Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"Snowflake" is used by idiots who say something offensive or inappropriate, then blame others for pointing it out. It's an excuse for ignorance.

Yet, I bet if I called one of those using it the c word, they would most definitely take offence. They would have every right to take issue with it. 

I would argue that people who are uncomfortable with the LGBT community are most definitely "snowflakes".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Snowflakism is rife and is a direct result of instant communications of today's world.  More and more people are coming through their lives only ever having known social media as being the norm - and they are not the better for it imo.

Thankfully there are those of us that can remember what it was like before twitter/emails/instant information/internet etc - it was not a bed of roses, but it was a heck of a lot more natural - if you wanted to get in touch with someone, you had to either write to them, go and see them, or talk to them on the phone.   I dare say some will remember times before they even had telephones (real ones, not the little mind distracting toys people have nowadays).

People are too easily offended if you waver from what is deemed as the collective line - ie you have to agree or you will be ostricised by those who think they have some kind of monopoly on what is right, whereas in reality they are just spouting stuff from what they have been told or seen on the internet.

I do believe people are losing the ability to think for themselves.

 

(I bet you've got a "distracting toy" though).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

 

People are too easily offended if you waver from what is deemed as the collective line - ie you have to agree or you will be ostricised by those who think they have some kind of monopoly on what is right, whereas in reality they are just spouting stuff from what they have been told or seen on the internet.

 

Well yeah, if the “collective line” is that everyone deserves to be treated equally regardless of gender, race, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability or religious belief then they are going to be offended by people who either act against that line, support or incite acts against that line or disagree with that line.

Believing in that collective line has nothing to do with social media-some people have held those values since they were old enough to think for themselves-social media has just made it easier to call out others who transgress.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what Jake Humphrey’s said about our club, how we are beyond such a thing as an open and supportive club that is actively fighting homophobia. I’d like to think all the players, whatever their sexuality, feel very loved and welcomed here, and certainly don’t see the need to publicly “come out”. What they do in their private lives is exactly that, private, and we’ll back them on the pitch no matter what 👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

I ask you? Is this sensible debate?

Erm, no. Did you not think that may have been the point?

Shout at any fat golfers today, broad one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

"Snowflake" is used by idiots who say something offensive or inappropriate, then blame others for pointing it out. It's an excuse for ignorance.

Yet, I bet if I called one of those using it the c word, they would most definitely take offence. They would have every right to take issue with it. 

I would argue that people who are uncomfortable with the LGBT community are most definitely "snowflakes".

Is that so?

Is that a longstanding view or is it something you've just come up with to suit the occasion?

I notice that you cannot resist proffering the word "idiots." Is that a longstanding trait or just an off the cuff insult used to replace civilised debate, or 'an excuse for ignorance' as you so amply put it?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Is that so?

Is that a longstanding view or is it something you've just come up with to suit the occasion?

I notice that you cannot resist proffering the word "idiots." Is that a longstanding trait or just an off the cuff insult used to replace civilised debate, or 'an excuse for ignorance' as you so amply put it?

 

Apologies for using the word "idiot". I didn't realise you were such a snowflake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Snowflakism only really exists in the eyes of the idiots who spout the stupid term. And they invariably tend to be individuals who actually most match the attributes they have given the title.

Idiot #1:   "HAHA, Snowflake, you get offended by the fact that I don't like gays doing gay things in public. If you'd only get off social media you would realise that gays are sinners"

Also Idiot #1:  "WHAT?! Someone got a milkshake thrown at them? Waaaaaah, disgraceful!"

Also Idiot #1:   "WHAT?! VEGAN SAUSAGE ROLLS IN GREGGS?! WAAAAAAAAAH."

And don't forget, they rail against social media how? On social media. Because out in public they are generally compliant, timid little souls.

You could replace Idiot #1 for a fair few people on here.

What a stupid generalisation.  There are many ways to look at many subjects, but mostly "snowflakes" are just those who are too lazy or who are incapable of thinking for themselves and just spout what they think is the party line. At least Broadstairs - and me for that matter - are not afraid of trying to discuss things in a wider sense, but that is not good enough for some.  No, it has to be the party line or you are shouted at, ridiculed and insulted.

I can understand where Broadstairs is coming from - an older person (apologies if you are not) who was probably brought up in a world where to be gay was illegal and morally wrong - it's like being indoctrinated from an early age, not an easy frame of mind to escape from.  Also he probably accepts that it is ok to be gay.....but hey, because of that ingrained attitude from years ago, he still finds it uncomfortable to see gays kissing....so he is not being homophobic - he is merely saying what he thinks - he accepts it but finds it difficult to be comfortable with it.

We are not all perfect and it is about time someone stood up to people like you who cannot think beyond their own narrow world view.  Hoolahansolo is exactly the same.  Always there with a put down rather than actually offer anything constructive.

The inability to try and understand is what snowflakism is all about - shout and be offended at it rather than try and understand it.  You can shout "equality for all" if you like - and fair enough - but understanding requires actual thought.  Like I said, some are  incapable of it.

 

You need to grow up a bit, the opair of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

Well yeah, if the “collective line” is that everyone deserves to be treated equally regardless of gender, race, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability or religious belief then they are going to be offended by people who either act against that line, support or incite acts against that line or disagree with that line.

Believing in that collective line has nothing to do with social media-some people have held those values since they were old enough to think for themselves-social media has just made it easier to call out others who transgress.

Truth.

Unfortunately, even though I've blocked Lakey, I can still see when people quote him... have to say it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that he's waded in on the side of the minority of one. I'm leaving this thread well alone, and suggest we now leave the homophobic dinosaurs to their antiquated views... they'll die with those views irrespective of anything anyone else says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

 

If you confuse them they resort to insults, name calling and the total contorted nonsense and self-constructed fairy tale stuff that we have just been presented with in the above rant.

I suppose it depends on your definition of what constitutes an insult. For my money, the first insult on this thread was made by you in response to Bethnal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I can understand where Broadstairs is coming from - an older person (apologies if you are not) who was probably brought up in a world where to be gay was illegal and morally wrong

It was never morally wrong, you ignorant old fool.

Now, take a deep breath and re-read your post. If you do it with genuine reflection and introspection, you'll feel the need to apologise. Don't worry though, you can just chalk it up to experience and scurry off embarrassed that you've been schooled by a millennial.

But what you've done is essentially torpedoed your own ridiculous position.

You start by justifying Broady's discomfort with homosexuals (another way of saying homophobia) because he was bought up in a world where it was illegal. Have a little think there.....got it yet.....no? I'll explain. What you have described is an example of someone who is"too lazy or...incapable of thinking for themselves and just spouts what they think the party line is".

So what we essentially have is you justifying someone's bigotry because they were simply taught and indoctrinated to a party line and then railing against people who point out their bigotry by saying that they are feeling fake offence because it's what they party line tells them.

In a nutshell, your argument is that it's ok to be homophobic because that was the party line homophobes were raised in, but being offended by homophobic views only happens because of the party line those people were brought up in.

7 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

We are not all perfect and it is about time someone stood up to people like you who cannot think beyond their own narrow world view.

It's a good job there were people who stood up to people like you and Broadstairs back in the 70s and 80s, otherwise a thread contemplating the potential "coming out" of a professional footballer wouldn't exist today. And those people actually stood up to people, rather than just spout inane, idiotic and attention-seeking drivel on an internet message board.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was much simpler when we were all Worthy outers or KTFers...

Edited by nutty nigel
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

What a stupid generalisation.  There are many ways to look at many subjects, but mostly "snowflakes" are just those who are too lazy or who are incapable of thinking for themselves and just spout what they think is the party line. At least Broadstairs - and me for that matter - are not afraid of trying to discuss things in a wider sense, but that is not good enough for some.  No, it has to be the party line or you are shouted at, ridiculed and insulted.

I can understand where Broadstairs is coming from - an older person (apologies if you are not) who was probably brought up in a world where to be gay was illegal and morally wrong - it's like being indoctrinated from an early age, not an easy frame of mind to escape from.  Also he probably accepts that it is ok to be gay.....but hey, because of that ingrained attitude from years ago, he still finds it uncomfortable to see gays kissing....so he is not being homophobic - he is merely saying what he thinks - he accepts it but finds it difficult to be comfortable with it.

We are not all perfect and it is about time someone stood up to people like you who cannot think beyond their own narrow world view.  Hoolahansolo is exactly the same.  Always there with a put down rather than actually offer anything constructive.

The inability to try and understand is what snowflakism is all about - shout and be offended at it rather than try and understand it.  You can shout "equality for all" if you like - and fair enough - but understanding requires actual thought.  Like I said, some are  incapable of it.

 

You need to grow up a bit, the opair of you.

I offered my view above. "Snowflake" is an utterly lazy term, banded about by people with ignorant views who get tetchy when others point out their discrimination or inappropriateness. 

If I told you to eff off and you took offence, would it make you a "snowflake"? Of course it wouldn't.

Quite frankly, you come across as an old man who is wholly out-of-touch with the modern world, and blame others for your bigotry.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

It was never morally wrong, you ignorant old fool.

Now, take a deep breath and re-read your post. If you do it with genuine reflection and introspection, you'll feel the need to apologise. Don't worry though, you can just chalk it up to experience and scurry off embarrassed that you've been schooled by a millennial.

But what you've done is essentially torpedoed your own ridiculous position.

You start by justifying Broady's discomfort with homosexuals (another way of saying homophobia) because he was bought up in a world where it was illegal. Have a little think there.....got it yet.....no? I'll explain. What you have described is an example of someone who is"too lazy or...incapable of thinking for themselves and just spouts what they think the party line is".

So what we essentially have is you justifying someone's bigotry because they were simply taught and indoctrinated to a party line and then railing against people who point out their bigotry by saying that they are feeling fake offence because it's what they party line tells them.

In a nutshell, your argument is that it's ok to be homophobic because that was the party line homophobes were raised in, but being offended by homophobic views only happens because of the party line those people were brought up in.

It's a good job there were people who stood up to people like you and Broadstairs back in the 70s and 80s, otherwise a thread contemplating the potential "coming out" of a professional footballer wouldn't exist today. And those people actually stood up to people, rather than just spout inane, idiotic and attention-seeking drivel on an internet message board.

Yet again, absolutely nailed it. I wouldn't hold your breath for even an ounce of contrition, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AJ said:

I like what Jake Humphrey’s said about our club, how we are beyond such a thing as an open and supportive club that is actively fighting homophobia. I’d like to think all the players, whatever their sexuality, feel very loved and welcomed here, and certainly don’t see the need to publicly “come out”. What they do in their private lives is exactly that, private, and we’ll back them on the pitch no matter what 👍

All well and good but flipping it round, why can't these players come out if they want to? And most of them would want to if they felt they could.

Why should they have to hide the existence of their other half if they have one, pretend to have a girlfriend in public (as they will be doing right now), keep their social life in the shadows, live in fear of their feelings being exposed, ridiculed or exploited by the worst elements that still exist in society (some on display here).*

This is what "not coming out" means in reality... not some kind of blissful state of privacy as you seem to be making out - sorry if i have misinterpreted your comment.

*The answer is of course the drip-feed of hatred, persecution and discrimination from an irrational warped minority - whether in board rooms, dressing rooms, the media, online, 'on the terraces', in the street... an influential minority that unnecessarily gains extra power through those who say 'stay silent! or you'll get grief from the bigots'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I see on this thread is a load of name calling and a lack of respect for people having different views

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

What a stupid generalisation.  There are many ways to look at many subjects, but mostly "snowflakes" are just those who are too lazy or who are incapable of thinking for themselves and just spout what they think is the party line. At least Broadstairs - and me for that matter - are not afraid of trying to discuss things in a wider sense, but that is not good enough for some.  No, it has to be the party line or you are shouted at, ridiculed and insulted.

I can understand where Broadstairs is coming from - an older person (apologies if you are not) who was probably brought up in a world where to be gay was illegal and morally wrong - it's like being indoctrinated from an early age, not an easy frame of mind to escape from.  Also he probably accepts that it is ok to be gay.....but hey, because of that ingrained attitude from years ago, he still finds it uncomfortable to see gays kissing....so he is not being homophobic - he is merely saying what he thinks - he accepts it but finds it difficult to be comfortable with it.

We are not all perfect and it is about time someone stood up to people like you who cannot think beyond their own narrow world view.  Hoolahansolo is exactly the same.  Always there with a put down rather than actually offer anything constructive.

The inability to try and understand is what snowflakism is all about - shout and be offended at it rather than try and understand it.  You can shout "equality for all" if you like - and fair enough - but understanding requires actual thought.  Like I said, some are  incapable of it.

 

You need to grow up a bit, the opair of you.

This is all so disingenuous.

Basically everyone that disagrees with you is a snowflake toeing the party line, while you and Broadstairs are the free thinkers.

I don't believe gay rights are important because I'm some indoctrinated idiot following a party line- I believe they are important because a man loving another man or a woman loving another women is entirely natural and anyone who is uncomfortable with that needs to realise that their feelings aren't more important than these peoples freedom to love who they want without judgment or consequence.

You want a debate where most of society has realised these isn't a debate to be had. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the point about the older generation having old fashioned views. That doesn’t make it acceptable though.

If an old man is caught racially abusing somebody, the authorities wouldn’t just let him off because things were different in his day.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

It was never morally wrong, you ignorant old fool.  Now, take a deep breath and re-read your post. If you do it with genuine reflection and introspection, you'll feel the need to apologise. Don't worry though, you can just chalk it up to experience and scurry off embarrassed that you've been schooled by a millennial. But what you've done is essentially torpedoed your own ridiculous position.  You start by justifying Broady's discomfort with homosexuals (another way of saying homophobia) because he was bought up in a world where it was illegal. Have a little think there.....got it yet.....no? I'll explain. What you have described is an example of someone who is"too lazy or...incapable of thinking for themselves and just spouts what they think the party line is".  So what we essentially have is you justifying someone's bigotry because they were simply taught and indoctrinated to a party line and then railing against people who point out their bigotry by saying that they are feeling fake offence because it's what they party line tells them.  In a nutshell, your argument is that it's ok to be homophobic because that was the party line homophobes were raised in, but being offended by homophobic views only happens because of the party line those people were brought up in. It's a good job there were people who stood up to people like you and Broadstairs back in the 70s and 80s, otherwise a thread contemplating the potential "coming out" of a professional footballer wouldn't exist today. And those people actually stood up to people, rather than just spout inane, idiotic and attention-seeking drivel on an internet message board.

What a load of old rubbish.   You - as always - totally fail to understand anything.  You and FTW who I see has agreed with you are symptomatic of those who cannot see beyond the nose in front of their faces.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, FenwayFrank said:

The only thing I see on this thread is a load of name calling and a lack of respect for people having different views

Would you consider “snowflake” name calling? Because it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

What a load of old rubbish.   You - as always - totally fail to understand anything.  You and FTW who I see has agreed with you are symptomatic of those who cannot see beyond the nose in front of their faces.

"Always there with a put down rather than actually offer anything constructive."

Hypocrisy? Completed it mate.

I'm not even saying this for a rise out of you, I have genuinely never, ever encountered someone so lacking in self-awareness.

Edited by canarydan23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I give up trying to talk some sense into this argument. One or two people are so incapable of reading and understanding what is written, who repeatedly fail to understand anything in the context it is written, yet place themselves as judge and jury. Typical - and snowflakism at it's worst. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 "I can understand where Broadstairs is coming from - an older person  ..."

I'm not that old LDC, but sixty is on the distant horizon.

 

However, unlike you I do feel that age is no excuse for prejudice.

I would never want my upbringing to influence my current thinking in any way ... brainpower has to be utilised in a far better way.

In the course of a month or so I have been labelled a racist because I flippantly and without malice used a term about Pakistani cricketers which seemed to cause offence.

Now, because it is my preference not to watch two men kissing I am labelled homophobic.

News to me, but they know best.

I won''t even go into the racist nonsense.

It's all such crass superficial and uncompromising thinking which allows for no middle ground, debate or even assumed pomposity.

I was never aware that being generally genial, not over-concerned with and understanding towards our gay population needed to be in an 'all or nothing package' whereby if you deviate slightly you are immediately placed in the anti camp and are then subjected to name calling. Labels.

My own inclination is that they and their ilk should be encouraged do delve a bit more deeply into these issues, but this appears to be a fruitless ideal as they seem to be stuck in the concrete assumption that it's 'our way or no way.' They are comfortable with the superficial and the second hand.

Oh well! If  it's the Twitterati mentality or something further, I wouldn't know.

It just lacks depth and therefore it is easy fun to rail against. They wax liberal and and get full.of hurt when you call them snowflakes, but then embark upon a tirade of much more inflamed abuse in return.

It's hardly worth pursuing. We may try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

"Always there with a put down rather than actually offer anything constructive."

Hypocrisy? Completed it mate.

I'm not even saying this for a rise out of you, I have genuinely never, ever encountered someone so lacking in self-awareness.

He’s an ignorant old man, a relic of the past, who uses lazy right-wing put downs on anybody that disagrees with his antiquated views.

His pathetic attempts at defending and justifying homophobia, suggest he’s actually the one who can’t see past his own nose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

"Always there with a put down rather than actually offer anything constructive."

Hypocrisy? Completed it mate.

I'm not even saying this for a rise out of you, I have genuinely never, ever encountered someone so lacking in self-awareness.

It's staggering, isn't it? My experience of this board has been so much better since I blocked him. I still feel a little pang of misery when I see the little pop-up: You've chosen to ignore content by lake district canary. It reminds me that he still exists and is still doing his damnedest to suck the fun out of everyone else's experience with his miserable narcissism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

In the course of a month or so I have been labelled a racist because I flippantly and without malice used a term about Pakistani cricketers which seemed to cause offence.

Hahahahaha Jesus Christ, this is absolutely incredible. Just incredible. Still staring blithely into the middle distance with confusion about how using a patently racist epithet, and then spending days trying to justify it and blame everyone else for taking it out of context, led to him being branded a racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

I get the point about the older generation having old fashioned views. That doesn’t make it acceptable though.

If an old man is caught racially abusing somebody, the authorities wouldn’t just let him off because things were different in his day.

 

Kaaboom!!! Times change,  bigots refuse to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

Snowflakism is rife and is a direct result of instant communications of today's world.  More and more people are coming through their lives only ever having known social media as being the norm - and they are not the better for it imo.

Thankfully there are those of us that can remember what it was like before twitter/emails/instant information/internet etc - it was not a bed of roses, but it was a heck of a lot more natural - if you wanted to get in touch with someone, you had to either write to them, go and see them, or talk to them on the phone.   I dare say some will remember times before they even had telephones (real ones, not the little mind distracting toys people have nowadays).

People are too easily offended if you waver from what is deemed as the collective line - ie you have to agree or you will be ostricised by those who think they have some kind of monopoly on what is right, whereas in reality they are just spouting stuff from what they have been told or seen on the internet.

I do believe people are losing the ability to think for themselves.

 

And the Internet has mechanisms to show you what you already subscribe to so you only see what you already agree with. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Hahahahaha Jesus Christ, this is absolutely incredible. Just incredible. Still staring blithely into the middle distance with confusion about how using a patently racist epithet, and then spending days trying to justify it and blame everyone else for taking it out of context, led to him being branded a racist.

Are you for real?

All you've done is just confirmed everything I have recently written.

After that nonsense I need to give up. A tirade of assumption, abuse and ignorance is all you seem capable of.

What the eff is the "middle distance" and furthermore if what I originally said was a "patently racist" epithet (nb) then you have a lot to learn.

I get the impression that you do not really know what proper racism is all about. It's not just about a single word used on a footie foru, that's for sure.

What stupid exaggerated childishness.

Grow up fella. You seem to have spent the entire day boosting your blood pressure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...