I don’t hear many complaints when the womens 100m relay team is all black. They were picked because they were the best at that time. Maybe the same is true in the footballl
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2022 2:01 pm
by Currywurst and Chips
CEB wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 11:52 am
The article itself isn’t “woke” (though there’s a couple of sentences that are straight out of a script rather than seeming to be genuinely convincing on the idea that the whiteness of the England team will mean young black girls are not inspired/stop participating. That feels more like a grown up projection than based on any analysis of how kids respond to the ethnic make up of sports teams) and makes lots of really good points about the structural issues that can be a barrier to working class participation, and how that disproportionately impacts on participation by girls from ethnic minority backgrounds.
If we’re defining “woke” in a pejorative sense as “progressive hyperbole in service of a culture war we insist isn’t happening”, then the guardian’s choice of what to focus on in the headline - the idea that the lack of diversity *in the squad* will “stop kids dreaming” fits the bill. It’s the guardian’s choice of framing that’s off here; you could have a headline “the Euro’s have been a massive success and will inspire a new generation - but how can we ensure the next generation reflects the diversity of the country?” and while I’m sure someone would still post it on this thread, there could only be a bad faith reason for doing so in that case. The headline as it is, places the guardian somewhere predictable on a front in a “culture war”, and prioritises outrage clicks and Twitter engagement both from people who don’t read the story and say “oh so we have to put black players in even if they’re not good enough?” and from those who engage to say “have you read the article? It’s a completely reasonable piece of writing by someone who knows what she’s talking about”
Working class people have a barrier to getting into football?
Not trying to be snide, guessing that's because the wages are low and there's limited full time professionals?
Only ask as they're basically 80-90% of the men's game both here and in most of the World.
CEB wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 11:52 am
The article itself isn’t “woke” (though there’s a couple of sentences that are straight out of a script rather than seeming to be genuinely convincing on the idea that the whiteness of the England team will mean young black girls are not inspired/stop participating. That feels more like a grown up projection than based on any analysis of how kids respond to the ethnic make up of sports teams) and makes lots of really good points about the structural issues that can be a barrier to working class participation, and how that disproportionately impacts on participation by girls from ethnic minority backgrounds.
If we’re defining “woke” in a pejorative sense as “progressive hyperbole in service of a culture war we insist isn’t happening”, then the guardian’s choice of what to focus on in the headline - the idea that the lack of diversity *in the squad* will “stop kids dreaming” fits the bill. It’s the guardian’s choice of framing that’s off here; you could have a headline “the Euro’s have been a massive success and will inspire a new generation - but how can we ensure the next generation reflects the diversity of the country?” and while I’m sure someone would still post it on this thread, there could only be a bad faith reason for doing so in that case. The headline as it is, places the guardian somewhere predictable on a front in a “culture war”, and prioritises outrage clicks and Twitter engagement both from people who don’t read the story and say “oh so we have to put black players in even if they’re not good enough?” and from those who engage to say “have you read the article? It’s a completely reasonable piece of writing by someone who knows what she’s talking about”
Working class people have a barrier to getting into football?
Not trying to be snide, guessing that's because the wages are low and there's limited full time professionals?
Only ask as they're basically 80-90% of the men's game both here and in most of the World.
The article mentions infrastructure in place for boys that isn’t there for girls, eg clubs arranging transport to training sessions, taxiing players from schools etc, meaning young male players aren’t reliant on parents having time and resources to do it. The implication is that that structure isn’t in place for the girls game, so a lot more family support is needed
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:31 am
by Currywurst and Chips
Offensive comedian gets cancelled by Edinburgh fringe after people buy tickets to watch offensive comedian and get offended.
Venue that booked offensive comedian who is very well known for being offensive said
"Opinions such as those displayed on stage by Sadowitz are not acceptable and The Pleasance are not prepared to be associated with such material"
CEB wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 11:52 am
The article itself isn’t “woke” (though there’s a couple of sentences that are straight out of a script rather than seeming to be genuinely convincing on the idea that the whiteness of the England team will mean young black girls are not inspired/stop participating. That feels more like a grown up projection than based on any analysis of how kids respond to the ethnic make up of sports teams) and makes lots of really good points about the structural issues that can be a barrier to working class participation, and how that disproportionately impacts on participation by girls from ethnic minority backgrounds.
If we’re defining “woke” in a pejorative sense as “progressive hyperbole in service of a culture war we insist isn’t happening”, then the guardian’s choice of what to focus on in the headline - the idea that the lack of diversity *in the squad* will “stop kids dreaming” fits the bill. It’s the guardian’s choice of framing that’s off here; you could have a headline “the Euro’s have been a massive success and will inspire a new generation - but how can we ensure the next generation reflects the diversity of the country?” and while I’m sure someone would still post it on this thread, there could only be a bad faith reason for doing so in that case. The headline as it is, places the guardian somewhere predictable on a front in a “culture war”, and prioritises outrage clicks and Twitter engagement both from people who don’t read the story and say “oh so we have to put black players in even if they’re not good enough?” and from those who engage to say “have you read the article? It’s a completely reasonable piece of writing by someone who knows what she’s talking about”
Working class people have a barrier to getting into football?
Not trying to be snide, guessing that's because the wages are low and there's limited full time professionals?
Only ask as they're basically 80-90% of the men's game both here and in most of the World.
Working class girls have barriers getting into football, yes.
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2022 12:57 pm
by Dunners
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:31 am
Offensive comedian gets cancelled by Edinburgh fringe after people buy tickets to watch offensive comedian and get offended.
Venue that booked offensive comedian who is very well known for being offensive said
"Opinions such as those displayed on stage by Sadowitz are not acceptable and The Pleasance are not prepared to be associated with such material"
How does this imply Hannah has conned Dave into fatherhood? What absolute nonsense. Sinclair has lost the plot.
The implication is that Hannah is a slapper and puts it about, not that Dave has been tricked.
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 8:35 am
by Rich Tea Wellin
That’s what I thought. Get being woke right ffs
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 8:56 am
by Dunners
Heh.
Also, what the wokeratti really should be complaining about is that this is an advert where both of the couple are white. Where's the diversity, FFS?
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 9:44 am
by Long slender neck
This sort of thing obviously does happen though, so whats the problem?
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:34 am
by CEB
Both sides on this are ridiculous if you look at the comments. There’s some people acting as if the joke is some egregious, terrible thing, while there are others being like “thanks for hyping up this ad, I’m now gonna buy Crown Paints!” as if the most important factor in choice of paint is it’s ability to trigger the snowflakes.
I have been watching the repeats of the tv adult comedy sitcom show ''Coupling'' made between 2000 to 2004 and wonder if this show would have been able to be made nowadays due to much of its content and dialogue ?
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 1:49 pm
by faldO
Backlash as man appointed Scotland's first "period dignity officer"
I have been watching the repeats of the tv adult comedy sitcom show ''Coupling'' made between 2000 to 2004 and wonder if this show would have been able to be made nowadays due to much of its content and dialogue ?
Hey Sid, do you remember the whole 'Lad' culture thing of the mid to late 90s?
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 1:59 pm
by Max Fowler
Samantha Janus was so beautiful though, wasn't she?
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:01 pm
by CEB
I must say, I didn’t expect to see Coupling held up as an example of the type of high quality sitcom we’re no longer allowed to enjoy
I have been watching the repeats of the tv adult comedy sitcom show ''Coupling'' made between 2000 to 2004 and wonder if this show would have been able to be made nowadays due to much of its content and dialogue ?
Hey Sid, do you remember the whole 'Lad' culture thing of the mid to late 90s?
Yes of course i do !
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:10 pm
by Sid Bishop
CEB wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:01 pm
I must say, I didn’t expect to see Coupling held up as an example of the type of high quality sitcom we’re no longer allowed to enjoy
The show was named "Best TV Comedy" at the 2003 British Comedy Awards.
Re: Woke watch.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 2:28 pm
by Dunners
Gary the Plumber wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 1:59 pm
Samantha Janus was so beautiful though, wasn't she?
Call me fussy, but I could never get past her surname.