11 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

 

Starting to doubt your claims on what you say you do "i'va".

 

No

10 minutes ago, JackoTheMuss said:

Let's be clear- Eddie had his knickers in a knot because Caro wrote a comment  piece on succession of his presidency. Boo-f$&@ing hoo. 

Sooo damaging. Gimme a break

 

I wasn't referring to Eddie.  Apparently, some on here can't chew gum and walk at the same time.

20 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

I understand it was meant for SWYL, thanks Chris.  But unless I have missed something, I fail to see where he's condoned, provoked or supports violence against women.  Perhaps you could now give Stuie some counsel.

 

You must have missed the 5 or 6 posts in a row where he said exactly that.

Just to Help Iv'a out a bit. 

This is what he has said (feel free to correct Iv'a if I get it wrong)

- Violence and threats of violence are wrong against anyone, including women, in almost all circumstances. (I am guessing self defence is the only one where it is right)

- One a separate issue, Journos need a thick skin and need to be accountable for what they write as they can be very inflammatory at times. This means they can be ridiculed, attacked, have things written about them as long as they are not violent or threatening. 

What Iv'a hasn't written

- That journos need to be accountable as they write hurtful things and therefore they shouldn't get upset about threats of violence. 

Hope this helps. 

30 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Because it takes a while for the female contingent of the confected outrage group to gather their forces.....

What they are saying is that its OK to joke about violence unless its about a female..

Let's face it Eddie, Frawley and Brayshaw are not people's favourites and what they said is stupid but its the womens lobby that has become outraged. And not becuase they are advocating violence- even in a joking fashion - but because a female is the brunt of the joke. So where is all the outrage when they are advocating violence (albeit jokingly) against males?? Or is that supposed to be OK and 'blokey'??

Wowee.

That's some issues, right there.

1 minute ago, Undeeterred said:

You must have missed the 5 or 6 posts in a row where he said exactly that.

OK, if he said he wanted her beaten to a pulp, then that is inexcusable.

9 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

 

You might need a new screen name after you've been banned, as well as a holiday.

Start by taking away his knighthood!!  He can become 'Why You Little' again!

On a serious note.  As a female poster, I am greatly heartened by the number of men on DL who get the issue and are standing up for what they believe (and by implication for the women in their lives).

4 minutes ago, Chris said:

Just to Help Iv'a out a bit. 

This is what he has said (feel free to correct Iv'a if I get it wrong)

- Violence and threats of violence are wrong against anyone, including women, in almost all circumstances. (I am guessing self defence is the only one where it is right)

- One a separate issue, Journos need a thick skin and need to be accountable for what they write as they can be very inflammatory at times. This means they can be ridiculed, attacked, have things written about them as long as they are not violent or threatening. 

What Iv'a hasn't written

- That journos need to be accountable as they write hurtful things and therefore they shouldn't get upset about threats of violence. 

Hope this helps. 

Thank you Chris.  Maybe war is the exception, but even then its anathema.

Edited June 20, 20169 yr by iv'a worn smith

8 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

OK, if he said he wanted her beaten to a pulp, then that is inexcusable.

Just had a look back and the offending comments have been removed, it seems he may have been as well.  

Would Ed have said it about his wife?

His kids?

I would think not.

So he has to ask himself why he wouldn't.

Then that answers why it was wrong.

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

I find it totally hypocritical of posters on here, who have a go at Eddie and crew, whose banter I thought was just Footy Show tasteless, and yet will have a personal go at other posters/players/officials etc without knowing the gender of posters, from behind the safety of the keyboards   glasshouses and stones rings a bell

'Saty', I think it's a sign of our society and it's probably about time everybody sat back and had a good look at how they behave and the words they speak (type).

To me Eddie was having a direct shot at Carro and I thought it was cheap, it's the reason I don't listen to the MMMM'ssss...Bogan radio with a capital B

Same on this site, love the debate and banter but sometimes it goes too far. Some could pull their heads in a bit, some could respect opinions a bit more as just opinions...sometimes we get a bit hot headed and say or write what we shouldn't. Time to apologise, don't keep digging a deeper hole...

This wasn't emotional for Eddie, he was having a calculated shot and being a total A hole which is par for course.

13 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

Thank you Chris.  Maybe war is the exception, but even then its anathema.

I did think about war but that fits in with the self defense or defense of others category, it is just an extreme version. There is still no excuse for starting a war if not for the afore mentioned reasons. 

yep, got that right rjay, par for course and calculated payback

1 minute ago, Chris said:

I did think about war but that fits in with the self defense or defense of others category, it is just an extreme version. There is still no excuse for starting a war if not for the afore mentioned reasons. 

Uh oh, now it's turning into a geopolitical thread....

17 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Start by taking away his knighthood!!  He can become 'Why You Little' again!

On a serious note.  As a female poster, I am greatly heartened by the number of men on DL who get the issue and are standing up for what they believe (and by implication for the women in their lives).

It would be interesting to know the background of the people and there opinions, things like education level, age, socioeconomic factors, etc. There may be no link but it would almost be more interesting if there wasn't one and it would show that pervading attitudes are pervasive across the whole of society, not just in some segments. 

1 minute ago, Moonshadow said:

Uh oh, now it's turning into a geopolitical thread....

I thought that while we were dealing with the sociology thread we could expand it and cover all the worlds issues. We could have it all solved by mid night!

3 minutes ago, Chris said:

Just had a look back and the offending comments have been removed, it seems he may have been as well.  

Understandable.  But Stuie gets away with insulting me and questioning the integrity of what I do, in the area of domestic violence.  Go figure.

No chance of anyone nominating Carro to go down the slide next year now.

Bummer.

I have lost respect for Eddie for apologising. That is about it.

16 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Wowee.

That's some issues, right there.

You're right. Why aren't females castigating females who condone kiiling men? I present you one of The AGE's finest journalists. 

 

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Because it takes a while for the female contingent of the confected outrage group to gather their forces.....

What they are saying is that its OK to joke about violence unless its about a female..

Let's face it Eddie, Frawley and Brayshaw are not people's favourites and what they said is stupid but its the womens lobby that has become outraged. And not becuase they are advocating violence- even in a joking fashion - but because a female is the brunt of the joke. So where is all the outrage when they are advocating violence (albeit jokingly) against males?? Or is that supposed to be OK and 'blokey'??

Fair call jnrmac. Well said.

Time to leave the thread when Clemintine Ford starts being quoted.

7 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

Understandable.  But Stuie gets away with insulting me and questioning the integrity of what I do, in the area of domestic violence.  Go figure.

The thing is, iv'a, what you write is a bit surprising coming from someone who chairs a domestic violence committee. I don't know where integrity comes into ti.  Then again, I used to chair an ethics committee.  Strange places we can wind up.

3 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

I find it totally hypocritical of posters on here, who have a go at Eddie and crew, whose banter I thought was just Footy Show tasteless, and yet will have a personal go at other posters/players/officials etc without knowing the gender of posters, from behind the safety of the keyboards   glasshouses and stones rings a bell

Sorry Saty but you are wrong on this one. For media guys to joke about drowning a female journalist, who both have had issues with in the past incidentally, is not just harmless banter. Both are AFL Presidents and know better. To say they would pay to see her drown is pretty disgusting. The AFL should be ropeable. I wonder how the Pies Ladies team feels about it. 

Then to actually refuse to admit the mistake and apologise and to make an apple pie statement about domestic violence, is [censored] weak.  

Not the first such incident for Eddie, he has form.  

Pathetic really. 

Saty your comparison to posters on here is totally spurious.  

You know I am not one of those that has a go at you as I enjoy your info, but we disagree on this issue. 

Edited June 20, 20169 yr by Redleg

5 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Time to leave the thread when Clemintine Ford starts being quoted.

It was really to point out the double standards. Violence against anyone is bad. Threatening violence is bad. Eddie should know better and in my view should be censured by the AFL. But let's not be selective about who cops it. Let's not excuse/ignore others just because they happen to be female.