Jump to content

Rayvin

Moderators
  • Posts

    19259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Rayvin last won the day on June 21 2021

Rayvin had the most liked content!

About Rayvin

  • Birthday 12/04/1985

Recent Profile Visitors

3374 profile views

Rayvin's Achievements

Mentor

Mentor (12/14)

  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

3k

Reputation

  1. They have a thread complaining that the BBC hasn't given them sufficient attention on Look North. "BBC Look Newcastle". https://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/bbc-look-north.1580345/ They're fucking weapons man, almost to a man. No other club in the country, not one club anywhere, will have whacked up a thread about whether or not their latest achievement received sufficient coverage on the BBC regional news.
  2. What the fuck is wrong with the Tory party... and more to the point, what is wrong with anyone who votes for them!
  3. The guy trying to argue that their owner is the son of the guy who is responsible for this so it's totally different. Aye mate, and we're owned by PIF and not the Saudi state, two totally different things, I assure you!
  4. Have to say mind, responses so far are entirely based on whataboutery. I mean we all know that none of the people giving us a hard time about this do actually give a fuck about the issues - we probably give more of a fuck tbh - but stuff like this really does show how vapid and disingenuous these attacks are. Not only do they not care, clearly, about the human component of the matters they bring up - they're also actively capitalising on them, using the plight of these people to sling mud in a local rivalry. That's not limited to the mackems mind, I think you could apply that to everyone in football who gets worked up about this shit.
  5. Is Aubameyang world class?? I have him set at "average to good" in my head, which is a few rungs below where Morgan seems to rate him. Don't really pay attention to Arsenal though I guess.
  6. Ritchie might get subbed on at the end or something, but it's an away game after all so limited impact for the sentimental stuff anyway. Nice to see we're set up professionally though. EDIT - why Lascelles over Schar?
  7. Aye, I'm just going to read Gemmill's inevitable MBM on here.
  8. I want them to lose here because honestly I don't think they'll go back down again if they go up. I mean they're not getting out of the championship anytime soon but I'm fairly sure they'll consolidate without getting relegated next season if they do go up. Sadly, I reckon this is probably where (this particular aspect of) the hilarity of Sunderland's plight ends.
  9. Glendenning doing the guardian's MBM for it I assume he begged them to let him do one.
  10. Christ man, is there any other club in the country that has this much of a carry on about going to London? You're left to imagine that most of them genuinely never leave Sunderland at all. Which would explain, amongst other things, the inbreeding.
  11. I mean, I thought that this was a respectful and interesting discussion. Didn't get the sense that anyone was going to fall out. Either way, fair enough.
  12. Yeah I've 180'd fully on this on thinking it through. I can't reconcile holding the view that "opposing" someone over something they can't change is in any way acceptable or productive, and it should be called out. It may be a "belief" but not all beliefs are benign. And his non-involvement may be actively harming homosexual people within Islamic communities. He may simply be ignorant of the facts, but he can fix that by informing himself. I'm sorry for my initial post which was poorly thought through and insensitive tbh.
  13. It's a tough one though because the flag is asking him to say "I think homosexual people should be treated with the same respect in their private lives as everyone else" and his non-consent to support that notion is saying... I mean presumably the opposite. He's not saying "I choose not to be gay" (as if that was an option) - he's instead saying "I reject the notion that this other person can "choose" to be gay". That does feel like a fairly solid step over a line that we wouldn't accept in other contexts?
  14. Tbh I've thought myself out of that view I think. We have a responsibility to act on information and evidence that is logical and well evidenced. That is something I fundamentally believe. If we cannot logically oppose a view, we should accept it until a better alternative comes along. This means that Gueye has either rejected the logical and well evidenced information that indicates that homosexuality is not a choice, in which case he should be criticised for it. Or he has determined that it's not a choice but that it's ok to oppose people for things they can't change about themselves. In which case he should be criticised for it since that's no different to racism. The only possible wiggle room IMO is that he could claim that the rainbow flag represents some sort of political dimension and statement beyond simply attempting to advocate for the notion that homosexuality is acceptable, but I wouldn't be generous enough to grant him that interpretation unless he actually said it. And even then it's weak.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.