Remove this Banner Ad

The Law MeToo Movement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Antares
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Carringbush2010 said:
I have not read your thoughts on this previously but you can understand how unbelievable it sounds.
Click to expand...
agree. but respectfully, you may not know the ins and outs of the PR industry and Burson Martseller and their ilk. I reckon Hutchie and SEN have a major contra deal with AFL hq, and they have their radio rights financials less their market billings to AFL House. I completely agree, to all on this thread, this sounds absurd. If I did not have my intuition, and listen to SEN pro forma scripts, I would agree with you initial position. You have footballers who may not have behaved like model citizens in their lives, come all SJW at you on the airwaves, staccato. Nope, it is not autonomy. You can be respectful to both sexes, men, women, and all sexual preferences, without being sold the codswallop of moral SJW imbibed from the SEN crowd. It is not authentic, not their own Milgram-agency.

They are attempting a social engineering brief from AFL hq. It will be profitable for the shareholders. I am very impressed by Hutchie and his team, and Croc. I just dont like the AFL's social engineering. I understand it from a zeitgeist cultural pov. It is good business sense. Colin Carter and Mike Fitzpatrick and Kim Williams would also be equivalently impressed. Hutchie is destined to make Mcguire look like a pigmy. that can be cited ;)

*declaration. There is material chance, a significant chance I am wrong. My risk/error margin would be high. 30% margin, I think likelihood it is my intuition, about half (50%). so 50% other way, with a significant error margin.

If anyone can bring more info to help me round out my perspective, see: either Maynard Keynes or Churchill's aphorism on updating their information and potentially changing their mind. I am in the see-saw tipping. 50-50, so the intuition aint conspiracy, i wanna be right, either way. no dog in the fight. I prefer to be correct, so I am happy to move with accurate info. Anyone know if Dylan Howard on the forum, he is a croc media almumnus in US, before being a righthand man of Harvey.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Number37 said:
People watch AFLW and think, what is this shit? It is terrible to watch.
But it is no different to AFL. It is terrible to watch.

Have you ever watched women's Rugby or women's Rugby League?
Both are as good as the men's version.
Click to expand...

I'd rather watch AFLW than any rugby league (not that I watch AFLW) actually I'd rather watch the Pines in the Mornington league than NRL.

My opinion is that the AFL is good to watch, and if you think it is shit then I don't know why you're on a footy forum.
 
Snake_Baker said:
There is a political "equality of outcome" agenda that is in full swing.
Click to expand...
No, it's a 'political' "equality of opportunity" agenda that is in full swing.
 
Last edited:
Father Jack said:
No, it's a 'political' "equality of opportunity" agenda that is in full swing.
Click to expand...


More Bullshit.

Women have had "equality of opportunity" with football for 50 years, it's just that no one would watch the crap if they were playing it in their front yard.

The MEN created the AFL. Not women. They just piggybacked on the men's competition to gain an exposure they couldn't gain for themselves (i.e. equality of outcome).
 
blackcat said:
i liked him better in Big
plus Turner and Hooch

evo would say he is the prototypical #beta leadingman paradox in hollywood. does not take advantage of his privilege. prolly gay. #niceguyz

#poe's_law
Click to expand...

In a league of their own is castaways like mr hankz.
 
Snake_Baker said:
More Bullshit.

Women have had "equality of opportunity" with football for 50 years, it's just that no one would watch the crap if they were playing it in their front yard.

The MEN created the AFL. Not women. They just piggybacked on the men's competition to gain an exposure they couldn't gain for themselves (i.e. equality of outcome).
Click to expand...

Well, this is typically educated of you.

SA wa and Vic have invested 100s of millions over those 50 years in coaching and science for male footballers. The media have long ignored female sports. Only changing recently.

Every male administrator and player all had women backing them up. The men's game could not of been built without them.
 
Yesterday I saw a few roundhouse rights to the head. Some well aimed knees and such. It was quite a spiteful game. The corio women played ruff once it was apparant they were getting spanked.

Strange that the metoo movement is only about males against females.

Phillips got it at every point. Got a few free kicks. One punch cut her face.
 
Thegibbsgamble said:
Well, this is typically educated of you.

SA wa and Vic have invested 100s of millions over those 50 years in coaching and science for male footballers. The media have long ignored female sports. Only changing recently.

Every male administrator and player all had women backing them up. The men's game could not of been built without them.
Click to expand...

Please, take your "touchy feely" delusional bullshit elsewhere.

All women care about is social status, which is overwhelmingly facilitated on the back of mens achievements (#Briffaults law, #Hypergamy, etc.).

It's the EXPOSURE that they crave, not the sport.
 
Snake_Baker said:
Please, take your "touchy feely" delusional bullshit elsewhere.

All women care about is social status, which is overwhelmingly facilitated on the back of mens achievements (#Briffaults law, #Hypergamy, etc.).

It's the EXPOSURE that they crave, not the sport.
Click to expand...

You make some points on gender eqaulity

But this stuff here makes people turn off and judge you as sexist. And thus what rational points you make go through to the keeper.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Thegibbsgamble said:
You make some points on gender eqaulity

But this stuff here makes people turn off and judge you as sexist. And thus what rational points you make go through to the keeper.
Click to expand...

I don't care about irrational programmed emotions. I live in reality.
 
Father Jack said:
No, it's a 'political' "equality of opportunity" agenda that is in full swing.
Click to expand...
Everyone conflates male pursuits (ie. things: mechanical, competion, sport, physical adventure, rockmusic, classical composition, and the intellectual output mathematics, philosophy, physics, engineering) W the women interests (literature-Austen,Bronte,Elliot; psychology:SabinaSpeilrein Russian contemporary of Jung and Freud; sociology, and drama and performance theatre, medicine, law)... the actual differences are infinitisemal and express themselves at the margins - real differences that are actually infinitisemal manifest themselves when one, the individual, makes a choice, because every day of one's experience is a compilation of thousands of opportunity COST decisions. Will I take philo101 or soc101. Do I major in literature or mathematics? Marginal and infinitisemal differences become realised. So when a large uni campus of 10000 adolescents and young adults make choices, one can determine clear differences. We are not talking generalities and general differences. we are talking minute, tinytiny differences which can be better recognised when the individual has to decide between two competing options. And you sum the total of 12.5 million women's decision on a competing choice, and 14.95million men's decision on the same sum total decision.

There is NO BETTER sex, they have equivalent intellectual talent and ability.

The fact that muscles and brawn needed to build modern mature Manchester industry economy in the past 300 years and inheritance passed thru the paternal lineage meant MEN got a head start. But those same men built the academy, Oxford,Heidelberg, Harvard, and female students now dominate enrollment. If there was patriarchy then those men would have quotas no?

Identity politics lacks all rigor
 
Last edited:
blackcat said:
.. the actual differences are infinitisemal and express themselves at the margins - real differences that are actually infinitisemal manifest themselves when one makes a choice, because ever day of one's experience is a compilation of thousands of opportunity COST decisions. Will I take philo101 or soc101. Do I major in literature or mathematics? Marginal and infinitisemal differences become realised. So when a large uni campus of 10000 adolescents and young adults make choices, one can determine clear differences.

There is NO BETTER sex, they have equivalent intellectual talent and ability.

The fact that muscles and brawn needed to build modern mature Manchester industry economy in the past 300 years and inheritance passed thru the paternal lineage meant MEN got a head start. But those same men built the academy, Oxford,Heidelberg, Harvard, and female students now dominate enrollment. If there was patriarchy then those men would have quotas no?

Identity politics lacks all rigor
Click to expand...

110% correct, but it won't go down well with the marketing people.

The idea of a "better" sex is patently absurd. There's males & females and their "general" traits, and that's all there is to it. It's an idiotic argument to state otherwise. "Gender is a social construct" is unmitigated frogshit to a biologist. Mother nature just laughs at this contemporary stupidity.
 
blackcat said:
Everyone conflates male pursuits (ie. things: mechanical, competion, sport, physical adventure, rockmusic, classical composition, and the intellectual output mathematics, philosophy, physics, engineering) W the women interests (literature-Austen,Bronte,Elliot; psychology:SabinaSpeilrein Russian contemporary of Jung and Freud; sociology, and drama and performance theatre, medicine, law)... the actual differences are infinitisemal and express themselves at the margins - real differences that are actually infinitisemal manifest themselves when one makes a choice, because ever day of one's experience is a compilation of thousands of opportunity COST decisions. Will I take philo101 or soc101. Do I major in literature or mathematics? Marginal and infinitisemal differences become realised. So when a large uni campus of 10000 adolescents and young adults make choices, one can determine clear differences.

There is NO BETTER sex, they have equivalent intellectual talent and ability.

The fact that muscles and brawn needed to build modern mature Manchester industry economy in the past 300 years and inheritance passed thru the paternal lineage meant MEN got a head start. But those same men built the academy, Oxford,Heidelberg, Harvard, and female students now dominate enrollment. If there was patriarchy then those men would have quotas no?

Identity politics lacks all rigor
Click to expand...

George Orwell rates a mention. All part of of divide conquer and and control
 
the major major flaw is women in MEast, India, China... Merryl Streep and J-Law can whinge about Hollywood studios and their dough, pity they never mention the undeveloped economies and their brethren[sic] sex. I know sometimes we do get a token word, but that is all it is. Usually we have the introspective solipsism navel gazing about their lot and woeisme.
blackcat said:
Everyone conflates male pursuits (ie. things: mechanical, competion, sport, physical adventure, rockmusic, classical composition, and the intellectual output mathematics, philosophy, physics, engineering) W the women interests (literature-Austen,Bronte,Elliot; psychology:SabinaSpeilrein Russian contemporary of Jung and Freud; sociology, and drama and performance theatre, medicine, law)... the actual differences are infinitisemal and express themselves at the margins - real differences that are actually infinitisemal manifest themselves when one, the individual, makes a choice, because every day of one's experience is a compilation of thousands of opportunity COST decisions. Will I take philo101 or soc101. Do I major in literature or mathematics? Marginal and infinitisemal differences become realised. So when a large uni campus of 10000 adolescents and young adults make choices, one can determine clear differences. We are not talking generalities and general differences. we are talking minute, tinytiny differences which can be better recognised when the individual has to decide between two competing options. And you sum the total of 12.5 million women's decision on a competing choice, and 14.95million men's decision on the same sum total decision.

There is NO BETTER sex, they have equivalent intellectual talent and ability.

The fact that muscles and brawn needed to build modern mature Manchester industry economy in the past 300 years and inheritance passed thru the paternal lineage meant MEN got a head start. But those same men built the academy, Oxford,Heidelberg, Harvard, and female students now dominate enrollment. If there was patriarchy then those men would have quotas no?

Identity politics lacks all rigor
Click to expand...
 
Thegibbsgamble said:
Well, this is typically educated of you.

SA wa and Vic have invested 100s of millions over those 50 years in coaching and science for male footballers. The media have long ignored female sports. Only changing recently.

Every male administrator and player all had women backing them up. The men's game could not of been built without them.
Click to expand...
a little specious. don't take Snake personally.

sorry, but test cricket and VFL sports were a leisure pastime that the masses could afford to go to; Spring Street and Canberra were right to put money there, in our political system. America, no, the state politicians do fund the stadia when they are given brinksmanship ultimatums by free-market private owners going rent-seeking. The managing bodies did has administrative assistants who were female. They had wives who raised their children as mothers, but that is the general history. Women driving the male sports leagues of the last century that is a stretch and lacks all test and rigor. And this is a fail that hurts their cause.

Proffer a counter-factual where Ellyse Perry gets her face on a Weaties box and is the most high profile athlete and best remunerated like Ian Thorpe. All the sponsors new he was gay but they still paid him because his brand and face was valuable to the market, and was gonna sell things.

Women have ALWAYS contributed. Because the human project was about two sexes working in unison to shared goals. The decade of 2010 is all about victims and grievances. An alternative lens would interpret good fortune and luck compared to 7.975BILLION others on this planet. We have it good here in Australia, how about appreciate what we have, AND where we can IMPROVE. not specific to Thegibbsgamble but some was discrete answer
 
Last edited:

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

blackcat said:
Women have ALWAYS contributed. Because the human project was about two sexes working in unison to shared goals. The decade of 2010 is all about victims and grievances. An alternative lens would interpret good fortune and luck compared to 7.975BILLION others on this planet. We have it good here in Australia, how about appreciate what we have, AND where we can IMPROVE. not specific to Thegibbsgamble but some was discrete answer
Click to expand...

Why does it always come down to being that ANY criticism of identity politics is an attack on an entire gender?

Only stupid emotionally manipulated/manipulative people think like this. These folks simply cannot think in constructs outside of herd mentality.

I have some news for them, the great achievements of mankind have overwhelmingly been achieved by committed and resourced individuals or handfuls of people who were at liberty to conduct their work.
 
I have just received an email from a University to take place in a sexism and harassment program.

This is going to be brilliant. Standby for reports.
 
Carringbush2010 said:
So you don't like footy then? So why are you on a footy forum?
Click to expand...

I've seen this argument a couple of times recently and I find it strange. We are not on a footy forum, we are on a Society, Religion and Politics forum. The website name doesn't restrict the conversation to footy, or the participation to footy fans.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom