Certified Legendary Thread Covid, Life, UFOs, Food, & Wordle :(

[sr36]

My mother who was quite a good tennis & squash player (she even had occasion to play with Jeff Hunt) at social level played Margret in a match.

It was always a great little story our family told.

Now, that b*tch can go & get f’ed!!!!!!!!!!

Ambiguous subject of the last line. I hope your mum doesn't interpret it incorrectly.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Ambiguous subject of the last line. I hope your mum doesn't interpret it incorrectly.

I see what you're saying but no interporo incorrecto, she passed 2 years ago, so unlikely.

 

[Good Horse]

Back in my own stable. Feels very strange being back home in Vic for the first time in ages. Familiar but uncertain. Time for carrots and a rest but good to have lots of people round. Horses know its better with a herd. Hope all of you have your herds looking after you.

 

[WalterBlaknWhte]

On this Invasion Day, I recall an episode of ‘Midday with Ray Martin’

Leading to the Bicentennial in the eighties, it was very chi-chi amongst the salons of Double Bay to identify that you were of convict stock

A genealogist recounted to Ray an unarmed society matron engaging her to discover her roots (no, not with an Argentinian polo player for the puerile reader)

The matron was delighted to hear that she was indeed of convict stock

She pressed about the crime: ‘...stealing bread to feed his starving family...’ etc etc

Eventually the genealogist could evade no longer

‘Ahhh, no dear, he was convicted of buggering a cow’

 

[Vicky Park]

My mother who was quite a good tennis & squash player (she even had occasion to play with Jeff Hunt) at social level played Margret in a match.

It was always a great little story our family told.

Now, that b*tch can go & get f’ed!!!!!!!!!!

John McEnroe (a tennis player I actually like) calls her Australia’s crazy old Aunty.

If only she was just crazy...

 

[magpie_marty]

John McEnroe (a tennis player I actually like) calls her Australia’s crazy old Aunty.

If only she was just crazy...

 

[neilk]

I was glad to see that Kerry O'Brien has, on my behalf, refused to accept the Order of Australia he was due to receive tomorrow.

Kerry O’Brien refuses Order of Australia after Margaret Court honour

The veteran journalist has said there is something “fundamentally wrong with a system that can produce such a deeply insensitive and divisive decision”.

www.theage.com.au

The decision to give the award to Marg Court was 'deeply insensitive and divisive'.

Indeed Kerry.

I think you've always been my fave ranga, but this confirms it.

And I think I've heard he's a Pies supporter?

 

[JB1975]

And I think I've heard he's a Pies supporter?

I didn't know that, or that he follows footy at all.

Kerry might be a man of many mysteries.

He'd be a good bloke to watch the footy with, reckon he'd get riled up in the way that only a ranga can.

 

[Black_White]

I do not begrudge Court for her earlier gong. It was deserved for her contribution to Australian sport.
But elevation of that gong to the highest award available should be based on what she has done for the country since those glory years.
But her hate speech, at complete odds with Australian society’s views expressed in a plebiscite only a few years ago, is not furthering Australian society in any way shape or form.
Rewarding hate speech is sending the wrong message to Australia and the world.

 

[sr36]

I do not begrudge Court for her earlier gong. It was deserved for her contribution to Australian sport.
But elevation of that gong to the highest award available should be based on what she has done for the country since those glory years.
But her hate speech, at complete odds with Australian society’s views expressed in a plebiscite only a few years ago, is not furthering Australian society in any way shape or form.
Rewarding hate speech is sending the wrong message to Australia and the world.

They're not rewarding hate speech. She got the award for her tennis.

I think the net result of the Court award is quite positive. I think it's good that she has received the award as it's resulted in widespread condemnation of hate speech and non-inclusive attitudes and beliefs, whilst also accknowledging the greatness she achieved in her tennis career.

It's time that we as a nation moved on from deifying sportspeople and the idea of great athlete necessarily being a person to emulate in all aspects. The controversy surrounding Court's award helps with that, making it crystal clear that there is a distinction between greatness in sport and greatness in other areas.

 

[TKiL]

They're not rewarding hate speech. She got the award for her tennis.
I think the net result of the Court award is quite positive. I think it's good that she has received the award as it's resulted in widespread condemnation of hate speech and non-inclusive attitudes and beliefs, whilst also accknowledging the greatness she achieved in her tennis career.
It's time that we as a nation moved on from deifying sportspeople and the idea of great athlete necessarily being a person to emulate in all aspects. The controversy surrounding Court's award helps with that, making it crystal clear that there is a distinction between greatness in sport and greatness in other areas.

if she got this upgraded gong for her tennis, what has she done for tennis since between her last gong and this upgrade?

 

[sr36]

if she got this upgraded gong for her tennis, what has she done for tennis since her last gong and this upgrade?

I think it was becasue it was the 50 year anniversary of her winning the grand slam. No idea why that makes her achievement greater or what they usually upgrade upon

 

[TKiL]

I think it was becasue it was the 50 year anniversary of her winning the grand slam. No idea why that makes her achievement greater or what they usually upgrade upon

if they start handing out gongs purely for anniversaries, gonna be a lot of gongs...

 

[jmac70]

if she got this upgraded gong for her tennis, what has she done for tennis since her last gong and this upgrade?

What did Laver get?

 

[sr36]

What did Laver get?

In 2016, Laver was given the title that Court just received.

Which interestingly, I think may have been before Court became publicly on the nose. Got to wonder at the time why Laver was elevated before Court.

 

[jmac70]

In 2016, Laver was given the title that Court just received.

Which interestingly, I think may have been before Court became publicly on the nose. Got to wonder at the time why Laver was elevated before Court.

Well there you go. Award given for service to tennis and Court achieved more. She’s earned it under that criteria.

 

[Good Horse]

It's an interesting one for me. Do we stop celebrating greatness in a field, if the same person is shithouse in another field? My initial answer to that is no - celebrate Margaret Court's tennis career. But then when you factor us looking for heroes to emulate and the ridiculous reality that emulation crosses fields, I don't know what my final answer is.

Does celebrating Margaret Courts career require is to grant her one of the highest national decoration there are? This goes beyond acknowledging her career, something that has been done already in any case. This is a cheap shot in the culture war, done precisely because it is going to hurt people like me.

Maybe it's easier to be flip about this when she isn't spewing her hate speech at you. But I'm glad you're ok with it.

 

[TradeDraft]

I think it was becasue it was the 50 year anniversary of her winning the grand slam. No idea why that makes her achievement greater or what they usually upgrade upon

Showing what a Token of a Award it is

 

[sr36]

Does celebrating Margaret Courts career require is to grant her one of the highest national decoration there are? This goes beyond acknowledging her career, something that has been done already in any case. This is a cheap shot in the culture war, done precisely because it is going to hurt people like me.

Maybe it's easier to be flip about this when she isn't spewing her hate speech at you. But I'm glad you're ok with it.

The award was granted for her "eminent service to tennis". Pretty hard to debate this part of it when you consider that Laver has already received the same award. So really it's a debate about whether or not she should be disqualified from an award for having made "eminent service to tennis", based on something unrelated to tennis.

Rather than a cheap shot, I think it can be viewed as a pragmatic decision to not disqualify achievements based on factors not related to that achievement. I'm glad that this principle is being adhered to. As I think disqualifying Court from such an award based on her views and beliefs is the thin edge of a really ugly wedge.

Further on pragmatism, I think the award was always going to result in widespread condemnation regarding the attitudes and views of Court - so I don't view it as having a negative net result for the LGBTI. Basically, I don't think it will spread hate, but rather I think the award will focus a voice against hate.

 

[jmac70]

I’m not sure why sports people get these awards at all. Cahill was a good soccer player who earned millions. Does he need an award for it?

 

[Good Horse]

The award was granted for her "eminent service to tennis". Pretty hard to debate this part of it when you consider that Laver has already received the same award. So really it's a debate about whether or not she should be disqualified from an award for having made "eminent service to tennis", based on something unrelated to tennis.

Rather than a cheap shot, I think it can be viewed as a pragmatic decision to not disqualify achievements based on factors not related to that achievement. I'm glad that this principle is being adhered to. As I think disqualifying Court from such an award based on her views and beliefs is the thin edge of a really ugly wedge.

Further on pragmatism, I think the award was always going to result in widespread condemnation regarding the attitudes and views of Court - so I don't view it as having a negative net result for the LGBTI. Basically, I don't think it will spread hate, but rather I think the award will focus a voice against hate.

The eminent service to tennis is the cover story. I guarantee this was put forward precisely because of the controversy and as a * you to people like me.

On your last paragraph. I think you are wrong. I think putting an official stamp of the highest national award on someone who is known precisely because of her homophobia mostly places a stamp of approval on homophobia, will be taken precisely as that by people who are celebrating right now, who will also trot out the line about tennis because they like plausible deniability on this as an alibi and because people like you fall for it.

And I am intrigued that the view of someone like me of the impact on people like me, rather than your own view of the impact on people like me, makes not one dent in your analysis.

 

[sr36]

And I am intrigued that the view of someone like me of the impact on people like me, rather than your own view of the impact on people like me, makes not one dent in your analysis.

Because what I'm trying to say isn't about your views, it's about the opposite view that still exists in the community. I don't think you're necessarily in a better position to judge what is likely to increase or decrease the attitudes that you want removed.

 

[Good Horse]

Because what I'm trying to say isn't about your views, it's about the opposite view that still exists in the community. I don't think you're necessarily in a better position to judge what is likely to increase or decrease the attitudes that you want removed.

And I think telling me "there there, don't be upset about this, it's really in your interests anyway, trusty me it will be good for you" takes a special kind of grotesque paternalistic arrogance.

 

[JB1975]

The award was granted for her "eminent service to tennis". Pretty hard to debate this part of it when you consider that Laver has already received the same award. So really it's a debate about whether or not she should be disqualified from an award for having made "eminent service to tennis", based on something unrelated to tennis.

Rather than a cheap shot, I think it can be viewed as a pragmatic decision to not disqualify achievements based on factors not related to that achievement. I'm glad that this principle is being adhered to. As I think disqualifying Court from such an award based on her views and beliefs is the thin edge of a really ugly wedge.

Further on pragmatism, I think the award was always going to result in widespread condemnation regarding the attitudes and views of Court - so I don't view it as having a negative net result for the LGBTI. Basically, I don't think it will spread hate, but rather I think the award will focus a voice against hate.

Whether or not Rod Laver or any other over-hyped sportsperson received an Oz Day award is neither here nor there. Marg doesn't deserve one simply because Rod got one.

Different year, different people giving out the awards, different recipients.

Court is not unrecognised for her tennis achievements.

She is most lately recognised for hate speech, for the toxicity of her views towards gay people. The fact that she is awarded the highest honour in the land so soon after her expression of these views is --in my opinion-- an undoubted provocation.

No matter her greatness in another field, which really did no more than service her own ego in any case, her award is an insult.

I suppose everyone asks different questions. For me, does the seriousness of her poisonous views disqualify her from consideration of the nation's highest honour (not including Gold Logie)? It should.

Gary Ablett Sr would be an AFL legend by now, but they've delayed inducting the man because of the hurt he's caused. As in Court's case, I'd say that it's fair enough.

 

[sr36]

And I think telling me "there there, don't be upset about this, it's really in your interests anyway, trusty me it will be good for you" takes a special kind of grotesque paternalistic arrogance.

Don't think I said that or if I did I worded myself very poorly if that's how you inferred it. I think I just posted an opinion that I view the award as likely to result in so much negative controversy and condemnation of Court's views that it is likely to contribute to a shift away from those views.