|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons.......
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 0
|
LOL, they only named this 4 months ago 
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Yes mate and how many blacks did they let in exactly? You do know they had a language test to weed out 'undesirables'. Africans have arrived in Australia in a number of different waves. Before 1976 the intake was primarily from South Africa (42% of all African-born residents in 2006) and white
and While they did not arrive in great numbers, they were sufficient to add to an underlying fear of non-whites that drove the establishment of the ‘White Australia’ policy at the time of Federation (Rivett, 1962). Africans were specifically mentioned in the debates about immigration restriction and limitations of the franchise in the first years of the Commonwealth.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Wait, are you agreeing with me or did you fail to see the sarcasm in my post?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... Hahahaha is that true.... Awesome if so... hahahah Im not sure what specific "internet designated group" I belong too I just think both sides are emotionally and intellectually retarded.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Wait, are you agreeing with me or did you fail to see the sarcasm in my post? No, I dont agree that black immigration to Australia was so rare that they would be considered equivalent to a unicorn... quite the opposite actually as stemming black immigration was one of the reasons for the White Australia Policy (amongst other undesirable groups like Asian and Southern European).
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Yes mate and how many blacks did they let in exactly? You do know they had a language test to weed out 'undesirables'. Africans have arrived in Australia in a number of different waves. Before 1976 the intake was primarily from South Africa (42% of all African-born residents in 2006) and white
and While they did not arrive in great numbers, they were sufficient to add to an underlying fear of non-whites that drove the establishment of the ‘White Australia’ policy at the time of Federation (Rivett, 1962). Africans were specifically mentioned in the debates about immigration restriction and limitations of the franchise in the first years of the Commonwealth. Yes I do know they had the dreaded language test... in fact the wording of the policy was such as that the immigration officer could "test" the visa applicant in ANY European language as Australia didnt have an "official" language per se... A Greek-Egyptian bloke at South games tells me he was submitted to such a test in the late 40s when he first arrived here straight from Alexandria.. Had flawless English so they brought in a French bloke to test him (George spoke French, Arabic, English, Greek and a smattering of Italian and German - most Greek Egyptians are highly educated) ....
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... here here, the loud minorities are a thorn in todays society period. Sic of the OTT behaviour over minor BS that they turn into mole hills. I feel for SK be she's innocent or not but I've also come to the point IDGAF anymore. Also please drop the politcs, no one wins these battles.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
mark_000au
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
We do have a women pro league in Australia Btw In Japan, every kids at a very young age got trained to have perfect first touch. First touch over and over and nothing else. I watched a documentary about Japan football they compare first touch in soccer as a basic knife skill for chefs. You can't cook if you can't cut. Many of these young Matildas don't even have basic first touch skill. Its like aussie kids skipped step 1 and go straight to step 2, 3, 4,5. There are plenty more details about Japan way. But I won't go too far cuz even the 1st step Aussie kids have failed already.
|
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 607,
Visits: 0
|
+xThe skill disparity was quite clear to see. We played our traditional strong, powerful football and they played like professional footballers. Their passing was smooth and accurate when it did not go astray, while we did some very nice things for moments then gave the ball away after any good work. It wasn't even pressure as such - we just could not pass straight a lot of the time. Still very much a developing game at this age group for us. Can we turn it round for the third place playoff against South Korea? Shame we went down 1-5. The girls were quite shattered when the score line blew out from the 1-1 we had struggled to hold so long. The 1-2 goal was a bastard - headed onto one of our defenders at close range to the keeper and an otherwise handled shot became a goal. Typical. Try and find excuses instead of just owning it. Although, being a roar supporter you're no doubt used to finding excuses.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Wait, are you agreeing with me or did you fail to see the sarcasm in my post? No, I dont agree that black immigration to Australia was so rare that they would be considered equivalent to a unicorn... quite the opposite actually as stemming black immigration was one of the reasons for the White Australia Policy (amongst other undesirable groups like Asian and Southern European). Yes but Enzo is claiming that that although there was a 'white Australia policy' there was no 'no black policy' which is clearly garbage. 'There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy.'
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... here here, the loud minorities are a thorn in todays society period. Sic of the OTT behaviour over minor BS that they turn into mole hills. I feel for SK be she's innocent or not but I've also come to the point IDGAF anymore. Also please drop the politcs, no one wins these battles. Apologies. Will drop out. Someone can start a 'Sam Kerr the racist' thread separately if they want.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 607,
Visits: 0
|
Firstly, you can only play whoever they put in front of you, but what seems to happen ,all to often , is how easily we gloss over the display or the level of the opposition with the explanation - we won so, we must be good until we get smashed and then and only then will we wake up to where we really are situated.
So easy to fool ourselves. It's laughable.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... here here, the loud minorities are a thorn in todays society period. Sic of the OTT behaviour over minor BS that they turn into mole hills. I feel for SK be she's innocent or not but I've also come to the point IDGAF anymore. Also please drop the politcs, no one wins these battles. Apologies. Will drop out. Someone can start a 'Sam Kerr the racist' thread separately if they want. accepted mate, I just see these posts carry on and on that its a sad melting pot getting no where so lets stick to football and if anything the SK incident only, we got enough politics in the game itself let alone dragging in Fed policies.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+xFirstly, you can only play whoever they put in front of you, but what seems to happen ,all to often , is how easily we gloss over the display or the level of the opposition with the explanation - we won so, we must be good until we get smashed and then and only then will we wake up to where we really are situated. So easy to fool ourselves. It's laughable. TBH this is being a aussie football supporters trait :) I agree, much of the comments of the recent AC was similar imo yet some couldn't cop it and went on with stats to cover the cracks.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+xFirstly, you can only play whoever they put in front of you, but what seems to happen ,all to often , is how easily we gloss over the display or the level of the opposition with the explanation - we won so, we must be good until we get smashed and then and only then will we wake up to where we really are situated. So easy to fool ourselves. It's laughable. welcome here from fantasy land, a place where you think no Australian supporter has been critical of the team or coaching over the last few years
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWe do have a women pro league in Australia Btw In Japan, every kids at a very young age got trained to have perfect first touch. First touch over and over and nothing else. I watched a documentary about Japan football they compare first touch in soccer as a basic knife skill for chefs. You can't cook if you can't cut. Many of these young Matildas don't even have basic first touch skill. Its like aussie kids skipped step 1 and go straight to step 2, 3, 4,5. There are plenty more details about Japan way. But I won't go too far cuz even the 1st step Aussie kids have failed already. Didnt you get the memo from the 'brains' running the sport in this country? We cant learn from the Japanese its KNVB or bust.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Wait, are you agreeing with me or did you fail to see the sarcasm in my post? No, I dont agree that black immigration to Australia was so rare that they would be considered equivalent to a unicorn... quite the opposite actually as stemming black immigration was one of the reasons for the White Australia Policy (amongst other undesirable groups like Asian and Southern European). Yes but Enzo is claiming that that although there was a 'white Australia policy' there was no 'no black policy' which is clearly garbage. 'There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy.' Hmmm tom-ato / to-mato mate...The White Australia Policy should rightly have been called Anglo/Irish and Northern European White Australia policy. It discriminated against black and brown people as freely as it did against WHITE Southern Europeans and Slav migrants and Asians of all colours. I have heard first hand tales of German migrants who (clearly of recent military age and probably with freshly removed swastika tattoos) couldn't speak a word of English being waved through immigration with a smile post WW2 while so called "allied whites" where herded into the sheds for a "purity check"....
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... here here, the loud minorities are a thorn in todays society period. Sic of the OTT behaviour over minor BS that they turn into mole hills. I feel for SK be she's innocent or not but I've also come to the point IDGAF anymore. Also please drop the politcs, no one wins these battles. Apologies. Will drop out. Someone can start a 'Sam Kerr the racist' thread separately if they want. accepted mate, I just see these posts carry on and on that its a sad melting pot getting no where so lets stick to football and if anything the SK incident only, we got enough politics in the game itself let alone dragging in Fed policies. Keep your hair on paisano.... its just a fairly tame conversation... Either she is guilty or innocent the British legal system will decide.. we are just pissing into the wind here.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... here here, the loud minorities are a thorn in todays society period. Sic of the OTT behaviour over minor BS that they turn into mole hills. I feel for SK be she's innocent or not but I've also come to the point IDGAF anymore. Also please drop the politcs, no one wins these battles. Apologies. Will drop out. Someone can start a 'Sam Kerr the racist' thread separately if they want. accepted mate, I just see these posts carry on and on that its a sad melting pot getting no where so lets stick to football and if anything the SK incident only, we got enough politics in the game itself let alone dragging in Fed policies. Keep your hair on paisano.... its just a fairly tame conversation... Either she is guilty or innocent the British legal system will decide.. we are just pissing into the wind here. haha I'm a baldy pretty much fyi - tbh its painful conversation to me :)
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. I think a jail term is ridiculous but it IS British law mate so whats good for one type of racism should also apply to another... A fine and a ban from playing for a while would make sense to me. She cant be stripped of the captaincy when she isnt the captain and as for endorsements and contracts with sponsors thats up to them I suppose, if they are happy to champion the "white is evil" cause then they wont do a thing about it. If she is found guilty Chelsea will drop her like a hot potato I predict... and she may have trouble finding another club in England ... they tend to take this sort of thing seriously over there. She's the presumptive captain of Australia when she returns. I feel like this Kerr thing is like a lightning rod for the 'good for goose, good for the gander' people to 'get one back' on the 'libtards' and 'feminazis' and they're loving every minute of it. I think the libtards and the feminazis need to simmer down and not take every single incident as some sort of social crusade. A tiny vocal shit minority on the internet is NOT reflective of society. A crime is a crime, we all live under the same laws... As for being the "presumtive captain" I dont follow closely enough but I thought Steph Catley has been captain, admirably, for quite a while. Well I think the anti-woke brigade need to calm the fuck down too. Look at how wound up they get over the most trivial of issues. Oh no Google took the egg out of the salad emoji because of vegans. It's the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It's a war on white people! Lol. Blah blah, thin end of the wedge, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb etc etc reasons....... here here, the loud minorities are a thorn in todays society period. Sic of the OTT behaviour over minor BS that they turn into mole hills. I feel for SK be she's innocent or not but I've also come to the point IDGAF anymore. Also please drop the politcs, no one wins these battles. Apologies. Will drop out. Someone can start a 'Sam Kerr the racist' thread separately if they want. accepted mate, I just see these posts carry on and on that its a sad melting pot getting no where so lets stick to football and if anything the SK incident only, we got enough politics in the game itself let alone dragging in Fed policies. Keep your hair on paisano.... its just a fairly tame conversation... Either she is guilty or innocent the British legal system will decide.. we are just pissing into the wind here. haha I'm a baldy pretty much fyi - tbh its painful conversation to me :) hahahaha you made me laugh brother.... Dont worry about being a baldy, you're more streamlined ... hahahahah
|
|
|
|
|
Roar in me Blood
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xThe skill disparity was quite clear to see. We played our traditional strong, powerful football and they played like professional footballers. Their passing was smooth and accurate when it did not go astray, while we did some very nice things for moments then gave the ball away after any good work. It wasn't even pressure as such - we just could not pass straight a lot of the time. Still very much a developing game at this age group for us. Can we turn it round for the third place playoff against South Korea? Shame we went down 1-5. The girls were quite shattered when the score line blew out from the 1-1 we had struggled to hold so long. The 1-2 goal was a bastard - headed onto one of our defenders at close range to the keeper and an otherwise handled shot became a goal. Typical. Try and find excuses instead of just owning it. Although, being a roar supporter you're no doubt used to finding excuses. He he hee. You really can be comical at times :) I thought I was being rather blunt about our lack of skill but you look to find something more to it? I know where I live rent free my friend ;)
When I wear their colours, I am the club.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. You seem pretty worked up about this. What would you like to see happen to Kerr? (a) Fine? (b) Jail? (c) Stripped of the captaincy? (d) Banned from the team? (e) all lefty wokies to admit they've created a giant monster that's come back to bite them in the arse? (f) complete destruction of western society and a ground up rebuild to occur based on conservative and right wing philosophy? (g) All of the above or (h) Slap on the wrist? (i) Dismissal of charges? Now don't be shy. Balls in your court fella. Sam Kerr should be dealt with as per the law in exactly the same manner as say if Matty Ryan called a female black police officer "a stupid black bitch". It either applies to everyone or no-one. If not then scrap the ridiculous law that allows peoples feelings being hurt over words to be the determinant of whether a crime was committed or not. Do you think we should have different applications of the law according to skin color, sex, sexual orientation, dietary preferences,?;So where do you sit on this, mate?
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. Blacks enslaved and oppressed other blacks for centuries, just as whites did to other whites. They did it because one group of blacks was more powerful than the other group of blacks, same as the Europans oppressing other Europeans (and Asians against other Asians).. The Anglos/French/Spanish/Belgian whites oppressed blacks because they were technologically inferior, and they did it with the help of other blacks! Their skin color was irrrelevant. Racism is universal. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly Asian) immigration to Australia, to help keep Australia ‘British’. ( https://www.naa.gov.au/explore-collection/immigration-and-citizenship/immigration-restriction-act-1901).When the Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, they were never treated equally as British immigrants until decades later. Dagoes. wops, wogs, greasers, chinks. They also had absolutely nothing to do with black slavery, oppression and government policy. Wasnt till 1975 and Whitlam's Racial Descrimination Act were it became illegal to: It is against the law to discriminate in areas such as: - Employment (section 15) - e.g. when seeking employment, training, promotion, equal pay or conditions of employment;
- Land, housing or accommodation (section 12) - e.g. when buying a house or when renting;
- Provision of goods and services (section 13) - e.g. when buying something, applying for credit, using banks, seeking assistance from government departments, lawyers, doctors and hospitals, or attending restaurants, pubs, entertainment venues;
- Access to places and facilities for use by the public (section 11) - e.g. when trying to use parks, libraries, government offices, hotels, places of worship, entertainment centres, hire cars;
- Advertising (section 16) - e.g. advertising for a job stating that people from a certain ethnic group cannot apply;
- Joining a trade union (section 14).
The first gen migrants in my family still raise a toast to Whitlam when they are on the piss, regardless of their political leanings. That man made them feel welcome in this country for the first time ever. Nah mate that can't be right- Whites can't suffer racism remember. Never happened..except did, a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Wait, are you agreeing with me or did you fail to see the sarcasm in my post? No, I dont agree that black immigration to Australia was so rare that they would be considered equivalent to a unicorn... quite the opposite actually as stemming black immigration was one of the reasons for the White Australia Policy (amongst other undesirable groups like Asian and Southern European). Yes but Enzo is claiming that that although there was a 'white Australia policy' there was no 'no black policy' which is clearly garbage. 'There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy.' Hmmm tom-ato / to-mato mate...The White Australia Policy should rightly have been called Anglo/Irish and Northern European White Australia policy. It discriminated against black and brown people as freely as it did against WHITE Southern Europeans and Slav migrants and Asians of all colours.I have heard first hand tales of German migrants who (clearly of recent military age and probably with freshly removed swastika tattoos) couldn't speak a word of English being waved through immigration with a smile post WW2 while so called "allied whites" where herded into the sheds for a "purity check".... Bang on correct. Today that history is being wiped out. It doesn't fit the simplistic narrative that racism is just limited to white on black..hell even the Asians are starting to be excluded as victims of racism (because they successfully assimilated) and their success doesn't fit the narrative.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Wait, are you agreeing with me or did you fail to see the sarcasm in my post? No, I dont agree that black immigration to Australia was so rare that they would be considered equivalent to a unicorn... quite the opposite actually as stemming black immigration was one of the reasons for the White Australia Policy (amongst other undesirable groups like Asian and Southern European). Yes but Enzo is claiming that that although there was a 'white Australia policy' there was no 'no black policy' which is clearly garbage. 'There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy.' +x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I think the point here is that is it racist or offensive to be called “white”? For me personally I’m not offended, but you may be. I would argue that the majority of white people would not be offended or consider it racist to be called “white”. It has no history or connections with anything derogatory or offensive apart from being more easily sunburnt, a movie about not being able to jump, not being good at dancing, or having a smaller… She didn't simply say "white". "Stupid white bastard" is the allegation. As for the history or connections of being white, "white" does not equal Anglo Celtic. White Europeans are diverse historically, culturally, linguistically, genetically. Some were oppressors. Others were oppressed. Some conquered, others were conquered. Some kept slaves, others were enslaved. Some murdered millions, others were murdered. The idea that whites can't be victims of racism is one if, not the, stupidist things I've heard. Those oppressed or murdered was not only because they were white, it was because generally they were done by other white people. These were done because of their religion or their race or different ideologies, not because of the colour of their skin. The Blacks were oppressed because they were black. HUGE Difference. During Australia 'No Black immigration policy', when British, Greeks, Italians, Chinese, Lebanese flooded this country, no blacks were allowed. Blacks were not allowed to vote, to swim in the same swimming pools, go to the same bars as white people. In America another country with huge immigration, they had segregation in Schools, universities, toilets, public transport because of the colour of their skin. There never has been a No Black Immigration Policy. There was The White Australia Policy. In actual fact the aim of the law was to limit non-white (particularly This is laughable. I mean it's easily 'proven' by the fact of our giant African intake post WW1 and post WW2. Just because something isn't written down doesn't mean it didn't exist. Of course there was no 'no black policy' because the whole idea of letting 'blacks' in was so ridiculous there was no point having a policy for it. Having a 'no black policy' was equivalent to having a 'no unicorn policy'. ummm what? Dude one of the ifrst national acts post federation was the Immigration Restriction act brought about to align us with South Africa and other British colonial practices at the time... https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/projects/african-australians-project-australias-migration-policies#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20African%20diaspora,British%20(Pybus%2C%202006). Yes mate and how many blacks did they let in exactly? You do know they had a language test to weed out 'undesirables'. Africans have arrived in Australia in a number of different waves. Before 1976 the intake was primarily from South Africa (42% of all African-born residents in 2006) and white
and While they did not arrive in great numbers, they were sufficient to add to an underlying fear of non-whites that drove the establishment of the ‘White Australia’ policy at the time of Federation (Rivett, 1962). Africans were specifically mentioned in the debates about immigration restriction and limitations of the franchise in the first years of the Commonwealth. Your own quote says they did not arrive in great numbers. The main objective of the White Australia Policy was to limit Asian immigration-of whom there were far more, were closer geographically in the context of recently having fought a war against Japanese invasion but also to secure the Britishness of the nation. The policy was designed to exclude anyone who was not white and British, especially Asians. Of course that included Africans, but it equally also meant Southern and central white Europeans. This despite there not being a "No Southern and Central European policy just as much as there wasn't a "No Black Policy" either.
|
|
|
|
|
dirk vanadidas
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Why did Kerr refuse to pay £200 to the Uber driver to clear up her vomit when she is apparently a sporting millionaire
Europe is funding the war not Chelsea football club
|
|
|
|
|
Hillbilly55
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 503,
Visits: 0
|
According to the Football Australia story, the Matildas game next month against Mexico is only going to be on Paramount. Not on TEN!!!!!
It is on at 10.00am AEST Wednesday 10th April
What a wasted opportunity!
|
|
|
|
|
mark_000au
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWhy did Kerr refuse to pay £200 to the Uber driver to clear up her vomit when she is apparently a sporting millionaire She is drunk. You can do unusual things when you're drunk.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Matildas Olympics draw at 6am tomorrow (AEDT)
PotsWomen's tournamentPot 1
France
Spain
USA
Pot 2
Germany
Japan
Canada
Pot 3
Brazil
Australia
Colombia
Pot 4
New Zealand
CAF 1
CAF 2
|
|
|
|