- Jun 18, 2010
- AFL Club
- Other Teams
- FFC Quay Club
Front ended deals rely on the integrity of the player.
Some people are rats.
Some people are rats.
You don't understand because Identity politics doesn't affect you. It's an abstract concept that exists outside your immediate surroundings, something you only know of because you read about it in the news, probably attributing it to millenial nonsense on tumblr.I don't understand the posts about BHIll's race. It has nothing to do with a player trade. Identity politics is cancer.
Take the money. Ok. But pay back the front loaded part of your contract.I don't see any legitimate reason to boo a player unless they're an actual bad human being (committed heinous crimes or said some shitty things), it's pointless and I guarantee 99% of people talking shit about Brad wouldn't say any of it to his face, why? Because it's easier for them to say it from behind the keyboard or from the boundary. They wouldn't have the balls to say it to him in person. He was a good player for us, like Neale. He took the bigger pay day, like any of us would, and he gives a damn about his relationship. I certainly won't be booing him, but I know people will. Was at the Brisbane game this year and it was ******* appalling hearing Neale get booed, it annoyed me to the point that I just ended up cheering whenever he got the ball.
Either my brain is more jet-lagged than I thought, or identity politics doesn't mean what you think it does. Or both.You don't understand because Identity politics doesn't affect you. It's an abstract concept that exists outside your immediate surroundings, something you only know of because you read about it in the news, probably attributing it to millenial nonsense on tumblr.
For Hill identity politics is a tangible reality that affects his life in concrete ways every day. When decisions involve financial opportunity, inherent socioeconomic inequality absolutely is a consideration.
Refers to marginalized groups and the assertion + advocacy (politics) that they face inequality and injustice. What did you think it means?Either my brain is more jet-lagged than I thought, or identity politics doesn't mean what you think it does. Or both.
And as for Hill, to paraphrase our dearly departed coach, you sook your way in and you sook your way out.
That's not identity politics, otherwise Martin Luther King was preaching identity politics.Refers to marginalized groups and the assertion + advocacy (politics) that they face inequality and injustice.
What?That's not identity politics, otherwise Martin Luther King was preaching identity politics.
In identity politics, the end point is maintenance of your diversity/separation. Your homogenous group identity should not be compromised and is more powerful than being part of a heterogenous, societal whole. It's predicated on the idea that marginal groups can't truly advance by being part of white/male/cis society as that society will always consume them and maintain it's dominance. So you either tear dominant society down or you co-exist separately from it rather than being part of it.
Brad Hill earning 900K a year playing by the rules in a predominantly white man's league is the antithesis of identity politics.
Yes indeed. I also have some optimism that we improve from the trade.I reckon BHill's missus was a bit selfish wanting to go back to Melbourne.
I reckon Colin Young was a bit selfish putting the feelers out there so he could earn more commission.
I reckon BHill's a bit selfish for going to another club while under contract for much bigger dollars.
I reckon Freo supporters are being a bit selfish when knocking BHill for going because Freo will be a worse side in 2020 without him.
And I reckon we've probably all got a good case to argue that we are right to think the way we do ... all of us, his missus, Colin Young, BHill and us supporters.
Build a bridge and move on.
No doubt we could carry on the disagreement for many more pages but only you and I would be interested, so I'll leave it. To keep it on topic, Brad Hill:What?
Identity politics is when people of a particular race, ethnicity, gender, or religion form alliances and organize politically to defend their group’s interests. The feminist movement, the civil rights movement, and the gay liberation movement are all examples of this kind of political organizing.www.philosophytalk.org
politics in which groups of people having a particular racial, religious, ethnic, social, or cultural identity tend to promote their own specific interests or concerns without regard to the interests or concerns of any larger political group… See the full definitionwww.merriam-webster.com
"separation" as an integral motivation is not listed in any description of identity politics in any source I could find. I'm really curious where you got your definition from because it's pretty left field. Identity politics pretty simply is the political position of a marginalized community faces injustice, and your attitudes and policies are supportive of bridging this gap, and by some definitions even to the detriment of the greater majority.
If you want to get nuanced with Martin Luther King yes in a way you can interpret his politics of combating racism and inequality by abolishing the borders of social groups, i.e. breaking down African American identity to simply skin colour as to then not be judged by it. This is opposed to advocating equality and acceptance of cultural and social groups for what they are, and excepting individuals regardless of their differences, instead of erasing them.
A lot of feminists take this approach, i.e. break down sexism by destroying and rejecting feminine identity. Combating misogyny by assuming a masculine identity. This is problematic in my opinion but another topic.
Identity politics though semantics aside is fighting for equal rights for your social group, and pertinently advocating for respect and equal rights for your social identity, rather than assimilate. But how does this relate to my first comment, and also how is Hill rooting the system ergo causing detriment to the majority (white dudes on the internet and AFL suits) for physical resources otherwise denied to his social group antithetical to identity politics?
Dead to me
Sadly, could've played 150. But hey his legacy. Didn't draft him in 2011, even though he was a pick 33. We picked Crozier, Forster and Sheridan before him. So bit of a lose-lose in the end. Worked out for him though.He played 54 games for the club, why are people acting like he gave us great service? He came in, got paid and left. Good for him but he is far from someone that “bleeds purple”. Will almost certainly play more games for two other clubs than he did for us.