News of the day

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67283593

Quote:

---

"If this phrase is used again by a football participant, we will seek police guidance on how we should treat it and respond," an FA statement said.

---

Now, hang on a second here. Outlawing 'support' for Hamas is one thing, probably a bad thing on balance in a free society, but isn't that getting a bit sinister?

On an unrelated but related note, I also find it quite saddening the sheer number of programmes that need to carry the 'discriminatory language' warning these days. Saw 'Anita and Me' get pinged with it on BBC2 last night, after the same day reading about how Little Britain has to be absolutely plastered with the same warnings, although perhaps more fairly. Isn't it a bit of an indictment on our society that we now need to caveat a film which addresses the issue of racial intolerance as a central theme as needing to have a 'warning: discriminatory language' caveat? I mean, who is watching that and getting upset about the language? Isn't that the whole fucking point? Are we now fully into the realm of context-free words?

Brother save yourself the struggle and don't try and view any of this matter with an analytical mind. Just sit back and enjoy the vibes.

Quote:

---

The phrase is often interpreted as supportive of Palestinian nationalism.

---

Whereas Israeli nationalism (Zionism) is just fine.

Sport, particularly football, in this country really has got itself into an absolute mess by welcoming, even encouraging, political stances into the game. When you do that it's hard to then turn around and say "well, you can't talk about those political stances".

Where do you stop? Should we have kept on playing against apartheid South Africa? Sport is politics and politics is sport.

I think a large part of it is people being more annoyed by hypocrisy than they should be. Hypocrisy is the natural result of everyone coming from a different place. English hypocrites are upset by Palestine flags but not by poppies. Arab hypocrites are upset by rainbow flags but not by Palestine flags. American hypocrites are upset by black slavery but not by other types of slavery. These things are all inevitable within the diversity of humankind.

Big up Anwar El Ghazi. Hamza could learn a thing or two, the fucking chinless softy.

The sporting boycotts of apartheid South Africa were based on them refusing to de-politicise sporting contests by selecting teams etc. on racial grounds. It was us inisisting on keeping politics out of sport, not because we thought that they were meanies. We happily kept competing against shithouse communist countries because they at least pretended to keep politics out of their sports, which South Africa never did.

Our teams are named after 'England', a political entity. It's all politics.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67288289

What an absolute loon.

Most sports clubs were founded on some sort of societal/political basis. To say that we are now "welcoming" politics into sports sounds a bit out of place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adramelch

Most sports clubs were founded on some sort of societal/political basis. To say that we are now "welcoming" politics into sports sounds a bit out of place.

---

Well I can't speak for 100+ years ago, but certainly sport has become more political (if that's the right way to phrase it) in the last 10 years vs. the previous 20.

Jury nullification is an interesting topic, and one XR are probably quite keen to get out in the mainstream.

It's been raised as a possibility in the upcoming trial of David McBride in Australia by his supporters, and should probably be contemplated in that case by most sane jurors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yevrah

Well I can't speak for 100+ years ago, but certainly sport has become more political (if that's the right way to phrase it) in the last 10 years vs. the previous 20.

---

Narcissism. People can't accept or even begin to conceive that their personal opinions and interests - especially when it comes to identity issues like race, sexuality, etc. - aren't the most important and interesting thing in the world, so everything, and even better if they are traditionally non-political spheres, has to be co-opted into it.

No it’s not Yevrahs just aged and turned into a Boomer.

Yeah, everything is exactly the same as it was 20 years ago Yev, you twat.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67264703

Imagine if this was Russia.

The main issue with politics in sports is that sports are full of retards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67264703

Imagine if this was Russia.

---

You'd applaud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonics

No it’s not Yevrahs just aged and turned into a Boomer.

---

That lazy explanation could be used to justify absolutely anything that isn't the same as it once was though. Some of the things I observe will absolutely be down to me getting older, but it can't be everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pepe

The main issue with politics in sports is that sports are full of retards.

---

Yep. They're already into tribalism so what's one more tribe to back?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewis

Narcissism. People can't accept or even begin to conceive that their personal opinions and interests - especially when it comes to identity issues like race, sexuality, etc. - aren't the most important and interesting thing in the world, so everything, and even better if they are traditionally non-political spheres, has to be co-opted into it.

---

And you see Phonics, whether you agree with Lewis' take on why or not, there's a million more times effort and thought gone into it than "lol, boomer".

Anyway, is our sort of stance on this domestically that overt support for Palestine is ok, but overt support for Hamas is not ok, or that both just are not ok?

Bombing a Refugee Camp claiming it that it was because a Hamas general there and you killed him so it's fine is bad. Bombing it two more times afterwards is just showing off.

Your public diplomacy minister going to parliament and saying "Erase all of Gaza from the face of the earth. That the Gazan monsters will fly to the southern fence & try to enter Egyptian territory or they will die & their death will be evil. Gaza should be erased!" while the Western commentariat try to get people sacked for chants that rhyme is a look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonics

Bombing a Refugee Camp claiming it that it was because a Hamas general there and you killed him so it's fine is bad. Bombing it two more times afterwards is just showing off.

Your public diplomacy minister going to parliament and saying "Erase all of Gaza from the face of the earth. That the Gazan monsters will fly to the southern fence & try to enter Egyptian territory or they will die & their death will be evil. Gaza should be erased!" while the Western commentariat try to get people sacked for chants that rhyme is a look.

---

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F9jte3PX...jpg&name=large

I don't even think they're showing off, they just don't consider the civilians civilians.

Quote:

---

M&S has apologised after being accused of posting an Instagram photo of Christmas party hats in the colours of the Palestinian flag on fire.

---

And that's numberwang.

I keep thinking we've achieved peak ridiculousness but it somehow keeps going.

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/11...8889949045.jpg

lol.

It was shot in August too, so before the conflict even started.

You can imagine the scenes in their boardroom.

"We have to what?"

"Apologise for something that's a complete coincidence that you have to look for to see, but has nonetheless upset the mob"

"Fucking really?"

"Yes, really. Just do it"

Gammon, gammon, gammon here. But, doesn’t the Palestinian have black in it. They haven’t burnt a black hat have they?

Why are they not just telling the people who are complaining that it’s got absolutely nothing to do with what’s happening over there and saying if they don’t like it fuck off.

They're on a black grate, which in itself is a reference to slavery when black people would make fires to keep white people's feet warm - and rightly so, might I add. Pass the mustard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luke Emia

Why are they not just telling the people who are complaining that it’s got absolutely nothing to do with what’s happening over there and saying if they don’t like it fuck off.

---

Because we've allowed a society to develop where people and businesses are absolutely terrified at pissing the online hate mob off, whether it's justified to do so or otherwise. With stuff like this the path of least resistance is to apologise, so that's what happens.

I'm sure the 18 year olds currently boycotting them were regulars. They're really going to feel the pinch now.

It would take just one or two companies of a decent size to say “don’t be so ridiculous “ in response to this sort of stuff and there’d be enough of a precedent for that to be the standard response from then on in. Until one is actually brave enough to do that though, which I don’t see happening any time soon, we’re stuck with this.

They probably don't want the rubber dinghy rapids mob throwing scrap metal through their HQ windows.

I'm confused, is the offending image pro-Palestine, with the commentary being Palestine is on fire due to what is going on, or anti-Palestine, with the commentary being the symbolic burning of the Palestinian flag?

I would have leaned towards the former, but talk of hysterical boycotting makes me think this isn't a Stamford Hill driven thing.

Absolutely insane.

Their Christmas advert is a woman, some brown people, a mixed-race gay couple, and another woman. You would have thought that would have been sufficient tribute, but no. Maybe re-film it in Gaza.

Utterly ridiculous.

And M & S feel obliged to apologise, lest they end up like Maccies, with mice being lobbed into stores painted in the colours of Palestine. Who genuinely thought that was a solid idea?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewis

Their Christmas advert is a woman, some brown people, a mixed-race gay couple, and another woman. You would have thought that would have been sufficient tribute, but no. Maybe re-film it in Gaza.

---

This stuff really has run absolutely mad.

South Park did what I'd heard was a good take on similar stuff recently, but sadly I only laughed once so that can be consigned to the bin of inappropriate response to stem this insanity. Two of my friends are non-white (which if you're only looking at people I go out of my way to bother seeing and are not family, accounts for about 20% of my go to social circle these days, so I'm doing ok against a 73.5% white population of England, 82% UK) and they both think it's absolutely ludicrous and more than ever so slightly patronising, which leaves me wondering who is actually pushing this now?

I also wonder if ad execs/businesses have to force themselves to count the diversity because if they didn't they'd just hire white people in an inherent admission that they're just a bit racist. Either way, I'm minded of Morgan Freeman's take on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeixtYS-P3s

It's because they're always chasing younger customers and want to align with their values. Same reason Radio 2 decided they had to fire all their much loved DJs and replace them with worse but 'representative' ones, because execs live in constant fear of the audience average age going up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd

It's because they're always chasing younger customers and want to align with their values. Same reason Radio 2 decided they had to fire all their much loved DJs and replace them with worse but 'representative' ones, because execs live in constant fear of the audience average age going up.

---

Which makes sense, but are young people stupid enough these days to think that just because they see an advert with a bukkake of diversity in it that the company involved is actually prioritising that from a 'right thing to do' standpoint rather than just doing so because they think it'll maximise shareholder wealth? If so, God help their future.

Look at this poor fucker in the LIDL ad. He only came round to get his Yodel parcel.

Toggle Spoiler

https://gcdnb.pbrd.co/images/lagEYIZg8NHW.png?o=1

It's because 1) brown people are less likely to engage with things that they aren't 'represented' in (which is also why you get these weird groups devoted to things like hiking whilst black, as if anybody is stopping them); and 2) middle class white women associate brown people with positive values etc., which are more likely to inform their choices. White men and normal people will just shop wherever so there is no need to speak to them.

That 'Boss Your Bathroom' advert has a mixed-race lesbian couple in it, and their daughter somehow looks like both of them. That or it's just the white woman's kid and its black dad did a statistically-likely runner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewis

1) brown people are less likely to engage with things that they aren't 'represented' in

---

Got evidence on that one? I would have thought that except for a few lunatics too invested in this shit, no one gives a fuck.

Seems I forgot to put 'FACT' after that one. My mistake.

I just wanted to know if someone had actually measured it, for the morning lols.

Meanwhile, we have been invited to the event "Addressing the Unrelenting Anti-Blackness of XXXX University" this Friday. Looking forward to the reasonable, even-handed, discussion.

How has the unrelenting manifested itself?