comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 3 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Twitter is full of intolerant Africans. And they have the worst opinions on football. Racism will never go away as long as we have Africans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah its their fault people are racist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed his jist.😉
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gist.
And No, I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You did
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did he say racism was Africans fault? He didn’t. He pointed out many of arrrse backwards viewpoints, which from what I’ve seen on SM is absolutely spot on
comment by Alejandro The King Garnacho (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
It’s a bit stupid to assume that someone that holds certain beliefs are unspoken. It’s through interaction that people come to hold certain beliefs.
However, if we were to indulge this claim it would only be through these beliefs being seen as so heinous by society that they felt the need to not repeat them.
Which begs the question: do you think heinous beliefs should be allowed to be held because of free thought and respect to someone’s belief.
The defence that it causes no harm to hold a belief unless it is acted upon is a terrible argument, because by allowing certain beliefs to be held and respected it gives it license to disseminate which makes actions inevitable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It had often been said that we should respect other people's beliefs. But I reject this. I respect someone's right to have a belief, but that does not mean I respect their belief itself.
The harm of a belief is an indirect one. This would have to be the first time I've seen liberals paying any heed to indirect harm. Usually if something doesn't cause any direct harm, they're fine with it.
I would agree that beliefs shouldn’t necessarily be respected. The mantra itself may be a liberal one but it has always come with certain stipulations, and it’s used in all political circles to justify certain agendas.
I wouldn’t say that liberals are unconcerned with indirect harm, however. Quite the opposite in fact, it’s usually liberal circles that are pushing the case for indirect harm being cause by certain beliefs. Where liberals may be uncomfortable with things like that happening is when it may be seen as a contradiction, I think this is particularly the case with regard to freedom of religion and an opposition to cultural imperialism.
There’s a tension there that people will try to avoid, but like RR points out there’s a paradox in much of this thinking rather than it always being inconsiderate or contradictory.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
What if next season a Newcastle player refuses to wear their third kit—which is an imitation of the Saudi team's kit?
No room for personal beliefs anymore it seems, everyone has to fall in line with the corporate order (the new organised religion).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem with personal beliefs being shared and I'd applaud any Newcastle player who spoke out against e.g. the extrajudicial murder of Khashoggi and the hypocrisy of the footballing administrators who one minute talk about inclusivity and the next allow our institutions to be bought by a regime that executes gay people. I do have a problem with the expression of personal beliefs if the upshot of that speech is contributing to a culture where minority groups feel they can't participate in the world of football.
This isn't inconsistency. It's the paradox of tolerance: sometimes you need to be intolerance of intolerance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it would depend on how you're defining 'intolerance'. Someone having a different viewpoint is not intolerance in and of itself. You will all struggle with this as you're expected to approve of things that are getting increasingly ridiculous. There is already tension between feminist and trans for instance.
Anyway, is the view of one minority likely to exclude another minority from football despite support from the majority?
comment by Alejandro The King Garnacho (U10026)
posted 11 minutes ago
I would agree that beliefs shouldn’t necessarily be respected. The mantra itself may be a liberal one but it has always come with certain stipulations, and it’s used in all political circles to justify certain agendas.
I wouldn’t say that liberals are unconcerned with indirect harm, however. Quite the opposite in fact, it’s usually liberal circles that are pushing the case for indirect harm being cause by certain beliefs. Where liberals may be uncomfortable with things like that happening is when it may be seen as a contradiction, I think this is particularly the case with regard to freedom of religion and an opposition to cultural imperialism.
There’s a tension there that people will try to avoid, but like RR points out there’s a paradox in much of this thinking rather than it always being inconsiderate or contradictory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the understanding more or less is that you can believe what you like as long as you don't preach hate. Drawing the line there balances the rights of both parties.
So what we are saying is it's OK to be a cant as long as you do it in secret (voting tory and not admitting to it)
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 3 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Twitter is full of intolerant Africans. And they have the worst opinions on football. Racism will never go away as long as we have Africans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah its their fault people are racist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed his jist.😉
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gist.
And No, I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You did
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did he say racism was Africans fault? He didn’t. He pointed out many of arrrse backwards viewpoints, which from what I’ve seen on SM is absolutely spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup...you got the jist.👍
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 4 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 58 minutes ago
People have the right to believe what they want and they don’t have to act in the way that others with different views have to. Guaye made a choice that is his right. He doesn’t have to have different views imposed on him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see you haven’t replied to Dyron, just so he get your stands are you pro or anti bumming?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You would love the Scottish boards, buddy🤣👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve occasionally visited, been drawn in by some hilarious threads like chimp vs Bruce lee on there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha, who would win?
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Alejandro The King Garnacho (U10026)
posted 11 minutes ago
I would agree that beliefs shouldn’t necessarily be respected. The mantra itself may be a liberal one but it has always come with certain stipulations, and it’s used in all political circles to justify certain agendas.
I wouldn’t say that liberals are unconcerned with indirect harm, however. Quite the opposite in fact, it’s usually liberal circles that are pushing the case for indirect harm being cause by certain beliefs. Where liberals may be uncomfortable with things like that happening is when it may be seen as a contradiction, I think this is particularly the case with regard to freedom of religion and an opposition to cultural imperialism.
There’s a tension there that people will try to avoid, but like RR points out there’s a paradox in much of this thinking rather than it always being inconsiderate or contradictory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the understanding more or less is that you can believe what you like as long as you don't preach hate. Drawing the line there balances the rights of both parties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s a legal sense, but the cultural sense is more sensitive than that.
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
What if next season a Newcastle player refuses to wear their third kit—which is an imitation of the Saudi team's kit?
No room for personal beliefs anymore it seems, everyone has to fall in line with the corporate order (the new organised religion).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem with personal beliefs being shared and I'd applaud any Newcastle player who spoke out against e.g. the extrajudicial murder of Khashoggi and the hypocrisy of the footballing administrators who one minute talk about inclusivity and the next allow our institutions to be bought by a regime that executes gay people. I do have a problem with the expression of personal beliefs if the upshot of that speech is contributing to a culture where minority groups feel they can't participate in the world of football.
This isn't inconsistency. It's the paradox of tolerance: sometimes you need to be intolerance of intolerance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it would depend on how you're defining 'intolerance'. Someone having a different viewpoint is not intolerance in and of itself. You will all struggle with this as you're expected to approve of things that are getting increasingly ridiculous. There is already tension between feminist and trans for instance.
Anyway, is the view of one minority likely to exclude another minority from football despite support from the majority?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess the devil is in the detail. I'm not advocating exclusion of any 'groups' (and not really exclusion, just holding to minimum standards), but rather individuals who claim there's no place in this sport for people like XYZ.
As for your second paragraph, we're at a point where the first man for 30 years has come out as gay in English football and it is widely seen as incredibly brave. I'd hold off congratulating ourselves as the enlightened majority for a while yet.
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 13 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
What if next season a Newcastle player refuses to wear their third kit—which is an imitation of the Saudi team's kit?
No room for personal beliefs anymore it seems, everyone has to fall in line with the corporate order (the new organised religion).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem with personal beliefs being shared and I'd applaud any Newcastle player who spoke out against e.g. the extrajudicial murder of Khashoggi and the hypocrisy of the footballing administrators who one minute talk about inclusivity and the next allow our institutions to be bought by a regime that executes gay people. I do have a problem with the expression of personal beliefs if the upshot of that speech is contributing to a culture where minority groups feel they can't participate in the world of football.
This isn't inconsistency. It's the paradox of tolerance: sometimes you need to be intolerance of intolerance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it would depend on how you're defining 'intolerance'. Someone having a different viewpoint is not intolerance in and of itself. You will all struggle with this as you're expected to approve of things that are getting increasingly ridiculous. There is already tension between feminist and trans for instance.
Anyway, is the view of one minority likely to exclude another minority from football despite support from the majority?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this sums up my views really. Holding a different view is not intolerance in itself. Attitudes move so quickly in this world and some people and 'institutions' who have long and deep seated views struggle to keep up and modernise. The change in attitudes takes time and this is a constantly evolving thing and I think it is wrong to single out people or groups that hold such beliefs where they do not manifest themselves as intolerance or worse. if people treated others equally regardless of their beliefs then these debates would not be necessary. I would sepearte race from this though as racism is founded in pure prejudice, based on superiority and hatred. such views can never result in people being treated equally. You cannot consider people as inferior and treat them as your equal.
Devonshirespur, you can validly argue that deep-seated cultural or religious homophobia ought to be approached with sensitivity. There are firmer and gentler ways of pushing for equality. I struggle to see how you can argue it isn't 'intolerance' though. It's a refusal to acknowledge or welcome the coexistence of gay people in the public realm on the basis that their lifestyle is unnatural or evil.
As to the second part of your post, this is what I've been trying to pin down. A crux of your position is that, essentially, you think racism is absolutely wrong, whereas homophobia is maybe not quite so clear-cut.
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 17 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 3 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Twitter is full of intolerant Africans. And they have the worst opinions on football. Racism will never go away as long as we have Africans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah its their fault people are racist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed his jist.😉
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gist.
And No, I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You did
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did he say racism was Africans fault? He didn’t. He pointed out many of arrrse backwards viewpoints, which from what I’ve seen on SM is absolutely spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed my jist.😉
Backward viewpoints? According to whom? You? According to them your viewpoints are equally if not more facked up.
Sign in if you want to comment
twatbook
Page 7 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 20/5/22
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 3 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Twitter is full of intolerant Africans. And they have the worst opinions on football. Racism will never go away as long as we have Africans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah its their fault people are racist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed his jist.😉
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gist.
And No, I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You did
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did he say racism was Africans fault? He didn’t. He pointed out many of arrrse backwards viewpoints, which from what I’ve seen on SM is absolutely spot on
posted on 20/5/22
comment by Alejandro The King Garnacho (U10026)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
It’s a bit stupid to assume that someone that holds certain beliefs are unspoken. It’s through interaction that people come to hold certain beliefs.
However, if we were to indulge this claim it would only be through these beliefs being seen as so heinous by society that they felt the need to not repeat them.
Which begs the question: do you think heinous beliefs should be allowed to be held because of free thought and respect to someone’s belief.
The defence that it causes no harm to hold a belief unless it is acted upon is a terrible argument, because by allowing certain beliefs to be held and respected it gives it license to disseminate which makes actions inevitable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It had often been said that we should respect other people's beliefs. But I reject this. I respect someone's right to have a belief, but that does not mean I respect their belief itself.
The harm of a belief is an indirect one. This would have to be the first time I've seen liberals paying any heed to indirect harm. Usually if something doesn't cause any direct harm, they're fine with it.
posted on 20/5/22
I would agree that beliefs shouldn’t necessarily be respected. The mantra itself may be a liberal one but it has always come with certain stipulations, and it’s used in all political circles to justify certain agendas.
I wouldn’t say that liberals are unconcerned with indirect harm, however. Quite the opposite in fact, it’s usually liberal circles that are pushing the case for indirect harm being cause by certain beliefs. Where liberals may be uncomfortable with things like that happening is when it may be seen as a contradiction, I think this is particularly the case with regard to freedom of religion and an opposition to cultural imperialism.
There’s a tension there that people will try to avoid, but like RR points out there’s a paradox in much of this thinking rather than it always being inconsiderate or contradictory.
posted on 20/5/22
*inconsistent
posted on 20/5/22
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
What if next season a Newcastle player refuses to wear their third kit—which is an imitation of the Saudi team's kit?
No room for personal beliefs anymore it seems, everyone has to fall in line with the corporate order (the new organised religion).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem with personal beliefs being shared and I'd applaud any Newcastle player who spoke out against e.g. the extrajudicial murder of Khashoggi and the hypocrisy of the footballing administrators who one minute talk about inclusivity and the next allow our institutions to be bought by a regime that executes gay people. I do have a problem with the expression of personal beliefs if the upshot of that speech is contributing to a culture where minority groups feel they can't participate in the world of football.
This isn't inconsistency. It's the paradox of tolerance: sometimes you need to be intolerance of intolerance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it would depend on how you're defining 'intolerance'. Someone having a different viewpoint is not intolerance in and of itself. You will all struggle with this as you're expected to approve of things that are getting increasingly ridiculous. There is already tension between feminist and trans for instance.
Anyway, is the view of one minority likely to exclude another minority from football despite support from the majority?
posted on 20/5/22
comment by Alejandro The King Garnacho (U10026)
posted 11 minutes ago
I would agree that beliefs shouldn’t necessarily be respected. The mantra itself may be a liberal one but it has always come with certain stipulations, and it’s used in all political circles to justify certain agendas.
I wouldn’t say that liberals are unconcerned with indirect harm, however. Quite the opposite in fact, it’s usually liberal circles that are pushing the case for indirect harm being cause by certain beliefs. Where liberals may be uncomfortable with things like that happening is when it may be seen as a contradiction, I think this is particularly the case with regard to freedom of religion and an opposition to cultural imperialism.
There’s a tension there that people will try to avoid, but like RR points out there’s a paradox in much of this thinking rather than it always being inconsiderate or contradictory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the understanding more or less is that you can believe what you like as long as you don't preach hate. Drawing the line there balances the rights of both parties.
posted on 20/5/22
So what we are saying is it's OK to be a cant as long as you do it in secret (voting tory and not admitting to it)
posted on 20/5/22
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 3 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Twitter is full of intolerant Africans. And they have the worst opinions on football. Racism will never go away as long as we have Africans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah its their fault people are racist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed his jist.😉
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gist.
And No, I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You did
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did he say racism was Africans fault? He didn’t. He pointed out many of arrrse backwards viewpoints, which from what I’ve seen on SM is absolutely spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup...you got the jist.👍
posted on 20/5/22
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 4 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 58 minutes ago
People have the right to believe what they want and they don’t have to act in the way that others with different views have to. Guaye made a choice that is his right. He doesn’t have to have different views imposed on him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see you haven’t replied to Dyron, just so he get your stands are you pro or anti bumming?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You would love the Scottish boards, buddy🤣👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve occasionally visited, been drawn in by some hilarious threads like chimp vs Bruce lee on there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha, who would win?
posted on 20/5/22
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Alejandro The King Garnacho (U10026)
posted 11 minutes ago
I would agree that beliefs shouldn’t necessarily be respected. The mantra itself may be a liberal one but it has always come with certain stipulations, and it’s used in all political circles to justify certain agendas.
I wouldn’t say that liberals are unconcerned with indirect harm, however. Quite the opposite in fact, it’s usually liberal circles that are pushing the case for indirect harm being cause by certain beliefs. Where liberals may be uncomfortable with things like that happening is when it may be seen as a contradiction, I think this is particularly the case with regard to freedom of religion and an opposition to cultural imperialism.
There’s a tension there that people will try to avoid, but like RR points out there’s a paradox in much of this thinking rather than it always being inconsiderate or contradictory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the understanding more or less is that you can believe what you like as long as you don't preach hate. Drawing the line there balances the rights of both parties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s a legal sense, but the cultural sense is more sensitive than that.
posted on 20/5/22
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 58 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
What if next season a Newcastle player refuses to wear their third kit—which is an imitation of the Saudi team's kit?
No room for personal beliefs anymore it seems, everyone has to fall in line with the corporate order (the new organised religion).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem with personal beliefs being shared and I'd applaud any Newcastle player who spoke out against e.g. the extrajudicial murder of Khashoggi and the hypocrisy of the footballing administrators who one minute talk about inclusivity and the next allow our institutions to be bought by a regime that executes gay people. I do have a problem with the expression of personal beliefs if the upshot of that speech is contributing to a culture where minority groups feel they can't participate in the world of football.
This isn't inconsistency. It's the paradox of tolerance: sometimes you need to be intolerance of intolerance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it would depend on how you're defining 'intolerance'. Someone having a different viewpoint is not intolerance in and of itself. You will all struggle with this as you're expected to approve of things that are getting increasingly ridiculous. There is already tension between feminist and trans for instance.
Anyway, is the view of one minority likely to exclude another minority from football despite support from the majority?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess the devil is in the detail. I'm not advocating exclusion of any 'groups' (and not really exclusion, just holding to minimum standards), but rather individuals who claim there's no place in this sport for people like XYZ.
As for your second paragraph, we're at a point where the first man for 30 years has come out as gay in English football and it is widely seen as incredibly brave. I'd hold off congratulating ourselves as the enlightened majority for a while yet.
posted on 21/5/22
comment by N2 (U22280)
posted 13 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
What if next season a Newcastle player refuses to wear their third kit—which is an imitation of the Saudi team's kit?
No room for personal beliefs anymore it seems, everyone has to fall in line with the corporate order (the new organised religion).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem with personal beliefs being shared and I'd applaud any Newcastle player who spoke out against e.g. the extrajudicial murder of Khashoggi and the hypocrisy of the footballing administrators who one minute talk about inclusivity and the next allow our institutions to be bought by a regime that executes gay people. I do have a problem with the expression of personal beliefs if the upshot of that speech is contributing to a culture where minority groups feel they can't participate in the world of football.
This isn't inconsistency. It's the paradox of tolerance: sometimes you need to be intolerance of intolerance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it would depend on how you're defining 'intolerance'. Someone having a different viewpoint is not intolerance in and of itself. You will all struggle with this as you're expected to approve of things that are getting increasingly ridiculous. There is already tension between feminist and trans for instance.
Anyway, is the view of one minority likely to exclude another minority from football despite support from the majority?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this sums up my views really. Holding a different view is not intolerance in itself. Attitudes move so quickly in this world and some people and 'institutions' who have long and deep seated views struggle to keep up and modernise. The change in attitudes takes time and this is a constantly evolving thing and I think it is wrong to single out people or groups that hold such beliefs where they do not manifest themselves as intolerance or worse. if people treated others equally regardless of their beliefs then these debates would not be necessary. I would sepearte race from this though as racism is founded in pure prejudice, based on superiority and hatred. such views can never result in people being treated equally. You cannot consider people as inferior and treat them as your equal.
posted on 21/5/22
Devonshirespur, you can validly argue that deep-seated cultural or religious homophobia ought to be approached with sensitivity. There are firmer and gentler ways of pushing for equality. I struggle to see how you can argue it isn't 'intolerance' though. It's a refusal to acknowledge or welcome the coexistence of gay people in the public realm on the basis that their lifestyle is unnatural or evil.
As to the second part of your post, this is what I've been trying to pin down. A crux of your position is that, essentially, you think racism is absolutely wrong, whereas homophobia is maybe not quite so clear-cut.
posted on 21/5/22
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 17 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by TBABlue and Yellow. (U9292)
posted 3 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Assassin Baby - (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Twitter is full of intolerant Africans. And they have the worst opinions on football. Racism will never go away as long as we have Africans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah its their fault people are racist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed his jist.😉
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gist.
And No, I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You did
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did he say racism was Africans fault? He didn’t. He pointed out many of arrrse backwards viewpoints, which from what I’ve seen on SM is absolutely spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you missed my jist.😉
posted on 21/5/22
Backward viewpoints? According to whom? You? According to them your viewpoints are equally if not more facked up.
Page 7 of 7
6 | 7