Manly Inclusive Pride jersey backlash

Status
Not open for further replies.
jirskyr said:
It's not a stunt if the Manly hierarchy believe in it. And even then, almost certainly not a stunt for the LGBTQI community.

I would never expect 2022 Manly to assume to bank a win against Roosters, even with a full side.
Click to expand...
It is a stunt for a couple of reasons…
1. Scott Penn described what he thought was occurring was very different to what we ended up with.
2. Celebrities knew before the players did
3. It was launched on a round that was already devoted to a cause.
 
Earl said:
I hope the NRL looks at this and does something about. I saw Israel Folau's wife called the NRL boss a hypocrite. She isn't exactly right but I get her point.

The difference is Folau was openly preaching hatred towards gay people. These players are just stating we don't agree with it and we won't participate.

I hope something comes out of this but I don't see anything really changing unless religions change and start accepting that a person's sexuality is not a big deal.
Click to expand...
Earl, your sentence I've bolded is unfortunately typical of what can go wrong .
He wasn't preaching, he quoted a bible verse that mentioned homosexuals amongst a group of 6 or 7 other categories of "sinners" that should repent.
Nobody from the adulterer or murderous community got outraged. They happily went on screwing the neighbour and killing blokes.
1/7th of the "accused" (in a verse that he didn't write, just quoted) . . . . . only 1/7th saw fit to blow the whole thing sky high.
No need to guess which 14.28% it actually was.
Anyway, seeing that the rainbow people are so focused on inclusiveness, tolerance and understanding . . . you would think that THEY would be pushing for an NRL jersey with a full colour image of Our Lord Jesus Christ on the front, and the Blessed Virgin Mary on the back.
That ticks all the boxes they use for their own platform. Diversity, inclusiveness, tolerance and acceptance.
Except that tolerance and inclusiveness only work for them when you agree with them.
Funny, that.
 
Not to defend Manly's lack of consultation with the players or hijacking of women in league round, but it makes sense for manly as a club to support this cause given the very progressive demographic of the northern beaches. 75% of the beaches population supported marriage equality in 2017. It's like the Bulldogs being the first club to embrace multicultural day in the 90s given their multicultural fanbase.
 
TV Ted Ellery said:
Not to defend Manly's lack of consultation with the players or hijacking of women in league round, but it makes sense for manly as a club to support this cause given the very progressive demographic of the northern beaches. 75% of the beaches population supported marriage equality in 2017. It's like the Bulldogs being the first club to embrace multicultural day in the 90s given their multicultural fanbase.
Click to expand...
Great point, why couldn't the nrl just say wear the jersey if u want or just wear the regular one simple really.
 
liltiger said:
So if I agree with the players stand does that make me homophobic, even though one of my closest mates is gay and also supports the players for refusing to wear the jerseys.
Click to expand...

I can't tell you if you are homophobic or not. It's just asking a question.
 
Why did the players find out last , and yet others new months prior , was it to hope it just slipped through with no issue no kick back , I wonder , also the fact they dumped it on woman of league round , did Manly not know it was woman of league round or the NRL forget it was woman of league round , I think they forgot respect all of them , Manly , NRL , Rainbow
 
TV Ted Ellery said:
Not to defend Manly's lack of consultation with the players or hijacking of women in league round, but it makes sense for manly as a club to support this cause given the very progressive demographic of the northern beaches. 75% of the beaches population supported marriage equality in 2017. It's like the Bulldogs being the first club to embrace multicultural day in the 90s given their multicultural fanbase.
Click to expand...
The original intention was not just about ‘gay pride’. It was about inclusion of EVERYONE. The LGBTQI+ community made it all about them.
What we got is a bastardised version of a good intention by the same group who always hijack headlines for self promotion.
FFS…Chanel nine has unofficially renamed this round, which is totally unfair to all women who’ve helped make this game what it is.
 
liltiger said:
Great point, why couldn't the nrl just say wear the jersey if u want or just wear the regular one simple really.
Click to expand...

This was one of my earlier suggestions for principled responses to this issue.

In stating that I am pretty sure that the Manly owner has stated he will go ahead with this next year and the players are now supportive. So it's not the NRL but the Manly owner.

I support his decision on this.
 
Go_You_Good_Things said:
Earl, your sentence I've bolded is unfortunately typical of what can go wrong .
He wasn't preaching, he quoted a bible verse that mentioned homosexuals amongst a group of 6 or 7 other categories of "sinners" that should repent.
Nobody from the adulterer or murderous community got outraged. They happily went on screwing the neighbour and killing blokes.
1/7th of the "accused" (in a verse that he didn't write, just quoted) . . . . . only 1/7th saw fit to blow the whole thing sky high.
No need to guess which 14.28% it actually was.
Anyway, seeing that the rainbow people are so focused on inclusiveness, tolerance and understanding . . . you would think that THEY would be pushing for an NRL jersey with a full colour image of Our Lord Jesus Christ on the front, and the Blessed Virgin Mary on the back.
That ticks all the boxes they use for their own platform. Diversity, inclusiveness, tolerance and acceptance.
Except that tolerance and inclusiveness only work for them when you agree with them.
Funny, that.
Click to expand...

To me this is a different issue.

You appear to be stating that people who are into the LGBT community are bigoted against religion. Is that correct ?

I'm not discussing that issue. I am definitely not bigoted against religion.
 
Its in reality just a jersey, panthers wear pink ones others have gambling logos and what not. Most footy players would love to pull on a first grade jersey regardless of what it represented.
The players made their choice for their beliefs and then the club lost a game it could of won.
Each to their own when it comes to religious beliefs but when your paid to play and you say nah not doing it because of this and that i hope they miss a weeks salary. Not many other people can refuse to do a job based on their religious beliefs and still get paid. Well not that i am aware of.
 
Earl said:
To me this is a different issue.

You appear to be stating that people who are into the LGBT community are bigoted against religion. Is that correct ?

I'm not discussing that issue. I am definitely not bigoted against religion.
Click to expand...
I don't know if they are or not. You'd think there'd be a backlash against religion in a tit for tat scenario. I don't know.
But we will never find out, I guess.
But just as they accuse sections of society of being narrow minded and divisive by not embracing a symbol of homosexuality and beyond, I'm saying that if they were genuinely inclusive, then they'd be championing the need to have jerseys for specific sections of society other than indigenous and homosexual specific categories. The Christians, Italians, Greeks, fishermen, etc.
A nice 45cm whiting on the jerseys for baitfishing round. Hmmm . . . I wonder what peta and the vegans would have to say 'bout that ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 409 (members: 6, guests: 403)
Back
Top