Sign in to follow this  
Sports Prophet

Serena Williams

Recommended Posts

On ‎9‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 9:48 PM, Bedford Roughyed said:

Yes.

Now and again !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If that is aimed at me I am disappointed John. And you would be bang out of order.

It wasn't.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Farmduck said:

You know that cheese was named after the man who developed that cheese-making process.

I didn't, but it would still be unlikely to be well received over here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Shadow said:

I didn't, but it would still be unlikely to be well received over here.

In my memory I don't recall that c### word being used for black people here, just like the p##### word for people who travel a lot. I'd never heard the p-word until I was on Brit RL forums. In UK I guess people don't use words like boong or slope as much as they would be used out here.

I've never understood the problem with the P#### word. Out here everything gets abbreviated. The Filipinos call themselves Filos. Is that going to be a slur when white people use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

 

I've never understood the problem with the P#### word. Out here everything gets abbreviated. The Filipinos call themselves Filos. Is that going to be a slur when white people use it.

what do people from pedorido  in Portugal call themselves?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

The TV programmes "It was alright in the 70's/80's" etc were quite interesting for this. It was pretty shocking looking back at some of the stuff that was on some of these shows. 

I defy anybody to watch those shows and complain that those things have stopped being on TV due to PC gone mad - but it is exactly these kind of complaints about seemingly harmless fun (blacking up, Benny Hill chasing topless women on Prime Time etc.) that have helped to make these changes.

Plenty of people do racist things, it is down to them as to whether they actually are racist in the context of disliking people of different races.

I have some older family members who will still refer to black people as 'coloured', still use the P word irresepctive of whether these people have ever set foot in Pakistan - but they may have black friends so won't class themselves as racist. I do think there is a complexity with some older people that they will use dated terminology etc. but it isn't that hard not to call somebody a P*k*. I think it is right to challenge these little bits of casual racism.

That is very fair.

It is an insensitive cartoon, and people could reasonably be offended.  I do not believe there was malicious intent, but the newspaper is being pathetic with its little strop (as newspapers of all hues are inclined to be).  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

That is very fair.

It is an insensitive cartoon, and people could reasonably be offended.  I do not believe there was malicious intent, but the newspaper is being pathetic with its little strop (as newspapers of all hues are inclined to be).  

It is the reaction that has convinced me they knew what they were doing. The cartoonist claiming he is unaware of the racist cartoons of the past is very difficult to believe (although I suspect he gets a truth pass by being very very specific on what he was unaware of). The paper will certainly have been aware.

They just don't care and are going for a campaign against PC on it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It is the reaction that has convinced me they knew what they were doing. The cartoonist claiming he is unaware of the racist cartoons of the past is very difficult to believe (although I suspect he gets a truth pass by being very very specific on what he was unaware of). The paper will certainly have been aware.

They just don't care and are going for a campaign against PC on it. 

I completely disagree. They are standing up for logic and reason in the face of hysteria and unfounded accusations. They have every right to do that and I'm glad that they are doing so. Too often people are abused and threatened into silence on these matters. Some people just want to shout "racism, sexism, ageism, etc." and think that other people should be forced into silence and into agreeing with them and doing what they want.

Just look at how many people are ignorantly accusing the cartoonist of "whitewashing" the Japanese player. He did no such thing. Those people haven't even got the brains to look at a photo of her on that day to see that her hair actually was blonde - the bit visible behind her cap, at least - before they spout their nonsense. What logical reason would the cartoonist have for making the player appear more white? He wants people to know that it's Osaka - that's why he's drawn her with a blonde ponytail and wearing the exact outfit that Osaka was wearing on that day. Why on earth would he deliberately make her look white, as opposed to her skin tone just not being a perfect match due to the nature of drawing people and skin colour? It's such illogical nonsense. Is Serena Williams skin colour a perfect match in the photo? Is her tongue that shade of pink? Is every other colour in the cartoon a perfect match with how it really was. I totally empathise with The Herald cartoonist when he talks about things being crazy. People are throwing logic and reason out of the window in an attempt to be offended (or offended on behalf of someone else).

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It is the reaction that has convinced me they knew what they were doing. The cartoonist claiming he is unaware of the racist cartoons of the past is very difficult to believe (although I suspect he gets a truth pass by being very very specific on what he was unaware of). The paper will certainly have been aware.

They just don't care and are going for a campaign against PC on it. 

It is another cry at victimhood with a remarkable lack of self-awareness. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 17 stone giant said:

I completely disagree. They are standing up for logic and reason in the face of hysteria and unfounded accusations. They have every right to do that and I'm glad that they are doing so. Too often people are abused and threatened into silence on these matters. Some people just want to shout "racism, sexism, ageism, etc." and think that other people should be forced into silence and into agreeing with them and doing what they want.

Just look at how many people are ignorantly accusing the cartoonist of "whitewashing" the Japanese player. He did no such thing. Those people haven't even got the brains to look at a photo of her on that day to see that her hair actually was blonde - the bit visible behind her cap, at least - before they spout their nonsense. What logical reason would the cartoonist have for making the player appear more white? He wants people to know that it's Osaka - that's why he's drawn her with a blonde ponytail and wearing the exact outfit that Osaka was wearing on that day. Why on earth would he deliberately make her look white, as opposed to her skin tone just not being a perfect match due to the nature of drawing people and skin colour? It's such illogical nonsense. Is Serena Williams skin colour a perfect match in the photo? Is her tongue that shade of pink? Is every other colour in the cartoon a perfect match with how it really was. I totally empathise with The Herald cartoonist when he talks about things being crazy. People are throwing logic and reason out of the window in an attempt to be offended (or offended on behalf of someone else).

It was insensitive.  Some people are offended, others are not.  The world carries on. 

No-one has actually been arrested over the cartoon.  The persucution is people not seeing things in exactly the same way.

Getting upset and making a big deal of that judgement is not hysterical.  Having a front page passive aggressive strop is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, graveyard johnny said:

what do people from pedorido  in Portugal call themselves?

People from Ericeira in Portugal call themselves Jaboz so it could be anything 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

I completely disagree. They are standing up for logic and reason in the face of hysteria and unfounded accusations. They have every right to do that and I'm glad that they are doing so. Too often people are abused and threatened into silence on these matters. Some people just want to shout "racism, sexism, ageism, etc." and think that other people should be forced into silence and into agreeing with them and doing what they want.

Just look at how many people are ignorantly accusing the cartoonist of "whitewashing" the Japanese player. He did no such thing. Those people haven't even got the brains to look at a photo of her on that day to see that her hair actually was blonde - the bit visible behind her cap, at least - before they spout their nonsense. What logical reason would the cartoonist have for making the player appear more white? He wants people to know that it's Osaka - that's why he's drawn her with a blonde ponytail and wearing the exact outfit that Osaka was wearing on that day. Why on earth would he deliberately make her look white, as opposed to her skin tone just not being a perfect match due to the nature of drawing people and skin colour? It's such illogical nonsense. Is Serena Williams skin colour a perfect match in the photo? Is her tongue that shade of pink? Is every other colour in the cartoon a perfect match with how it really was. I totally empathise with The Herald cartoonist when he talks about things being crazy. People are throwing logic and reason out of the window in an attempt to be offended (or offended on behalf of someone else).

 

 

I'm confused, you are arguing that the artist was just being accurate with the blonde hair but not being accurate too. Which is it? The reality is it looks like a blonde white girl at the back, whether that was his intention or not, but lets not champion his accuracy, otherwise we musy criticise the exaggeration in the other character surely?

But the other bits are a sideshow. 

These style of cartoons to depict black people have been controversial for a very long time now. He chose to draw Williams like this with huge lips and a round dumpy figure, reminiscent of some of the old cartoons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

It was insensitive.  Some people are offended, others are not.  The world carries on. 

No-one has actually been arrested over the cartoon.  The persucution is people not seeing things in exactly the same way.

Getting upset and making a big deal of that judgement is not hysterical.  Having a front page passive aggressive strop is.

It's strange if he has had death threats over his cartoon that his employer would go for the approach of plastering it over the front page in an antagonistic style. Just in case any nutters had missed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone spot any similarities between this image on a Nazi Germany propaganda poster from1944 and the Serena caracature? The newspaper concerned are talking b@locks defending this.

Blog+Pic+4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a little bewildered.

Stating Corbyn had been no more than insensitive when accused of anti-semitism put me in the middle.

Saying the cartoon was racially insensitive, also puts me in the middle. 

But, the people on either side of me have changed sides.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bob8 said:

It is another cry at victimhood with a remarkable lack of self-awareness. 

Hardly.  I'd say the paper was flicking the Vs at the moaners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nearenough said:

Can anyone spot any similarities between this image on a Nazi Germany propaganda poster from1944 and the Serena caracature? The newspaper concerned are talking b@locks defending this.

Blog+Pic+4.jpg

That's two examples of Godwin's Law I've read in less than two minutes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

That's two examples of Godwin's Law I've read in less than two minutes!

Fair enough.

You will want to defend Corbyn, he is being called an anti-semite and it is all rather silly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

I am a little bewildered.

Stating Corbyn had been no more than insensitive when accused of anti-semitism put me in the middle.

Saying the cartoon was racially insensitive, also puts me in the middle. 

But, the people on either side of me have changed sides.

Bob8 some of your posts have been very, very close to antisemitism from my POV but you can't see it.  You don't think you are anti-Semitic even though you say you have been accused of it in the past (and I can appreciate why).  I appreciate the nuances of antisemitism that you claim not to see.  I also appreciate the nuances of other forms of racism but I do not see those nuances in that particular cartoon.  I may pick up on those nuances in another cartoon if one were produced, who knows.  People have focused on Williams' lips but had she had no lips but my guess is that they would have exaggerated them because she gobbed off.  She never shut up.  Had she been white or sky blue pink with yellow dots on, they would have exaggerated her lips because she ranted on and on at the poor umpire.  As for the rest of her body well that is simply an exaggeration of her.  That is what satirical cartoons are like: exaggerations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nearenough said:

Can anyone spot any similarities between this image on a Nazi Germany propaganda poster from1944 and the Serena caracature? The newspaper concerned are talking b@locks defending this.

Blog+Pic+4.jpg

Wartime propaganda is hardly the same thing as a daily satirical cartoon.

Unless you're arguing that all satirist cartoons are Nazis?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Fair enough.

You will want to defend Corbyn, he is being called an anti-semite and it is all rather silly.

I have no desire to defend Corbyn at all, but not only because I believe him to be an anti-Semite, which I do, but also because he is a slimeball, a danger to national security should he be elected PM, and spouts rabid socialist views and policies which would destroy this country as fast as those same views and policies destroyed Venezuela.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

Bob8 some of your posts have been very, very close to antisemitism from my POV but you can't see it.  You don't think you are anti-Semitic even though you say you have been accused of it in the past (and I can appreciate why).  I appreciate the nuances of antisemitism that you claim not to see.  I also appreciate the nuances of other forms of racism but I do not see those nuances in that particular cartoon.  I may pick up on those nuances in another cartoon if one were produced, who knows.  People have focused on Williams' lips but had she had no lips but my guess is that they would have exaggerated them because she gobbed off.  She never shut up.  Had she been white or sky blue pink with yellow dots on, they would have exaggerated her lips because she ranted on and on at the poor umpire.  As for the rest of her body well that is simply an exaggeration of her.  That is what satirical cartoons are like: exaggerations.

Many of your posts would have had you accused too.  That would have been wrong.

It is a UK definition, but it is nonsense.  My social group (and romantic life) in the USA was largely in Jewish groups and the contrast is great.

It is the hypocracy of people claiming great concern about racism when not actually giving a toss that irritates.

"very, very, close" still means "not".  Fair enough.  The point is that context is everything.  Hodges lives in a different world to the St Helens Labour voter and has a different context.  Taking what they say at face value is irresponsible without context. 

I have been clear on what is Corbyn being insensitive.  I say the same of the cartoonist.  Hypocrits change sides around me.

Edited by Bob8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Many of your posts would have had you accused too.

It is a UK definition, but it is nonsense.  My social group (and romantic life) in the USA was largely in Jewish groups and the contrast is great.

It is the hypocracy of people claiming great concern about racism when not actually giving a toss that irritates.

I have been clear on what is Corbyn being insensitive.  I say the same of the cartoonist.  Hypocrits change sides around me.

What would many of my posts had me accused of?  Antisemitism?  

Given that this board is a UK board then I would imagine it is best to live to the terms accepted here wouldn't you say?  Besides, having spent two years in the USA myself, I don't see much difference in the meaning of antisemitism on either side of the Atlantic and hasn't the US signed up to the international definition?

If I am a hypocrite by your standards then that is fine by me given that you can't appreciate Corbyn's antisemitism simply because your judgment is as clouded by your own leanings as you say mine are by my leanings.  In other words, I rather think this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Edited by Saintslass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Saintslass said:

What would many of my posts had me accused of?  Antisemitism?  

Given that this board is a UK board then I would imagine it is best to live to the terms accepted here wouldn't you say?  Besides, having spent two years in the USA myself, I don't see much difference in the meaning of antisemitism on either side of the Atlantic and hasn't the US signed up to the international definition?

If I am a hypocrite by your standards then that is fine by me given that you can't appreciate Corbyn's antisemitism simply because your judgment is as clouded by your own leanings as you say mine are by my leanings.  In other words, I rather think this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You defense of the coverage of Milliband eating a bacon sandwich, citing George Soros as a Jew who interferes in democracies, veiled criticism of the metropolitan elite, defence of the openly anti-Jewish racial policies of Viktor Orbán.

I do not suspect you are actually an anti-Jewish racist, I will be clear on that.

I imagine I spent far more time in Jewish communities than yourself while in the USA, but I do not know that.

Edited by Bob8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express Yearbook 2018/19 - Order Now


Rugby League World - Nov 2018

Rugby League World - Nov 2018



League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday