Re: Adam Goodes

[Rosy]

I look forward to you discovering that you are focussed on the wrong end of this issue and that by continually posting about Goodes and not endemic racism you detract from the issue and provide cover for racists to keep on keeping on.

I know you're playing no talkies but I just read this post. What absolute crap. I'm not copping any blame for racists' behaviour. I bet you couldn't give one reasonable example of how me commenting about Adam Goodes on a tin pot web forum is providing cover for racists. I am not the tiniest bit responsible for it. Who are you to make such a claim?

Edit. Using your logic would you appreciate me suggesting your comments to me on here provide a cover for all the bullying and abuse I cop?

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I know you're playing no talkies but I just read this post. What absolute crap. I'm not copping any blame for racists' behaviour. I bet you couldn't give one reasonable example of how me commenting about Adam Goodes on a tin pot web forum is providing cover for racists. I am not the tiniest bit responsible for it. Who are you to make such a claim? Get over yourself and your holier than though personal judgements and attitude.

There's plenty of crap on this thread Rosy and some of it is yours. We don't see eye to on this and I felt that you started resorting to goading in your replys and I was fed up with your moaning about my not answering your every question, so I politely posted that I would stop responding to your posts. I note you didn't afford me the same courtesy. Am I free to post in my own way or do I have to post in the way you want me to?

If you are happy that the reasons you give for your take on Goodes are the exact same reasons that Bolt, Jones and the rest of the bogan crew give for theirs, that's fine. I don't think I blamed you for it, I said your protestations provide cover, not in the world, in this thread. There are some pretty archaic views on here. Some, I can't remember if you were among them, defended "black face" for instance. You are not responsible for the views of others and at no stage have I said you were, but your use of those arguments smoothes the way for those who are of the same opinion or even further down the "I'm not racist...but" path to express theirs. And you didn't just read this post because you responded to it earlier, on page 52.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Edit. Using your logic would you appreciate me suggesting your comments to me on here provide a cover for all the bullying and abuse I cop?

If that is how you feel use the report to moderater feature. I don't think I have done anything or been personal in my responses, I have reacted only to the actual content of your posts. Can I report all of your pushy posts about me not answering you? Is that bullying?

[EDIT] If you want to discuss bullying or other issues with my posting please PM me.

 

[Rosy]

What a load of hogwash.

I may well post crap but I don't harass others telling them what to say or judging them personally.

I mentioned Sam Newman was pretending to be Nicky Winmar. I'd never heard of "blackface". Was Nicky offended or insulted? He still chose to appear on the show. Nicky showed he was proud to be black. I still don't know if he felt the way some on here seem to be claiming for him. Me saying that hasn't given cover to racists in any way.

You seem to take exception to me discussing the girl incident and the spearing dance. You had a few cracks about it. They are what interests and disappoints me in regards to Adam Goodes the footballer. Whether I discuss them or not makes no difference to others. I do not provide cover for racists and it's pretty ordinary to accuse me of that. As I said I bet you can't provide one example of what you're accusing me of. Feel free to try.

You did not specify whether the racists my comments gave cover to were on here or in the world to regardless of what you "think".

And of course I didn't show you the same courtesy to ignore your posts. It wasn't me who made grandiose announcements in that department. More comebacks than John Farnham. :hihi

 

[Rosy]

If that is how you feel use the report to moderater feature. I don't think I have done anything or been personal in my responses, I have reacted only to the actual content of your posts. Can I report all of your pushy posts about me not answering you? Is that bullying?

[EDIT] If you want to discuss bullying or other issues with my posting please PM me.

Funny. I don't see much benefit in reporting a post to my self. I was being facetious. I said applying your logic (which I reckon is way out of line). I don't think my question to you is the case at all, same as I don't believe I am providing cover for racism. Seems you're not that happy when the tables are turned.

 

[Rosy]

.......
If you are happy that the reasons you give for your take on Goodes are the exact same reasons that Bolt, Jones and the rest of the bogan crew give for theirs, that's fine. .........

I wouldn't have a clue what they say. Please elaborate on the "exact same reasons" the people you refer to give. Reasons for what?

 

[1eyedtiger]

If you are happy that the reasons you give for your take on Goodes are the exact same reasons that Bolt, Jones and the rest of the bogan crew give for theirs, that's fine.

I assume you're using the term 'bogan' in a nice way and not in a derogatory sense.

 

[mld]

So it's all over bar the shouting.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I assume you're using the term 'bogan' in a nice way and not in a derogatory sense.

In reference to Bolt, Jones, Brereton, Panahi et al...if the cap fits.

 

[K3]

On a different tram...

When considering the events of the past couple (?) of weeks, has anything that has been said, or done, changed your views on... anything?

For me, nope.

 

[tigertim]

On a different tram...

When considering the events of the past couple (?) of weeks, has anything that has been said, or done, changed your views on... anything?

For me, nope.

I think I've learnt even something as simple as booing can effect people. What I mean is I would've thought being booed would be water off a ducks back to afl footballers but I now understand it can effect ones state of mental health.

 

[K3]

I think I've learnt even something as simple as booing can effect people. What I mean is I would've thought being booed would be water off a ducks back to afl footballers but I now understand it can effect ones state of mental health.

Nice one mate (Y)

 

[ninjahaha]

I couldn't agree more Sensei. There are those that refuse to see past some of Goodes behaviour at the issues that he and others are trying to highlight. They are unintetionally, I hope, justifying the behaviour of bogans by claiming that Goodes "brought it on himself" and is "creating a divide". But Goodes and all Indigenous Aussies and those that have copped racist abuseand discrimination, live the divide, they sure as hell didn't create it. My hope is that all this will help the scales fall from their eyes, so to speak.

If this saga sparks steps towards helping deal with the issues after 200 years of dispossessing the indigenous people of this land then all this will be worth it. My fear is it will end with the of booing of racial minorities and Adam retiring.

Seriously hope I'm wrong.

 

[martyshire]

On a different tram...

When considering the events of the past couple (?) of weeks, has anything that has been said, or done, changed your views on... anything?

For me, nope.

I've learnt that lots journalists and public figures like to have really strong views about topics that they know very little about; seemingly just because an issue is divisive and they are determined to fall on a particular side of the fence.

I already knew that 'average joe' can't be bothered trying to understand complicated issues or appreciating more than one side of view, but I didn't realise how many public figures were the same.

Hats off to Gillon Mclachlan. He is the only one I have heard not getting carried away in one direction or the other.

 

[AngryAnt]

I've learnt that lots journalists and public figures like to have really strong views about topics that they know very little about; seemingly just because an issue is divisive and they are determined to fall on a particular side of the fence.

I already knew that 'average joe' can't be bothered trying to understand complicated issues or appreciating more than one side of view, but I didn't realise how many public figures were the same.

Hats off to Gillon Mclachlan. He is the only one I have heard not getting carried away in one direction or the other.

It's called sitting on the fence, and if you are a CEO who does it it does you are not the right man for the job either because you can't make a decision or because you don't have control of key stakeholders. Both are bad.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I wouldn't have a clue what they say. Please elaborate on the "exact same reasons" the people you refer to give. Reasons for what?

Hi Rosy. I am tired of arguing with you about this and I don't like the antagonistic tone it has now taken. I am happy to wear the blame for that, I would like to reboot our discussion hopefully with less of an edge.

Where I think our disagreement lies, and where the post you quoted is leading, is to the incident with the girl, and the incident with the imaginary spear and his statements about Australian historical treatment of Indigenous. My problem with your characterisation of the day he called out the girl is that you and commentators I was referencing insist on ignoring all the very caring and thoughtful things Adam said on the day and the next day. It centres entirely on the action at the time and disregards the rest which I think is unfair. Where it becomes antagonistic is when I try to figure why you choose to ignore these other actions of Goodes? I clearly read-in a bias that you for some reason want to only see the negative side that agrees with your position so you intentionally ignore the rest. That is my bias I guess.

I can't really say it any better than Waleed Aly did on The Project or Offsiders did with their montage. Have you seen them? If so what do you think of the way they portray this?

 

[Rosy]

..........

My problem with your characterisation of the day he called out the girl is that you and commentators I was referencing insist on ignoring all the very caring and thoughtful things Adam said on the day and the next day. It centres entirely on the action at the time and disregards the rest which I think is unfair.

.....

That is incorrect Knighters.

I haven't said much about his actions on the day. I've said it wasn't his fault the girl was subjected to the ordinary treatment on the day. It was the next day he singled the girl out as the face of racism. After all she'd been through he still put her up for public humiliation. Yes he did say some nice things at the time too but in my mind they didn't negate the fact he labeled her the way he did. He chose to her out himself in a media conference while telling others to support her.

.....
Where it becomes antagonistic is when I try to figure why you choose to ignore these other actions of Goodes? I clearly read-in a bias that you for some reason want to only see the negative side that agrees with your position so you intentionally ignore the rest. That is my bias I guess.
......

If you just asked me I'd be happy to discuss my opinions. It's the boorish attitude and repeated snide digs some are dishing out to those they disagree with that annoy me. It's the repeated not reading what was actually said, twisting words and misquoting that's frustrating. You say I don't discuss the positives of Goodes. There are some who don't/won't discuss the negatives. I'm sure he's not perfect and I've no doubt given his time again he might do things a bit differently. I've asked some general questions that nobody has answered. It works both ways. People have a right to discuss what they want to without being harassed.

I have repeatedly made it clear the areas I'm interested in discussing on this thread are in regards to AFL football. That doesn't mean I have no interest or caring in regards to indigenous welfare.

I haven't seen the programs you mention. My opinions are my own.

There was a nice article yesterday about Bachar dealing with Muslims and the taunts they cop. Adam could do well to read it and think about a far less confrontational and aggressive approach imo.

 

[Rosy]

Does the AFL discriminate?

Ben- rude gesture to the camera off-field which never had to be made public. FINED

Dusty- private gesture to someone unknown. FINED

Adam- confronts the crowd in a way he said a war dance that was meant to be intimidating. ENCOURAGED AND CONDONED

Lewis- confronts the crowd in an intimidating manner. ACCEPTED

There are many more examples of players being fined, stood down, being forced to apologise. I don't really approve of any of them. I don't see how the AFL can encourage the so called recently choreographed war dances and simulated spearing being performed in the face of the opposition supporters over the fence when they come down so hard on others.

Can anyone tell me why some of these actions are frowned upon and others are encouraged. I'm sure plenty don't agree with me and I'd be really interested to see it from their point of view.

This is not meant to be a discussion on Adam Goodes per se or indigenous welfare. There's a thread on the Race, Religion, Politics thread for that. This is about the AFL and what I see as double standards. Are they handling this right?

 

[Al Bundy]

Re: Does the AFL discriminate?

The gun gesture from Mark Williams , player was never fined or sanctioned off memory that was fire upwards, then hand gun, then bow and arrow as he was told to tame it from his coach. AFL did nothing. I can't remember was Krak @ Coll fined as well for doing the wrist cross like Dusty?

 

[Bunnerz]

Re: Does the AFL discriminate?

I think Dane Swan and Andre Krakour did the jail salute...not sure if they were sanctioned though.
AFL does discriminate though.