Billy

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
s9EfENp.jpg


rOB0zak.jpg
:thumbsu:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

GHS33 said:
Disgusting and enraging article from Geelong Advertiser on the matter.

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au...t/news-story/5c2280e3c58842c69830d34a19b96726
Click to expand...

The utter crap this 'social editor' has spewed within this article has been repeated a number of times in tweets etc over the last 24 hours, and unfortunately, they have all missed the point.

Billy was not objectifying women - he was saying that the morals and ethics of a 'mateship' ordain that you don't take a bloke's wife, just as you wouldn't touch his wallet, because it would break all the trust and hnour within that friendship.

Unfortunately, this principle is being ignored by some because it doesn't suit their need to express outrage against an 'offence' to feminism.
 
GHS33 said:
Disgusting and enraging article from Geelong Advertiser on the matter.

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au...t/news-story/5c2280e3c58842c69830d34a19b96726
Click to expand...

Really? I can't see anything disgusting and enraging at all in her well-written article.

She pretty much nails the situation and points out the double-standards found in these situations - the blatant misogynist thinking, language and behaviour associated with all that is 'mateship' and what is regarded 'moral' in society.
 
Cataholic said:
The utter crap this 'social editor' has spewed within this article has been repeated a number of times in tweets etc over the last 24 hours, and unfortunately, they have all missed the point.

Billy was not objectifying women - he was saying that the morals and ethics of a 'mateship' ordain that you don't take a bloke's wife, just as you wouldn't touch his wallet, because it would break all the trust and hnour within that friendship.

Unfortunately, this principle is being ignored by some because it doesn't suit their need to express outrage against an 'offence' to feminism.
Click to expand...

Yeah - I'd say that's the definition of objectifying women. :D
 
James1970 said:
Really? I can't see anything disgusting and enraging at all in her well-written article.

She pretty much nails the situation and points out the double-standards found in these situations - the blatant misogynist thinking, language and behaviour associated with all that is 'mateship' and what is regarded 'moral' in society.
Click to expand...

I don't think there are double standards. I think there are plenty of women who see men for nothing but their wallets.
 
James1970 said:
Yeah - I'd say that's the definition of objectifying women. :D
Click to expand...

I don't, but that's ok.

Some might view it as quaint, but I think the honour in a true mateship, which by its very nature says you don't stab him in the back by fooling with his partner, because she's off limits by virtue of the trust and loyalty between mates, is outstanding.

A true mate, friend, doesn't betray you, doesn't doesn't steal from you.....whether wallet or wife.

Anyhow, I'll get off my soap box. I respect your opinion, but strongly disagree.

That makes the world go round hey? Boring if we were all the same :)
 
Biggy_Boy said:
I don't think there are double standards. I think there are plenty of women who see men for nothing but their wallets.
Click to expand...

Also a double standard when an older man is 'disgusting' for pursuing a yonger woman, but an older woman pursuing a younger man is lauded as a 'cougar' and admired by other women o_O

Anyhow, the world is full of double standards, and this discussion could degenerate and wander off-track mighty quick, so.......thoughts with Billy, family, and all those affected by this.

Just a shame, more than anything, that it's being played out in public.
 
Billy is no wordsmith..and although he may have failed to be precise when talking about his feelings , I doubt he was try to objectify anyone.
Although the Social editor technically has a point the line between ownership and what is just normal and acceptable is blurred... my Hubby or my wife also portrays some sort of ownership. Its another example of PC police type thinking.

Is this the best she can do? Yes anyone can do what they want ...once they have moved on but a better question is should they? Even if the affect on previous partners is irrelevant , id say your family should be considered. If somone still has feelings for an x . Do you wish them only the best for the future or pain? Perhaps help/counselling in getting past a pervious relationship or the damage social media can do innocent?
But thats not what this journo would like to highlight. She wants to talk about wallets.

I'd have thought that to highlight Billy's everyday man type expressions was easy meat , if she wants to standup for female rights try another article on the Addy website ...
http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au...s/news-story/8be474afdc9d45f0aabf3647a2a87204

Anyway , not sure this a main stream footy topic to be honest. It falls closer to the salcious stuff of radio jocks with ring up now with your story about ex mates wifes and such.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Cataholic said:
Some might view it as quaint, but I think the honour in a true mateship, which by its very nature says you don't stab him in the back by fooling with his partner, because she's off limits by virtue of the trust and loyalty between mates, is outstanding.
Click to expand...

I'd say there's a better way to determine whether she's 'off limits' - ask her. She's in charge of her life, no one else is.
 
James1970 said:
Really? I can't see anything disgusting and enraging at all in her well-written article.

She pretty much nails the situation and points out the double-standards found in these situations - the blatant misogynist thinking, language and behaviour associated with all that is 'mateship' and what is regarded 'moral' in society.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Anyone who has spent 5 seconds at a footy club shouldn't be surprised either.
 
Partridge said:
I've seen Brownless at best and fairest nights, both when he was playing and current day. Hes no innocent victim.
Click to expand...

I haven't, so can't comment, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Still, what Lyon did is a big no-no amongst mates.

Anyway, I'm not here to argue morals, so I'll just say I hope they all find a way to move forward.
 
Biggy_Boy said:
I don't think there are double standards. I think there are plenty of women who see men for nothing but their wallets.
Click to expand...
You mean Jerry Hall didn't marry Rup for love. Heaven forfend.:rolleyes:
Partridge said:
I've seen Brownless at best and fairest nights, both when he was playing and current day. Hes no innocent victim.
Click to expand...
There are one or two others putting this story about on other boards. When ever I've asked for something more than general scuttlebutt I get zilch.
 
AM said:
You mean Jerry Hall didn't marry Rup for love. Heaven forfend.:rolleyes:

There are one or two others putting this story about on other boards. When ever I've asked for something more than general scuttlebutt I get zilch.
Click to expand...
I doubt he's gone on and ****ed them for 3 months!

Don't worry i was on a contiki trip in vegas in 95 and carlton were there....sos was no angel in two nights neither was peter dean!

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
It's a pity we don't have a way to say 'you don't do something that will hurt your friend' that doesn't invoke property rights. Fair enough Billy has been hurt but comparing your wife to your wallet is pretty ******* gross.
 
thejester said:
It's a pity we don't have a way to say 'you don't do something that will hurt your friend' that doesn't invoke property rights. Fair enough Billy has been hurt but comparing your wife to your wallet is pretty ******* gross.
Click to expand...

He wouldn't know any other way. It's probably the only culture he's known since he was 15.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top