Carlton Supporters Club

Sheargold sacked LMAO.

Triple M going woke.

Quote from: LP – on February 26, 2025, 09:35:26 am

Much of the controversy seems to rise from the idea of equal pay for equal work, but in terms of sport there is a clear difference in performance, no matter how some want to spin it. There are two types of elite, elite relative to peers and elite in an unrestricted comparison.

Can women's sport compete with men's sport as a general spectacle? Well as far as I can tell it can't if the comparison is to remain unrestricted, but if the comparison is exclusively relative to other female sport then fans should understand the differences.

The error perhaps isn't driven by the sport becoming commercial too soon, but the expectation that it will be or is unrestrictedly comparable to men's sport.

I don't watch a lot of women's football of any code.
If the AFLW is on I might watch a bit.
If the Carlton women are playing.. perhaps a bit more
But over a season I'll miss more games than I see.
While most of these football codes have had women playing for some time, it's only recently they've moved to a more elite level.
Things like speed, skill and pressure are still noticeably way off the men's game.

Two sports I enjoy watching women competing in are swimming and track and field.
While the men's performances are still superior to women's there is not a great deal of difference in technique.
In training the women athletes/swimmers work just as hard as men and dedicate a similar number of hours to that preparation.
They have been doing so for nearly 100 years.

I would guess that's the same with Womens tennis.
It's very popular, and has been so since I was a lad.

It goes without saying that the skill gap between men and women footballers will narrow, and while it will never be the same, it will be significantly closer than it is now.

More than anything the football codes probably just need time.

Finally, if "woke" is being aware of social problems such as racism and inequality, why is it undesirable?

Quote from: DJC – on March 01, 2025, 01:34:14 pm

Finally, if "woke" is being aware of social problems such as racism and inequality, why is it undesirable?

I think it is a radical minority that at times some perceived to be "Woke", but are really harbouring agendas hijacking the cause of those with better intentions.

Perhaps some need to call out the pirates, but the very nature of wokeness seems to mean a conflict of inclusiveness, even if those being  included hijack legitimate causes.

For me it's quite analogous to the way Lydia Thorpe has hijacked indigenous issues for personal political gain, for example I read today she weighed in on the Marty Sheargold saga.

No matter what side of society or politics you sit on, you must behave with honour and call out those that behave dishonourably, silence is damning.

Those who are opposed to those fairly basic desirable attributes of more enlightened societies have taken to calling tolerant folk “woke” as if it’s a bad thing.

I think what folks often have an issue with is the 'extreme' end of wokeness-the 'morally superior', patronising attitude, the talking down, as if those that don't fully agree are less intelligent than those advocating these social advances.
It's the call for 'respect' but giving no respect  in return.

Woke isn't an 'either' or 'thing'
It's an end on a spectrum of views and attitudes and each of us give different weight to many of these issues depending on our own life experiences and knowledge.
At it's core are things like equality, fairness and respect.

I think what folks often have an issue with is the 'extreme' end of wokeness-the 'morally superior', patronising attitude, the talking down, as if those that don't fully agree are less intelligent than those advocating these social advances.
It's the call for 'respect' but giving no respect  in return.
Often it's asking for people to completely alter their 'own' perceptions to accomodate 'their' perceptions and values

There are also times when the advocacy of one group, while not disadvantaging another, doesn't give them exactly the same benefits, even though there is little 'difference' in their situations which in turn leads to a perceived inequality and resentment.

Difference seems to be at the heart of all the major issues-race, religion, nationalism, gender identity... and maybe concentrating on the the 'things that bind' rather than worrying about the 'differences' is where our attention should be concentrated.

Quote from: Lods – on March 02, 2025, 09:47:59 am

Woke isn't an 'either' or 'thing'
It's an end on a spectrum of views and attitudes and each of us give different weight to many of these issues depending on our own life experiences and knowledge.
At it's core are things like equality, fairness and respect.

I think what folks often have an issue with is the 'extreme' end of wokeness-the 'morally superior', patronising attitude, the talking down, as if those that don't fully agree are less intelligent than those advocating these social advances.
It's the call for 'respect' but giving no respect  in return.
Often it's asking for people to completely alter their 'own' perceptions to accomodate 'their' perceptions and values

There are also times when the advocacy of one group, while not disadvantaging another, doesn't give them exactly the same benefits, even though there is little 'difference' in their situations which in turn leads to a perceived inequality and resentment.

Difference seems to be at the heart of all the major issues-race, religion, nationalism, gender identity... and maybe concentrating on the the 'things that bind' rather than worrying about the 'differences' is where our attention should be concentrated.

I would argue that the extreme end of the spectrum is not "woke" and the folk who gravitate to that position would not identify as "woke".

The US civil rights movement came up with a perfectly good word to identify those who recognise injustice, discrimination and inequality.  Those opposed to those basic principles of modern society have very cleverly demonised "woke".  It's a bit like calling anyone who is concerned about conservation or maintaining biodiversity a "greenie".

While 'woke' may have been originally used in a positive sense, it has now also evolved to be a negative and in some cases derogatory and insulting term.

I have said on many occasions that AFLW is unwatchable, does that make me a misogynist ?