Thierry Henry quits social media until companies act on racism and bullying

Eric Cartman

The people contacting employers about posts are by far the lowest of the low, its their favourite weapon because theyre usually unemployed or in academia where the same hurt cant be bestowed on them for their sins

McGinniesta

Good riddance to bad rubbush.

McGinniesta

Your Face wrote: »

So brave and virtuous - wasnt he was sponsored by Nike, of child-labour infamy?

Some people have opinions for money.

The same way that some people publish their opinions to deadlines in national media

alchemist33

nolivesmatter wrote: »

The definition of murder is pretty much constant and unanimously understood.
The definition of racism seems to be endlessly expanding and is often subjective. Most accusations of racism I see these days are bull****.

And many racism allegations are clearly racism. Why is it so difficult for some people to accept this should be challenged?

extra gravy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yawn... You and Cartman seem very hard done by.

You could guess before opening the thread which posters would try to make light of actual racism and instead make it about themselves. Yawn indeed.

Mad_maxx

BanditLuke wrote: »

No loss. An incredibly boring and uncharismatic person.

incredibly smug man too

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The people contacting employers about posts are by far the lowest of the low, its their favourite weapon because theyre usually unemployed or in academia where the same hurt cant be bestowed on them for their sins

Know of hackers who do a lot worse, all employed some self employed, none in academia.
Funny how some start crying when people point out the fact that they are an arsehole and it comes back to bite them.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The odds of you or me having racial abuse because we're white is incredibly low. Also it's unlikely to hold you back in any way. So ya, I would say your claims of an anti white agenda is up there with the anti male agenda. You're uncomfortable with what should be unacceptable behaviour being finally called out. So yep, I'd say get over yourself as you're pretty transparent and there's no horrible agenda against white people or men for that matter.

Actually, if you apply the modern perspective of racism against Black people, to all other races including White people, you'd find White people on the receiving end of a quite a bit of racist comments both online and offline. Same with Asians. There's a broad range of liberals or those who consider themselves to be race activists, who feel no compunction about encouraging racist stereotypes about White people, or other racial groups.

As for there being an agenda, of course there is. Many BLM activists throughout their campaigns didn't seek to focus on racists... they focused on White people as a race. A collective group, rather than seeking to highlight racists on their own, and a blatant disregard for the behavior of Black people who contributed to the problem.

As for an anti-male agenda, again, of course there is. Any balanced appraisal of feminist ideology will show that they've sought to make the male gender the enemy, attacking the place of fatherhood in families, and encouraging the use of terms like toxic masculinity, mansplaining, etc. All terms to make men collectively responsible and better yet, make the behavior of individuals representative of the overall gender. If you don't see that as an anti-male agenda, then I suspect you've got your own bias to plug.

statesaver

But can we still call him a cheating bastard ?

anewme

extra gravy wrote: »

You could guess before opening the thread which posters would try to make light of actual racism and instead make it about themselves. Yawn indeed.

Same group if people who complain about censorship and lack of free speech, when the reality is they just want to be left to spew out nasty views unchallenged.

TomTomTim

anewme wrote: »

Same group if people who complain about censorship and lack of free speech, when the reality is they just want to be left to spew out nasty views unchallenged.

Find me one person who supports free speech who doesn't want a back and forth discussion. The whole point of supporting free speech is that you want society to be able to discuss things. If you censors these people, discussions can't be had at all, so your post is somewhat contradictory.

anewme

TomTomTim wrote: »

Find me one person who supports free speech who doesn't want a back and forth discussion. The whole point of supporting free speech is that you want society to be able to discuss things. If you censors these people, discussions can't be had at all, so your post is somewhat contradictory.

Theres back and forth discussion and then theres wrapping up racism/misogyny etc up as free speech.

If you need the cloak of anonymity to have a discussion and would not express those views openly, then it might indicate that you are fully aware of the difference.

pretty boy floyd

walshb wrote: »

Racism is a human condition..

Even labeling it a problem is kind of inaccurate..

Human beings are by their very nature ALL capable of being racist...

Racism cannot and will not ever be eradicated. It’s an impossibility..

His stance here is attention seeking pie in the sky

What kind of drivel is this?

pretty boy floyd

pretty boy floyd wrote: »

What kind of drivel is this?

It's actually pretty accurate. Human society still rests heavily on tribal associations, where you find people grouping based on race, and other considerations. When that happens, you'll find many who consider other groups, "outside" of their own group as being a threat or inferior. When that grouping is based on race or culture, then racism will occur. In spite of social evolution, we haven't moved much away from tribal systems.

As such racism is something that is not going disappear entirely. It can be mitigated, and controlled to an extent (through laws, and social conditioning), but it will continue to manifest, either in peoples behavior or their thoughts.

If anything over the last few decades, we've made race even more important a consideration due to the movement against racism. Since quite often these race activists, cloak their own racism in double standards and claims that they're fighting against racism... when they're just being one-sided, and not against all racism equally.

As so, racism will increase because there is little emphasis on removing race as an important consideration of identity and interpersonal communication.

And yup, I'd see Thierry as just seeking attention as opposed to any genuine belief that he'll be combating racism.

IMHO racism won't be resolved as a common issue, because people don't want to give up their own biases and considerations about race. It's selective. They'll cry against racism of certain groups, while making generalisations about others. Few people want to deal with humanity by removing the focus on race.. and treating people as individuals.

CtevenSrowder

anewme wrote: »

Theres back and forth discussion and then theres wrapping up racism/misogyny etc up as free speech.

If you need the cloak of anonymity to have a discussion and would not express those views openly, then it might indicate that you are fully aware of the difference.

That isn't what you said though. You said these people want to spew hatred unchallenged. So you've shifted the goal posts.

What people fear is those with an authoritarian streak wanting to shut down debate about certain topics by labeling anyone with a dissenting view to that of the progressive view as a racist, homophobe, transphobe, islamaphobe, xenophobe, misogynist, sexist etc. Etc. depending on the topic, particularly now that using legal means is potentially about to become the course de rigeur.

Those of us with a bit of backbone want to be able to have robust, honest discussion were one party isn't afraid of stating their opinion, regardless of what it is. Nick Griffin is a good example of how this works. A man who has now drifted into obscurity after his infamous appearance on Question Time that the everything-phoebe people didn't want to happen, wanting him de-platformed.

CtevenSrowder

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

That isn't what you said though. You said these people want to spew hatred unchallenged. So you've shifted the goal posts.

What people fear is those with an authoritarian streak wanting to shut down debate about certain topics by labeling anyone with a dissenting view to that of the progressive view as a racist, homophobe, transphobe, islamaphobe, xenophobe, misogynist, sexist etc. Etc. depending on the topic, particularly now that using legal means is potentially about to become the course de rigeur.

Those of us with a bit of backbone want to be able to have robust, honest discussion were one party isn't afraid of stating their opinion, regardless of what it is. Nick Griffin is a good example of how this works. A man who has now drifted into obscurity after his infamous appearance on Question Time that the everything-phoebe people didn't want to happen, wanting him de-platformed.

Nick Griffin is a woeful example.

Even the United States First Amendment couldn't grant him sanctuary from some of the stuff he has said.

He got his most general election votes after his appearance on Question Time...

Thierry Henry has always thought he was the coolest thing since sliced bread.

He was a great player but I always found his "angry face" goal celebrations to be incredibly arrogant. Now that he is not a player he likes to pretend to be cool with the new generation the Pogbas etc, the street style handshakes etc. As a pundit I find him mostly boring.

Thelonious Monk

Robbie Keane dived for a penalty against Georgia in that world cup campaign, it was so embarrassing the reaction to that handball, it's football and these things happen.
Anyway some of the stuff you see on Twitter is just horrible, love her or loathe her but nearly every time Hazel Chu tweets there's seems to be some arsehole going on about Chinese takeaway or new Irish etc. I wouldn't blame high profile people leaving if they're getting that kind of abuse, it's just depressing.

extra gravy

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Robbie Keane dived for a penalty against Georgia in that world cup campaign, it was so embarrassing the reaction to that handball, it's football and these things happen

Like the Pool fans that turn a blind eye to Salah diving for penalties every week, people will accept cheating when it benefits them. Irish people really made a show of themselves with the reaction to Henry.

CtevenSrowder

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Nick Griffin is a woeful example.

Even the United States First Amendment couldn't grant him sanctuary from some of the stuff he has said.

He got his most general election votes after his appearance on Question Time...

His profile had been raised around the time, hence why he ended up on question time in the first place. So his achieving his highest set of votes in a general election is no surprise (it was an increase of ~70 votes btw from his previous high) . He likely lost more votes than he gained, considering less than a year previously he was elected to the European parliament with around 130000 votes, which collapsed to 'just' 30000 in 2014.

CtevenSrowder

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

His profile had been raised around the time, hence why he ended up on question time in the first place. So his achieving his highest set of votes in a general election is no surprise (it was an increase of ~70 votes btw from his previous high) . He likely lost more votes than he gained, considering less than a year previously he was elected to the European parliament with around 130000 votes, which collapsed to 'just' 30000 in 2014.

So he lost votes in a secret ballot after appearing on the nation's flagship TV show because the #FARLEFTSOCIALISTCOMMUNISTLIBERALWOKEMOB wanted him cancelled?

Meanwhile Nigel Farage was going from strength to strength in Europe...

CtevenSrowder

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So he lost votes in a secret ballot after appearing on the nation's flagship TV show because the #FARLEFTSOCIALISTCOMMUNISTLIBERALWOKEMOB wanted him cancelled?

Meanwhile Nigel Farage was going from strength to strength in Europe...

EH what? I've no idea what that hash tag is about. Yes Farage isn't a fascist and a racist like Griffin, which was plain for all to see after his appearance on QT. Have you been following the discussion?

Griffin likely lost votes due to his appearance on Question Time, which occurred at a time when his profile had been raised, and he had just been elected an MEP. After his appearance, which was roundly seen as disastrous for him, he failed to be elected an MP and only increased his vote share by 70 votes from his previous high. In 2014, his voting numbers dropped by 100,000 when going for reelection as an MEP.

extra gravy

extra gravy wrote: »

Like the Pool fans that turn a blind eye to Salah diving for penalties every week, people will accept cheating when it benefits them. Irish people really made a show of themselves with the reaction to Henry.

It was embarassing at the time. If the roles were reversed we would be still celebrating the rogue-ish Irish chancer and how we were able to use our street smarts to put one over on the big boys.

The most painful bit about that game is not the handball, it's the fact that a limited Ireland team played with such aggression and skill against superior opponents, putting them on the back foot for most of the game having been comfortably beaten 1-0 in the home leg.

CtevenSrowder

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

EH what? I've no idea what that hash tag is about. Yes Farage isn't a fascist and a racist like Griffin, which was plain for all to see after his appearance on QT. Have you been following the discussion?

Griffin likely lost votes due to his appearance on Question Time, which occurred at a time when his profile had been raised, and he had just been elected an MEP. After his appearance, which was roundly seen as disastrous for him, he failed to be elected an MP and only increased his vote share by 70 votes from his previous high. In 2014, his voting numbers dropped by 100,000 when going for reelection as an MEP.

Politicians get unelected all the time. The fact he got elected in the first place is the real story.

The post that I initially replied to suggested that Nick Griffin was the victim of cancel culture. You've admitted that Griffin is a racist and a fascist yet it's somehow surprising that, after he came to prominence, he lost support...

walshb

Henry is a deliberate unapologetic cheat....

Anything he comes out with needs to be taken with a pinch of salt..

Hence this latest attention seeking insincere nonsense he is spouting.

CtevenSrowder

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Politicians get unelected all the time. The fact he got elected in the first place is the real story.

The post that I initially replied to suggested that Nick Griffin was the victim of cancel culture. You've admitted that Griffin is a racist and a fascist yet it's somehow surprising that, after he came to prominence, he lost support...

I think you are missing the point somewhat. I explicitly stated he wasn't a victim of cancel culture, which is one of the reasons he wasn't reelected, or elected an MP. Had he not been able to publicly air his views on the main politics show on the BBC, it is more probable that he would've done better in the proceeding elections for MP's and MEP's, particularly the former, as his opinions and policies would've remained largely unchallenged in such a public waywith such a large audience.

Also funny you state I 'admitted' he was a racist and a fascist, as if to suggest I ever claimed this wasn't the case.

Thelonious Monk

walshb wrote: »

Henry is a deliberate unapologetic cheat....

That's pretty much all footballers, he's nothing special in that regard. Look at our own Aaron Connolly.

AllForIt

https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/world-cup-2018/fixtures-and-results/thierry-henry-urges-footballs-big-guns-to-address-qatars-human-rights-record-40254920.html

He's taking on Qatar this week, China next week probably.