Eddie McGuire

[Baloo]

Just wondering is it ok to publicly voice your dislike for a female if you're a man or is that seen as misogyny?

Seems fine if you're expressing dislike for the person and what about them you don't like.

eg Pauline Hanson, plenty vocal about what she stood for and it wouldn't have made a difference if she was male or female

 

[tigersnake]

And not sure that pointing to someone else doing something/saying something similar absolves the original party from blame or responsibility anyway.

I think you're missing the point. If I say to you to your face 'such and such is on the warpath they want to kill you', Its very different from me saying in your absence 'I want to kill that bastard'. I think its very different anyway.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Seems fine if you're expressing dislike for the person and what about them you don't like.

So would Eddie have just been better off saying he hated her?

 

[spook]

So would Eddie have just been better off saying he hated her?

Yes.

 

[tigertim]

Maguires words were "and if she stays under, 50"

Shaws words were "and hold her under Dwayne"

Now I understand Wilson has said McGuire can't compare the 2 because Shaw said it in her presence and were "completely different" and she's entitled to say that in defence of her 3aw colleague but it seems pretty similar IMO.

 

[Mac]

They're the big losers. Plenty of people already thought Eddie was a *smile*. Those who've bought into AFL grandstanding on social issues will be confused.

As for McGuire, the "apology" was even poorer than the comments.

This was linked on another thread, but seems apt to link again here.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-07/david-pocock-shows-sporting-world-how-to-make-an-apology/7306588

And so here is another 'hall of shame' apology from McGuire, going the old angle of 'sorry if was taken a certain way by others' rather than actually saying sorry for doing the wrong thing himself. He's actually putting blame onto others for taking it the wrong way. "Light hearted banter" excuses him. He does NOT own doing wrong AT ALL. He is sorry for other people reacting, not for doing the wrong thing:

"[I'm] really disappointed that these comments have led to these feelings from people," he said.

"I apologise and retract them in the spirit of what we're trying to achieve, which is to look after women and children in our community."

Where does he actually own where HE is wrong? He apologises, but only in a general sense and even then only in a spirit of a greater movement, not with any real individual contrition. Then more vagueries and meaningless wordiness:

"Anything at all that can be perceived to promulgate or support, even in a light-hearted manner, domestic violence is unacceptable," he said.

Well, der. Thanks for pointing out an obvious statement that effectively sits alone without tying himself to it. If only he had have linked this back to his specific behaviour and conceded that his words had flown directly in the face of this sentiment and that he was personally responsible for breaking that code in a disappointing way.

But he doesn't.

If he did, this would be slightly more palatable. "I was a dill and I let myself and everyone else down" would have been acceptable over "I'm sorry you feel offended about me talking about drowning someone as a joke on public radio". If he had, I wouldn't be on this 'pc rant'.

And you know what, even if he is usually a champion against violence to women, he let his intense dislike of a person who happens to be a women cloud his judgement of what was clearly a stupid thing to say and makes him look a boorish misogynist, even if he's not. So apologise properly for goodness sake.

Moving away from the fact is was directed at a woman, what if it's just taken as being directed at an individual? There have been comments about 'if it was a man, the world would have moved on and not cared'. Possibly true, but that's a bit of a sad reflection anyway. Anyone who's lost someone to drowning could be forgiven for being pretty distressed at the imagery drummed up by this idiot.

He was stupidly careless. It happens to us all, but have the stones to own your mistakes. And the boofheaded yes men didn't even stop to think before they all leaped on - all blinded by their own dislike of a woman brave enough to throw scrutiny on their boys-club feeblemindedness.

Grow the hell up footy world.

 

[tigersnake]

Maguires words were "and if she stays under, 50"

Shaws words were "and hold her under Dwayne"

Now I understand Wilson has said McGuire can't compare the 2 because Shaw said it in her presence and were "completely different" and she's entitled to say that in defence of her 3aw colleague but it seems pretty similar IMO.

There is this thing called context Tim.

 

[Rosy]

So would Eddie have just been better off saying he hated her?

I'd question someone having the need to publicly and openly express hatred of another person. Better to ignore them and keep such valuable info to yourself. It may not be mysoginistic but it is a form of bullying. Exactly the kind of thing schools are trying to eradicate with kids.

 

[Harry]

Yeah Eddie McGuane and James Bradshaw are quite smug aren't they? Sorry if you took it the wrong way...lol. it's your fault.

 

[Baloo]

And the boofheaded yes men didn't even stop to think before they all leaped on - all blinded by their own dislike of a woman brave enough to throw scrutiny on their boys-club feeblemindedness.

Oddly enough, the journo I give the least credibility to, Parrot, was the only one of the group who didn't play follow the leader. Whether that's only because of the gig on Footy Classified or not I don't know, but credit goes to him.

 

[Tigers of Old]

I'd question someone having the need to publicly and openly express hatred of another person. Better to ignore them and keep such valuable info to yourself. It may not be mysoginistic but it is a form of bullying. Exactly the kind of thing schools are trying to eradicate with kids.

Interesting, so now you can't say you hate/dislike somebody either?

 

[buenavista]

Just wondering is it ok to publicly voice your dislike for a female if you're a man or is that seen as misogyny?

Nah I think it is all misogyny these days old buddy. No place for opinions, jokes or larrikins anymore, too many people just waiting around ready to be offended.

 

[Tigers of Old]

I know one things for sure, I'm starting to feel older.

 

[Rosy]

Interesting, so now you can't say you hate/dislike somebody either?

I don't make the rules. How would you react if kids at school told your child they hated him and wouldn't play with him. I am glad that kind of bullying isn't acceptable in schools. Hopefully the kids will grow up to be better people because of it. What is to be gained by telling someone you hate them.

 

[TigerForce]

Nah I think it is all misogyny these days old buddy. No place for opinions, jokes or larrikins anymore, too many people just waiting around ready to be offended.

We need some new Ken Bruce style commercials......"Political Correctness has gone completely mad!!!"

 

[Harry]

Oddly enough, the journo I give the least credibility to, Parrot, was the only one of the group who didn't play follow the leader. Whether that's only because of the gig on Footy Classified or not I don't know, but credit goes to him.

Don't mind parrot. Reckon he gets unfairly criticised, mainly because tiger fans are a bit sensitive when someone says the truth about us that we are a mediocre club.

 

[Tigers of Old]

I don't make the rules. How would you react if kids at school told your child they hated him and wouldn't play with him. I am glad that kind of bullying isn't acceptable in schools. Hopefully the kids will grow up to be better people because of it. What is to be gained by telling someone you hate them.

Totally understand it in a school environment.

 

[Rosy]

Totally understand it in a school environment.

What about in a non school environment. Is that kind of behaviour acceptable outside the school grounds? If not when does it become acceptable?

 

[jb03]

I think you're missing the point. If I say to you to your face 'such and such is on the warpath they want to kill you', Its very different from me saying in your absence 'I want to kill that bastard'. I think its very different anyway.

No not missing the point. In fact, we are in furious agreement (our points are slightly different).

I was stating that Triple M's defence simply seems to be that it was all ok because someone else (3AW) did it as well.

 

[spook]

What about in a non school environment. Is that kind of behaviour acceptable outside the school grounds? If not when does it become acceptable?

It's not acceptable anywhere, rosy. Gutless bullying; pack mentality. McGuire has a lot of power and plenty of pilot fish don't want to lose his slipstream. Danny Frawley ought to be ashamed of himself. He's a simpleton and easily led, but he has four daughters. Pathetic, Spud.

I'm no Mark Robinson fan, but he has said all the right things about this. Called it for what it was: bullying. Called the AFL out for its weak response. Called out the pack mentality and how they're all scared of McGuire.

A boys' club of moron Neanderthals.