Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Definitely has my support. It's easy to say racism is "just joking" when you're not on the receiving end. It's easy to laugh off racism when you are not the minority being stereotyped.saintspremiers wrote:twirly - are you a Muslim?
Good luck getting support on this forum!
Well your entire post is ignorant and offensive. Another PC flog trying to find offense and intent to cause same, where none exists.twirlyhair wrote: Your ignorance is not the only offensive aspect of your response. But more about that shortly. To spell it out for you (and clearly others), the use of the word Jihad with Etihad stadium is seen as offensive by Muslims as it is a unfair and divisive 'throw away' line that only further stereotypes people or organisations that are identified as Muslim. Consider the Muslim kids that attend Saints games and hear you saying Jihad stadium. As a father how would you respond to your child when this is asked? And why not take it further and label the Pies as Jihad Collingwood? (Major sponsor Emirates), or walk into Crazy Johns and say 'Jihad Jihad' because the founder was Muslim? But back to your original premise in your thread. Quote ..'And please...we are allowed to say 'jihad' in a jocular context surely.' This is the most insidious aspect of bigotry as it works on the basis that those who are offensive get to decide whether it is offensive or not. Much like the racists who continually abused players like Nicky Winmar and then would say 'but I'm just joking around', your beliefs belong to times past.
So if it rhymes it is ok to be offensive????? How convenient.True Believer wrote:Well your entire post is ignorant and offensive. Another PC flog trying to find offense and intent to cause same, where none exists.twirlyhair wrote: Your ignorance is not the only offensive aspect of your response. But more about that shortly. To spell it out for you (and clearly others), the use of the word Jihad with Etihad stadium is seen as offensive by Muslims as it is a unfair and divisive 'throw away' line that only further stereotypes people or organisations that are identified as Muslim. Consider the Muslim kids that attend Saints games and hear you saying Jihad stadium. As a father how would you respond to your child when this is asked? And why not take it further and label the Pies as Jihad Collingwood? (Major sponsor Emirates), or walk into Crazy Johns and say 'Jihad Jihad' because the founder was Muslim? But back to your original premise in your thread. Quote ..'And please...we are allowed to say 'jihad' in a jocular context surely.' This is the most insidious aspect of bigotry as it works on the basis that those who are offensive get to decide whether it is offensive or not. Much like the racists who continually abused players like Nicky Winmar and then would say 'but I'm just joking around', your beliefs belong to times past.
The reason "jihad" is not used in reference to Emirates or Crazy John's or anything else is because it doesn't rhyme as it does with Etihad. And the original intent of the reference was to demonstrate feelings of disassociation brought about by yet more corporate "branding" and name changing.
Example:
"where is the game this weekend?"
"It's at Jihad Stadium or whatever it's called this week"
Did you look to defend the sensitivities of Wizards or the Chinese when the same premise was used to deride the name of the pre-season competition? Because in response to having a new corporate name for that competition every season, people started referring to it as the Wizard Wok (influenced by the trophy shape, not a racist hatred of Chinese people).
Lose the pious, holier than thou attitude and stop lecturing long enough and you may learn something and have some fun.
No it's not OK to be offensive, but who determnined that the word Jihad is offensive or racist? You? Who annointed you as the keeper of communal standards.twirlyhair wrote: So if it rhymes it is ok to be offensive????? How convenient.
I think your nickname, True Believer, is an offensive swipe at people who do actually believe in a deity and that you reduce their holy journey to some kind of sporting analogy is just plain insensitive.True Believer wrote:No it's not OK to be offensive, but who determnined that the word Jihad is offensive or racist? You? Who annointed you as the keeper of communal standards.twirlyhair wrote: So if it rhymes it is ok to be offensive????? How convenient.
It is a simple word, it is not derogatory, and has no derisory implications or descriptors of a person contained within. It is a word meaning "holy war". In fact it's true meaning as I understand, is to describe one's inner battle with one's faith, and it has been loosely translated as holy war !!
So again, seeing as you have taken it upon yourself to lecture others on what they can or cannot say, I ask you, who determined the word jihad to be offensive and racist and why?
Perhaps you direct your enthusiasm for intervention towards a worthwhile cause that is genuinely offensive, such as bonded child labour in third world countries, or unnecesary abject poverty and subjugation for huge numbers of people in Africa.
+ 1True Believer wrote:Well your entire post is ignorant and offensive. Another PC flog trying to find offense and intent to cause same, where none exists.twirlyhair wrote: Your ignorance is not the only offensive aspect of your response. But more about that shortly. To spell it out for you (and clearly others), the use of the word Jihad with Etihad stadium is seen as offensive by Muslims as it is a unfair and divisive 'throw away' line that only further stereotypes people or organisations that are identified as Muslim. Consider the Muslim kids that attend Saints games and hear you saying Jihad stadium. As a father how would you respond to your child when this is asked? And why not take it further and label the Pies as Jihad Collingwood? (Major sponsor Emirates), or walk into Crazy Johns and say 'Jihad Jihad' because the founder was Muslim? But back to your original premise in your thread. Quote ..'And please...we are allowed to say 'jihad' in a jocular context surely.' This is the most insidious aspect of bigotry as it works on the basis that those who are offensive get to decide whether it is offensive or not. Much like the racists who continually abused players like Nicky Winmar and then would say 'but I'm just joking around', your beliefs belong to times past.
The reason "jihad" is not used in reference to Emirates or Crazy John's or anything else is because it doesn't rhyme as it does with Etihad. And the original intent of the reference was to demonstrate feelings of disassociation brought about by yet more corporate "branding" and name changing.
Example:
"where is the game this weekend?"
"It's at Jihad Stadium or whatever it's called this week"
Did you look to defend the sensitivities of Wizards or the Chinese when the same premise was used to deride the name of the pre-season competition? Because in response to having a new corporate name for that competition every season, people started referring to it as the Wizard Wok (influenced by the trophy shape, not a racist hatred of Chinese people).
Lose the pious, holier than thou attitude and stop lecturing long enough and you may learn something and have some fun.
Seems like i have struck a nerve with you. You see it is actually you, not me who is determining that this is offensive or not. And that is my point. Too often the perpetrator gets to decide whether something is offensive or not. Your description of Jihad whilst accurate is also naive. Jihad is now clearly associated with terrorists, and terrorists are associated with Muslims and Arabs. For some not offensive, for other clearly it is. Any by the way, I wouldn't get on an Etihad flight and start calling out 'I'm flying with Jihad'. It wouldn't go down to well.True Believer wrote:No it's not OK to be offensive, but who determnined that the word Jihad is offensive or racist? You? Who annointed you as the keeper of communal standards.twirlyhair wrote: So if it rhymes it is ok to be offensive????? How convenient.
It is a simple word, it is not derogatory, and has no derisory implications or descriptors of a person contained within. It is a word meaning "holy war". In fact it's true meaning as I understand, is to describe one's inner battle with one's faith, and it has been loosely translated as holy war !!
So again, seeing as you have taken it upon yourself to lecture others on what they can or cannot say, I ask you, who determined the word jihad to be offensive and racist and why?
Perhaps you direct your enthusiasm for intervention towards a worthwhile cause that is genuinely offensive, such as bonded child labour in third world countries, or unnecesary abject poverty and subjugation for huge numbers of people in Africa.
bulls***. You're back-peddling becuase I called you out on your control-freak PC dogma.twirlyhair wrote: Seems like i have struck a nerve with you. You see it is actually you, not me who is determining that this is offensive or not. And that is my point. Too often the perpetrator gets to decide whether something is offensive or not. Your description of Jihad whilst accurate is also naive.
Your over complicating things buddy. This is what I said ' Jihad is now clearly associated with terrorists, and terrorists are associated with Muslims and Arabs', So the point is, to repeat again, that some people would find this offensive (the use of the word Jihad) and of course some would not. To use this word in this context in a public forum is likely to offend some, and in a world in which division and isolation causes so many problems, your lack of sensitivity is not helpful.True Believer wrote:bulls***. You're back-peddling becuase I called you out on your control-freak PC dogma.twirlyhair wrote: Seems like i have struck a nerve with you. You see it is actually you, not me who is determining that this is offensive or not. And that is my point. Too often the perpetrator gets to decide whether something is offensive or not. Your description of Jihad whilst accurate is also naive.
From your own post:
"Your ignorance is not the only offensive aspect of your response. But more about that shortly. To spell it out for you (and clearly others), the use of the word Jihad with Etihad stadium is seen as offensive by Muslims "
Your words. They are only words, and only have power if people give them power by cowering fearfully from them and refusing to stand and argue in the face of a lie. You lied. You said the word Jihad is racist and offensive. Instead of being fearful of being labelled racist, I opted to confront you on the lie you told and share the real meanning of the word and ask for an explanation of how that is offensive or racist.
Instead you have now come back and contradicted yourself and demonstrated that your agenda was not to stamp out bigotry but to impose your will on the behaviour of another in the name of a injustice that is actually entirely fabricated by you.
good response...True Believer wrote:bulls***. You're back-peddling becuase I called you out on your control-freak PC dogma.twirlyhair wrote: Seems like i have struck a nerve with you. You see it is actually you, not me who is determining that this is offensive or not. And that is my point. Too often the perpetrator gets to decide whether something is offensive or not. Your description of Jihad whilst accurate is also naive.
From your own post:
"Your ignorance is not the only offensive aspect of your response. But more about that shortly. To spell it out for you (and clearly others), the use of the word Jihad with Etihad stadium is seen as offensive by Muslims "
Your words. They are only words, and only have power if people give them power by cowering fearfully from them and refusing to stand and argue in the face of a lie. You lied. You said the word Jihad is racist and offensive. Instead of being fearful of being labelled racist, I opted to confront you on the lie you told and share the real meanning of the word and ask for an explanation of how that is offensive or racist.
Instead you have now come back and contradicted yourself and demonstrated that your agenda was not to stamp out bigotry but to impose your will on the behaviour of another in the name of a injustice that is actually entirely fabricated by you.
same with carscum and the bumbers....terms i use with malice...when i call jihad stadium ..well...jihad stadium...do i mean any offenve to any of my fellow australians...of course not ffs.....just the same as jihad jack called himself jihad...was he being offensive to himself and his fellow muslims.....i hardly think so.....so harden the f*** up sport....
Very true, gave up the lead with 35 secs to go against the Cats and extremely late against the Blues too.Richter wrote:Eh?evertonfc wrote:Unconvinced we can beat top six teams.
Games against Carlton and Geelong that could have gone either way suggest differently Ev.
Admittedly we were flogged by the Bombers.
I'd say that we're no match for the pies either, but that we have a reasonable chance against both Hawthorn and Fremantle.
bozza1980 wrote:Very true, gave up the lead with 35 secs to go against the Cats and extremely late against the Blues too.Richter wrote:Eh?evertonfc wrote:Unconvinced we can beat top six teams.
Games against Carlton and Geelong that could have gone either way suggest differently Ev.
Admittedly we were flogged by the Bombers.
I'd say that we're no match for the pies either, but that we have a reasonable chance against both Hawthorn and Fremantle.
