CLUB STATEMENT- BK8 CONTRACT TERMINATED

[spindrift 23]

21 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

Just an FYI JK Rowling is probably not a good example, she’s been pretty thoroughly panned recently for her views on trans rights. I didn’t know anything about it either until I saw some very vocal stuff that was really negative about her.

After she "liked" some horribly transphobic tweets she claimed it was a mistake.

 

All that money and she still targets minorities. 

[lake district canary 4,531]

3 hours ago, FatCanary said:

3 hours ago, Branston Pickle said:

Absolutely- it’s quite astonishing the insistence if some that their view is the only acceptable one (eg LDC who is imo wrongly being lauded elsewhere). There’s always shades of grey.

I like you.

Ah, I see. So because I persistently disagreed with some people who were persistently putting across their view of it makes me in the wrong.  Strange how people view things, but it seems to me like it was a fair discussion - they put their views, I put mine. I thought that was what a discussion forum was all about.

[FatCanary 249]

Just now, lake district canary said:

Ah, I see. So because I persistently disagreed with some people who were persistently putting across their view of it makes me in the wrong.  Strange how people view things, but it seems to me like it was a fair discussion - they put their views, I put mine. I thought that was what a discussion forum was all about.

 

Why am I tagged in this? I just said I like Branston

[spindrift 23]

Quote

Football finance expert

@KieranMaguire

says Norwich won't have had to pay a financial penalty to cancel their partnership with BK8. He says 'good faith clauses' are commonplace in the sport.

 

 

[spindrift 23]

Maybe if BK8 hadn't lied three times in official company press releases it wouldn't have looked so bad for them. First they claimed the social media posts were "rogue" then "historic" then "deleted". All false claims.

 

So if a gambling firm are dishonest in official company press releases  it makes you wonder how scrupulously even-handed and open they were when they induced those young women to debase themselves..

[FatCanary 249]

Just now, spindrift said:

Maybe if BK8 hadn't lied three times in official company press releases it wouldn't have looked so bad for them. First they claimed the social media posts were "rogue" then "historic" then "deleted". All false claims.

 

So if a gambling firm are dishonest in official company press releases  it makes you wonder how scrupulously even-handed and open they were when they induced those young women to debase themselves..

You're probably right.

You've still got no proof of anything though.

[Monty13 2,231]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

Another FYI, what JK Rowling was getting thoroughly panned for was utter horsesh*t peddled by morons, and funnily enough, today a the Court of Appeal has actually set out a judgement that proves the grief she was getting was utter horsesh*t.

Maya Forstater lost her job because she held the belief that sex is immutable and cannot be changed and said as much on social media. As a direct result of that, her contract of employment was not renewed. She took her employer to a tribunal and inexplicably lost. In response, many people came out in support of her and a hashtag #IStandWithMaya erupted. JK Rowling pledged her own support with this...

...does any sane person think that is worthy of abuse? Following it, she doubled down and has come out supporting the so-called "gender-critical" viewpoint, railing publicly against marketing materials that are reluctant to use the word woman and instead use terms like "womb-haver" and "menstruator". Once again, nothing unusual or cruel, nothing personally insulting and nothing controversial.

Anyway, Maya Forstater understandably took the tribunal judgement to appeal and this morning the Court of Appeal released their judgement and ruled that no one should be discriminated against for holding the belief that sex is real, important and not to be conflated with the relatively modern concept of gender identity.

So, JK Rowling is an exceptionally good example. Admittedly she has the financial safety net to do so, but she came out fighting for people who had been unfairly treated despite the fact that, evidently from your comment, it would do her serious reputational damage, including her having to put up with sh*tty actors like Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint publically throwing her under the bus, despite the fact that a professional career in acting would never have come their way if it wasn't for JK Rowling.

So, in case you didn't know, the "incredibly vocal stuff that was really negative about her" will almost certainly have been disingenuous garbage from misguided or malicious idiots.

Anyway, back to the less explosive topic of fellating meat products... 

I didn’t say I agreed, or am particularly interested in the controversy, only that it exists.

However if you think it’s just a few misguided malicious idiots that don’t like her you are really spinning things disingenuously for some reason. You just have to start writing JK Rowling in Google and transphobic comes up and then their are literally tons of articles on what she’s said from mainstream media and it’s not limited to what you’ve posted.

Given the length of your post on what is arguably a subjective issue, I’m guessing you have a strong opinion. However it does not stop something from existing. There’s nothing legally wrong with what BK8 did either. 

In the court of public opinion we are all our own judge, I just found the example an interesting one given the controversy that has erupted around her.

[spindrift 23]

Just now, FatCanary said:

You're probably right.

You've still got no proof of anything though.

Here's the proof:

 

Quote

Despite BK8 saying in a statement on Monday that their marketing techniques were "historical", a video advertising Euro 2020 containing sexualised images of young women could be found on Youtube as recently as Tuesday morning, before being promptly taken down just a few hours later.

So we know the company are dishonest because we have proof of their dishonesty. Simples!

 

https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2021-06-10/norwich-city-announce-mutual-termination-of-controversial-bk8-sponsorship-deal-after-fan-backlash

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, spindrift said:

After she "liked" some horribly transphobic tweets she claimed it was a mistake.

 

All that money and she still targets minorities. 

That's bo**cks, by the way.

The main one that the TRA lobby talk about was her liking a tweet BY A TRANS WOMEN that said;

"Hormone prescriptions are the new antidepressants. Yes they are sometimes necessary and lifesaving, but they should be a last resort - not the first option. Pure laziness for those who would rather medicate that put in the time and effort to heal people's minds."

She liked that and was accused of all sorts. It's not transphobic, never has been. No one to this date has been able to show a single quote from JK Rowling that can be objectively described as transphobic. She has dozens and dozens of trans people that openly and publicly support her.

[Branston Pickle 3,654]

10 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Ah, I see. So because I persistently disagreed with some people who were persistently putting across their view of it makes me in the wrong.  Strange how people view things, but it seems to me like it was a fair discussion - they put their views, I put mine. I thought that was what a discussion forum was all about.

Precisely.  It is until you start to try to dictate who/what/when people are allowed to discuss.. (un?) fortunately that thread has been pulled though. 

Edited June 10, 2021 by Branston Pickle

[spindrift 23]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

That's bo**cks, by the way.

The main one that the TRA lobby talk about was her liking a tweet BY A TRANS WOMEN that said;

"Hormone prescriptions are the new antidepressants. Yes they are sometimes necessary and lifesaving, but they should be a last resort - not the first option. Pure laziness for those who would rather medicate that put in the time and effort to heal people's minds."

She liked that and was accused of all sorts. It's not transphobic, never has been. No one to this date has been able to show a single quote from JK Rowling that can be objectively described as transphobic. She has dozens and dozens of trans people that openly and publicly support her.

What are the transphobic tweets she liked that I'm talking about?

 

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

29 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I didn’t say I agreed, or am particularly interested in the controversy, only that it exists.

However if you think it’s just a few misguided malicious idiots that don’t like her you are really spinning things disingenuously for some reason. You just have to start writing JK Rowling in Google and transphobic comes up and then their are literally tons of articles on what she’s said from mainstream media and it’s not limited to what you’ve posted.

Given the length of your post on what is arguably a subjective issue, I’m guessing you have a strong opinion. However it does not stop something from existing. There’s nothing legally wrong with what BK8 did either. 

In the court of public opinion we are all our own judge, I just found the example an interesting one given the controversy that has erupted around her.

The length of my post is due to the fact that I have been following this tawdry saga for a couple of years, since I fell down the rabbit-hole through following Graham Linehan. Thankfully, recent signs suggest that commonsense is finally starting to prevail and those misguided idiots (perhaps the "few" but was incorrect) are being put back in their boxes. It'll be too late for some people, like the weightlifters losing out on prize money and opportunities to Lauren Hubbard, or the cyclists who have lost out on medals to Rachel McKinnon, it's too late for Tammika Brents fractured orbital bone, or the American college sprinters like Selina Soule and Chelsea Mitchell being denied victories and opportunities through being forced to race against male people, but hopefully their injustices will be repeated less in future. 

But back to JK Rowling, I'll set you a challenge, and from what you say about your Google searches this should be an easy assignment;

Present me with one single quote that came from JK Rowling that is objectively transphobic.

Edited June 10, 2021 by canarydan23

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 minutes ago, spindrift said:

What are the transphobic tweets she liked that I'm talking about?

You tell me.

[spindrift 23]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

You tell me.

So when you said "That's ****" you had no idea what I was talking about.

 

You've just played yourself son.

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, spindrift said:

So when you said "That's ****" you had no idea what I was talking about.

 

You've just played yourself son.

That's lovely.

So, about those tweets.

Where are they?

[spindrift 23]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

That's lovely.

So, about those tweets.

Where are they?

If you don't know what they are you have no idea whether they're bo**llocks. 

 

You're not very good at this.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, spindrift said:

If you don't know what they are you have no idea whether they're bo**llocks. 

 

You're not very good at this.

I don't know what they are.

But then again, I don't know what the tooth fairy is beyond a concept that only lives in the imagination of people.

Just like your "tweets" that she liked and apologised for. They're as real as a the tooth fairy, aren't they?

I suspect you've gotten yourself a little confused with the time she inadvertently added a vile quote from Tara Wolf, a trans women convicted of assaulting a women, to a reply to a child who praised The Ickabog. She quickly deleted it and apologised.

You've an open goal to prove me wrong and make me look a right tw*t here. Just take the shot... 

[spindrift 23]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

I don't know what they are.

 

So naturally you have no idea whether they're "bo**ocks", so yelling: "What you're saying is bo**ocks!" then admitting you don't know what I'm talking about makes you look like a silly sausage. 

 

Seriously mate, you're not cut out for rational, informed debate. You lack the skills and the knowledge. It' embarrassing.

[g00se 21]

1 hour ago, The Real Buh said:

 

and some fans are campaigning that a certain type of woman is not welcome in our club. They don’t fit our “family values” and they need to be removed from the place.

 

F-sake... no one's complaining about the women, they're complaining about the exploitation of them to sell product. Twisting the situation to argue for your right to look at t*ts and a*se is too obvious. 

[Monty13 2,231]

6 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

The length of my post is due to the fact that I have been following this tawdry sage for a couple of years, since I fell down the rabbit-hole through following Graham Linehan. Thankfully, recent signs suggest that commonsense is finally starting to prevail and those misguided idiots (perhaps the "few" but was incorrect) are being put back in their boxes. It'll be too late for some people, like the weightlifters losing out on prize money and opportunities to Lauren Hubbard, or the cyclists who have lost out on medals to Rachel McKinnon, it's too late for Tammika Brents fractured orbital bone, or the American college sprinters like Selina Soule and Chelsea Mitchell being denied victories and opportunities through being forced to race against male people, but hopefully their injustices will be repeated less in future. 

But back to JK Rowling, I'll set you a challenge, and from what you say about your Google searches this should be an easy assignment;

Present me with one single quote that came from JK Rowling that is objectively transphobic.

You seem to be misunderstanding my point and looking for an argument around something that I don’t particularly have strong opinions on or care about.

So let me lay it out. JK Rowling and Phillip Green were picked as the examples of two personalities and who would rather have in charge of our club. The implication being one was objectively the obvious choice.

My point was rather than the good v evil choice it was presented as in many peoples view it would actually be a lesser of two evils.

A controversy exists around JK Rowling, one that spread much farther and wider (not surprisingly given their relative fame) than the one surrounding BK8. Whether you agree with either controversy is irrelevant, a controversy exists.

Personally I wouldn’t want a figure with the level and area of controversy around her that JK Rowling has created associated with our Club any more than BK8 or Philip Green. The subjective level of moral outrage each has garnered is relevant IMO only to individually rank them to your own preferences of who you’d least like.

[Robornio 106]

53 minutes ago, spindrift said:

There is plenty of evidence. I even posted the examples.

 

We know that women have been coerced, threatened and tricked into these acts. We know that the company involved has alliances with hard-core pornographers and we know that they used trickery and evasion to circumvent UK ASA rules. The evidence is clear, the evidence shows that this firm uses deceit and lies to evade the rules and break the advertising standards.

 

"We need to ascribe the highest, purest motives to a gambling company who we know breaks the rules and exploits women!"

 

We most certainly don't.

 

 Let's face it, your educational level is not high. You don't understand how apostrophes work, you can't spell simple words, you have a nasty and creepy attitude toward women and you dislike being proved wrong. If your points are refuted you immediately change the subject. You're not very well informed or bright so you become emotional when your argument is demolished. It's unedifying.

Is there meant to be a sense of irony in your posts? 😄

Because someone doesn’t agree with your dogmatic opinions, it doesn’t mean they are “less intelligent” or “wrong”. Resorting to abuse is also not helping your cause here.

Secondly, your items of “evidence” both actually originate from opinion pieces – one, from some unknown TV magazine and the other from the Guardian, who are like vultures and can’t wait to voice an opinion on discrimination or controversy, if it backs their own agenda.

Thirdly, we need to stop using the word “phobia”, the Greco-Latin word for fear, when describing hate crime. Fear is not hate. Please update your vocabulary.

Finally, while I’m sure your world of Human Rights legislation is interesting to you, let’s bring this back to discussions about our wonderful club and have a happier day. Otherwise, get outside, do something productive or enjoy a nice frappe latte. 😁

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, spindrift said:

So naturally you have no idea whether they're "bo**ocks", so yelling: "What you're saying is bo**ocks!" then admitting you don't know what I'm talking about makes you look like a silly sausage. 

 

Seriously mate, you're not cut out for rational, informed debate. You lack the skills and the knowledge. It' embarrassing.

I don't think you're in any position to talk about rational, informed debate given what a failure you're doing at attempting it here. I'll give you a really simple example;

Person A: I think this is true!

Person B: That's boll*cks!

Person A: No it's not, here's proof.

Person B: *scuttles away with his tail between his legs*

You can make me that Person B. Instead, you made the comment that JK Rowling; ""liked" some horribly transphobic tweets she claimed it was a mistake. All that money and she still targets minorities."

Knowing what I know about the subject, I believe that to be patently false, or, using a more colourful terminology, boll*cks.

Your response, "WeLl, YoU, dOn'T kNoW wHaT tWeEtS i'M tAlKiNg AbOuT so STFU."

Just tell me what tweets you're talking about.

Careful though, the children's news website The Day were threatened with legal action and forced into a humiliating apology when they tried to insinuate that JK Rowling was transphobic and harmful to trans people.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

Just now, g00se said:

F-sake... no one's complaining about the women, they're complaining about the exploitation of them to sell product. Twisting the situation to argue for your right to look at t*ts and a*se is too obvious. 

Like I said I’m sure women everywhere appreciate you telling them what to do and how to think.

[g00se 21]

Just now, The Real Buh said:

Like I said I’m sure women everywhere appreciate you telling them what to do and how to think.

Nah - that makes no sense. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

2 minutes ago, g00se said:

Nah - that makes no sense. 

Will the women that don’t meet the family guidelines at Carrow road be shamed publicly or taken into a side room with party officials

[cambridgeshire canary 6,704]

37 minutes ago, spindrift said:

 

 

Shh don't go against the narative!

[g00se 21]

2 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Will the women that don’t meet the family guidelines at Carrow road be shamed publicly or taken into a side room with party officials

Nah... nope, still not making sense. 

No one is stopping you looking at **** though, still lots of places to look. 

[WD40 720]

1 minute ago, The Real Buh said:

Will the women that don’t meet the family guidelines at Carrow road be shamed publicly or taken into a side room with party officials

It’s not about the women

 

4 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Will the women that don’t meet the family guidelines at Carrow road be shamed publicly or taken into a side room with party officials

Your attempt to twist this into something else is an embarrassing attempt at saving face. But by all means keep digging.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

1 minute ago, WD40 said:

It’s not about the women

#HerGameToo

[king canary 7,603]

49 minutes ago, WD40 said:

It’s not about the women

 

Your attempt to twist this into something else is an embarrassing attempt at saving face. But by all means keep digging.

I've said before, he's a sad sack low level **** poster trying to bring his hilarious edge lord act from 4chan and reddit to a Norwich city forum. Best ignored at this point.