An appeal for Eddie

[S.S. Bleeder]

Even today I am amazed how soft the AFL and the media was on Eddie. Roseanne makes a monkey comment and they attack her like a group of vultures. Eddie calls Goodsey King Kong and he gets away Scot free. Identical comments and one is a racist and the other is just a commentator telling a joke!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's because Eddie is left wing whilst Rosie is right wing. That's how the overly politically correct and biased media works in the world these days.

It was actually quite embarrassing how Roseanne was treated. She, along with her fellow cast gets the sack for her making a monkey reference in a tweet whilst the rest of Hollywood says "@@@@ Trump" verbally and they get a pat on the back.

The political world is so unreasonably balanced.

[CureTheSane]

Only the political right claim this.....pathetically and desperately. No, not all white people are privileged but one thing is for sure, a person of colour is far more qualified to give an opinion on the 'non-white' experience...... The 'privilege' you refer to is actually......not being subjected to racism, bigotry, suspicion, lack of opportunity, stereotyping and being treated differently. I, as a non indigenous person, have never had to experience any of this undeserved burden in my life.....and I feel lucky, even privileged......but also slightly ashamed and very ready to listen.

Rubbish.
Go down to some housing commission flats and see how those in lower socio-economic categories are treated.
I fully understand the argument that you and others are trying to make, but you are saying that because of my skin colour I am able to come close to understanding the issues at hand that are faced by others.
Apparently my moral compass is locked in place, unable to move towards the 100% required to make a comment, because of my skin colour?

[CureTheSane]

Not really. Annie is not saying Cherny is "not worthy of making a comment", only that his comment carries very little weight because it is not informed by experience. Annie takes this further than I would, but there is a point to be made. What you seem to be suggesting - and I may be wrong here, please correct me if I am - is that all opinions are equally valid and carry equal weight. They aren't. Some draw on evidence, experience and reason. Others, to paraphrase Annie's colourful words, are pulled directly out of people's arses.

Of course. And different experiences allow for different angles on the issue.
There is also a morality argument here as well ie: a large proportion of the population is well on board with what is trying to be achieved and the opinions from these people should not be diminished due to lack of direct experience with the particular issue.

There are many arguments that I don't agree with, but that doesn't completely make them invalid.
Without these arguments (that most won't agree with) there IS no argument to be had.
There needs to be protagonists to create an issue and only after that can arguments be had and changes perhaps made.

But I've said it before. This issue, and many others like it, are generational.
I am constantly surprised at how my kids' generation is so different with regard to all forms of prejudice, inclusion and how these issues are so vastly lessened amongst them.

[stevoswan]

Rash generalisation that implies that if you are white (and this apparently is connected at the hip to privilege) then you are not worthy of having a comment.

Only the political right claim this.....pathetically and desperately. No, not all white people are privileged but one thing is for sure, a person of colour is far more qualified to give an opinion on the 'non-white' experience...... The 'privilege' you refer to is actually......not being subjected to racism, bigotry, suspicion, lack of opportunity, stereotyping and being treated differently. I, as a non indigenous person, have never had to experience any of this undeserved burden in my life.....and I feel lucky, even privileged......but also slightly ashamed and very ready to listen.

[Bloods05]

Rash generalisation that implies that if you are white (and this apparently is connected at the hip to privilege) then you are not worthy of having a comment.

Not really. Annie is not saying Cherny is "not worthy of making a comment", only that his comment carries very little weight because it is not informed by experience. Annie takes this further than I would, but there is a point to be made. What you seem to be suggesting - and I may be wrong here, please correct me if I am - is that all opinions are equally valid and carry equal weight. They aren't. Some draw on evidence, experience and reason. Others, to paraphrase Annie's colourful words, are pulled directly out of people's arses.

[CureTheSane]

Just to be clear, the Eddie in the thread title is Eddie Betts. Different from Eddie McG in several directions!

On a side note with regards to McGuire, it's interesting how quickly things can and have changed.
Australia certainly considers itself to be more racially enlightened than America.
Yet if you look at the Roseanne comment and the result of her comment you would say that Eddie completely dodged a bullet.
I wonder what the reaction would be (both public and as a retaliation) if he came out with something like that today?

[CureTheSane]

The article was written from a position of white privilege.
Unless you have personally been racially vilified, you have personally been told to "go back to where you come from", have personally been told that because you are brown you are not good enough, you are talking directly from your arse.

Rash generalisation that implies that if you are white (and this apparently is connected at the hip to privilege) then you are not worthy of having a comment.

[dimelb]

Just to be clear, the Eddie in the thread title is Eddie Betts. Different from Eddie McG in several directions!

[stevoswan]

Even today I am amazed how soft the AFL and the media was on Eddie. Roseanne makes a monkey comment and they attack her like a group of vultures. Eddie calls Goodsey King Kong and he gets away Scot free. Identical comments and one is a racist and the other is just a commentator telling a joke!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't miss Roseanne and she got what she deserved.....and wish I could say the same about Eddie. But this is Australia......

[0918330512]

Even today I am amazed how soft the AFL and the media was on Eddie. Roseanne makes a monkey comment and they attack her like a group of vultures. Eddie calls Goodsey King Kong and he gets away Scot free. Identical comments and one is a racist and the other is just a commentator telling a joke!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

On the AFL app there is a flashback to when Plugger (as a Saint) threw his crutch at Chins. They interviewed the Fat Controller recently for the clip and he smugly thinks the incident was amusing and takes no ownership for being the media vulture in the incident.

[crackedactor]

I agreed with Daniel Cherny's main message, but am disappointed about his shifty fence-sitting on Goodesy, especially on the girl who was removed from the MCG (which Adam followed up in an empathic way), and allowing the booers excuse (BS if ever I smelt it).

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...14-p4zljn.html

Even today I am amazed how soft the AFL and the media was on Eddie. Roseanne makes a monkey comment and they attack her like a group of vultures. Eddie calls Goodsey King Kong and he gets away Scot free. Identical comments and one is a racist and the other is just a commentator telling a joke!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KSAS]

Thanks to the Bolt's and Jones's of this world......and the fact that the 'too political' label they pinned on him got picked up and ridden with by the mainstream media gave a lot of journo's all they needed to keep their articles safe for a majority non-indigenous market (and still does) and it also gave the AFL the 'feedback' they needed for a response (or lack of it) that ultimately enabled the haters and for an absolute champion of the game, Adam Goodes......irretrievably failed him.

Will never forget Gill's look of a rabbit staring onto oncoming head lights when first asked what he thought was behind the ever increasing booing of Goodes and saying he wasn't sure. Like the Hawthorn FC president (Newbould), they didn't want to admit it was racially motivated because protecting their brand was the priority and not Goodes.

[KSAS]

In fact the reference to ?Invasion Day? was done in an extremely conciliatory context. So much so Goodes was attacked by more activist indigenous leaders (in effect being called an ?Uncle Tom?).

Thanks for that insight Meg, wasn't aware of that which makes you feel even more for what Adam was going through.

[stevoswan]

+1 That what got me. So many editorials & people at the time had a go at Adam for making a "Invasion Day" reference during his Australian of the Year acceptance speech, when it was obvious they hadn't heard his entire speech. It was taken completely out of context & if they had bothered to hear his speech they would've seen how passive it was. But no, he was instantly labelled as some sort of political activist which still carries on to this day judging by this article.

Thanks to the Bolt's and Jones's of this world......and the fact that the 'too political' label they pinned on him got picked up and ridden with by the mainstream media gave a lot of journo's all they needed to keep their articles safe for a majority non-indigenous market (and still does) and it also gave the AFL the 'feedback' they needed for a response (or lack of it) that ultimately enabled the haters and for an absolute champion of the game, Adam Goodes......irretrievably failed him.

[Meg]

So many editorials & people at the time had a go at Adam for making a "Invasion Day" reference during his Australian of the Year acceptance speech, when it was obvious they hadn't heard his entire speech. It was taken completely out of context & if they had bothered to hear his speech they would've seen how passive.

In fact the reference to ?Invasion Day? was done in an extremely conciliatory context. So much so Goodes was attacked by more activist indigenous leaders (in effect being called an ?Uncle Tom?).