Mega Thread The Adam Goodes Megathread - Now with Added Poll!

[Mr Lizard]

So where is the campaign to cease Australia day celebrations? Serious question.

What is more offensive to the indigenous population: the booing of Adam Goodes; or Invasion day?


Anyone who celebrates Australia day is racist, or at the least providing cover for racists.

Next, the flag.

 

[ManWithNoName]

So where is the campaign to cease Australia day celebrations? Serious question.

What is more offensive to the indigenous population: the booing of Adam Goodes; or Invasion day?


Anyone who celebrates Australia day is racist, or at the least providing cover for racists.

Next, the flag.

Next on Today Tonight: You won't believe how this dodgy builder ripped off these battling pensioners.

 

[Kummerspeck]

Okay, just saw it again. Go read the statement from the AFL commission where after consultation with the Swans, it directly says that Goodes feels the booing is racist. Pretty sure I've head this spoken by Swans spokespeople also, but can't find the reference. No projecting intentions or reading the thoughts of others involved as you so accused. It's been publicly reported to be the case.

Yep, the booing is "being felt by him... as racism" is certainly there. Still waiting on Goodes saying everyone who boos is racist though. Accusation still stands as it is.

 

[Mr Lizard]

Yep, the booing is "being felt by him... as racism" is certainly there. Still waiting on Goodes saying everyone who boos is racist though. Accusation still stands as it is.

If some racism falls in the woods but there are no racists there to spew it?

 

[tige19]

Why would you want to continue booing if you know it is affecting the mental well being of a player?

I can only think of one reason. Because you are an areshole.

Lifes tough, suck it up.

 

[threesixpio]

It doesn't matter what it was. This land belongs to everyone now

Goodes' speech was about Australia Day which is both about now and then

 

[tige19]

All countries have racism. Great countries are made greater by being tough - mentally, intellectually, legally, philosophically and politically tough. Whether Australia is more racist or less or whatever I have no problem in saying when it comes to tough national "looking yourself in the mirror" moments, which all great nations need to become greater or to plateau perhaps, we've been a bit sh&thouse recently. Too many times when hard questions are asked people wouse out and jump on jingoism. To me this is weak and Australia needs to toughen up. We need to be resilient and deal with criticism without losing our s**t and getting defensive and angry. But some issues are not straight forward. Here for example - saying all booers are racist hasn't helped (and some have said it in the media). Knee jerking from both sides hasn't been productive. Goodes is a s**t stirrer - but a reasonably tame one. The world needs s**t stirrers sometimes. Is it ok to bully him until he goes away. I don't reckon

Stop talking sense.

Australia is one of the most accepting countries in the world, racism is so microscopical in comparison to America and Europe. Sure our country has bigots, every country has but in the grand scheme of things we are extremely lucky to have such a pleasant place to live.

 

[ashep]

Bolt's latest statement might be the most disgusting yet.

The only way to end the abuse Adam, is if you come to us cap in hand and humble yourself, apologise for calling out the white girl who racially abused you. Only then will we consider forgiving you.

Disgusting.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Oh, so you enjoy test cricket and only watch when we are winning? I love Footy and cricket for the sport of it, for the skills of both teams, the battle between bat and ball / forward and defender.

No I don't just watch when we're winning, but we were getting absolutely creamed, if given the choice between that and TFS I would have picked TFS and THEN switched to the cricket.

 

[tige19]

So where is the campaign to cease Australia day celebrations? Serious question.

What is more offensive to the indigenous population: the booing of Adam Goodes; or Invasion day?


Anyone who celebrates Australia day is racist, or at the least providing cover for racists.

Next, the flag.

I'm sure they are happy to have a day off though...

 

[romeohwho]

Has much improved is society in general?

There is the answer.

People of all races are suffering all the world over.

Not sure if you are serious-there is a wide gap between the lifestyle for the 'European' settlers and their descendants, and the indigenous. One group has seen many improvements in the 200 years, the other group hasn't and continues to suffer 200 years later. Wouldn't one expect that over a 200 year period, in a wealthy, privileged, educated country, significant gains would have been made for the original inhabitants? But nope.

 

[Kummerspeck]

If some racism falls in the woods but there are no racists there to spew it?

A big part of this thread is people arguing that someone can take part in an action with racist undertones and not be racist (which I agree with, for the record). I don't think Goodes has ever publicly called someone racist, either.

 

[threesixpio]

Stop talking sense.

Australia is one of the most accepting countries in the world, racism is so microscopical in comparison to America and Europe. Sure our country has bigots, every country has but in the grand scheme of things we are extremely lucky to have such a pleasant place to live.

I agree. But why wouse out and knock complainers. Great countries have high expectations - if they don't they become s**t countries

 

[ManWithNoName]

I'm sure they are happy to have a day off though...

Because there's a choice?

 

[wallyt99]

In all seriousness - was he Bood every week (by other teams) before Mark Robson called Hawks fans rascist?

My recollection is that he wasnt.

Hawks fans have a fair bit more reason to boo Goodes than other clubs - forgetting all the other reasons listed he is Captain of the 'AFL swans' that stole Buddy and JK with AFL coin, and the 2012 gf, with extra rest day.

Given that - how much is the media to blame?

 

[Doss]

The difference between your question and his/Pridham's version is that there is a middle ground to yours. If the boo only carries a racist connotation, then you agree that there are other connotations/reasons for the boos. It is conceivable that for some people, their whatever (non-racial) reasons win out.

At the end of the day, can you call everyone a racist if they boo Goodes? Going by your version, if someone chooses to be silly, do you call them racist or is there a middle ground where you just call them silly and making bad judgement calls? Pridham does not allow this and that's why I find it rather disturbing.

The latter, obviously.

No way can you generalise that all booers are inherently racist.

I still just don't know why you'd want to associate yourself with it though.

I mean, if this is the issue that causes people to rail against 'PC Groupthink' then I truly worry, given that the booing in itself is a very neat product of pack mentality and group think, at the very least.

I mean. It is booing. It is not some eloquent and reasonable construction of prose that carefully lays out one's opinions.

Booing. Over and over.

Again, if that's the thing that causes people to rail about their 'rights'...

Well.

 

[hawker513]

Are you really so morally and rationally inadequate that you can run this "nothing here folks lets move on" moral nonsense and cowardice? . Whatever insults you may inflict on your own intelligence don't insult the intelligence of others.

Turn it up mate people booed Sam Mitchell because they didn't like his tactics, don't you think maybe it's the same with Adam Goodes ?

 

[ashep]

Turn it up mate people booed Sam Mitchell because they didn't like his tactics, don't you think maybe it's the same with Adam Goodes ?

People booed Mitchell for a few games. They've been booing Goodes for 2 years.

Don't you think maybe it's different with Adam Goodes?

 

[ManWithNoName]

In all seriousness - was he Bood every week (by other teams) before Mark Robson called Hawks fans rascist?

My recollection is that he wasnt.

Hawks fans have a fair bit more reason to boo Goodes than other clubs - forgetting all the other reasons listed he is Captain of the 'AFL swans' that stole Buddy and JK with AFL coin, and the 2012 gf, with extra rest day.

Given that - how much is the media to blame?

Uhh...he's not the captain.

And who boos the captain of a club because his club traded for another player?

And please explain how they "stole" Josh Kennedy.

And why it's the captains fault re scheduling/fixturing?

 

[PoppedCorn]

ffs goodes has not been booed for two years

 

[threesixpio]

Bolt's latest statement might be the most disgusting yet.

The only way to end the abuse Adam, is if you come to us cap in hand and humble yourself, apologise for calling out the white girl who racially abused you. Only then will we consider forgiving you.

Disgusting.

Bolt is a ....&&&@@""

 

[Monkey King]

?

Invasion and Colonialisation are mutually exclusive because........???

Oh this should be good. Explain the difference between Invasion and Colonisation.

Was there
(A) a military presence
(B) acts of aggression
(C) entering territory
(D) conquering of land
?

I can't believe this question is seriously being asked. Truly dumbfounded. There was no invasion force, no army incursion to conquer a people, their government or plunder the land. There was a colony established at one place on this continent for the purpose of housing and overseeing criminals. Then another was settled and another, as goes the process of colonisation.

The military presence was to control the convict population, not to invade. The acts of aggression were hardly that of an invading force, with reports being that settlement was relatively peaceful in it's initial phase; quite incongruent with the concept of invasion. Entering a territory? Well not sure how you can colonise without entering a new land, however which definition are you talking about, as there was certainly no territory as in belonging to a recognised State, as in terms of an invasion. Conquering of a land? When did that happen? Must have been the longest invasion in history given how long it look Europeans to settle across the continent and then join in federation.

I don't subscribe this invasion crap. It's just a rewrite of history. Like many lands around the world newly discovered by seafaring Europeans, this land was colonised. That is the term of our language. There is a reason invade and colonise are not shared synonyms. You should all wake up to yourselves.

 

[threesixpio]

I can't believe this question is seriously being asked. Truly dumbfounded. There was no invasion force, no army incursion to conquer a people, their government or plunder the land. There was a colony established at one place on this continent for the purpose of housing and overseeing criminals. Then another was settled and another, as goes the process of colonisation.

The military presence was to control the convict population, not to invade. The acts of aggression were hardly that of an invading force, with reports being that settlement was relatively peaceful in it's initial phase; quite incongruent with the concept of invasion. Entering a territory? Well not sure how you can colonise without entering a new land, however which definition are you talking about, as there was certainly no territory as in belonging to a recognised State, as in terms of an invasion. Conquering of a land? When did that happen? Must have been the longest invasion in history given how long it look Europeans to settle across the continent and then join in federation.

I don't subscribe this invasion crap. It's just a rewrite of history. Like many lands around the word newly discovered by seafaring Europeans, this land was colonised. There is a reason invade and colonise are not shared synonyms. You should all wake to yourselves.

Nup. You're naive and deluded

 

[ManWithNoName]

I can't believe this question is seriously being asked. Truly dumbfounded. There was no invasion force, no army incursion to conquer a people, their government or plunder the land. There was a colony established at one place on this continent for the purpose of housing and overseeing criminals. Then another was settled and another, as goes the process of colonisation.

The military presence was to control the convict population, not to invade. The acts of aggression were hardly that of an invading force, with reports being that settlement was relatively peaceful in it's initial phase; quite incongruent with the concept of invasion. Entering a territory? Well not sure how you can colonise without entering a new land, however which definition are you talking about, as there was certainly no territory as in belonging to a recognised State, as in terms of an invasion. Conquering of a land? When did that happen? Must have been the longest invasion in history given how long it look Europeans to settle across the continent and then join in federation.

I don't subscribe this invasion crap. It's just a rewrite of history. Like many lands around the word newly discovered by seafaring Europeans, this land was colonised. There is a reason invade and colonise are not shared synonyms. You should all wake to yourselves.

People arriving: Hello, this country will do. It's ours now.
Inhabitants: Uh hey guys, this is already our country, sorry.
People arriving: *gunshot* Anyone else?

#colonisation

 

[ashep]

Brainless analogies? Oh s**t man! The bar was set waaaay early in this thread, and I haven't seen it approached since:

Nope. The argument of many is that Goodes is disliked because he makes it all about himself, he thinks he's bigger than the game and people just want players to shut up and play footy.

The public's embrace of those other initiatives provide unequivocal proof that that is untrue.

It's proof that people don't hate Adam Goodes because he's speaking out, it's because of what it is he's speaking for.