Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Booing the knee *Mod Note in Post 1232 and OP*
Options
Comments
-
Bobblehats wrote: »Yeah those Hungarians. Serving them well based on their attendance today, isn’t it?
And in full song. Not a muzzle on sight
Ah come on man, wearing a mask isn't akin to a muzzle. Not wearing a mask isn't something to be proud of or necessarily something to like.0 -
extra gravy wrote: »You referring to the same Hungary whose refugee and migrants policies are in breach of international human rights conventions and whose leader is a racist xenophobe?A new report by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees said that legislation recently passed in Budapest has limited and deterred access to Hungary for those seeking refuge from war and persecution.
“UNHCR considers these significant aspects of Hungarian law and practice raise serious concerns regarding compatibility with international and European law, and may be at variance with the country’s international and European obligations,” it said.
By “obligations”, the UNHCR was referring to protection for people fleeing the threat of war or persecution in their home countries, and prompt processing of asylum applications.
The U.N. refugee agency criticized Hungary’s fence and a procedure whereby migrants arriving at the frontier must submit their asylum requests in so-called “transit zones”.
“The asylum procedure and reception conditions are not in accordance with European Union and international standards, in particular concerning procedural safeguards, judicial review and freedom of movement,” the report said.
A Hungarian government spokesman was not immediately reachable for comment on the UNHCR’s remarks.
Hungary also introduced legislation in September 2015 that allows courts to order the expulsion of migrants for illegally breaching the border fence.
The UNHCR said prison sentences had been “imposed following fast-tracked trials of questionable fairness, and (the sentences) are not suspended in the event that the concerned individual submits an asylum application”.
Not one thing in the above is even mildly unreasonable. If we lived in a sane world, ever nation would have such policies, especially when you consider the massive stream of immigration in the last 6 years or so. That's racist to you, yet it's normal to many people who aren't hell bent on cultural suicide.“The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”-― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov0 -
Not one thing in the above is even mildly unreasonable. If we lived in a sane world, ever nation would have such policies, especially when you consider the massive stream of immigration in the last 6 years or so. That's racist to you, yet it's normal to many people who aren't hell bent on cultural suicide.
The most peaceful period in European times has been since the creation of the EU. The freedom of movement is one of the prices to pay for this continued state of peace.
And this freedom is something which many hundreds of times more people have enjoyed than have been even slightly inconvenienced by it. Hungary wanted to benefit from the advantages of being in such a club, they should uphold the laws of the club.
And this extends to when refugees are seeking a place of security that it shouldn't just be those on the borders that have to accept them and deal with them. Enough of the countries in Europe have experience of creating or contributing to circumstances which created the flow of refugees for them to just shrug their shoulders now and say not my problem.
And I don't about you, but I find that the people who generally contribute to the culture of a country in a meaningful way are generally well disposed to the concept of being kind to those in need.
I wish those who spend so much time wishing we were back in the dark ages of isolation put some time in to contributing to the culture of whatever country they are in instead of just complaining at compassion being extended to others.0 -
Not one thing in the above is even mildly unreasonable. If we lived in a sane world, ever nation would have such policies, especially when you consider the massive stream of immigration in the last 6 years or so. That's racist to you, yet it's normal to many people who aren't hell bent on cultural suicide.
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/hungary
https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/country-monitoring/hungary
Knock yourself out.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »The most peaceful period in European times has been since the creation of the EU. The freedom of movement is one of the prices to pay for this continued state of peace.
And this freedom is something which many hundreds of times more people have enjoyed than have been even slightly inconvenienced by it. Hungary wanted to benefit from the advantages of being in such a club, they should uphold the laws of the club.
And this extends to when refugees are seeking a place of security that it shouldn't just be those on the borders that have to accept them and deal with them. Enough of the countries in Europe have experience of creating or contributing to circumstances which created the flow of refugees for them to just shrug their shoulders now and say not my problem.
And I don't about you, but I find that the people who generally contribute to the culture of a country in a meaningful way are generally well disposed to the concept of being kind to those in need.
I wish those who spend so much time wishing we were back in the dark ages of isolation put some time in to contributing to the culture of whatever country they are in instead of just complaining at compassion being extended to others.
Ok.
But if you are fleeing tyranny or persecution, should you be able to travel to wherever you want, or to the nearest safe space?
Should you expect your new host country to adapt to your belief or should you be so grateful that you adapt to theirs?
I'd help anyone in need. But I won't adapt my way of living for them0 -
Advertisement
-
So who’s actually kneeling at this thing, just the English is it?
Good company.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Ok.
But if you are fleeing tyranny or persecution, should you be able to travel to wherever you want, or to the nearest safe space?
Should you expect your new host country to adapt to your belief or should you be so grateful that you adapt to theirs?
I'd help anyone in need. But I won't adapt my way of living for them
What constitutes a safe space? Somewhere you are not at risk of being shot imminently or somewhere you think you and your family feel secure enough to plan a future with possibly some support structures to hand whether it be governmental, charity or a network of countrymen?
I've seen no instances of newly arrived migrants demanding a country adapt to them. I've seen it suggested they are doing so by people looking to keep them out, but not by the migrants themselves.
Who's asking you to adapt your way of life to accommodate them?0 -
Tell me how wrote: »What constitutes a safe space? Somewhere you are not at risk of being shot imminently or somewhere you think you and your family feel secure enough to plan a future with possibly some support structures to hand whether it be governmental, charity or a network of countrymen?
What constitutes as a safe space is the closest place where you are in no immediate danger of persecution or violence that you were in in the place you claim you are fleeing from.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »What constitutes as a safe space is the closest place where you are in no immediate danger of persecution or violence that you were in in the place you claim you are fleeing from.
I'd say people who have spent several months/years in limbo or having been moved from refugee camp to refugee camp would disagree with you.
Conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq are heading for going on for 20 years. It's 11 years since the Arab spring started in many countries in the middle east.
should people suffering in such locations wait eternally in horrific conditions on the promise that their homeland will becomes safe again?
Are we really suggesting that if we were in any a similar position (and but for the grace of god we could be) that we wouldn't do everything we could to optimise the potential for ourselves and our family?0 -
Bobblehats wrote: »Yeah those Hungarians. Serving them well based on their attendance today, isn’t it?
And in full song. Not a muzzle on sight
No idea what the second sentence is supposed to mean. As for the final one, that just proves you can't be taken seriously.1 -
Advertisement
-
You're making it seem like a 'peer pressure' may only be there on one side, there are clearly people involved in booing that are continuing to do it because they feel pressured by their group to do so.
Clearest example is how I haven't seen one person be able to justify their actions when challenged in an interview.
I justified why I would boo earlier on in the thread. Do you believe the news channels who have been championing BLM for the last few months have no agenda??0 -
-
-
Tell me how wrote: »Is it unreasonable for them to expect to be treated fairly, without prejudice and without having racism targeted at them?
I would say no, it is not unreasonable. But the platform (social media) that that racism is being sent from is not going to change by taking a knee. It will change if players and clubs boycott it and force change. That’s how SA changed from an apartheid state. If Rosa Parks took a knee at the bus stop, no one would ever have heard of her.
However millionaire players and their clubs will not do this as it may impact on their earning potential. They are LITERALLY putting money ahead of tackling racism, while taking a knee and complaining that nothing is changing.
To that I say Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo0 -
I would say no, it is not unreasonable. But the platform (social media) that that racism is being sent from is not going to change by taking a knee. It will change if players and clubs boycott it and force change. That’s how SA changed from an apartheid state. If Rosa Parks took a knee at the bus stop, no one would ever have heard of her.
However millionaire players and their clubs will not do this as it may impact on their earning potential. They are LITERALLY putting money ahead of tackling racism, while taking a knee and complaining that nothing is changing.
To that I say Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
You have no idea how Rosa Parks was viewed back then, do you?0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Is it unreasonable for them to expect to be treated fairly, without prejudice and without having racism targeted at them?
What percentage of white people do you think abuse black people ?? I'd say it's tiny . Does it happen , yes it does . Is it rampant , I've seen 2 racist incidents in the last 20 years . Do black people get called the n word everyday walking around Dublin , I'd doubt it. I go to 2 underage matches every week with my son. There's a black lad on his team and more often than not there's one in the opposition. I reckon I've been to about 250- 300 matches in the last 6 years and not once did I hear anyone on the sideline using racist abuse .
If people got off twitter and social media , the amount of cases of abuse would nose dive. They shouldn't have to , but a lot of people get abused online , most of its carried out by faceless idiots and wouldn't say it to there face . Id watch rugby more than football but many rugby players have come out with abuse they received online aswell . We live in an age where it's never been easier to abuse people , be they black , white , gay etc . Until the social media company create proper accounts with ID it'll keep on continuing . The police should come down hard on abusers too . If you think racists and faceless online abusers are gonna stop if because players are kneeling , you need your head examined. The players and clubs should pull all their media accounts indefinitely , till twitter and co get their act together.
https://m.independent.ie/sport/rugby/i-deleted-twitterit-can-really-impact-your-mental-health-jacob-stockdale-highlights-the-ills-of-social-media-39242049.html
https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/rugby/arid-40280618.html
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/british-and-irish-lions-james-haskell-social-media-hatred/0 -
I would say no, it is not unreasonable. But the platform (social media) that that racism is being sent from is not going to change by taking a knee. It will change if players and clubs boycott it and force change. That’s how SA changed from an apartheid state. If Rosa Parks took a knee at the bus stop, no one would ever have heard of her.
However millionaire players and their clubs will not do this as it may impact on their earning potential. They are LITERALLY putting money ahead of tackling racism, while taking a knee and complaining that nothing is changing.
To that I say Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
I’m not sure that this really stacks up. Based on what you seem to be saying (i.e. that players should simply acquiesce to online abuse and boycott social media), then the equivalent analogy would be that Rosa Parks should have just gotten off the bus. The concept of trying not to expose yourself to racists seems a bit overly defeatist to me. The social media companies could do more and pressure should be brought to bear on them — but this will likewise also need work by governments and legislators worldwide to have legal and regulatory frameworks which exert that pressure but also ensure that the companies themselves have the legal scope to take on the online racists and trolls.
The problem though is that there is a clear market appetite for social media platforms — boycott one and bring it down and another one simply takes it place. Also, whether one likes it or not, social media has proven a useful commercial tool and footballers are within their rights to use the commercial potential of these platforms like you and I. It should not be at the whim of racists to chase black players away from these, or for those players to run away.
I can’t say with any specific authority whether the Take the Knee gesture has achieved anything in tangible terms (maybe it has maybe it hasn’t), but ultimately here we are here discussing what could be done to address the problem when perhaps otherwise we would be talking about something else.1 -
I would say no, it is not unreasonable. But the platform (social media) that that racism is being sent from is not going to change by taking a knee. It will change if players and clubs boycott it and force change. That’s how SA changed from an apartheid state. If Rosa Parks took a knee at the bus stop, no one would ever have heard of her.
However millionaire players and their clubs will not do this as it may impact on their earning potential. They are LITERALLY putting money ahead of tackling racism, while taking a knee and complaining that nothing is changing.
To that I say Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Do you ever touch on reality?
Players led a boycott of social media for a full weekend a couple months ago in an effort to draw attention to the toxic nature on it?
And you accuse players of putting money ahead of tackling racism? What does that even mean? Please explain.
As for Rosa Parks, we know about her because she drew attention to a cause.
She didn't refuse to move one day and have segregation removed that evening. She was arrested, charged, lost her job, her husband lost her job, they had to move because she couldn't get a new one and it took a years boycott of the Montgomery Bus Company and activism by thousands of other people and several court cases before segregation was removed. But your remember it simplistically as she refused to sit and that's it is remembered but if she had knelt she'd be forgotten? Maybe if she had knelt in the aisle of the bus you'd support footballers now.
They are playing their part in creating a situation which some people can't ignore and so which means more attention is drawn to the conversation, which is the purpose of it.
You really should educate yourself some bit.1 -
kildare lad wrote: »What percentage of white people do you think abuse black people ?? I'd say it's tiny . Does it happen , yes it does . Is it rampant , I've seen 2 racist incidents in the last 20 years . Do black people get called the n word everyday walking around Dublin , I'd doubt it. I go to 2 underage matches every week with my son. There's a black lad on his team and more often than not there's one in the opposition. I reckon I've been to about 250- 300 matches in the last 6 years and not once did I hear anyone on the sideline using racist abuse .
If people got off twitter and social media , the amount of cases of abuse would nose dive. They shouldn't have to , but a lot of people get abused online , most of its carried out by faceless idiots and wouldn't say it to there face . Id watch rugby more than football but many rugby players have come out with abuse they received online aswell . We live in an age where it's never been easier to abuse people , be they black , white , gay etc . Until the social media company create proper accounts with ID it'll keep on continuing . The police should come down hard on abusers too . If you think racists and faceless online abusers are gonna stop if because players are kneeling , you need your head examined. The players and clubs should pull all their media accounts indefinitely , till twitter and co get their act together.
https://m.independent.ie/sport/rugby/i-deleted-twitterit-can-really-impact-your-mental-health-jacob-stockdale-highlights-the-ills-of-social-media-39242049.html
https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/rugby/arid-40280618.html
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/british-and-irish-lions-james-haskell-social-media-hatred/
How many times do we have to say it? No one thinks racists will stop because players are kneeling.
They hope that because players are kneeling, and people are losing their sh*t over it that the relevant authorities will realise that they need to do what they can in every sense and so newspapers will stop fanning the flames with barely cloaked articles, stadiums and organising groups will act to faster identify perpetrators and to punish them appropriately and social media companies will do likewise or introduce some changes to their platforms to make it harder for people to send abuse.
Players already had a week boycott of social media in an effort to draw attention to the need for action.
None of this is secret but some people are intent on misrepresenting what is going on, or has gone on. Why is that?0 -
Tell me how wrote: »How many times do we have to say it? No one thinks racists will stop because players are kneeling.
They hope that because players are kneeling, and people are losing their sh*t over it that the relevant authorities will realise that they need to do what they can in every sense and so newspapers will stop fanning the flames with barely cloaked articles, stadiums and organising groups will act to faster identify perpetrators and to punish them appropriately and social media companies will do likewise or introduce some changes to their platforms to make it harder for people to send abuse.
Players already had a week boycott of social media in an effort to draw attention to the need for action.
None of this is secret but some people are intent on misrepresenting what is going on, or has gone on. Why is that?
They stayed off social media for four days not a week , that's not much of a sacrifice .0 -
Advertisement
-
kildare lad wrote: »They stayed off social media for four days not a week , that's not much of a sacrifice .
Was it not 24 hours?0 -
kildare lad wrote: »They stayed off social media for four days not a week , that's not much of a sacrifice .Was it not 24 hours?
It was the weekend. It was a typo on my post.
It was the weekend the story of the European Super League broke.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »It was the weekend. It was a typo on my post.
It was the weekend the story of the European Super League broke.
So they kneel for a few seconds before a game and stay off twitter for a weekend , they're really giving Nelson Mandela and Bobby Sands a run for their money with their astonishing sacrifice...0 -
ArthurDayne wrote: »I’m not sure that this really stacks up. Based on what you seem to be saying (i.e. that players should simply acquiesce to online abuse and boycott social media), then the equivalent analogy would be that Rosa Parks should have just gotten off the bus. The concept of trying not to expose yourself to racists seems a bit overly defeatist to me. The social media companies could do more and pressure should be brought to bear on them — but this will likewise also need work by governments and legislators worldwide to have legal and regulatory frameworks which exert that pressure but also ensure that the companies themselves have the legal scope to take on the online racists and trolls.
The problem though is that there is a clear market appetite for social media platforms — boycott one and bring it down and another one simply takes it place. Also, whether one likes it or not, social media has proven a useful commercial tool and footballers are within their rights to use the commercial potential of these platforms like you and I. It should not be at the whim of racists to chase black players away from these, or for those players to run away.
I can’t say with any specific authority whether the Take the Knee gesture has achieved anything in tangible terms (maybe it has maybe it hasn’t), but ultimately here we are here discussing what could be done to address the problem when perhaps otherwise we would be talking about something else.
If players and clubs got together and said we are boycotting Twitter until stronger steps are taken in relation to abuse, the companies would be falling over themselves to create stronger rules, more identification of users etc. The USP of Twitter is that you can message a celeb/famous person as if they are in your phone contact book. Without them it’s a crappy messenging service.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Do you ever touch on reality?
Players led a boycott of social media for a full weekend a couple months ago in an effort to draw attention to the toxic nature on it?
And you accuse players of putting money ahead of tackling racism? What does that even mean? Please explain.
As for Rosa Parks, we know about her because she drew attention to a cause.
She didn't refuse to move one day and have segregation removed that evening. She was arrested, charged, lost her job, her husband lost her job, they had to move because she couldn't get a new one and it took a years boycott of the Montgomery Bus Company and activism by thousands of other people and several court cases before segregation was removed. But your remember it simplistically as she refused to sit and that's it is remembered but if she had knelt she'd be forgotten? Maybe if she had knelt in the aisle of the bus you'd support footballers now.
They are playing their part in creating a situation which some people can't ignore and so which means more attention is drawn to the conversation, which is the purpose of it.
You really should educate yourself some bit.
A whole weekend, with the promise that they’d be back on Monday!! Wow, what a powerful protest. I’d say Alphabet etc were on their knees in fear of a 3 day protest, with the promise to be back on Monday.
What have they followed the protest up with? What did they ask to change?
The most pertinent part of your post “ it took a years boycott of the Montgomery Bus Company and activism by thousands of other people”.
If footballers boycott social media purposefully, their fans will follow. That would result in thousands boycotting. But sure, taking a pointless knee is easier. As Homer J Simpson once said “can’t someone else do it”.0 -
kildare lad wrote: »So they kneel for a few seconds before a game and stay off twitter for a weekend , they're really giving Nelson Mandela and Bobby Sands a run for their money with their astonishing sacrifice...
The bit in bold are your words before anyone suggests later that those in support of kneeling have identified the players as such.A whole weekend, with the promise that they’d be back on Monday!! Wow, what a powerful protest. I’d say Alphabet etc were on their knees in fear of a 3 day protest, with the promise to be back on Monday.
What have they followed the protest up with? What did they ask to change?
The most pertinent part of your post “ it took a years boycott of the Montgomery Bus Company and activism by thousands of other people”.
If footballers boycott social media purposefully, their fans will follow. That would result in thousands boycotting. But sure, taking a pointless knee is easier. As Homer J Simpson once said “can’t someone else do it”.
For both posts, isn't it always the same with people looking to undermine those doing anything with saying to them withering queries of 'Yeah, but what else have you done?'
Was the same with Greta with people upset and irate that she didn't have all the answers upfront when calling for action and with many saying she should stop protesting, go to school, come up with the solutions and then maybe people will listen to her.
If people with this mindset were around when Rosa Parks started her protest, they'd probably have said 'She should buy a car if she wants to sit anywhere of her own choice'
Why should players do everything when football authorities won't always protect them as much as they should or when the social media companies know what exactly is happening but won't offer any solutions as to how changes to their platform might help fix it?
When Marcus Rashford did trojan work in forcing the UK government to continue providing school meals to disadvantaged kids some people still weren't happy and were telling him maybe he'd have better success on the field if he wasn't rushing around trying to be some sort of hero.
It's very easy to dismiss, judge and undermine the efforts of someone because there is always more that can be done. I'm always curious why people are so quick to have a go at those doing something instead of supporting them for what they have done.1 -
kildare lad wrote: »So they kneel for a few seconds before a game and stay off twitter for a weekend , they're really giving Nelson Mandela and Bobby Sands a run for their money with their astonishing sacrifice...
There is a hierarchy now is there. Better stop doing what your doing unless you reach this high1 -
martingriff wrote: »There is a hierarchy now is there. Better stop doing what your doing unless you reach this high
No you don't have to go to that extreme but having multi millionaire footballers delete their Facebook account for the weekend doesn't really scream like effort for me , or wearing a t shirt saying humans rights in response to the 6500 peasants who've died in Qatar getting the stadiums built for the world cup. That's nearly twice what died in the troubles in Northern Ireland , so our kneelers can kick a bit of leather around the pitch for a few weeks . The hypocrisy of it all0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Why should players do everything when football authorities won't always protect them as much as they should or when the social media companies know what exactly is happening but won't offer any solutions as to how changes to their platform might help fix it?.
Of course they don’t have to do everything or anything if they don’t want to.
But why would the social media companies do the work to improve things if the vast majority of the players are happy to use their services without complaint the vast majority of the time.0 -
Advertisement
-
Of course they don’t have to do everything or anything if they don’t want to.
But why would the social media companies do the work to improve things if the vast majority of the players are happy to use their services without complaint the vast majority of the time.
Because the social medias know exactly what could be done to fix this. Was that really a question?
You act like the platforms don't benefit greatly from players using them, why do you think they 'verify' people?0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement