Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[doverfox]

2 hours ago, los dedos said:

Not sure of the point you're trying to make . 

That Boohoo suppliers in the uk paying the global going rate for the job sparked outrage only because of where those employees live. It is ok to exploit people as long as it is happening where you cant see it, would be the message Boohoo take away from this story and those who think that this isnt normal just read this

  https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/replica-football-shirts-costing-107-16483416

And pretend to your self you wouldnt buy products made by people that are being exploited whilst weeping that the girl in the factory making the top has to work 20 hours to have name Vardy the number 7 on the back and the premier league badge on the sleeve.  Will i still buy the new top knowing this yes of course I will.

[Fox92]

10 hours ago, ScrumpyJack said:

Kasp

Vestergaard Kjaer Christensen

Maehle Delaney Hojbjerg Wass

Eriksen Damsgaard

Poulsen

 

I just think as a starting XI they’re more balanced. Really doubting England’s midfield of being able to contribute anything meaningful. Screaming for a pre-injury Owen Hargreaves type.

Yeah, I wasn't doubting, just genuinelly don't know that many players outside of the obvious ones. I forgot about Hojbjerg!

[filbertway]

Poulson is awful! I'd rather have Barry Hayles than that chump up top

[Nalis]

Not that its mattered since last March but any flight that takes less than 3 hours should not have reclining seats on that plane, or at least have them disabled.

[urban.spaceman]

The six other deadly sins should get a month too. 

[UniFox21]

Not sure if unpopular, but really dislike all the branding players 'uniquely' use such as JM10. Understood it for Ronaldo with CR7, as well it's Ronaldo, but other players doing is rather annoying me. 

 

 

 

[leicsmac]

I value the future more than the past.

[RonnieTodger]

Robbie Savage is a better co-commentator than he's given credit for

[The Bear]

53 minutes ago, RonnieTodger said:

Robbie Savage is a better co-commentator than he's given credit for

He's shite. Utter drivel last night in the Wales game. 

[RonnieTodger]

5 minutes ago, The Bear said:

He's shite. Utter drivel last night in the Wales game. 

Aren't they all? Are there any co-commentators that are universally liked? Maybe Ally McCoist, but that's not for his analysis. 

 

Savage is observant at the very least and tries to spot patterns or things that the commentator may not have seen. He did get swept in the Wales game though.

 

Can safely say he's better than Jenas, Keown, Murphy and McManaman to name a few.

[Dunge]

I like having Savage around, particularly in an era of dour co-commentators with no apparent enthusiasm except for probably one ESL club of choice.

 

Not sure I’d want more than one of him, of course.

[don_danbury]

1 hour ago, RonnieTodger said:

Robbie Savage is a better co-commentator than he's given credit for

his favourite word is DESIRE

[Guest Bert Fill]

3 hours ago, RonnieTodger said:

Robbie Savage is a better co-commentator than he's given credit for

However bad you expect him to be, Robbie Savage is always even worse.

[Free Falling Foxes]

2 hours ago, Bert Fill said:

However bad you expect him to be, Robbie Savage is always even worse.

Admitted, he has improved since but when he was first on 606 he would try and shoot down callers opinions by asking them, 'Have you ever played professional football?

Er, no Robbie but neither have 99.99% of callers. If he was suggesting that was a pre condition of a football phone in, then there wouldn't be many callers.

[Dr The Singh]

Dragovic was good enough for us and should have been a club legend

[Parafox]

9 hours ago, The Bear said:

He's shite. Utter drivel last night in the Wales game. 

He's Marmite. I like him as a co-comms but dislike him on 606 with Chris "I'm a WUM" Sutton

[Parafox]

8 hours ago, RonnieTodger said:

Aren't they all? Are there any co-commentators that are universally liked? Maybe Ally McCoist, but that's not for his analysis. 

 

Savage is observant at the very least and tries to spot patterns or things that the commentator may not have seen. He did get swept in the Wales game though.

 

Can safely say he's better than Jenas, Keown, Murphy and McManaman to name a few.

As bland as dry pastry. Offers nothing to the watching experience. Knows less about the action on the pitch than Clive Tyldesly.

[Facecloth]

5 hours ago, Parafox said:

As bland as dry pastry. Offers nothing to the watching experience. Knows less about the action on the pitch than Clive Tyldesly.

I wasn't watching the Netherlands match last night, but a mate said Jenas had said the Dutch should bring on Donny Van de Beek. That'll be the injured Donny Van de Beek who pulled out the squad last week. Useless.

[Nod.E]

LGBTQ discourse. What's the point? Sorry did I miss a letter?

 

I don't care if you're gay. I don't dislike it and I don't like it either, same way I couldn't give a fvck about the sex lives of straight people I know. Same way gay people are, I'm sure, totally uninterested about the nuances of my straight sexual preferences.

 

What I don't like is the one-upsmanship associated with the whole thing.

 

From what I can tell, brands apparently either aren't doing enough to recognise the community, or their support is a guise to get customers to buy more stuff. They can't win.

 

I'll say it again, I couldn't care less where people put their wang or their wadge. What does offend me, however, is how stupid and attention seeking people can be.

 

How much gay hate and discrimination actually is there? While I'm sure it exists, it'd have to be pretty fvcking rife to justify the response. I've not done the research so it's entirely possible I'm wrong, but pride MONTH (yes, MONTH) seems like more of an unnecessary celebration of sexual preference than a necessary conversation starter.

 

Speaking as somebody with no ill feeling towards the gay community, I can only imagine how ineffective Pride must be in turning homophobes. If, of course, that's the objective. Which, of course, it isn't.

Edited 22 June 2021 by Nod.E

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Nod.E said:

LGBTQ discourse. What's the point? Sorry did I miss a letter?

 

I don't care if you're gay. I don't dislike it and I don't like it either, same way I couldn't give a fvck about the sex lives of straight people I know. Same way gay people are, I'm sure, totally uninterested about the nuances of my straight sexual preferences.

 

What I don't like is the one-upsmanship associated with the whole thing.

 

From what I can tell, brands apparently either aren't doing enough to recognise the community, or their support is a guise to get customers to buy more stuff. They can't win.

 

I'll say it again, I couldn't care less where people put their wang or their wadge. What does offend me, however, is how stupid and attention seeking people can be.

 

How much gay hate and discrimination actually is there? While I'm sure it exists, it'd have to be pretty fvcking rife to justify the response. I've not done the research so it's entirely possible I'm wrong, but pride MONTH (yes, MONTH) seems like more of an unnecessary celebration of sexual preference than a necessary conversation starter.

Sadly, lots of other people do, and lots, in that order.

 

71 countries still criminalise LGBT relationships. 11 of them carry a potential death penalty for it. And that's just the criminally institutionalised discrimination, the everyday civil discrimination where LGBT folks have trouble obtaining healthcare, housing and work without being discriminated against is much more prevalent in many more places. Hell, the "gay panic" defence is still a viable defence for killing someone in some places.

 

Progress is being made compared even to a decade or two ago, but there's still a way to go and yes, the discrimination is still rife even if a lot of folks either can't see it or pretend not to.

 

Of course, if we're talking about the UK only then the issues aren't as bad as the majority of other places, but this discourse and Pride itself has never been just about one country.

[Nod.E]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Sadly, lots of other people do, and lots, in that order.

 

71 countries still criminalise LGBT relationships. 11 of them carry a potential death penalty for it. And that's just the criminally institutionalised discrimination, the everyday civil discrimination where LGBT folks have trouble obtaining healthcare, housing and work without being discriminated against is much more prevalent in many more places. Hell, the "gay panic" defence is still a viable defence for killing someone in some places.

 

Progress is being made compared even to a decade or two ago, but there's still a way to go and yes, the discrimination is still rife even if a lot of folks either can't see it or pretend not to.

 

Of course, if we're talking about the UK only then the issues aren't as bad as the majority of other places, but this discourse and Pride itself has never been just about one country.

I'll admit I was narrow minded enough to think domestically only!

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

I'll admit I was narrow minded enough to think domestically only!

That's understandable especially as the UK has made pretty decent strides on the matter of late.

 

But yes, Pride and applying a bit of pressure to global brands is happening to try to address a broadly global issue.

[Carl the Llama]

49 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

That's understandable especially as the UK has made pretty decent strides on the matter of late.

 

But yes, Pride and applying a bit of pressure to global brands is happening to try to address a broadly global issue.

The UK is better than most but we still have a ways to go.  Sure we've stopped chemically castrating war heroes and in the more recent past we've extended the tax benefits of marriage to same-sex couples which is nice, but you only have to go back 2 years to see the supposedly liberal option political party being run by a man who openly disagrees with homosexuality.  And that's not even talking about public attitudes, kids on the playground today still casually use "gay" or similar words as pejoratives.  Most of them will grow out of it like most of our generation has but the fact it's still a common insult is telling of prevailing social attitudes.  That's not even getting started on attitudes to trans people, both public and political.

[Nod.E]

49 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

The UK is better than most but we still have a ways to go.  Sure we've stopped chemically castrating war heroes and in the more recent past we've extended the tax benefits of marriage to same-sex couples which is nice, but you only have to go back 2 years to see the supposedly liberal option political party being run by a man who openly disagrees with homosexuality.  And that's not even talking about public attitudes, kids on the playground today still casually use "gay" or similar words as pejoratives.  Most of them will grow out of it like most of our generation has but the fact it's still a common insult is telling of prevailing social attitudes.  That's not even getting started on attitudes to trans people, both public and political.

We have a way to go on climate change but I don't see month-long awareness events for that. Bit more important, no?

 

And on school kids, they draw massive dicks over everything in sight so I'm not sure we should be taking much notice of their views on what is or isn't gay. Seriously though, something being 'a bit queer' has become part of the language (granted, wrongly), but it isn't indicative of any ill meaning in common usage, in fact not even referencing sexuality at all in many contexts.

 

We're in banning words territory.

[Carl the Llama]

2 hours ago, Nod.E said:

We have a way to go on climate change but I don't see month-long awareness events for that. Bit more important, no?

 

And on school kids, they draw massive dicks over everything in sight so I'm not sure we should be taking much notice of their views on what is or isn't gay. Seriously though, something being 'a bit queer' has become part of the language (granted, wrongly), but it isn't indicative of any ill meaning in common usage, in fact not even referencing sexuality at all in many contexts.

 

We're in banning words territory.

You miss the point.  Gay kids in England today still have to put up with it being used as a lazy insult by their peers.  It doesn't matter how much ill meaning is intended in individual instances, its frequent usage sends a clear message that society thinks there's something bad about an immutable feature of theirs.  Suggesting we teach people to have the empathy to be a bit more imaginative with how they express their frustration is hardly 1984.