I agree with you. I just don't think they deserve sympathy for getting complaints about it. I mean, what do you expect holding up a sexually suggestive banner in front of 10,000 people? Thats all I'm saying.Originally Posted by s2cazz
They deserve to be punished if only because of the stupidity of it.
That I really don't know. I am kind of borderline.
They do deserve punishment for the lack of creativity and making a banner that looks like a 2 year old drew it though.
On the other hand, our world is filled with sexual innuendo.
From billboards, to posters, to TV adverts, to movie trailers, to pop music, to...
YET THEY ALL GET AWAY WITH IT!
Well what can you do, the world is what the world is... you can't change it lol.
It does make parenting a little tougher these days though when your kids are exposed to sex on a daily basis...
I know what you are saying but when I take X offending display out of it (not using judgment on the content) and measure that against the tactics being used by their FO and the support of the League based off of 1 Twitter complaint.
That raises a flag or two for support in the MLS in general. There were meetings at the supporters summit that had a tone and now we are seeing implimentation of rules with minimal consultation with the supporters groups.
Road Trips: July 7 2007 Chicago, July 22nd 2007 Columbus, August 11 2007 NY, October 13 2007 LA, March 29 2008 Columbus, May 24th 2008 DC, May 26 2008 Montreal, June 28th 2008 NE, March 7-11-14 2009 Charleston, March 28 2009 Columbus, April 10 2010 New England, May 12 2010 Montreal, April 7 2012 Montreal, March 16 2013 Montreal , June 3 2014 Montreal, March 14 2015 Columbus
Twitter: @RPBPhil
Exactly. While I don't think the banner was appropriate, I also don't think it's any more offensive or sexist than an AXE commercial.
Yet, these same people that would/have complained, will throw their kids in front of the TV to get them out of their hair....which is alright.
But how dare football supporters do this!?!
Give me a break society, you can be so hilariously daft sometimes.
This is what can't be lost in all of this.
I still remember banner-gate last season.
has anyone seen the subject line of the newest TFC email?
I'm sure we can all agree with the feminists that this is very offensive... and by our own FO!
get a sense of humour...
I don't think so.has anyone seen the subject line of the newest TFC email?
I'm sure we can all agree with the feminists that this is very offensive... and by our own FO!
I can find a lot more problems with this banner other than being misogynistic:
That's about it I think... although there probably is some religious discrimination too if I think about it long enough.
- Both women are thin, so it discriminates against fat people
- Both women are young, so it's ageist
- Both women are women, so it's homophobic
- Neither of them are wearing opulent jewelry, so it must be discriminating against poor people
I've made my feelings about the banner itself known, but beyond that this is a critical issue to all of us and its where our attention and support for San Jose's supporters should be. Taking issue with the tactics of their FO shouldn't be confused with approving of the banner.
Snide and dismissive comments won't do anything to change the clear and obvious sexist and demeaning nature of the banner.
I think I understand what you are trying to say. Correct me if I'm wrong. We are not discussing the banner but the reaction.
I agree that the FO acted poorly. If they had an issue, it should have been dealt with right away. Them only having an issue after a complaint is what we are up in arms with. Right?
If that is the case, I think both sides can get in on this. People against the banner should be up in arms over the FO allowing the banner in the first place and people for the banner can be pissed there were sanctions in the first place. Right?
I have to say, it's pretty frustrating reading a lot of the comments. I have a great deal of respect for folks that may disagree but still engaged with these questions. But others who simply discount the perspectives of those critical of this (in inadvertently discounting the groups marginalized by mass soccer culture) really gets on my nerves. If you don't agree, it's fine, we're not going to change your mind anytime soon.. if you don't see issue about something, go ahead and explain why not .. but don't tell me that what I should not be offended at ...
The fact of the matter is, as a social worker, I've seen people have to deal with some really fucked up things .. and a banner certainly pales in comparison.. however, I see the two as very much connected. It's just two sides of the same coin. I am also in no way saying the messaging in this banner was 'exceptional' ... if anything it's not, and with that recognition, we should be more outraged not dismissive. We live in a rape culture that objectifies women and I have no interest in having a community I am very passionate about perpetuate it. If you disagree. Sure. But properly engage with the questions, instead of telling me I am being too serious or whatever..
Agreed.
I can't agree with the FO dictating what is allowed. It's really up to critical SJ fans and other football fans to speak out against what their supporter groups are doing.
All I want to add in, is that if you are in the camp that finds this type of banner inappropriate, I sure as hell hope you do not buy products from companies who use sex to advertise, or support anything that uses sex to push business.
If you do, you're a hypocrite, plain and simple.
It's absolutely unjust to muzzle soccer fans making a sex related joke while big business gets a free pass because their rolling in money.
I don't argue my stance because I support exploiting sex for financial gain, I believe it's wrong deep down to be perfectly honest. However, that's not the way the world works. It is used widely and is EVERYWHERE in EVERYONE's face and unless it's outlawed for all, taking a stance against this banner is flat out not fair.
Uhh.. you're joking, right?has anyone seen the subject line of the newest TFC email?
I'm sure we can all agree with the feminists that this is very offensive... and by our own FO!
Fixed. BTW - the inside joke can be found in the Leafs thread page 764.
LEAFS RULE
Last edited by billyfly; 04-12-2011 at 05:54 PM.
Like this ad that was in the London Free Press a few days ago, and full page too..
First done by BMW in 2008, full size prints in magazines, and billboard ads.
Like this ad that was in the London Free Press a few days ago, and full page too..
^I disagree that those ads are comparable to that TIFO. They're just not. But even if I didn't...
There's a bunch of topics in life, say for example: what the drinking age should be, or what the punishment for using drugs should be, or what constitutes pornography, that work a certain way.
The way these topics work is, somebody in a suit gets to draw where the line is. Like it or not.
If you don't know that going in, that's your problem.
"There are some people who might have better technique than me, and some may be fitter than me, but the main thing is tactics. With most players, tactics are missing. You can divide tactics into insight, trust, and daring." - Johan Cruyff
^
i have no comment on the tifo. I just liked that BMW ad when i first saw it in 2008 and thought it was a brilliant idea for a print ad with appropriate target audience
The offense doesn't come from using sex to advertise or promote its the depiction of the degradation of women that is offensive - there's a world of difference between the two.
A car company using a suggestive picture and caption is risque, but it certainly doesn't violate community standards the way a banner of two women submissively on their knees, grabbed by their hair, about to service a man who's lording over them. The use of force against the women (stand-ins for the opposing teams) and the fact that they aren't willful participants is at the heart of the intended message of the banner.
Not content to let it die in one thread, you now have to spread it to other threads as well? At first your obsession was flattering. Now it's creepy.
Sometimes it feels like I've been in detention walking out of BMO
doubt it
i'm sure people would praise it
Do you honestly think that a banner depicting a guy grabbing another guy buy the hair for the purpose of making him perform oral sex while a third guy submissively awaits the same fate would get praise from anyone ?!?
Moderator
This post remind me somewhat of this Onion article:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/rep...gay-sex,17698/Repeal Of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Paves Way For Gay Sex Right On Battlefield, Opponents Fantasize
WASHINGTON—As Congress prepares to allow gay individuals to serve openly in the military, those against the proposed change voiced their concerns Monday, warning the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" could soon lead to strong, strapping American soldiers engaging in mind-blowing homosexual intercourse right on the battlefield.
"We're sending our soldiers out there with a mission, and that mission is to protect this country," said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), one of many conservative politicians who staunchly oppose the change. "If this is repealed, what's to stop all-night sex romps from breaking out while U.S. servicemen are hiding in a bunker, or crawling around an irrigation ditch bathed only by the light of the moon, or, say, the dozens of other situations I've already thought through in elaborate detail?"
"We can't allow this to happen," Gohmert added as beads of sweat collected on his brow. "It's wrong. Sweaty male sex—no matter how erotic and uninhibited—is so wrong and so, so naughty."
Just sayin'.
Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.
Posting Permissions
