Opinion Non-Crows AFL 10

[Maddogmetro]

So let’s just be clear here: you think slurs on a football field should attract harsher penalties than say, punching someone out Barry Hall-style.

Those two things are not necessarily tied together, and so this conflates the issues.

I don't think their comments were about their views on suspensions that are given for violence.

Perhaps they think that slurs should get hefty suspensions, and also that there should be more harsh suspensions for blatant violence? Both of those things can be true.

 

[Samcro24]

The one word I never like to hear and I never ever speak in any situation is “see you next Tuesday’”.

What’s a synt?

 

[Slippery Pete]

Most workplaces have a set of rules around what constitutes harassment. I can go into my workplace and call a colleague an idiot and probably not face any repercussions. If I use a racial slur, I almost certainly will. Clearly there is a line somewhere. Who decides that line? My workplace, mostly. And if I think the line is inappropriate, I can go through various channels to challenge it.

Professional sport is very different from your workplace.

Sport is all about getting in the head of the other bloke. It is not a player’s obligation to spare his opponent’s mental health and in fact he has the opposite obligation.

You are pretending to know where the line is, but you really don’t. Nobody does.

 

[Slippery Pete]

What’s a synt?

 

[Scorpus]

Professional sport is very different from your workplace.

Sport is all about getting in the head of the other bloke. It is not a player’s obligation to spare his opponent’s mental health and in fact he has the opposite obligation.

You are pretending to know where the line is, but you really don’t. Nobody does.

Ah right, so you think players have an obligation to use slurs

 

[GROTTO]

In most workplaces if you called a co-worker a fat campaigner in a derogatory way you'd face some sort of discipline

I'd think the circumstances around weight vs sexuality would factor into the punishment. For example, weight can be adjusted through lifestyle, whereas sexual orientation cannot. And the historic and current vilification of some sexualities is much more severe than vilification related to weight

100%

Workplace bullying is “abusive conduct that is: threatening, humiliating, or intimidating, or work-interference, i.e., sabotage, which prevents work from getting done.”

 

[StonesThrow]

I reckon I was calling people the F (or P) word in heated situations when I was late teens/early 20s. That was a different time, but it was still immaturity and I grew out of it and realised it was a dumb thing to say.

A bit surprised to hear people still using it in this day and age though. It's a pretty hefty punishment and I don't really agree with the logic the AFL has used. You could argue that as time goes on, it will carry a lighter punishment (i.e. It's a less severe act).

 

[GROTTO]

A culture of homophobia and intolerance does have a serious impact on the mental health of gay people, which allowing homophobic slurs perpetuates. LGBTQ people have a high rate of suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts.


It's extremely easy to not use a slur

Experienced homophobia was also found to be a factor that was positively associated with a history of suicidal ideation among our sample. Other studies have corroborated this finding by showing how a history of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts has been associated with ever being subjected to general and sexual orientation-based violence or victimization, which aligns with and corroborates the minority stress model.

Experienced Homophobia and Suicide Among Young Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Men in Singapore: Exploring the Mediating Role of Depression Severity, Self-Esteem, and Outness in the Pink Carpet Y Cohort Study

Purpose: No prior study has been published on suicide-related behaviors among gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (GBTQ) men in Singapore, where sexual relations between men are criminalized. This study explores the association and mediational pathways ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Slippery Pete]

Ah right, so you think players have an obligation to use slurs

You don’t have an obligation to use slurs, but you have an obligation to get inside his head and defeat him.

Some players let their game do the talking, others use physicality or niggle, and others are good on the yap.

It all comes out in the wash.

There is summary justice on a football field for arseholes (or at least there used to be).

You don’t need the AFL handing down schoolyard suspensions to grown men using mean words.

 

[DJ75]

You don’t have an obligation to use slurs, but you have an obligation to get inside his head and defeat him.

Some players let their game do the talking, others use physicality or niggle, and others are good on the yap.

It all comes out in the wash.

There is summary justice on a football field for arseholes (or at least there used to be).

You don’t need the AFL handing down schoolyard suspensions to grown men using mean words.

ok grandad

 

[Slippery Pete]

ok grandad

You have never played football or competitive contact sport, obviously.

 

[kirky]

I reckon I was calling people the F (or P) word in heated situations when I was late teens/early 20s. That was a different time, but it was still immaturity and I grew out of it and realised it was a dumb thing to say.

A bit surprised to hear people still using it in this day and age though. It's a pretty hefty punishment and I don't really agree with the logic the AFL has used. You could argue that as time goes on, it will carry a lighter punishment (i.e. It's a less severe act).

The AFL wants it stamped out so therefore the penalties will become greater not less.

As in all things, it is about changing one’s behaviour and if you aren’t willing to change your behaviour then you will face the consequences.

 

[kirky]

You have never played football or competitive contact sport, obviously.

And when did you play?

 

[Danger in Texas]

You don’t need the AFL handing down schoolyard suspensions to grown men using mean words.

What (I’m guessing) was used carries much more weight than being a ‘mean word’

 

[Scorpus]

You don’t have an obligation to use slurs, but you have an obligation to get inside his head and defeat him.

Some players let their game do the talking, others use physicality or niggle, and others are good on the yap.

It all comes out in the wash.

There is summary justice on a football field for arseholes (or at least there used to be).

You don’t need the AFL handing down schoolyard suspensions to grown men using mean words.

So under your system where mental health is fair game, where it's impossible to decide where the line is, and where there is an obligation to defeat your opponent mentally... why wouldn't there be an obligation to use the most offensive insults possible?

Earlier when you said Will Minson said one of the worst things you'd ever heard on the football field, wouldn't that be a player doing the right thing by your logic? Just getting in their head and defeating them. So why did you feel those comments were "the worst"?

 

[kirky]

Always liked the following insult -

“May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits/crotch and your arms too short to scratch”.

 

[Samcro24]

Always liked the following insult -

“May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits/crotch and your arms too short to scratch”.

Yep that’s a zinger

 

[Twist_of_Lemon]

Always liked the following insult -

“May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits/crotch and your arms too short to scratch”.

By the time you get that out I've already kicked a bag against you kirky

 

[FR0GGY]

100%

Workplace bullying is “abusive conduct that is: threatening, humiliating, or intimidating, or work-interference, i.e., sabotage, which prevents work from getting done.”

Sounds like a tackle to me

 

[BRL121]

ok grandad

You disgusting ageist! You should be suspended immediately.

 

[FR0GGY]

By the time you get that out I've already kicked a bag against you kirky

Now that’s a zinger

 

[FR0GGY]

We are legit heading for no words to be said to opponents in 10 years time, if we continue this trend.

 

[cmndstab]

You don’t have an obligation to use slurs, but you have an obligation to get inside his head and defeat him.

Some players let their game do the talking, others use physicality or niggle, and others are good on the yap.

It all comes out in the wash.

There is summary justice on a football field for arseholes (or at least there used to be).

You don’t need the AFL handing down schoolyard suspensions to grown men using mean words.

Okay, so why not just deck your opponent when the umpire isn't watching? That will get in his head!

Oh that's right, somewhere along the line we decided that was unacceptable. You can still bump into them a bit though. I guess there's a line somewhere there?

I'm not claiming to know exactly where the line should be drawn, although I can certainly give you my opinion if you want. But to argue that there shouldn't be one is nonsense. So the only real question is, do you think that homophobic slurs should be on the acceptable side of the line or not. Given the context of immense harm associated with them, I would say absolutely yes.

 

[jenny61_99]

That's me out.

I’d love to see you tell him to his face that you think he’s a liar.

 

[jenny61_99]

The one word I never like to hear and I never ever speak in any situation is “see you next Tuesday’”.

But it’s such a brilliant word!