Gordon Elliott photograph

Stateofyou

partyguinness wrote: »

No I agree sitting on a dead horse is wrong. Perhaps my deep cynicism was not clear.

I grew up in the countryside and while I am not from a farming background it was a farming community and with a sprinkling of horses. "We" definitely have a more 'pragmatic' attitude toward animals than the city folk. If you spend your life rearing animals for profit then you view animals as a commodity- that is what they are and that is how they end up in supermarket shelves.

Horses are also commodities- horse breading and racing is all about profit and making money. Big money. So to that end I am struggling to see the outrage between this and slaughtering animals and eating them.

I know fishermen and they purposely go on seal killing expeditions off the west coast...why? because seals compete for fish with fishermen. That is straight from the fishermans mouth...bet that will shock some people. In fact I bet some posters will accuse me of making up such a horror story.

Yes he was absolutely wrong but I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones- when we are sitting down to a meat dinner..are we really any better? Was the picture a bit too real for some people's tastes?

So vegetarians can have an opinion then?

Honestly though, I see your point. The pig slaughter trade has largely been revealed to be utterly cruel and inhumane to the animals, and they're by far not the only ones. They go to great lengths to conceal what really goes on. Yet how many people here critical of the horse photo eat pork and other animal products and look the other way?
It's an interesting argument.

joseywhales

Silly Gilly wrote: »

Anyway poor Gordy got too big for his boots and forgot that without horses like Morgan he would likely be working as a panel beater in some garage as his father and lots of his family did.

Horses have afforded him the opportunity for fame, success and riches beyond his wildest imagination. He should be down on bended knees thanking them not using them as props for juvenile jokes.

His industry will likely crucify him tomorrow and he has no-one to blame but himself. Thems the breaks, Gordo!

This is my issue with those that are out for GE's blood.

From your post its clear that you are motivated by envy.
You comment on his family background as if it is derogatory to describe someone as a panel beater.
So you feel panel beaters are low status then.
You talk about his fame, success and riches as if he is one with massive ego and has status above his station.
This all just reflects on the giant chip on your shoulder and your feelings of inadequacy.

You even mentioned mensa in a previous post to deride GE's defenders, not only does such a tactic highlight your lack of confidence in engaging your opponents in debate but its also downright laughable that you would imagine that mensa is a reference point for intellectual authority.

What Gordon Elliot did was wrong but it would register as small the spectrum of negligent,incompetent or purposeful mistakes that the average person makes.

And I'm pretty indifferent about what happens to him, same as anyone else.

I just don't like when people use the mistakes of others to exorcise their own issues in life.

dickdasr1234

walshb wrote: »

You could hardly call it normal run of the mill behavior from Elliot, now

Unless we just want to erode the remaining standards we have in society?

I have never attempted to defend his inexplicable behaviour. I merely stated that no animal came to harm as a consequence.

The image of racing and animal welfare is a different matter.

I do feel that the incident is typical of the dark humour often employed by immature macho males when faced with situations where they are emotionally ill-equipped. I thought the awkward, immature embarrassment of the lads in the Rob James video perfectly illustrated such inadequacies.

I have worked in the child welfare field so please don't bring up the 'standards' we have in society.

We respond briefly to images of abused, drowned or starving children and move swiftly on.

The response to this image has been utterly out of proportion and the extrapolations nothing but brainless, ignorant bollocks!

Thelonious Monk

https://twitter.com/ethicalfarmIE/status/1367532290797142019

Where's the outrage over this?
I understand the horse pic is not a good look for the industry but I mean most people eat meat ffs.

walshb

dickdasr1234 wrote: »

I have never attempted to defend his inexplicable behaviour. I merely stated that no animal came to harm as a consequence.

The image of racing and animal welfare is a different matter.

I do feel that the incident is typical of the dark humour often employed by immature macho males when faced with situations where they are emotionally ill-equipped. I thought the awkward, immature embarrassment of the lads in the Rob James video perfectly illustrated such inadequacies.

I have worked in the child welfare field so please don't bring up the 'standards' we have in society.

We respond briefly to images of abused, drowned or starving children and move swiftly on.

The response to this image has been utterly out of proportion and the extrapolations nothing but brainless, ignorant bollocks!

I agree that it has been blown way out of proportion.

Silly Gilly

joseywhales wrote: »

This is my issue with those that are out for GE's blood.

From your post its clear that you are motivated by envy.
You comment on his family background as if it is derogatory to describe someone as a panel beater.
So you feel panel beaters are low status then.
You talk about his fame, success and riches as if he is one with massive ego and has status above his station.
This all just reflects on the giant chip on your shoulder and your feelings of inadequacy.

You even mentioned mensa in a previous post to deride GE's defenders, not only does such a tactic highlight your lack of confidence in engaging your opponents in debate but its also downright laughable that you would imagine that mensa is a reference point for intellectual authority.

What Gordon Elliot did was wrong but it would register as small the spectrum of negligent,incompetent or purposeful mistakes that the average person makes.

And I'm pretty indifferent about what happens to him, same as anyone else.

I just don't like when people use the mistakes of others to exorcise their own issues in life.

You have so spectacularly missed my point that I can only assume you are a regular customer of Paddy Power or Ladbrokes. Would you partake of an acca of a weekend?

I certainly am not running down Mr Elliott's family or their fine and noble profession. In fact you never saw a photo of Mr Elliott's father straddling one of his customer's cars.

zerosugarbuzz

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ethicalfarmIE/status/1367532290797142019

Where's the outrage over this?
I understand the horse pic is not a good look for the industry but I mean most people eat meat ffs.

All cruelty is inexcusable, one example does not negate the other.

dickdasr1234

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

All cruelty is inexcusable, one example does not negate the other.

Sitting on a dead horse is cruel? Time I found another way to pass the time.

I just watched 'The Mauritanian' and all I can say is f@ck you idiots and the horses you rode in on!

joe40

walshb wrote: »

You could hardly call it normal run of the mill behavior from Elliot, now

Unless we just want to erode the remaining standards we have in society?

"Standards in society" are probably better now than at any time in the past.

The picture was not cruelty or inhumane.
It was callous and disrespectful. He deserves some calling out but his business should not be ruined.

The racing industry will have the final say there, not the general public.

His main crime is sheer stupidity, fuelled by arrogance. Did he either think: A the picture would not become public or B, people would not care.

fryup

joe40 wrote: »

His main crime is sheer stupidity, fuelled by arrogance. Did he either think: A the picture would not become public or B, people would not care.

that's what i can't get my head around either,

unless the person who took the pic had a falling out with GE - which has been alluded to online

partyguinness

joseywhales wrote: »

This is my issue with those that are out for GE's blood.

From your post its clear that you are motivated by envy.
You comment on his family background as if it is derogatory to describe someone as a panel beater.
So you feel panel beaters are low status then.
You talk about his fame, success and riches as if he is one with massive ego and has status above his station.
This all just reflects on the giant chip on your shoulder and your feelings of inadequacy.

You even mentioned mensa in a previous post to deride GE's defenders, not only does such a tactic highlight your lack of confidence in engaging your opponents in debate but its also downright laughable that you would imagine that mensa is a reference point for intellectual authority.

What Gordon Elliot did was wrong but it would register as small the spectrum of negligent,incompetent or purposeful mistakes that the average person makes.

And I'm pretty indifferent about what happens to him, same as anyone else.

I just don't like when people use the mistakes of others to exorcise their own issues in life.

Indeed that post by Gilly was very telling- the lad from a panel beating background (the horror) breaking into the horse industry. Little upstart should know his place and get back to where he came from.

Nothing like a bit of old fashion Irish begrudgery.

partyguinness

Silly Gilly wrote: »

I certainly am not running down Mr Elliott's family or their fine and noble profession. In fact you never saw a photo of Mr Elliott's father straddling one of his customer's cars.

Yes, yes you are- that is exactly what you are doing. Why else would you bring it up his family business/background?

It is a thinly veiled sneer at the little upstart getting his just desserts (totally self inflicted I hasten to add).

A good old fashioned dollop of small time Parish pump begrudgery. Your posts make you look small and petty.

tipptom

partyguinness wrote: »

Yes, yes you are- that is exactly what you are doing. Why else would you bring it up his family business/background?

It is a thinly veiled sneer at the little upstart getting his just desserts (totally self inflicted I hasten to add).

A good old fashioned dollop of small time Parish pump begrudgery. Your posts make you look small and petty.

And bringing his father in to it like a child

Mind you,our local vegan feminist is on another forum defending.......Sheikh Mohaamed,that should go down well with the sisters.

Abduction,drugging,kidnapping,imrisonment,intimadation,murder,human rights,animal rights v some idiot sitting on a dead horse,Gilly hitches her wagon to the sheikh but the i suppose the shekh is not as low as a panel beater or them horrible low intelligence people who bet on the other site that you denigrated on this forum Gilly eh?


This is why no one should appease these irrational headbangers,they will do anything for their warped cause to ban everything and they will kill animals to get publicity and defend people like the Sheikh to further their cause and have utter contempt for working class people who finance their lifestyle.

Wasters

Stateofyou

partyguinness wrote: »

Yes, yes you are- that is exactly what you are doing. Why else would you bring it up his family business/background?

It is a thinly veiled sneer at the little upstart getting his just desserts (totally self inflicted I hasten to add).

A good old fashioned dollop of small time Parish pump begrudgery. Your posts make you look small and petty.

Eh, for one you don't know that poster yet you are presuming pretty hard to know what they think and what their intentions are. I think you read way too far into that post and projected your own bad intentions.

I didn't take it as Irish begrudgery at all (for once, ha).

I had similar thoughts myself. Along the lines of when people "make it" and become big and then forget the "little people" who helped them along the way, or are dismissive of their role in helping them to get where they are in life. Many of us know someone like that, who doesn't appreciate what they have and why they have it. An awful lot of people fall under that umbrella. And in that moment, Gordon Elliott was at least certainly disrespectful of what that horse provided.

partyguinness

Stateofyou wrote: »

Eh, for one you don't know that poster yet you are presuming pretty hard to know what they think and what their intentions are. I think you read way too far into that post and projected your own bad intentions.

.

Why else would that poster specifically bring up his family background and family business? I have not seen anyone else mention it...because it is of no relevance except to those who want to engage in petty sneers.

Like everyone else here we take the comments as we see them. I do not need to know the poster- if that is a consideration then we may as well shut down the entire site.

It is crystal clear why the poster brought that up....it was an obnoxious petty sneer.

Stateofyou

partyguinness wrote: »

Why else would that poster specifically bring up his family background and family business? I have not seen anyone else mention it...because it is of no relevance except to those who want to engage in petty sneers.

Like everyone else here we take the comments as we see them. I do not need to know the poster- if that is a consideration then we may as well shut down the entire site.

It is crystal clear why the poster brought that up....it was an obnoxious petty sneer.

I don't know, so I can't presume anything.

My impression however, was to illustrate how far he's come and so it follows how appreciative and respectful he should be for what got him there.

Seems obvious to me anyway. You seem to want to find the worst in a poster, once again resorting to personal insults. Says more about you than them really.

Silly Gilly

tipptom wrote: »

And bringing his father in to it like a child

Mind you,our local vegan feminist is on another forum defending.......Sheikh Mohaamed,that should go down well with the sisters.

Abduction,drugging,kidnapping,imrisonment,intimadation,murder,human rights,animal rights v some idiot sitting on a dead horse,Gilly hitches her wagon to the sheikh but the i suppose the shekh is not as low as a panel beater or them horrible low intelligence people who bet on the other site that you denigrated on this forum Gilly eh?


This is why no one should appease these irrational headbangers,they will do anything for their warped cause to ban everything and they will kill animals to get publicity and defend people like the Sheikh to further their cause and have utter contempt for working class people who finance their lifestyle.

Wasters

I'll explain it to you again, Thomas, as you seem a little slow on the uptake. I did not defend Sheikh Mohammed. I merely highlighted that it was easier for the awful racing industry to ignore his alleged misdemeanors in comparison to Elliott who was on the front of national newspapers sitting on a dead horse.

Your xenophobic assertion that the BHA is out to get Elliott because he is Irish is, frankly, ludicrous.

Have you any more pejorative terms that you would like to direct at me?

partyguinness wrote: »

Why else would that poster specifically bring up his family background and family business? I have not seen anyone else mention it...because it is of no relevance except to those who want to engage in petty sneers.

Like everyone else here we take the comments as we see them. I do not need to know the poster- if that is a consideration then we may as well shut down the entire site.

It is crystal clear why the poster brought that up....it was an obnoxious petty sneer.

I'll try to make it clear though I suspect you are willfully missing my point. I am not sneering at Elliott's family or the panel beating profession.

I merely stated the fact that if it were not for horses like the one Gordon Elliott used as a prop for a joke, that he would likely be an unknown panel beater. Not that there is anything wrong with that. It is just he would not have the lavish lifestyle that he currently has (had).

If anything Elliott was sneering at the horse and that, to me, reveals his character and lack of self-awareness.

ThewhiteJesus

Elliot has a horse running today called burn the evidence, talk about timing !

partyguinness

Stateofyou wrote: »

Seems obvious to me anyway. You seem to want to find the worst in a poster, once again resorting to personal insults. Says more about you than them really.

I regard the post as an obnoxious petty sneer. That is why they brought up the panel beating background. I don't regard that as a personal insult- how could it be? I don't know them personally


Anyway, I am sure the poster can explain themselves without the need for you to defend the post when you say yourself you don't know.

partyguinness

Silly Gilly wrote: »

I'll try to make it clear though I suspect you are willfully missing my point. I am not sneering at Elliott's family or the panel beating profession.

I merely stated the fact that if it were not for horses like the one Gordon Elliott used as a prop for a joke, that he would likely be an unknown panel beater. Not that there is anything wrong with that. It is just he would not have the lavish lifestyle that he currently has (had).

If anything Elliott was sneering at the horse and that, to me, reveals his character and lack of self-awareness.

"Willfully missing [your] point" seems to be your stock lazy reply when faced with criticism.

Every other poster has been perfectly capable of voicing their opinions on his conduct all week without any referenecs to his upbringing etc.

You were perfectly capable of saying that horses have made him very wealthy and successfull and left it at that but no, you took it a step further by expressly referencing his background purely to sneer.

Little upstart from a panel beating background should remember where he came from - that was your point and trying to dress it up as something else is utterly disingenuous.

"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."

Silly Gilly

partyguinness wrote: »

"Willfully missing [your] point" seems to be your stock lazy reply when faced with criticism.

Every other poster has been perfectly capable of voicing their opinions on his conduct all week without any referenecs to his upbringing etc.

You were perfectly capable of saying that horses have made him very wealthy and successfull and left it at that but no, you took it a step further by expressly referencing his background purely to sneer.

Little upstart from a panel beating background should remember where he came from - that was your point and trying to dress it up as something else is utterly disingenuous.

"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."

It doesn't seem like I am going to convince you of my intentions so I am not going to bother trying any more. You are not really that important to me.

I'm certainly not going to piss on you. Is that what you are into? Another racing fan?

joseywhales

Stateofyou wrote: »

I don't know, so I can't presume anything.

My impression however, was to illustrate how far he's come and so it follows how appreciative and respectful he should be for what got him there.

Seems obvious to me anyway. You seem to want to find the worst in a poster, once again resorting to personal insults. Says more about you than them really.

Apparently partyguinness is willfully ignorant, tipptom is slow on the uptake and I love an acca(whatever that is). Defenders of gordon elliot in general are not members of mensa and apparently "poor old gordy got too big for his boots"

If the poster wanted to say "elliot should show more respect to the animals he has relied upon throughout his successful career" I'm sure every poster in the thread would have agreed. Instead we have someone seemingly consumed by status and trying to disparage someone I assume they have never met to prop up their own fragile ego.

I mean if the poster feels aggrieved with what life has dealt them in comparison to the lowly panel beater elliot, then with their superior intelligence, they can use their talents, start a business and become financially independent. Ironically it's what elliot did. Then we will be in no doubt about their smarts, it will be proven in a competitive market and we won't have to listen to them exorcise their doubts and fears by insulting strangers on the internet.

partyguinness

Silly Gilly wrote: »

It doesn't seem like I am going to convince you of my intentions so I am not going to bother trying any more. You are not really that important to me.

I'm certainly not going to piss on you. Is that what you are into? Another racing fan?

Oh no... I am not that important to you...ho..ho..how...how could you be so cruel.

As a random anonymous poster on a public internet forum, I thought I meant the world to you. But I see I am some bit important but not “that” important. Better than nothing I suppose- I’ll take it.

With regard to pissing on me, you might do well to differentiate between a literal and figurative turn of phrase.


ps. I have zero interest in racing. Never heard of the guy up to a few days ago.

Gaoth Laidir

It's a complete overreaction to this photo.

Yes, it's an unfortunate snapshot in time but it is not indicative of his treatment of horses. I've heard others talk of similar situations on farms in which they'd be up all night trying to save a cow, but without success. At the end, they may sit on the animal, exhausted. It's doesn't mean cruelty. They'd been up all night trying to save it, ffs. It's one frame in time which doesn't represent the other 99.999% of the time in which they cared for the animal.

It's the same here. Has his outfit ever been suspected of maltreating horses in the past? From what I hear he is as careful as any other trainer about the animals in his care. When the fight has been lost and the animal has died then, as I outlined above, that doesn't mean you suddenly become a barbaric human.

I'm sure I'll get a bashing for this post, but mark my words, with time it will be revealed that this practice is common amongst many, including some of the trainers that are "outraged" by his actions, I'm sure.

tipptom

Silly Gilly wrote: »

I'll explain it to you again, Thomas, as you seem a little slow on the uptake. I did not defend Sheikh Mohammed. I merely highlighted that it was easier for the awful racing industry to ignore his alleged misdemeanors in comparison to Elliott who was on the front of national newspapers sitting on a dead horse.

Your xenophobic assertion that the BHA is out to get Elliott because he is Irish is, frankly, ludicrous.

Have you any more pejorative terms that you would like to direct at me?



I'll try to make it clear though I suspect you are willfully missing my point. I am not sneering at Elliott's family or the panel beating profession.

I merely stated the fact that if it were not for horses like the one Gordon Elliott used as a prop for a joke, that he would likely be an unknown panel beater. Not that there is anything wrong with that. It is just he would not have the lavish lifestyle that he currently has (had).

If anything Elliott was sneering at the horse and that, to me, reveals his character and lack of self-awareness.

That is purely made up lies because you are embarresed that people are calling you out for what you are

Now you go and show where in my posts i said that."the BHA was out to get Gordon Elliot BECAUSE HE WAS IRISH"?

wicklowstevo

Silly Gilly wrote: »

It is just he would not have the lavish lifestyle that he currently has (had).

If anything Elliott was sneering at the horse and that, to me, reveals his character and lack of self-awareness.

Lavish lifestyle ? I fear your understanding of the racing industry and people who work with horses for a living is lacking

GE is not jp mccamaus or some arab sheik

racing is a 24 7 commitment with very breaks or holidays

yes there is a lot of money involved but also a lot of work and its not a 9 to 5 job

wicklowstevo

ceegee wrote: »

Alleged fight was between the 2 women.

you picked a very public forum to commit slander

Stateofyou

partyguinness wrote: »

I regard the post as an obnoxious petty sneer. That is why they brought up the panel beating background. I don't regard that as a personal insult- how could it be? I don't know them personally


Anyway, I am sure the poster can explain themselves without the need for you to defend the post when you say yourself you don't know.

And you're not aggressively defending someone you don't even know? I'm sure Gordon Elliott can explain himself also.

Stateofyou

joseywhales wrote: »

Apparently partyguinness is willfully ignorant, tipptom is slow on the uptake and I love an acca(whatever that is). Defenders of gordon elliot in general are not members of mensa and apparently "poor old gordy got too big for his boots"

If the poster wanted to say "elliot should show more respect to the animals he has relied upon throughout his successful career" I'm sure every poster in the thread would have agreed. Instead we have someone seemingly consumed by status and trying to disparage someone I assume they have never met to prop up their own fragile ego.

I mean if the poster feels aggrieved with what life has dealt them in comparison to the lowly panel beater elliot, then with their superior intelligence, they can use their talents, start a business and become financially independent. Ironically it's what elliot did. Then we will be in no doubt about their smarts, it will be proven in a competitive market and we won't have to listen to them exorcise their doubts and fears by insulting strangers on the internet.

What? How on earth do you know they didn't?
This is just getting ridiculous now.

partyguinness

Stateofyou wrote: »

And you're not aggressively defending someone you don't even know? I'm sure Gordon Elliott can explain himself also.

I am not defending the guy at all. I have never at stage defended him. As I have written already, there is nothing to defend.

My posts concern the faux outrage and downright double standards from the chattering classes. Don't confuse that as a defence.