Trash Talking in the AFL

[Bombermania]

Which Law are you referring to?

Workplace laws.

 

[CrowToon]

Zorko has form as a shite bloke. Just ask his ex-wife.

This is just as cowardly and unhelpful as Zorko's sledging. It doesn't have anything to do with what he did last night.

 

[CrowToon]

Personally I think it’s pathetic that a comment from an opposition player can bring a bloke to tears. Toughen up for * sake. How soft have we become. They’re only words

You, and those like you, are part of the reason people are not playing footy these days.

 

[Ramify]

If someone could chose to be hurt by a word or not, why would anyone chose to be hurt by it?

The idea that you can choose to be offended by something is the most ridiculous idea in modern society.

How's about the idea that you could feint, fake or overstate being offended?

 

[NaturalDisaster]

How's about the idea that you could feint, fake or overstate being offended?

Thats different to being genuinely hurt by something.

 

[JasRulz63]

Zorko has form as a shite bloke. Just ask his ex-wife.

I agree. Same judgement applies to Dimma Hardwick I assume?

 

[Tugga27]

I googled it and you were right and apparently the sledge was about Darren Millane, not Mick's Father.

But I heard that rumour when I was in high school at any rate (over 20 years ago) and Woosha (whom I really admired as a player) did have a reputation for being a trash talker on field.

Yep, Woosha gave as good as he got but I don't think he would go over the line.

McGuire pretty much said Millane would've belted him if he said that. Caroline Wilson brought it up and Ed said it never happened.

 

[Nostradumbass]

How good was this?

Also apparently running into goal, Tony Lockett used to target loud mouth opposition Cheer squad members who gave him lip with a lethal hard short kick !

Remember the two old couples that sat behind the goals at every Sydney game? Lockett slammed one into them once.

 

[Ramify]

Thats different to being genuinely hurt by something.

Of course, but it's not much different in regard to the choice or ability to choose.
Do you agree people of this day and age are more easily offended than those that have come before us? Those that had/have more pressing issues of survival to contend with on a day to day basis than finding deeper offensive meaning in the words of some random?

It is an individuals choice as to how much weight they places on potentially offensive material. If there weren't "choice" then every single human would be offended by the exact same thing to the exact same degree which just isn't the case, even in these progressive times.

 

[Bombermania]

Of course, but it's not much different in regard to the choice or ability to choose.
Do you agree people of this day and age are more easily offended than those that have come before us? Those that had/have more pressing issues of survival to contend with on a day to day basis than finding offensive meaning in the words of some random?

It is an individuals choice as to how much weight they places on potentially offensive material. If there weren't "choice" then every single human would be offended by the exact same thing to the exact same degree which just isn't the case, even in these progressive times.

People have always been judgemental and easily offended, the AFL is riddled with rivalries built on little incidents.

 

[NaturalDisaster]

Of course, but it's not much different in regard to the choice or ability to choose.
Do you agree people of this day and age are more easily offended than those that have come before us? Those that had/have more pressing issues of survival to contend with on a day to day basis than finding offensive meaning in the words of some random?

No, only what people get offended over changes. Humans are emotional creatures (as much as many like to pretend we are not) and have been taken offense to things other people do and say since as long as we've existed.

The idea that people should wash their hands after using the toilet was once considered offensive to many.

It is an individuals choice as to how much weight a person places on potentially offensive material. If there weren't "choice" then every single human would be offended by the exact same thing to the exact same degree which just isn't the case, even in these progressive times.

Of course context matters.

Saying a "ya mumma" joke to a mate you know whos mother is alive and well vs someone whos mother has just passed away. Of course the latter is going to be genuinely hurt compared to the former, does that mean they should just "choose" not to be hurt?

 

[Ramify]

People have always been judgemental and easily offended, the AFL is riddled with rivalries built on little incidents.

Absolutely some people have and some people haven't.

I,e I could take offence to the part "in this day and age" because it could easily be construed that comment insinuates that Im somehow backward or ignorant for not sharing the "progressive" modern day viewpoint of the person I quoted, or I could simply fob it away as a baseless backhanded micro-agression(lol) that doesn't really bother me because I feel it's based on a lack of understanding.

My point is there is always choice no matter what day and age we live in.

 

[Ramify]

No, only what people get offended over changes. Humans are emotional creatures (as much as many like to pretend we are not) and have been taken offense to things other people do and say since as long as we've existed.

The idea that people should wash their hands after using the toilet was once considered offensive to many.



Of course context matters.

Saying a "ya mumma" joke to a mate you know whos mother is alive and well vs someone whos mother has just passed away. Of course the latter is going to be genuinely hurt compared to the former, does that mean they should just "choose" not to be hurt?

Exactly. What people have chosen to be offended by has changed.

Assessment of context in relation to the level of hurt you then experience is a concious decision making process= choice.

 

[iameviljez]

Do you agree people of this day and age are more easily offended than those that have come before us?

No, actually, I don't. I just think that what we find offensive has changed.

We used to be hugely offended about swearing, offences to God, offences to sexual decency, and offences to nationhood. Graham Kennedy was booted off-air for six weeks for making a joke about the f-bomb on TV. Lennon was pretty much cancelled in America for an offhand comment that the Beatles were bigger than Jesus.

Now we're offended about things like prejudice and language.

 

[sherb]

Personally I think it’s pathetic that a comment from an opposition player can bring a bloke to tears. Toughen up for * sake. How soft have we become. They’re only words

So someone could say anything to you and you wouldn't react because they are "only words"?

Bull****.

 

[Ramify]

No, actually, I don't. I just think that what we find offensive has changed.

We used to be hugely offended about swearing, offences to God, offences to sexual decency, and offences to nationhood. Graham Kennedy was booted off-air for six weeks for making a joke about the f-bomb on TV. Lennon was pretty much cancelled in America for an offhand comment that the Beatles were bigger than Jesus.

Now we're offended about things like prejudice and language.

You have some points.
My thrust was that we have choice when

No, actually, I don't. I just think that what we find offensive has changed.

We used to be hugely offended about swearing, offences to God, offences to sexual decency, and offences to nationhood. Graham Kennedy was booted off-air for six weeks for making a joke about the f-bomb on TV. Lennon was pretty much cancelled in America for an offhand comment that the Beatles were bigger than Jesus.

Now we're offended about things like prejudice and language.

You have some good points there I concede.

Your points back my position that we have choice in what we find offensive/hurtful and to what degree.

 

[iameviljez]

You have some good points there I concede.

Your points back my position that we have choice in what we find offensive/hurtful and to what degree.

Cheers

FWIW, I think we have choice up to a point. If it’s someone just being offensive and breaking an etiquette rule, yep you choose whether to be offended or not. But if it’s really genuinely hurtful, and from someone whose opinion matters to you, then often you don’t really have a choice IMO.

 

[Iamspock]

oh wow how wrong you are
as someones whos father was a merciless bully i can tell you now, yes he hit brutally on occassion, but what has really really scarred my mind, and i can still hear the comments at the age of 58, are the words. I did not choose that and i could not escape. day after ******* day, it took me a very long time to say yes, * you, i am good enough. He destroyed my mother. and before you say it, no back then she couldnt leave. when she could she did, but it was far too late to save her.

Thanks for sharing Magpie Jo, I'm sorry you've been made to suffer, especially by someone you should have been able to trust and feel safe with. Your reply shows how raw and long lasting these awful experiences continue to be.

 

[iameviljez]

To my mind, anything about football is absolutely fair game - and it's the most effective sledge, too.

Luke Parker

26

Luke Parker

Age

31

Ht

183cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.2

5star

K

12.6

5star

HB

11.6

5star

M

3.8

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.8

5star

D

22.1

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

9.9

5star

M

3.9

4star

T

5.0

5star

CL

5.5

5star

D

21.2

5star

K

11.4

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

8.0

5star

CL

5.2

5star

with the "shrug" against Dylan Shiel

9

Dylan Shiel

Age

31

Ht

182cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.6

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

12.2

5star

M

3.1

3star

T

3.9

5star

CL

4.9

5star

D

23.4

5star

K

13.6

5star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.2

2star

T

3.4

4star

CL

6.4

5star

D

19.8

5star

K

8.4

4star

HB

11.4

5star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.6

4star

CL

3.8

5star

? No issue with it. Same goes with Sam Mitchell's "jab" motion - after all, it's a footy issue.

 

[theyellowsash]

Everything is bullying now in the same way that everything is harassment. Harassment used to mean PERSISTENT unwanted attention. Now it's a single remark.

In the same way bullying used to mean an ongoing campaign and now people use the word to describe a one off.

And anyone who says words are worse than physical violence is deeply ignorant. Every single person that has ever been hurt by a word has chosen to be hurt by it. The difference between the verbal and the physical is you don't have a choice when it is physical.

Thats some pretty solid victim blaming there, up there with "Africans shouldn't do crimes if they don't want to be profiled" and "women should cover up if they don't want to get r*ped"

 

[NewMelbournian]

Thats some pretty solid victim blaming there, up there with "Africans shouldn't do crimes if they don't want to be profiled" and "women should cover up if they don't want to get r*ped"

The connection with the first example doesn't even make sense. As for the second example, you realise I am the one arguing that verbal attacks aren't as serious as physical crimes? Rape is obviously a physical crime. So logically I would not be the one minimising that. It's your side saying words can be as bad or worse than physical attacks.

 

[killtaker1993]

In school footy I got fat-shamed almost every week as I was a bit chunky - I remember once some kid asked why I am so fat and I just responded 'I love eating your sister's rancid box every night'

 

[theyellowsash]

The idea that we have no ability to self control our feelings and emotions is not healthy. It gives too much power to the person trying to hurt you. I know "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me" is not fashionable anymore. But perhaps people should take a look at the change in the suicide rate over the last few decades and maybe it would suggest that not all modern ideas are working. And not all old fashioned ideas were wrong.

Wow you're an absolute dropkick. Blaming people who committed suicide as just being too soft and easily offended.

People like you are thankfully being consigned to history. The world will be a better place when ideas like this are long dead and buried.

 

[theyellowsash]

The connection with the first example doesn't even make sense. As for the second example, you realise I am the one arguing that verbal attacks aren't as serious as physical crimes? Rape is obviously a physical crime. So logically I would not be the one minimising that. It's your side saying words can be as bad or worse than physical attacks.

Point. Missed.

Then again I'm not expecting much in the way of comprehension skills from a psychopath such as yourself.

 

[Happy_Neale]

The idea that we have no ability to self control our feelings and emotions is not healthy. It gives too much power to the person trying to hurt you. I know "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me" is not fashionable anymore. But perhaps people should take a look at the change in the suicide rate over the last few decades and maybe it would suggest that not all modern ideas are working. And not all old fashioned ideas were wrong.

You do realise a large number of the suicides you refer to are men who grew up in the age where showing feelings was considered a weakness?