue as the player got the same playing ban as Luis Suarez got.
If the case against our player is proved can you imagine our team without him for 8 games? That is really worrying and given our current form could easily be the difference that sees us dropped into a possible relegation battle. |
If it can be proved beyond doubt that the player concerned is 'guilty' then I hope he never wears a Dale shirt again.
There is no place for such conduct in sport in general, or society as a whole.
Rochdale AFC (or any other club) need to send out a message that they will not tolerate such conduct and that they will not employ people who do.
| |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Club Statement on 14:08 - Jan 18 with 1172 views | D_Alien |
| Club Statement on 13:15 - Jan 18 by SuddenLad |
If it can be proved beyond doubt that the player concerned is 'guilty' then I hope he never wears a Dale shirt again.
There is no place for such conduct in sport in general, or society as a whole.
Rochdale AFC (or any other club) need to send out a message that they will not tolerate such conduct and that they will not employ people who do.
|
Hence why I suggested that the rumours (and that's all they were) of the player being "given permission to talk to" another club would provide an acceptable solution, at least as far as Dale are concerned. |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 14:12 - Jan 18 with 1147 views | TTNYear |
| Club Statement on 13:15 - Jan 18 by SuddenLad |
If it can be proved beyond doubt that the player concerned is 'guilty' then I hope he never wears a Dale shirt again.
There is no place for such conduct in sport in general, or society as a whole.
Rochdale AFC (or any other club) need to send out a message that they will not tolerate such conduct and that they will not employ people who do.
|
That's a bit ham fisted surely. What if the player came out and apologised. Is no one allowed to make a mistake? |  |
| Anti-cliquism is the last refuge of the messageboard scoundrel - Copyright Dorset Dale productions |
| |
| Club Statement on 14:19 - Jan 18 with 1132 views | judd |
| Club Statement on 14:12 - Jan 18 by TTNYear |
That's a bit ham fisted surely. What if the player came out and apologised. Is no one allowed to make a mistake? |
Apologise for being gay? |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 14:23 - Jan 18 with 1118 views | TTNYear |
It would take heat off the racism | |
| Anti-cliquism is the last refuge of the messageboard scoundrel - Copyright Dorset Dale productions |
| |
| Club Statement on 14:25 - Jan 18 with 1109 views | judd |
| Club Statement on 14:23 - Jan 18 by TTNYear |
It would take heat off the racism |
Honky! | |
| |
| Club Statement on 14:26 - Jan 18 with 1106 views | TTNYear |
| Club Statement on 14:25 - Jan 18 by judd |
Honky! |
I can see the headlines
"I'm gay and KKK'" says un-named Dale scouser [Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
| |
| Anti-cliquism is the last refuge of the messageboard scoundrel - Copyright Dorset Dale productions |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
