Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Con Gorozidis wrote:If people want to be mean, demean others and just be a_holes well people have to right to call them out on it.
Sam Gilbert says hi
Nice try guys.
I have never made any disparaging comments about Gilbo's personality. Never. He seems like a decent chap. He was once a great football player.
I have only every questioned the current on-field contributions of Gilbo and what position/role he plays.
When he plays a good game (or quarter) I say so. But when he has a shocker I bang on about it. Mainly because I find the notion that he is a 'gun' that some fans claim is ridiculous.
I have certainly never attacked his personality. I admit sometimes I have banged on too often and disproportionately. My bad for that. He is a professional footballer. So questioning his football is not the same thing as going to town on his personality.
A speed reading of the quoting of an article by a conservative employee of the conservative Murdoch says it all.
There is an old saying that "Nothing is today as it was yesterday" - so, by extension everything progresses, or we hope and trust it is progression and not regression!
Altho, today with the Brits voting on exiting the EU regression may well be the agenda!!
We fought a War in Vietnam, costing over 300 young, conscripted 20 year old Australian their lives (and many, many more their well being) to comprehensively lose that War - and 50 years on what do we have?
Progress, with Vietnam now one of our major trading partners.
The Conservatives would still have us at war - because it seems they must have an enemy (their being behind the CFA intransigence and the "Stop Skyrail" protests et al).
So, on the one hand we have the Conservatives attacking change and the "progressives" but on the other they endorse and support that the most effective form of regulation is self regulation because they see that as enshrining "power" and sticking to the tried and true, not learning and progressing (hence Climate Change being a left wing conspiracy etc. etc.).
Then their is the "trickle down" economic agenda, for the same reasons - to entrench "power" and wealth (it is not the "power" it is "entrench").
So we have under employment, jobs added being exclusively casual and part time and flat wages growth which the tabloid media (Murdoch) endorse in the interests of self interest.
Plus youth unemployment - feeding into accommodation costs etc. etc.
And they divide to continue this status quo.
The Conservatives support exclusively "Free enterprise", until you do not agree with them, so the article represented attacks "progressives" and "progressive issues".
A contradiction?
Going back thru contributions to this issue, I put what I saw as the real damage the likes of Maguire, Brayshaw, Frawley and Newman et al do from my first hand experiences - they give "free kicks" to the "Violence against women and their children" campaign, a campaign which seeks to characterise ALL males - and makes it so much more difficult for males, ALL males because we are ALL "branded" by association with the likes of Maguire, Newnan, Brayshaw and Frawley et al.
And the Conservative Murdoch employee manipulating and peddling her nonsense to attack "progressives" and "progressive issues".
But then garners its headlines from "attacks on women and their children" and starts "community" campaigns.
Another contradiction?
That puts it into context - and excuse to attack a demographic you do not agree with, the same as the per se attack on all males by acceptance that violence is exclusively against women and their children.
Con Gorozidis wrote:If people want to be mean, demean others and just be a_holes well people have to right to call them out on it.
Sam Gilbert says hi
Nice try guys.
I have never made any disparaging comments about Gilbo's personality. Never. He seems like a decent chap. He was once a great football player. I have only every questioned the current on-field contributions of Gilbo and what position/role he plays.
When he plays a good game (or quarter) I say so. But when he has a shocker I bang on about it. Mainly because I find the notion that he is a 'gun' that some fans claim is ridiculous. I have certainly never attacked his personality. I admit sometimes I have banged on too often and disproportionately. My bad for that. He is a professional footballer. So questioning his football is not the same thing as going to town on his personality.
I'm not going to trawl through all your posts Con, but comments such as the one below (which is quite typical) do in fact bring into question his character/personality rather than simply his football:
Con Gorozidis wrote:
Gilbert is cruising and going through the motions and simply playing to build up his super
That's a pretty damning thing to say about any player that pulls on our jumper! Admit it.
Just to add, Ferage is reported as saying "We have fought against the multi nationals, the big merchant banks, against big politics against lies, corruption and deceit" and "we have won without a bullet being fired" (which is rather an unfortunate comment).
Progressive?
Or regression for the fears and trepidation of people going about their lives in the society (economy) of today and tomorrow?
The initial conclusion is that we are all poorer, because our superannuation accruals will take a very, very significant hit.
So the Conservatives have returned the status quo - exiting the EU and what membership of the EU offers (and hoping the EU collapses back to Soveriegn States).
Everything is back in its place!!!
And here, in Australia, we have a Conservative Merchant Banker, known as being "a day late and a dollar high", concentrating on making money but eventually costing other people much more money, such as his role in the sale of FAI. It was "successful" fee generating business, but it didn't work out all that well for HIA, presenting for election as pm!!
What would Ferage say after exiting the UK from the EU and his reading of this outcome and the reasons?
Con Gorozidis wrote:If people want to be mean, demean others and just be a_holes well people have to right to call them out on it.
Sam Gilbert says hi
Nice try guys.
I have never made any disparaging comments about Gilbo's personality. Never. He seems like a decent chap. He was once a great football player. I have only every questioned the current on-field contributions of Gilbo and what position/role he plays.
When he plays a good game (or quarter) I say so. But when he has a shocker I bang on about it. Mainly because I find the notion that he is a 'gun' that some fans claim is ridiculous. I have certainly never attacked his personality. I admit sometimes I have banged on too often and disproportionately. My bad for that. He is a professional footballer. So questioning his football is not the same thing as going to town on his personality.
I'm not going to trawl through all your posts Con, but comments such as the one below (which is quite typical) do in fact bring into question his character/personality rather than simply his football:
Con Gorozidis wrote:
Gilbert is cruising and going through the motions and simply playing to build up his super
That's a pretty damning thing to say about any player that pulls on our jumper! Admit it.
Con Gorozidis wrote:If people want to be mean, demean others and just be a_holes well people have to right to call them out on it.
Sam Gilbert says hi
Nice try guys.
I have never made any disparaging comments about Gilbo's personality. Never. He seems like a decent chap. He was once a great football player. I have only every questioned the current on-field contributions of Gilbo and what position/role he plays.
When he plays a good game (or quarter) I say so. But when he has a shocker I bang on about it. Mainly because I find the notion that he is a 'gun' that some fans claim is ridiculous. I have certainly never attacked his personality. I admit sometimes I have banged on too often and disproportionately. My bad for that. He is a professional footballer. So questioning his football is not the same thing as going to town on his personality.
I'm not going to trawl through all your posts Con, but comments such as the one below (which is quite typical) do in fact bring into question his character/personality rather than simply his football:
Con Gorozidis wrote:
Gilbert is cruising and going through the motions and simply playing to build up his super
That's a pretty damning thing to say about any player that pulls on our jumper! Admit it.
c'est con
In fairness to Con here, it's a reasonable expectation that people have the ability to put things into context... And the bolded quote above is not a literal comment. To me that looks like a criticism of Sam's work rate mixed in with a bit of hyperbole to illustrate his point rather than the character assassination it's being implied to be.
"This wasn't banter. Banter, says the dictionary, is "the playful and friendly exchange of teasing remarks". The key word is "exchange", implying giving and getting. This was all giving...................."
Con Gorozidis wrote:If people want to be mean, demean others and just be a_holes well people have to right to call them out on it.
Sam Gilbert says hi
Nice try guys.
I have never made any disparaging comments about Gilbo's personality. Never. He seems like a decent chap. He was once a great football player. I have only every questioned the current on-field contributions of Gilbo and what position/role he plays.
When he plays a good game (or quarter) I say so. But when he has a shocker I bang on about it. Mainly because I find the notion that he is a 'gun' that some fans claim is ridiculous. I have certainly never attacked his personality. I admit sometimes I have banged on too often and disproportionately. My bad for that. He is a professional footballer. So questioning his football is not the same thing as going to town on his personality.
I'm not going to trawl through all your posts Con, but comments such as the one below (which is quite typical) do in fact bring into question his character/personality rather than simply his football:
Con Gorozidis wrote:
Gilbert is cruising and going through the motions and simply playing to build up his super
That's a pretty damning thing to say about any player that pulls on our jumper! Admit it.
c'est con
In fairness to Con here, it's a reasonable expectation that people have the ability to put things into context... And the bolded quote above is not a literal comment. To me that looks like a criticism of Sam's work rate mixed in with a bit of hyperbole to illustrate his point rather than the character assassination it's being implied to be.
"In the aftermath of community outrage at Eddie McGuire, James Brayshaw and Danny Frawley’s “joke” about people paying to watch a drowning of journalist Caroline Wilson, the apologies came thick and fast. Lost in the torrent of sympathy was the nexus between the attempted silencing of a powerful female journalist and the violence that claims on average more than one women a week in Australia."
Yeah this has become all about Caro. She could have replied that she was in the process of buying some scuba gear. That would have shut them up.
In Springfield, they're eating the dogs. The people that came in, they're eating the cats. They’re eating – they are eating the pets of the people that live there.
magnifisaint wrote:Yeah this has become all about Caro. She could have replied that she was in the process of buying some scuba gear. That would have shut them up.
She should have just said she loves ice. In fact her and Ben Cousins were deep in it just last weekend.
Anyway, this is an industry that re-constructed the public image of Wayne Carey from wife beater to Dalai Lama. So nothing surprises me.
The Fireman wrote:a media civil war that has sucked us all in.
Indeed News Ltd vs Fairfax, Channel 9 vs Chanel 7 etc etc. Unfortunately, the public go along on the pointless & trivial ride. As if there are not more important things to worry about.
Linton Lodger wrote:
This is quite different to his comments regarding Adam Goodes, where he basically inferred that Adam Goodes looked like an ape and would be available for mindless stunts.
Fundamentally, at the end of the day I couldn't give a rat's arse about what he said about Caro or indeed if she'd said it about him.
I think this is the point to a degree.
You see it as different to the Adam Goodes comments. You obviously felt the Adam Goodes comments were out of line.
You couldn't give a rat's arse about what he said about Caro and vice versa.
But it's not about what you, or I, or Eddie or Sam Newman think.
Plenty of people didn't think the Adam Goodes thing was out of line. Even though you did.
Plenty think that Eddie was out of line on this one. Even though you don't.
People who don't think the Adam Goodes thing was out of line, are generally people stuck in a time when casual racism and an underlying belief that Aboriginals are second rate humans was acceptable. These people might no longer act out their views, but it still remains.
People who think the Caroline Wilson thing was not out of line, are generally people who haven't bought in to the fact that women are equal to men in terms of their rights and relevance to humanity - and as a result need to be treated differently in certain circumstances. Same as men need to be treated differently in certain circumstances also.
And by the way, the above does not apply strictly to men. Women in a lot of cases do the cause of other women no favours at all with their actions.
I don't think you quite got my point.
The Goodes comments were inappropriate, because McGuire was making a joke of Adam Goodes' appearance, specifically in relation to his race.
There is a clear distinction from the Caro comments, because McGuire was expressing a personal dislike of Caro due to things she had written.
If McGuire had made the same comments he made regarding Caro, about Adam Goodes, after Goodes had criticised Eddie or Collingwood, then I'd have no issue whatsoever. Doesn't mean I would be agreeing with the comments or thinking they were smart.
"In the aftermath of community outrage at Eddie McGuire, James Brayshaw and Danny Frawley’s “joke” about people paying to watch a drowning of journalist Caroline Wilson, the apologies came thick and fast. Lost in the torrent of sympathy was the nexus between the attempted silencing of a powerful female journalist and the violence that claims on average more than one women a week in Australia."
Are they now wheeling out Phil Cleary? With all due respect, Phil Clearly lost his sister in horrible circumstances and is probably incapable of offering an objective view in relation to such matters.
Claiming that this is an attempt to silence a female journalist sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory to me. Or a bit of propaganda perhaps?
Is Mr Clearly still doing media for the Electrical Trades Union? If so, they wouldn't happen to be on a recruiting drive for more female members at the moment by any chance? Female members that will access the fabulous Income Protection Insurance available to ETU members for which Dean Mighell and now Troy Gray get a 20% commission. I wonder if Phil gets a cut of the brokerage fees.
Its a bit rich of Phil to be pontificating, when he has spent years working for a corrupt and criminal organisation. Walk through the ETU office and you'll only need one hand to count the token female staff in the organisation.
Linton Lodger wrote:
Are they now wheeling out Phil Cleary? With all due respect, Phil Clearly lost his sister in horrible circumstances and is probably incapable of offering an objective view in relation to such matters.
Claiming that this is an attempt to silence a female journalist sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory to me. Or a bit of propaganda perhaps?
Is Mr Clearly still doing media for the Electrical Trades Union? If so, they wouldn't happen to be on a recruiting drive for more female members at the moment by any chance? Female members that will access the fabulous Income Protection Insurance available to ETU members for which Dean Mighell and now Troy Gray get a 20% commission. I wonder if Phil gets a cut of the brokerage fees.
Its a bit rich of Phil to be pontificating, when he has spent years working for a corrupt and criminal organisation. Walk through the ETU office and you'll only need one hand to count the token female staff in the organisation.
No-one's wheeling him out. Bet you didn't read the article. He's just another person seeing how the Sam Newman's and Footy Show Boys' Club-ism belong back in the 1970's with Ron Casey and World of Sport.
"This is what usually happens when you call out sexism in sport: nobody pays any attention at all.
We’re used to sporting codes being sexist: used to paltry pay packets for female athletes, used to their bodies being objectified, used to sports administrations being dominated by men. Pointing out egregious examples of the worst of sport’s sexism only sometimes raises an eyebrow.
I write about sport and gender a fair bit. Only a couple of weeks ago, I wrote about a broadcaster in Adelaide saying on air that women should never be football commentators........."
"This is what usually happens when you call out sexism in sport: nobody pays any attention at all.
We’re used to sporting codes being sexist: used to paltry pay packets for female athletes, used to their bodies being objectified, "
I wonder if she jotted her notes down for this article on the back of a "Men for all seasons" calendar.......
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
magnifisaint wrote:Yeah this has become all about Caro. She could have replied that she was in the process of buying some scuba gear. That would have shut them up.
I've seen lots of comments and opinions on this well-travelled topic,
and this comment has to be head and shoulders above them all.
Why, oh why, has nobody thought of this response.
Now, can we just lock this topic as it's well over its use-by date.
Media types are just using this topic to be relevant and get noticed on twitter. Such as Erin somebody or other.
A real Sainter will pledge allegiance to the ❤ and despise the Pies, the Blues, and the Injectors.
Remember one of the 10 Commandments : Thou shalt have no other team before thee
Linton Lodger wrote:
Are they now wheeling out Phil Cleary? With all due respect, Phil Clearly lost his sister in horrible circumstances and is probably incapable of offering an objective view in relation to such matters.
Claiming that this is an attempt to silence a female journalist sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory to me. Or a bit of propaganda perhaps?
Is Mr Clearly still doing media for the Electrical Trades Union? If so, they wouldn't happen to be on a recruiting drive for more female members at the moment by any chance? Female members that will access the fabulous Income Protection Insurance available to ETU members for which Dean Mighell and now Troy Gray get a 20% commission. I wonder if Phil gets a cut of the brokerage fees.
Its a bit rich of Phil to be pontificating, when he has spent years working for a corrupt and criminal organisation. Walk through the ETU office and you'll only need one hand to count the token female staff in the organisation.
No-one's wheeling him out. Bet you didn't read the article. He's just another person seeing how the Sam Newman's and Footy Show Boys' Club-ism belong back in the 1970's with Ron Casey and World of Sport.
"This is what usually happens when you call out sexism in sport: nobody pays any attention at all.
We’re used to sporting codes being sexist: used to paltry pay packets for female athletes, used to their bodies being objectified, used to sports administrations being dominated by men. Pointing out egregious examples of the worst of sport’s sexism only sometimes raises an eyebrow.
I write about sport and gender a fair bit. Only a couple of weeks ago, I wrote about a broadcaster in Adelaide saying on air that women should never be football commentators........."
No male with a voice as annoying as Kellie Underwood's would ever get an on-air role!
magnifisaint wrote:Yeah this has become all about Caro. She could have replied that she was in the process of buying some scuba gear. That would have shut them up.
I've seen lots of comments and opinions on this well-travelled topic,
and this comment has to be head and shoulders above them all.
Why, oh why, has nobody thought of this response.
Now, can we just lock this topic as it's well over its use-by date.
Media types are just using this topic to be relevant and get noticed on twitter. Such as Erin somebody or other.
The Fireman wrote:a media civil war that has sucked us all in.
Indeed News Ltd vs Fairfax, Channel 9 vs Chanel 7 etc etc. Unfortunately, the public go along on the pointless & trivial ride. As if there are not more important things to worry about.
I get a kick out of watching the self righteous prance around on forums trying to prove how they are above the rest in moral status. This is how the media survives. I was over it as soon as I had heard about it. but some love the storm in a tea cup...please continue all you moral campaigners.
magnifisaint wrote:Yeah this has become all about Caro. She could have replied that she was in the process of buying some scuba gear. That would have shut them up.
I've seen lots of comments and opinions on this well-travelled topic,
and this comment has to be head and shoulders above them all.
Why, oh why, has nobody thought of this response.
Now, can we just lock this topic as it's well over its use-by date.
Media types are just using this topic to be relevant and get noticed on twitter. Such as Erin somebody or other.
Now that would be banter. However, that would reduce the greater issue to a trivial joke. Dumb. It's not all about Caro, never was.
And my opinion is that St Kilda are on the rise and will continue to rise.
In regards this subject, and the references to Cleary, he has his experiences in his life and they obviously impact on his presentations.
But, my response to Cleary and the publicity he craves on the issue of "Domestic Violence", raising his head as he does and most likely because the media "cheat sheet" lists him as a "go to" source of a headline, is to send him a copy of a Family Report attended by the Family Court of Australia and challenge him in regards his assertion (consequent on the murder of his sister) that it is exclusively men who are at fault.
And send him further correspondence I have confirming the making of false allegation (for which there appears no penalty).
As do many, many others joining the "politically correct" violent men band wagon on these issues (probably because they have never been impacted).
And they do damage to men, exclusively - not to perpetrators regardless.
Domestic Violence (including on children by acts and words) is NOT a single gender issue.
In regards the Union Cleary is referred to as associated with on this site, I have a son who is a member of that Union.
Firstly, a Union is a collective of people bonded by vocation.
The same as the myriad of Employer Associations (costing consumers what?) who represent their demographic and their political interests, significantly the Liberal Party.
So why can not workers in a vocation have a collective representation?
As a contract electrician, my son moves from site to site and from employer to employer contingent on the awarding of major Contacts.
So, ultimately, on project completion, he is retrenched then finding any work ahead of finding another employer who has a major Contract.
On Union sites, there is a redundancy agreement at project completion - and higher wages including in the final stages of a project when work is 24/7 so the Contractor can claim "efficiency bonuses" for completing the works early.
Then there is the OH&S requirements, almost exclusively ignored at non-Union sites and introducing site risks.
That there are obviously some in the Union movement who are "questionable" as to intent and practice is a given, because Unions reflect society as does business including "big" business (who gave us the GFC and why?).
The Law is there to deal with perpetrators (although big business seems to escape - including Turnbull, collecting his fee for selling FAI to HIH - and HIH then collapsing).
Society is multi faceted.
What "Brexit" has shown us (including the geographical demographics of that vote in England) is that "trickle down" economics and "the economy" have not served the population well except for those resident in London, the financial capital of Europe until now, and the population have voted accordingly because they read the headlines but they see no dividend in their lives.
There are lessons to be learnt.
Employment growth being exclusively casual and part time, the consequent under employment in society, youth unemployment and flat to recessionary wages growth - aligned to who the beneficiaries of tax cuts will be.
It is not the "fall out" of "Brexit", it is the reasons for that vote that need to be addressed.
"We are best at handling the fall out"
Well, no actually because it should be "We are the ones who will learn the lessons and identify the reasons, and we will address the reasons"
So single issues such as Cleary's and "violence against women and their children" are not representative because society is wider than that.
The real danger in this matter is not Wilson.
It is "branding" and that "branding" being applied to males exclusively.
To provide a credibility to my presentations on the subject underpinning this matter, a mother has today faced a committal hearing in Melbourne in regards the murder of her 3 youngest children.
This is why this subject requires to be presented as a non gender matter.
And why the likes of Maguire and his "cronies" including the Clown Prince at the AFL giving yet another "free kick" to the "Violence against women and their children" lobby is so, so dangerous.
ANYONE giving a "free kick" to the "Violence against women and their children" lobby is dangerous because the issue is NOT gender specific.
To the top wrote:To provide a credibility to my presentations on the subject underpinning this matter, a mother has today faced a committal hearing in Melbourne in regards the murder of her 3 youngest children.
This is why this subject requires to be presented as a non gender matter.
And why the likes of Maguire and his "cronies" including the Clown Prince at the AFL giving yet another "free kick" to the "Violence against women and their children" lobby is so, so dangerous.
ANYONE giving a "free kick" to the "Violence against women and their children" lobby is dangerous because the issue is NOT gender specific.
'Violence', and 'violence against women' could be considered two different issues though couldn't they?
Same as 'abuse' and 'racial abuse'.
Both are bad, but both ultimately are abuse. But I have no issue with one being isolated as a specific issue.
I suppose it is what acts are included under "Violence" - so by extension you raise a very good point which should be clarified in regards the "Violence on women and their children" agenda.
So a child being hit by a mother (including to the head) then told not to tell the father because telling the father would see the end of the marriage would be two (associated) acts - one physical (and easily defined given identification) and the other verbal?
"but the fact that they were said and said consistently has left their mark", whilst verbal would also appear also to be environmental compromising the living environment of a child?
As a single income family, the refusal of the wage earning member to increase a Bankcard Limit to accommodate the spending requirements of the non income earning partner (for financial considerations) is presented as "violence" - albeit with "Domestic" included in the description?
I would imagine that the use of the word "Violence" predicts physical acts in the view of many.
But "violence" comes in many forms, including demeaning, bullying and (perceived) financial - and the victims are children and adults.
Children are the more important - because they are compromised.
Adults are able to respond.
So, instead of grouping all allegations (including false allegations which appear a feature of contested Family Court of Australia proceedings and where false allegation of sexual abuse of a child and the subsequent interrogations of that child would, in my view anyway, constitute an assault on the child) under "violence" we need to better identify and understand exactly what we are referring to as the crux for improvement in attitudes (and, by extension, actions and reactions)
Because for every action there is a reaction.
So you make a good point in as far as you make it - and Wilson responding that the comments made re her were "bullying" is but one example.
and despise the Pies, the Blues, and the Injectors.
