Woke is alive and well

Stirlingsays said:
We agree on this juxtaposition not making much sense.

Also, your observation is correct in explaining what they think they are doing.

However, it's ridiculous and it's not only ridiculous in the sense of criticising this model....who I can't see for the life of me is doing anything wrong....but it's ridiculous in criticising what they tend to refer to as the 'male glaze'.

Most women aren't interested in sport and most men prefer to watch male sport.....of the ones who are interested in watching of course some of them are perving.....So what? I've heard women make comments about Rugby or football players.....What's wrong with that, it might be the only interest they have?

If they want to get rid of these viewers....Ok.....but I don't see it doing them any good.....Can't be many of them anyway.

If they think they are encouraging more girls to take up sport I don't think the angle of implying 'it's alright to be ugly'.....said by a runner with a face full of make up.....is going to do that and is the wrong focus. It comes across as attention seeking to me.

It's also a weird form of snobbery. A weird telling others who they can and can't fancy.....Even if it were possible, which is isn't, it's just a pointless attempt to shame males (because that's who it seems to be directed at) for natural responses and attempting to control them.
Click to expand...

They're criticising the model for contributing to a norm that they dislike.

I don't see that at all - I don't think it has anything to do with being fancied.

The point is a lot of female athletes don't want to be fancied by random blokes. They want to be respected for their talent, as their male counterparts are.
 
CPFCSaturn said:
They're criticising the model for contributing to a norm that they dislike.

I don't see that at all - I don't think it has anything to do with being fancied.

The point is a lot of female athletes don't want to be fancied by random blokes. They want to be respected for their talent, as their male counterparts are.
Click to expand...

I must admit I don't really understand what you're saying here, seems a bit of a contradiction.

'I don't see that at all - I don't think it has anything to do with being fancied.

The point is a lot of female athletes don't want to be fancied by random blokes. '

Regardless, you seem to have just repeated the position I've attacked after I've stated why this is ridiculous.

Also, this notion of 'not being respected'? That doesn't even make sense and again it's controlling and trying to shame people.

Not only have they criticised males for natural responses, when I suspect that most of their male viewership wasn't even perving, but they are attributing attitudes to them.

If we swapped the genders around and these were males saying this I'd also call them out on their ridiculousness.
 
CPFCSaturn said:
You seem to just vaguely grab things from your culture war memory bank and apply them as terrible analogies. It's like a buzzword matching game.

I don't know if 'women' (all of the women?) were sexualising 'the tennis player' (which one?) a few weeks ago - some women may well have been.

If those women also make the argument about the sexualisation of women's sport, you could reasonably accuse them of double standards, sure. I'd argue that historical context would be relevant in that conversation, but it would be a reasonable accusation of those people.

I'm not sure what you think that proves in relation to my post.

#buzzwordbingo
Click to expand...

If the issue is “don’t sexualise women in sport” then selective outrage when it suits the narrative still looks like a double standard.
 
Stirlingsays said:
You seem to have just repeated the position I've attack after I've stated why this is ridiculous.

Also, this notion of 'not being respected'? That doesn't even make sense and again it's controlling and trying to shame people.

Not only have they criticised males for natural responses, when I suspect that most of their male viewership wasn't even perving, but they are attributing attitudes to them.

If we swapped the genders around and these were males saying this I'd also call them out on their ridiculousness.
Click to expand...

You suggested there is someone, I don't know who, "telling others who they can and can't fancy" - I don't see that at all. No one is saying Sydney Sweeney isn't attractive or that you can't find her attractive.

As a separate, but related point; the women who are criticising this are not interested in being fancied by random blokes. There is no contradiction at all.

Just because you view something as ridiculous, it doesn't make it so.

The notion of 'not being respected' doesn't make sense..? You'll have to explain that one.

Who has criticised males for 'natural responses'?
 
Last edited:
eaglesdare said:
If the issue is “don’t sexualise women in sport” then selective outrage when it suits the narrative still looks like a double standard.
Click to expand...

I've literally said those women could be accused of a double standard, yes.

Are the women criticising Sydney Sweeney the same ones who were ogling the tennis player..? Or are you just using 'women' to conflate entirely separate groups of people and then land on a conclusion of double standards?
 
CPFCSaturn said:
Just because you view something as ridiculous, it doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

Pointless statement.

No one's statement on anything, 'makes it so'.

You are aware this is an opinion forum aren't you?

It's not a court room where my judgement sends someone to jail.

CPFCSaturn said:
The notion of 'not being respected' doesn't make sense..? You'll have to explain that one.
Click to expand...

Well, they were your words.

CPFCSaturn said:
Who has criticised males for 'natural responses'?
Click to expand...

She has, it's the implication of the very argument being made.....you yourself stated that the position was against random males finding them attractive.
 
CPFCSaturn said:
I've literally said those women could be accused of a double standard, yes.

Are the women criticising Sydney Sweeney the same ones who were ogling the tennis player..? Or are you just using 'women' to conflate entirely separate groups of people and then land on a conclusion of double standards?
Click to expand...

No idea if it’s the exact same individuals.
But the loudest voices pushing “don’t sexualise women in sport” and the ones who went quiet or sad nothing when the tennis player took his shirt off are the double standards.

Lets be honest here. Sweeney is a white beautiful woman who is republican. That's why there is the outrage. If these women really cared about the sexualization of women in sport they would make sure that men are banned from female sports, their toilets and changing rooms.
 
CPFCSaturn said:
You suggested there is someone, I don't know who, "telling others who they can and can't fancy" - I don't see that at all. No one is saying Sydney Sweeney isn't attractive or that you can't find her attractive.

As a separate, but related point; the women who are criticising this are not interested in being fancied by random blokes. There is no contradiction at all.
Click to expand...


Errrr.....there is certainly a contradiction that is obvious to anybody sensible.

It's an attempt to shame those males who find them attractive....when that's a natural response for them.

If you can't see that perhaps it's pointless discussing it with you.
 
Stirlingsays said:
Pointless statement.

No one's statement on anything, 'makes it so'.

You are aware this is an opinion forum aren't you?

It's not a court room where my judgement sends someone to jail.



Well, they were your words.



She has, it's the implication of the very argument being made.....you yourself stated that the position was against random males finding them attractive.
Click to expand...

Exchanges with you always leave my totally baffled - I genuinely can't work if it's deliberate or a comprehension issue, but you consistently end up miles and miles away from the point.

They weren't my words, they were yours - word for word: "Also, this notion of 'not being respected'? That doesn't even make sense"

Yes, most female athletes are not interested in being found attractive by random blokes, they are interested in being judged as athletes - not a part of that sentence, or my previous one, is criticising males.
 
eaglesdare said:
No idea if it’s the exact same individuals.
But the loudest voices pushing “don’t sexualise women in sport” and the ones who went quiet or sad nothing when the tennis player took his shirt off are the double standards.

Lets be honest here. Sweeney is a white beautiful woman who is republican. That's why there is the outrage. If these women really cared about the sexualization of women in sport they would make sure that men are banned from female sports, their toilets and changing rooms.
Click to expand...

Ok, so you have no idea if there's a double standard, but you're going to fling the accusation around regardless.

The republican bit genuinely made me laugh - credit where it's due.
 
CPFCSaturn said:
Exchanges with you always leave my totally baffled - I genuinely can't work if it's deliberate or a comprehension issue, but you consistently end up miles and miles away from the point.

They weren't my words, they were yours - word for word: "Also, this notion of 'not being respected'? That doesn't even make sense"
Click to expand...

Post 2,221

'The point is a lot of female athletes don't want to be fancied by random blokes. They want to be respected for their talent'

CPFCSaturn said:
Yes, most female athletes are not interested in being found attractive by random blokes, they are interested in being judged as athletes - not a part of that sentence, or my previous one, is criticising males.
Click to expand...

Repeating points that have already been answered. Unless you have something new to say there's no point carrying on this nonsense.
 
Stirlingsays said:
Post 2,221

'The point is a lot of female athletes don't want to be fancied by random blokes. They want to be respected for their talent'



Repeating points that have already been answered. Unless you have something new to say there's no point carrying on this nonsense.
Click to expand...

SO WHAT PART OF 'NOT BEING RESPECTED' DOESN'T MAKE SENSE? YOU SAID IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. WHY DOESN'T IT MAKE SENSE!?



It's definitely deliberate :drunk:
 
eaglesdare said:
Lets be honest here. Sweeney is a white beautiful woman who is republican. That's why there is the outrage. If these women really cared about the sexualization of women in sport they would make sure that men are banned from female sports, their toilets and changing rooms.
Click to expand...

And that's the crux of it. If this was a "dove advert" style thing showing all the female pigs of the world doing sport but wearing fk.all and yet acting sexually then you wouldn't have the BBC, Guardian and other woke agenda agencies complaining and publishing it.

Well done Sweeney for just being female
 
CPFCSaturn said:
The double standard of women who criticised Sydney Sweeney and also ogled an unnamed tennis player who took his shirt off - we obviously have no idea what overlap exists between those groups, but you can just invent one as it suits.
Click to expand...

You completely misunderstood my point. My point is that why did the woman who have called out Sweeney for "sexualizing women in sport" not also call out the women who "sexualized men in sport". It's selective outrage and double standard.
 
CPFCSaturn said:
The double standard of women who criticised Sydney Sweeney and also ogled an unnamed tennis player who took his shirt off - we obviously have no idea what overlap exists between those groups, but you can just invent one as it suits.
Click to expand...

Who cares. What kind of knt do you have to be to get so upset by fancying the opposite sex. If it was same sex ogling then NONE IF THIS would've been brought up, except the opposite
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top