Random Media v.4 (Comedy Optional, Interesting Optional)

How do you feel about Vraelomon?

  • Long live The King.

    Votes: 41 31.3%
  • I didn't vote for him.

    Votes: 90 68.7%

  • Total voters
    131

Users who are viewing this thread

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
giphy.gif
 

Nega-Brutus

Sergeant at Arms


Context: Crowder avoids Sam Seder like a plague because Sam is an actual debater.
Crowder challenges h3h3(?) to debate, Sam drops in instead. Crowder ****ing loses it. :fruity:
 

Cyborg Eastern European

Canis Mechanicus
Archduke
Isn't the ability to own people like...half the libertarian platform? :???:

71CjS.jpg

Friend saw this and went "Dio? I don't recognise the other three." :lol:
ZUG4z.jpg
gMr-b.jpg
 
Last edited:

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
Archduke
WBNWM&BVC
UEFA's argument is that Munich's request was linked to the Hungarian team's presence, and thereby political (which it under any other circumstances would not be).
They're walking a rhetorically very thin line :smile:
 

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
UEFA's argument is that Munich's request was linked to the Hungarian team's presence, and thereby political (which it under any other circumstances would not be).
They're walking a rhetorically very thin line :smile:
It is not very clear cut. I bought the UEFA argument about flashing the Hungarians with gay colors being political (as it has to do with a protest against a law in Hungary). There are recent precedents like FIFA objecting to English and other players wearing poppies to celebrate the WW1 Armistice Day (FIFA ultimately backed down).
But then UEFA had to clumsily try to appease its critics by posting a rainbow image of the UEFA logo, claiming it didn't represent gayness for them, but general inclusivity. And that somehow isn't political because they just did that randomly.
 
Last edited:

DanAngleland

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNW
Who decides that a rainbow is gay? Leprechauns in the process of burying their treasure and particular weather events are sick of strangers saying "Oh, I didn't realise you were gay".
 
UEFA's argument is that Munich's request was linked to the Hungarian team's presence, and thereby political (which it under any other circumstances would not be).
They're walking a rhetorically very thin line :smile:
As much as I think literally every building in Europe should be lighted rainbowly due to how stupidly incredibly dull and infuriating and backward and unfair the new Hungarian law is, I actually buy and understand UEFA's arguments. I just found the image funny.
 

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
Archduke
WBNWM&BVC
I think the argument has merit. It's just that homosexuality shouldn't even be a political issue. Respecting your fellow people should be a common thing everyone could agree on, like sportmanship, fair play, honesty etc. that we don't consider political because it's just being a good person.
But sadly it is political, so UEFA should either (1) deny all messages on topics made political, or (2) accept all messages about sexuality as valid.
 
I think the issue here is that any tacit public support of homosexuality implies not only societal acceptance of homosexuals but also a call for legislative or policy changes to remove or soften the discrimination LGBT people face in certain areas. I don't think these two can be divorced which makes the whole rainbow issue political, especially for people (and countries) opposing these changes.

UEFA should maybe just back a little on the apolitical claims or simply state that only political gestures can come from UEFA itself and not the clubs. Claiming to be ultra apolitical ties your hands and can potentially leave you in a situation with no apolitical solution (the decision to order removal / non-removal of Crimea on Ukrainian jerseys has political implications either way). Not to mention that explicit support for BLM movement does not really say apolitical either.
 

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
I think the issue here is that any tacit public support of homosexuality implies not only societal acceptance of homosexuals but also a call for legislative or policy changes to remove or soften the discrimination LGBT people face in certain areas. I don't think these two can be divorced which makes the whole rainbow issue political, especially for people (and countries) opposing these changes.

UEFA should maybe just back a little on the apolitical claims or simply state that only political gestures can come from UEFA itself and not the clubs. Claiming to be ultra apolitical ties your hands and can potentially leave you in a situation with no apolitical solution (the decision to order removal / non-removal of Crimea on Ukrainian jerseys has political implications either way). Not to mention that explicit support for BLM movement does not really say apolitical either.
UEFA is a federation of all European countries. To remain such it needs to avoid becoming biased in quarrels between those countries.
Therefore, it needs to remain apolitical, at least where the target is another country. BLM was not against a particular country (no apartheids in Europe), but the Crimea shirts (actually it was about printed "nationalist" slogans as Crimea is legally Ukrainian) and the spectral stadia had definite targets and UEFA is wise not to allow such shennanigans in their competition.
I think the same principle applies to any such organization - there are several examples where Eurovision songs were banned because they targeted another country. Although there were "human rights" examples too, like banning the Belarus entry because it was an anti-protester propaganda song, and therefore obviously political (and obnoxious to the rest of Europe).
 
Russia challenged the dresses both due to the slogan and Crimea being depicted. The complaint was succesful in the slogan part, but Crimea stayed. My point was that any solution to this complaint is bound to be political. Sometimes, there is no apolitical option at all.
 

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
Russia challenged the dresses both due to the slogan and Crimea being depicted. The complaint was succesful in the slogan part, but Crimea stayed. My point was that any solution to this complaint is bound to be political. Sometimes, there is no apolitical option at all.
This line of thinking is unhelpful, it's like saying "everything is political [so we might as well give up on being apolitical]". There are hard choices and nuances that may change as political debates change, but some organizations have an existential need to try for neutrality and their problems need to be appreciated instead of dismissed.
 
I think either you lost me or I lost you. I am saying that it is sometimes very hard to stay apolitical, sometimes even impossible, and hence either the language (not neccessarily the policy itself) referring to strong neutrality or the gestures regarding inclusivity, racism, sexual minorities and so on should be dropped (and you will still face pretty political issues from time to time) as the mix creates inconsistencies in the justification of your actions and, among other things, memes with Spiderman.
 

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
I think either you lost me or I lost you. I am saying that it is sometimes very hard to stay apolitical, sometimes even impossible, and hence either the language (not neccessarily the policy itself) referring to strong neutrality or the gestures regarding inclusivity, racism, sexual minorities and so on should be dropped (and you will still face pretty political issues from time to time) as the mix creates inconsistencies in the justification of your actions and, among other things, memes with Spiderman.
Examples would be good. I was going after you for not being constructive, comrade! :smile:
The memes thing is spot on, it's very easy to become hypocritical when doing a balancing act on an apolitical rope.
the roma would like a word
The Roma typically need to have a word with themselves first. I've met well-meaning people working with them end up disillusioned.
 
Top Bottom