Yes, but as you said, it depends on the motives and/or the understanding of why something "should be offensive" - whether a change is beneficial to the "greater good" or a whiney teenager.chris111 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:32 pmWouldn’t you agree that “attention seeking” is a good thing when it’s designed to raise wider awareness of issues that people feel are not well understood? And that it’s perhaps not easy to distinguish between this and narcissistic indulgence?Pellsey wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:19 pmOf course I would. I would never go out to offend or hurt anyone. One of my degrees included German history and I have studied and visited a lot of concentrations camps in Germany and Poland, which can be seen as some of the worst examples of anti-humanity, and these affected me to my core. I think we are on the same page regarding not wanting to hurt anyone, but there are a lot of young people who are attention seeking, who annoy the ... out of me.
Rugby tonight
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
Re: Rugby tonight
-
- Top Cat
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2020 5:58 pm
Re: Rugby tonight
Some middle aged white men can't play 'dressing up' and wear a cheap collection of brightly dyed chicken feathers on their heads.
This truly is the Orwellian nightmare his books predicted
This truly is the Orwellian nightmare his books predicted
Re: Rugby tonight
And all the university snowflakes and unwashed treehuggers with the well off middle aged retirees all turning up to BLM marches,it doesn’t effect them either does it? See my point?northerntiger wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 2:16 pm You really don’t get it. I’ll bite and argue your point. Whatever Mandela may have done, it doesn’t/didn’t directly affect you. Using religious/cultural symbolism does affect people whose culture that is. Using a represention of a cross, for example, would clearly be offensive.
Last edited by Scott1 on Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Re: Rugby tonight
And the left are the Orwellian stormtroopersBrightonTiger wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:53 pm Some middle aged white men can't play 'dressing up' and wear a cheap collection of brightly dyed chicken feathers on their heads.
This truly is the Orwellian nightmare his books predicted
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Re: Rugby tonight
It appears that here is a tangential argument. Whilst I am in favour of not causing offence in general I fail to see why the religious, who always sneak in on the coattails of arguments like this, should get a free pass. Being Black or First Nation is not a choice, believing in fairy tales is.northerntiger wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 2:16 pm You really don’t get it. I’ll bite and argue your point. Whatever Mandela may have done, it doesn’t/didn’t directly affect you. Using religious/cultural symbolism does affect people whose culture that is. Using a represention of a cross, for example, would clearly be offensive.
Omnia dicta fortiora si dicta Latina
Re: Rugby tonight
I will leave you with one final thought (as I really must get some work done!). I absolutely understand the temptation to assume someone claiming to be offended/upset is being an attention-seeker, a snowflake - or a whiney teenager! - but if instead we start with an assumption of good faith, that whether or not we agree with them their feelings are genuine, we’ll almost certainly have a more constructive dialogue.Pellsey wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:09 pmYes, but as you said, it depends on the motives and/or the understanding of why something "should be offensive" - whether a change is beneficial to the "greater good" or a whiney teenager.chris111 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:32 pmWouldn’t you agree that “attention seeking” is a good thing when it’s designed to raise wider awareness of issues that people feel are not well understood? And that it’s perhaps not easy to distinguish between this and narcissistic indulgence?Pellsey wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:19 pm
Of course I would. I would never go out to offend or hurt anyone. One of my degrees included German history and I have studied and visited a lot of concentrations camps in Germany and Poland, which can be seen as some of the worst examples of anti-humanity, and these affected me to my core. I think we are on the same page regarding not wanting to hurt anyone, but there are a lot of young people who are attention seeking, who annoy the ... out of me.
After all, almost everyone here today has been considered and respectful, despite our differences, and we’ve had a really interesting discussion as a result. Thank you for that, and although we’ll probably never agree on this topic, we’ve come away with a better appreciation of why we all respond to differently.
Re: Rugby tonight
Fairy tales?! I’m still waiting for concrete proof of the big bang theory nonsense as well as evolution. Are you familiar with the first and second laws of thermodynamics,the law of probability,the law of biogenesis etc? I’m religious myself but even if I wasn’t in a strange sense of irony there’s more evidence that point towards a creator while it’s science that’s desperately clinging on to its faith!Old Hob wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 4:04 pmIt appears that here is a tangential argument. Whilst I am in favour of not causing offence in general I fail to see why the religious, who always sneak in on the coattails of arguments like this, should get a free pass. Being Black or First Nation is not a choice, believing in fairy tales is.northerntiger wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 2:16 pm You really don’t get it. I’ll bite and argue your point. Whatever Mandela may have done, it doesn’t/didn’t directly affect you. Using religious/cultural symbolism does affect people whose culture that is. Using a represention of a cross, for example, would clearly be offensive.
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Re: Rugby tonight
OMG. The flat earthers have arrived!!
Re: Rugby tonight
Who mentioned flat earth?! And this singularity, this pinhead shall we call it that started the Big Bang rolling,please do tell me where it came from. I'll wait..........
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:25 pm
Re: Rugby tonight
Always found the laws of thermodynamics to be pretty reliable myself...
Re: Rugby tonight
Theyre still debatable but law of biogenics? Life must come from life. And what about law of probability? You number 10 cards 1 to 10 and give them a good shuffle and there's a one in 3,326,800 chance that they would fall 1-10. When you use a 100 cards it's 1 in 10 followed by 158 zeros chance it would fall 1-100. Without a living God to create life, the laws of probability and complexity prove beyond doubt that life could never come into existence at all.Cardiff Tig wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:06 pm Always found the laws of thermodynamics to be pretty reliable myself...
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
Re: Rugby tonight
This sums it up completely for me in the words of Rowan Atkinson / Ricky Gervais / Stephen Fry....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOxJ-789YtA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOxJ-789YtA
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:25 pm
Re: Rugby tonight
This is actually just incorrect - your arguments don't prove anything. There are undoubtedly unknowns surrounding the first emergence of "life", and it will likely never be answered due to the timescales involved and current scientific/technology levels as they are today.Scott1 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:30 pmTheyre still debatable but law of biogenics? Life must come from life. And what about law of probability? You number 10 cards 1 to 10 and give them a good shuffle and there's a one in 3,326,800 chance that they would fall 1-10. When you use a 100 cards it's 1 in 10 followed by 158 zeros chance it would fall 1-100. Without a living God to create life, the laws of probability and complexity prove beyond doubt that life could never come into existence at all.Cardiff Tig wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:06 pm Always found the laws of thermodynamics to be pretty reliable myself...
And I'm not sure what any of this has to do with a rugby team in Devon using symbolism and profiting off the back of a group of people that have been historically - and still are to this day - oppressed and exploited by others.
I really need to stop getting involved in these threads...
Re: Rugby tonight
I haven't read the whole thread but that Sir is an excellent post. And should be applied in all situations/discussions. There is of course the odd person who really isn't genuine but IME most, when you listen, have some legitimacy.chris111 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 4:10 pm I will leave you with one final thought (as I really must get some work done!). I absolutely understand the temptation to assume someone claiming to be offended/upset is being an attention-seeker, a snowflake - or a whiney teenager! - but if instead we start with an assumption of good faith, that whether or not we agree with them their feelings are genuine, we’ll almost certainly have a more constructive dialogue.