more PC garbage

Associate
Joined
14 Feb 2004
Posts
1,103
Location
London
Lionesses welcomed home

what a load of *******s - how is this sexist or patronising even if taken out of context, cut and paste, painted splattered stated whatever?


Let's replace that exact sentence with the male equivalents:
Our lions go back to being fathers, partners and sons but they have taken on another title: heroes...

Is that sexist to any of you? Do any fella's here feel their rights have been compromised? Any of us feel patronised by this?

It's garbage like this that mocks the real struggles faced by women in gender equality - so how is it that this tosh is given the light of day? Honestly makes me furious
 
It seems pretty clear to me and very obviously sexist. That headline would never be used for men, because it's seen as OK that they are professional footballers. However, for some that isn't extended to female players. Instead, it's something they do part time and now that's over they are back to doing their subservient roles.
It was extremely poor taste, and very sexist.

I disagree with you, and actually think that this demonstrates how far we still have to come to tackle inequality in gender.
 
Well I can understand how it can be seen as sexist but honestly don't think it was the intention but rather a poorly written tweet.
 
To be fair some of the coverage of the women's game in general has been pretty horrific. Eni Aluko's column on the BBC was quite priceless stating that anyone who compares the women's game with the mens is misguided and ignorant, then she refers to one of her England colleagues as 'the mini Messi'. Last time I checked I'm pretty sure he played for the mens Argentinian squad. But that might be more of a reflection on the intelligence of footballers in general :p
 
It seems pretty clear to me and very obviously sexist. That headline would never be used for men, because it's seen as OK that they are professional footballers. However, for some that isn't extended to female players. Instead, it's something they do part time and now that's over they are back to doing their subservient roles.
It was extremely poor taste, and very sexist.

I disagree with you, and actually think that this demonstrates how far we still have to come to tackle inequality in gender.

But the women aren't professional footballers. They're part time players. They do all those things that are described. How is telling the truth sexist?
 
So there going back home because they got knocked out of whatever competition ? hardly heroes then are they oh wait modern schooling you are a hero for taking part, here have a badge timmy
 
But the women aren't professional footballers. They're part time players. They do all those things that are described. How is telling the truth sexist?

The whole point is that the women have been defined by their genders. They aren't doctors, lawyers, soldiers, or whatever. They are just women who's only real role is to be subservient to their men.

That is how the message came across, and that's the outrage. There's a very similar thing to people seeing someone with a disability and letting that disability form the identity of the person.

It's quite clearly wrong.
 
It seems pretty clear to me and very obviously sexist. That headline would never be used for men, because it's seen as OK that they are professional footballers. However, for some that isn't extended to female players. Instead, it's something they do part time and now that's over they are back to doing their subservient roles.
It was extremely poor taste, and very sexist.

I disagree with you, and actually think that this demonstrates how far we still have to come to tackle inequality in gender.

How exactly are any of the terms:

"Mother"
"Partner"
"Daughter"

Subservient in any way, shape or form?

If you want something "sexist" to whinge about, lets get started on the P&G "Mums are heroes" advertising campaign which is extremely sexist against men, because apparently dads don't exist :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
The whole point is that the women have been defined by their genders. They aren't doctors, lawyers, soldiers, or whatever. They are just women who's only real role is to be subservient to their men.

That is how the message came across, and that's the outrage. There's a very similar thing to people seeing someone with a disability and letting that disability form the identity of the person.

It's quite clearly wrong.

Again it's accurate. So it's not wrong. The things listed are what those women do day to day. Go look up the jobs of each of the individuals.
They are part time players who are classified therefore as amateurs.
 
Back
Top Bottom