Absolute *** of our time Pt.MXXVI

[grobyfox1990]

33 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Seems to me these days that if you don’t follow the same train of thought as the supposed populist opinion then you’re a racist, sexist, bigot, Neanderthal- whichever slur people want to throw at you.
 

Using those slurs because someone is of a different opinion to you doesn’t undermine the person with that opinion. It undermines the person throwing around those slurs, and highlights their inability to accept other viewpoints. Who are the Neanderthals again?

Again wouldn’t think too much about it. Once Barton comes out with his coke-ridden madness you’ll have loads of middle aged middle England white men desperately trying to prove they’re not like him, so will call him and his like bigots, Neanderthals, thick, fascists etc etc. Best ignored 

[Facecloth]

Imagine if Chelsea and Porto player 20 odd years ago decided they wouldn't listen to someone because they hadn't played the game at the top level. Bournemouth would be non league, Arsenal wouldn't be invincibles, we wouldn't have an FA Cup.

[Lionator]

50 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Seems to me these days that if you don’t follow the same train of thought as the supposed populist opinion then you’re a racist, sexist, bigot, Neanderthal- whichever slur people want to throw at you.
 

Using those slurs because someone is of a different opinion to you doesn’t undermine the person with that opinion. It undermines the person throwing around those slurs, and highlights their inability to accept other viewpoints. Who are the Neanderthals again?

I’m speaking about Barton, not about anyone else. He’s a scumbag.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/joey-barton-ex-footballer-cleared-of-assaulting-his-wife-after-judge-ruled-he-could-not-get-a-fair-trial-12735414

 

He treats women with contempt. He spoke out and defended his brother the other week who murdered someone. Why did he murder someone, drug deal gone wrong? Neighbourhood dispute? Mental health issue? No, it was because a black man dared to walk past him. 
 

I understand debate, I understand why people may feel threatened or anxious by stuff like equality and diversity as they feel opportunities are taken away from them (even though I don’t agree). How anyone can sit there and defend Joey Barton is beyond me. He is scum of the earth. 

[Tuna]

Hadn't seen the Barton tweets and realized I'd already muted him 

[bmt]

Male pundits are by and large dreadful too. So he's just being sexist

[The Year Of The Fox]

31 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I’m speaking about Barton, not about anyone else. He’s a scumbag.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/joey-barton-ex-footballer-cleared-of-assaulting-his-wife-after-judge-ruled-he-could-not-get-a-fair-trial-12735414

 

He treats women with contempt. He spoke out and defended his brother the other week who murdered someone. Why did he murder someone, drug deal gone wrong? Neighbourhood dispute? Mental health issue? No, it was because a black man dared to walk past him. 
 

I understand debate, I understand why people may feel threatened or anxious by stuff like equality and diversity as they feel opportunities are taken away from them (even though I don’t agree). How anyone can sit there and defend Joey Barton is beyond me. He is scum of the earth. 

I’m not defending Barton. I’m just saying regards  women in the men’s game that he’s absolutely spot on

Edited 6 January by The Year Of The Fox

[Lionator]

16 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

I’m not defending Barton. I’m just saying regards  women in the men’s game that he’s absolutely spot on

Do you not think it's a bit odd to be triggered by that?

 

Aluko may be crap but Emma Hayes for example is far more insightful and understands the sport far better than many male pundits. 

Edited 6 January by Lionator

[The Year Of The Fox]

24 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Do you not think it's a bit odd to be triggered by that?

 

Aluko may be crap but Emma Hayes for example is far more insightful and understands the sport far better than many male pundits. 

No not in the slightest. If the push on women’s football wasn’t so high, then women commentators wouldn’t be around in the men’s game. 
 

My issue isn’t the women commentators, it’s the fact that they’re shoe horned into the men’s game in the push to raise the women’s game profile. 
 

I honestly don’t know why it needs to happen. Can’t the growth of the women’s game be organic? If it can’t be organic then perhaps it’s not as popular as it otherwise would be 

Edited 6 January by The Year Of The Fox

[Nick]

2 hours ago, Daggers said:

If you complain about “box ticking” then you aren’t that far removed from Barton or his ilk. Do you also get narked by the sight of blended families on adverts? Does the sound of the lesbian couple on The Archers being happy increase your blood pressure? Do you not like having things ‘forced down your throat’?

 

We have a proud history of shite ITV sports commentary and long may it continue. If you’re focussing on the colour or sex of the commentator because of “box ticking” then, sorry to break it to you,  you’re a bit of a bigot.

[Jon the Hat]

6 hours ago, Daggers said:

If you complain about “box ticking” then you aren’t that far removed from Barton or his ilk. Do you also get narked by the sight of blended families on adverts? Does the sound of the lesbian couple on The Archers being happy increase your blood pressure? Do you not like having things ‘forced down your throat’?

There’s a lesbian couple on the archers? Jesus wept!!

I do sometimes wonder why the proportion of blended, gay etc people on TV seems so much higher than it is in real life.  It doesn’t nark me to use your words, but it’s interesting.

[ozleicester]

FFS
These discussions and opinions happening in 2024

[LiberalFox]

The issue is Barton feeling entitled to treat women with contempt for not meeting his expectations. He's then gone and doubled down in a nasty menacing way after being called out for it and believes that's also something he's entitled to do. 

 

[Daggers]

1 minute ago, ozleicester said:

FFS
These discussions and opinions happening in 2024

Innit. 
 

 

[Sampson]

6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

And free exchange of opinion on matters like this should be encouraged - someone should be able to give the opinion Barton is a bigoted tw@t, someone should the likewise be able to call that person an arsehole for thinking Barton is a bigoted tw@t in the first place, because that Tweet isn't conclusive and can be viewed subjectively. No harm, no foul.

 

The problem is (and this is something that is happening more and more these days) is people using the same arguments when it comes to matters of established fact. And it's so easy for one to bleed over into the other given the huge amount of digital platforms that exist today.

I usually agree with you on most matters leicsmac and used to agree with you here, but since the Brexit debate, sadly I don't necessarily agree anymore.

 

It's been clear to me since the Brexit debate that many use "it's just my opinion" and "we should allow civil debate" as a defence mechanism to hold clearly non-scientific, bigoted and objectively wrong views on an array of different subjects and that they actually don't want to debate them and so latch onto "it's just my opinion" and like to talk about how we should be having a civil debate as a way to disarm their opponents and end any discussion, when they themselves don't want any part in any actual evidence based civil debate on the subject.

 

Civil debate as a genuine option for the betterment of society was shown pretty starkly to be quackery for me when anyone who tried to make any economic argument for staying in the EU was met with "project fear" and "you don't believe in Britain" duing the lead up to the election and then were all told after the result when Leave won, largely due to 2 word sloganeering and lowest-common denominator appeals to patriotism that the reason Remain lost was because "you didn't actually debate anyone and don't respect the opposite side's opinion" or som false equivalence "there was lying going on on both sides" when the truth was the Remain side constantly tried to engage in genuine economic and evidence based debate but were shot down by meaningless sloganeering and appeals to patriotism and meaningless and vague ideas of self-governing that no one ever wanted to define. 

 

Then we had Trump, Covid and wars in Ukraine and Gaza and these weird culture war, anti-"wokeness" stuff and I feel like things since have shown even more that "civilized debate" doesn't work. What the alternatives are I don't know. But "it should be just people's opinions, sitting down and having a civilized debate" is pretty clearly just a defence mechanism for trying to disarm the enemy and ignore any actual debate so that the status quo stays in tact at this point.

Edited 6 January by Sampson

[Bryn]

People like Year of the Fox and Jon the Hat are dying out. They know it, that's why they're causing as much trouble as they can before they go.

[Lionator]

13 minutes ago, Bryn said:

People like Year of the Fox and Jon the Hat are dying out. They know it, that's why they're causing as much trouble as they can before they go.

There’s a new generation of teenage boys who hold women in such atrocious contempt because of attitudes like those Barton and Tate. 
 

Honestly I think Barton is about ten tweets away from endorsing Taliban policy. 

[Zear0]

Yup, file Joey under absolute bellend. 

 

 

[HighPeakFox]

2 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Yup, file Joey under absolute bellend. 

 

 

Christ Almighty

[leicsmac]

42 minutes ago, Sampson said:

I usually agree with you on most matters leicsmac and used to agree with you here, but since the Brexit debate, sadly I don't necessarily agree anymore.

 

It's been clear to me since the Brexit debate that many use "it's just my opinion" and "we should allow civil debate" as a defence mechanism to hold clearly non-scientific, bigoted and objectively wrong views on an array of different subjects and that they actually don't want to debate them and so latch onto "it's just my opinion" and like to talk about how we should be having a civil debate as a way to disarm their opponents and end any discussion, when they themselves don't want any part in any actual evidence based civil debate on the subject.

 

Civil debate as a genuine option for the betterment of society was shown pretty starkly to be quackery for me when anyone who tried to make any economic argument for staying in the EU was met with "project fear" and "you don't believe in Britain" duing the lead up to the election and then were all told after the result when Leave won, largely due to 2 word sloganeering and lowest-common denominator appeals to patriotism that the reason Remain lost was because "you didn't actually debate anyone and don't respect the opposite side's opinion" or som false equivalence "there was lying going on on both sides" when the truth was the Remain side constantly tried to engage in genuine economic and evidence based debate but were shot down by meaningless sloganeering and appeals to patriotism and meaningless and vague ideas of self-governing that no one ever wanted to define. 

 

Then we had Trump, Covid and wars in Ukraine and Gaza and these weird culture war, anti-"wokeness" stuff and I feel like things since have shown even more that "civilized debate" doesn't work. What the alternatives are I don't know. But "it should be just people's opinions, sitting down and having a civilized debate" is pretty clearly just a defence mechanism for trying to disarm the enemy and ignore any actual debate so that the status quo stays in tact at this point.

Honestly, there have been times where I absolutely, unequivocally agree with this. The way that the very idea of truth is being subverted in a sea of "debate" and "opinion" is not only aggravating, but also flat out terrifying when it comes to getting in the way of progress on a lot of matters. So I can see why you'd think the whole idea of "civilized debate" is being made pretty redundant, and quite frankly I don't have much time for it on some issues where the truth is not only obvious, but also lives are at stake based on action regarding it.

 

However, with all the above being said, if that idea is dead, then the only alternative I can see to bring about the necessary progress is conflict and the bringing about of consensus by direct oppression. And that doesn't really sound like a world any of us want to be part of.

 

Perhaps something in between can be found.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Christ Almighty

Not surprised.

 

Regressive shilling is good for followers and the bottom line these days, Barton is just treading a well established path.

 

Perhaps he might be encouraged to say what he said here directly to the parents of Brianna Ghey. Or any other person in that demographic who has suffered and died simply because of who they chose to be.

[leicsmac]

56 minutes ago, Lionator said:

There’s a new generation of teenage boys who hold women in such atrocious contempt because of attitudes like those Barton and Tate. 
 

Honestly I think Barton is about ten tweets away from endorsing Taliban policy. 

And this is reflected in the continuing popularity of figures like Trump, Bolsanaro and Yoon in South Korea.

 

The ideology isn't going to go away - this is a continual thing.

[bovril]

2 hours ago, Zear0 said:

Yup, file Joey under absolute bellend. 

 

 

Transgenderism as a "mental illness". Will be interesting to see how this one plays out. 

[Heathrow fox]

Ironically the BBC right on mob gave Mr JB’s new career as a malicious WUM a major leg up,when they invited him onto the panel of one of their flagship political programs.Question Time lost all it’s remaining credibility from that point on.

[ozleicester]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/06/rishi-sunak-javier-milei-donald-trump-atlas-network

[Sly]

I think it’s generally accepted that Barton is a bit extreme in his views let’s say.

 

If you ever hear Neville speak about his first time on Sky Sports, he was nervous, anxious he’d say something daft etc. it takes time to learn how to do a job. Neville and Carragher have been given the time to grow. 

 

The same will be required not just for female pundits, but all pundits.

 

Like any job, it doesn’t matter if you’re male, female, black, white, non binary, pregnant,  Christian, Hindu, Muslim, atheist, have a disability, eighteen, eighty two or thirty seven. 
 

When I listen, I just want to learn and gain a better appreciation for what I’m watching. 

Edited 7 January by Sly