actually I am yet to see evidence that you haver any thought process
Ah I see. Premiership ruckman Brian Sampson was also known as Sambo.
2 Likes
He was my massage therapist for like a decade, and now his daughter does it. I never called him Sambo thoughā¦ At least not while he was in the room.
Top bloke, pity he left the Bombers before 100 games. He was also the best street fighter in our region.
2 Likes
Good player in some rubbish sides. Wingman, I still have an old footy card somewhere.
Ah yes, the old revert to calling someone a flog in a forum about crossing the line on abuse.
ā ā ā ā ā ā ā hypocrit. Keep pandering
1 Like
I rarely comment in threads (at least outside of DJ King) mainly because I donāt like arguing. But, I wanted to offer my opinion on racism.
First, I donāt agree with the attempt to shift the definition of racism to exclude ābelief.ā Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that oneās own race is superior. Itās not what you do or say, itās the beliefs underlying those actions or words that make someone racist.
Second, I think a heavy handed and simplistic approach will cause more harm than good. I noted a poster called Wimmera a racist. I think thatās an extraordinary (and ridiculous) claim, lacking any proof. And claims of that nature will not lead to any meaningful dialogue about the topic. Obviously, people are free to say whatever they like, Iām just saying I donāt think that approach is helpful.
Third, when everyone is a racist, then nobody is a racist. I think we should use the label very cautiously or it will become meaningless.
Finally, racism is obviously something that needs to be talked about, but how we go about the conversation is just as important as the arguments and points we bring to the discussion. I know this is a footy forum and everything eventually devolves into name calling. But, IMO this is a really important topic, deserving of a higher standard of conversation. I was saddened to read some of the comments in this thread and watch the conversation devolve and spiral out of control.
As MLK said, I hope we get to the stage in this country where we are judged solely by the content of our character, not by the colour of our skin. In that sense I respect Adam Goodes for the work heās done both on and off the field, but I also recognise heās made mistakes at times (like we all have), so I can understand people booing him when he made poor decisions on the football field. But theyāre in the past now. I sincerely wish him all the best for his future after football.
7 Likes
If blitz was chasing you down the street booing you then you might have had a point
1 Like
Blitz would so do this. 
1 Like
There are some real intellectual heavy hitters getting around this thread.
My cats name is Mittens.
4 Likes
Whatās the world coming to when you canāt take a guy called Army of Poon seriously
1 Like
Lots of posts from AoP ā¦a tsunami from the Poon Army
1 Like
Turned up on my this day x years ago on facebook.
At the time I dismissed it as a poorly timed accident. Now Iām not so sure.
1 Like
Give the sport editor a break? All darkies look the sameā¦
2 Likes
I heard one of the producers of one of the Goodes documentaries talking on SEN this morning, and amongst other things discussed the indigenous connection with the land which I think we all recognise. Fair enough, but did not mention the Mabo decision at all as though that historic decision never happenedā¦
I am interested, now over 25 years since the Mabo decision what is the indigenous view of the native title act/Mabo decision.
Perhaps understandably, maybe it did not go far enough in that some greater area of land all up could have been granted by native title. But perhaps as significant was that the concept of terra nullius was overturned as invalid.
Can someone bring me up to date on the current views on Mabo ?
Itās the vibe
2 Likes
Mm hmm someone just watched The Castle
1 Like
Just recently watched the doco so reading the thread.
While Iāll agree that someone from a persecuted minority taking offence at something doesnāt 100% mean it was offensive or racist, I vehemently disagree with your view that it depends on the intent of the speaker. People can be accidentally or sub-consciously racist, sexist, or otherwise offensive. That they didnāt intend to be doesnāt mean that the action or words werenāt subjectively offensive.
And not calling this out gives a pass to this type of behaviour. The classic being āit was just a jokeā. I remember when I was young there were plenty of jokes about Irishmen, Aborigines and other groups at our school in a country Victorian town. People in our town had (mostly) never met any of those groups. I donāt think they/we were being deliberately racist. But we sure as ā ā ā ā were being so.
This latent or accidental racism (and sexism) is especially bad in groups and when it is coming continuously as it is very intimidating and demoralising to have to face a constant barrage or face being significantly outnumbered.
Many booing Goodes may not have consciously been intending to be racist. But when you take what was happening, the context that nothing similar occurred for other players who acted similarly on field, that it only happened to Goodes after he started speaking out on racism, that it continued after many called it out as racism, then it is hard to argue that this wasnāt a racist act. Regardless of the intent of some participants.
And obviously a lot of those participants are then going to be offended to be told they supported a racist act.
So if someone calls a black person āā ā ā ā ā ā ā, not knowing that itās racist, that isnāt a racist act anyway?
3 Likes
I can see reason in a lot of your post, and I can see reason in why indigenous people (and other minorities) might take offence at things that werenāt meant to be offensive.
Their subjective perception is different to the perception of others, because of their experience of discrimination/persecution/bullying etc.
They are offended - yes. But the person who has caused them to take offence is not necessarily racist, and the act/statement itself is not necessarily racist. The intent of the speaker, and their meaning can be non racist, but still offensive to the minority because of their sensitivity.
The logic of saying people should refrain from anything that might be taken as racist, even when it isnāt intended to be (eg booing, or less controversially, criticism), because the offence taken by the person being booed or criticised makes the action racist, is flawed.
By that logic, if the recipient is offended despite the legitimate intent of the action (or words), the action should be avoided, to avoid causing offence. For example, you shouldnāt call someone a racist if it causes them offence.
2 Likes