We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.I don’t know what the answer is, but I know putting some colourful laces on my boots isn’t it.
As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.Why is challenging a bigoted viewpoint virtue signalling? It’s yet another USA import to discourage challenging bigotry.
In the main, people aren't challenging with any degree of articulation, they are whinging cos he hurt their feelings.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.
That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.
I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.
As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
In the main, people aren't challenging with any degree of articulation, they are whinging cos he hurt their feelings.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
I actually agree with what you say here but I'm not sure how you think a gay person using lived experience to express an opinion on the contrary to that of the the OP is not valid evidence. Shmmeee has also offered up actual evidence.But my point is that we all carry prejudices. It is a human survival instinct. It is the reason we don't walk the streets at night by a group of youths, why we cross the road if someone heading our way doesn't look right and why we were on high alert to anyone of Arabian looking descent when flying on a plane right after 9/11. It is nonsense prejudice.
We are all a product of our environment and obviously the posters environment was very different to yours and many others. It doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean he gets a free pass. But it does mean you need to understand why he is of that opinion and then try and change it with debate and evidence. And if he doesn't, don't worry about it. That's his right to live in ignorance.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
In your instance, I can understand that offence will be caused as it is personal to you.It's not politicaly insensitive it's down right fully factually inaccurate and of course it's offensive, he is saying that I can't raise a child as well as a male/female relationship which is the pure definition of offensive
Just look how white and male dominated football attendance is. Surely people look around and realise it doesn’t reflect their communities or workplaces? Football has massive problem in this regard and has a moral, ethical and financial need to change.We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.
That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.
I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.
Those prejudices are the result of a perceived sense of danger. Largely unwarranted but somewhat understandable, and crossing the street to avoid some youths or not travel by air doesn’t really impact anyone else.But my point is that we all carry prejudices. It is a human survival instinct. It is the reason we don't walk the streets at night by a group of youths, why we cross the road if someone heading our way doesn't look right and why we were on high alert to anyone of Arabian looking descent when flying on a plane right after 9/11. It is nonsense prejudice.
We are all a product of our environment and obviously the posters environment was very different to yours and many others. It doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean he gets a free pass. But it does mean you need to understand why he is of that opinion and then try and change it with debate and evidence. And if he doesn't, don't worry about it. That's his right to live in ignorance.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
That’s more of a reflection on you.As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
No its not! To call something out as offensive it has to be offensive to you as a perceived insult, otherwise it is virtue signalling. You can't be offended on behalf of someone.It's not virtue signalling, it's calling out something offensive as offensive.
Personally I’d find racism against non-white people offensive.In your instance, I can understand that offence will be caused as it is personal to you.
For everyone else, his opinion should be treated with the contempt it deserves and either engage to educate him or move on.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
I have never said don't challenge, in fact that is what I have been advocating for. What I have said is let's not turn this into a witch hunt because opinions don't allaign and instead try to educate him.If you don’t challenge prejudice, which he accepts this is, attitudes can’t be changed. If you do, you’re only doing it to score virtue points.
Though since he asked, dealing with prejudiced opinions is part of my day job.
No its not! To call something out as offensive it has to be offensive to you as a perceived insult, otherwise it is virtue signalling. You can't be offended on behalf of someone.
You can feel a sense of injustice, a sense of protection over the aggrieved and a million other emotions. But do not be so disingenuous and patronising to believe that you understand what the offended party is feeling. Any claims that you do are virtue signalling.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
No, I am not. If a Flat Earth believer was on here you wouldn't be offended by them. Its that his opinion is politically sensitive and therefor you are offended and have a need to tell everyone just how offended you are. Its the very definition of virtue signalling.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
I should correct my original post to "some" people are not challenging. My issue are with those who are jumping on the bandwagon of outrage without offering any substance to the debate.People have given personal accounts and other scientific evidence to disprove his views. How is that not debate and education with credibility?
I couldn't agree more.As above, I haven’t personally attacked or insulted him once. Just called out the offensive posts for what they are as you suggested he hadn’t made any.
And yes referring to your other post, we do carry sub conscious prejudice in ways even more entrenched than the ones you listed. But that is much more difficult and nuanced to deal with than the quite conscious beliefs the OP has expressed in detail. It’s worth at least trying to get him to reflect on his views.
I couldn't agree more.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Why is it never “outrage” or “virtue signalling” when someone is giving a conservative or religious opinion? Curious.Havr you even read the thread? We’ve got logical arguments, scientific research, personal experience.The full gamut of evidence, nothing to do with outrage. Outrage is just your personal buzzword for people not agreeing with you.
It is valid evidence, of course it is. It just brings me to the end of my post where I say "And if he doesn't, don't worry about it. That's his right to live in ignorance" lifes too short to worry about the things you can't change.I actually agree with what you say here but I'm not sure how you think a gay person using lived experience to express an opinion on the contrary to that of the the OP is not valid evidence. Shmmeee has also offered up actual evidence.
How so?That’s more of a reflection on you.
You have an interesting way of reading only the parts that serve your agenda in my posts dont you.Interesting. So nobody is allowed to challenge anything unless they are the victim.
If somebody is sexist, racist or homophobic in my classroom I should just let it happen because I’m a white straight man. Got it.
You have an interesting way of reading only the parts that serve your agenda in my posts dont you.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Have I offended you?In which case direct your frustrations at virtue signalling or aimless ranting elsewhere!
Have I offended you?
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
This is absolute nonsense.No its not! To call something out as offensive it has to be offensive to you as a perceived insult, otherwise it is virtue signalling. You can't be offended on behalf of someone.
And how come that people are allowed their opinions, but a view that something is offensive is not allowed?Why is it never “outrage” or “virtue signalling” when someone is giving a conservative or religious opinion? Curious.
And how come that people are allowed their opinions, but a view that something is offensive is not allowed?
We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.
That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.
I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.
Everyone is allowed their opinion mate but that only extends to one level. An opinion disagreeing with the first opinion is virtue signalling.And how come that people are allowed their opinions, but a view that something is offensive is not allowed?
So you’re saying we need to step it up, maybe make it more visible?The campaign has been going on for what, maybe a decade now, and in that time 1 professional player in a dead Australian league has come out as gay.
Yeah the campaign is working wonders.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?