Men’s football female presenters and pundits

[Blue Walter]

Maybe it's just me, but when I watch adverts I don't sit there thinking, "there's a black person. There's a white person. There's an Asian person. Oooo there's a man putting his cock in another man's mouth" (I'm just being silly here to keep the mood light). These things just don't register with me. I see people. I see interactions between people. I see products. I couldn't tell you if one demographic is being represented more than another or not as it just doesn't matter. People are people and the sooner the human race realises this, the sooner we can move away from hatred and discrimination and just treat everyone equally.

Spot on. Seems like it needs a blunt instrument to start things as there are too many people who will try to get around equality by whatever means possible.

That's already happening and 'the blunt instrument' is the division hammer.

[Dinksy]

Getting back to the original point about female punditry (that a word?).....being a pundit used to be about providing some 'expert' opinion on what is happening. Now everything is about celebrity. It's about private jokes that have Micah Richards and Gaby Logan in stitches or about the bromance between Lineker and Shearer.
Simple solution to all this: the 'mute' button.

[Blue Walter]

Getting back to the original point about female punditry (that a word?).....being a pundit used to be about providing some 'expert' opinion on what is happening. Now everything is about celebrity. It's about private jokes that have Micah Richards and Gaby Logan in stitches or about the bromance between Lineker and Shearer.
Simple solution to all this: the 'mute' button.

Yes, there does seem to be a lot of silliness in the studio these days from the pundits. As you say the pundit position seems to have moved from its original concept into a celebrity spot, possibly with an eye on a tv career for some individuals. For me I am interested in what someone has to say that has had experience in what they are commenting on. I quite like to listen to Roy Keane as he is a 'no frills' pundit and has been involved in big games at club & International level. I don't always agree with what he has to say but he does talk about the game as he sees it. I like Ian Wright when commenting on England games. His love for the game and the England team comes through in the way he talks about it, sometimes his emotions gets the better of him and clouds his judgement in my opinion but I still like listening to him.

[NSRailings]

Maybe it's just me, but when I watch adverts I don't sit there thinking, "there's a black person. There's a white person. There's an Asian person. Oooo there's a man putting his cock in another man's mouth" (I'm just being silly here to keep the mood light). These things just don't register with me. I see people. I see interactions between people. I see products. I couldn't tell you if one demographic is being represented more than another or not as it just doesn't matter. People are people and the sooner the human race realises this, the sooner we can move away from hatred and discrimination and just treat everyone equally.

Spot on. Seems like it needs a blunt instrument to start things as there are too many people who will try to get around equality by whatever means possible.

That's already happening and 'the blunt instrument' is the division hammer.

Yes I know

[Betelgeuse]

Sorry BW misread your post. I thought you were talking about the recruitment issue.

My position on the quotas is stated earlier. In summary, reluctantly in favour of quotas as a means to a desirable end.

I was talking about recuitment in general. I am firmly against this quota system being used currently because all it has done is turned the tables on the average white male. In the past women & ethnic groups were overlooked in favour of the majority white male in the workplace. If someone has one position to fill and they have decided to go down the route of not employing a white male, in favour of a coloured or female person, they will know full well any bloke the turns up for the job won't get it. Just like in the past where the white male had preference, which was totally wrong. Not only that it is against the law to employ, or not to employ, anyone because of their gender or colour.

Then there is the so called 'diversity' issue. If the idea is to make the ethnicity representative then they are missing the target. Adverts on TV will have you believe that something like 20 percent of the population are white when the actual figure is more than 85%. They would have you believe most people are in mixed race relationships when the actual figure is in low single figure percentage. Pre Millennials the figure is below one percent but much higher post Millennial. There is absolutely nothing wrong with mixed race relationships but trying to give the impression that it's the norm is misguiding. The the gay representation is ridiculously shown. It seems that the general population are being groomed into believing what is shown is normality.

I have come to the conclusion that the white male is now the most oppressed section of our community. Tables certainly turned.

Maybe it's just me, but when I watch adverts I don't sit there thinking, "there's a black person. There's a white person. There's an Asian person. Oooo there's a man putting his cock in another man's mouth" (I'm just being silly here to keep the mood light). These things just don't register with me. I see people. I see interactions between people. I see products. I couldn't tell you if one demographic is being represented more than another or not as it just doesn't matter. People are people and the sooner the human race realises this, the sooner we can move away from hatred and discrimination and just treat everyone equally.

That's quite a simplistic way of looking at it Chris, we might as well have open borders in that case. The UK is predominantly a white, christian country, and of course a measure of diversity is a good thing but the way things are going we'll be under Shariah Law in a few decades or less. I have no problem with ethnicity but when you watch tv or see advertising you would be forgiven for thinking that we are living in a mixed race country with whites in the minority, and most people are gay.

[Pompey1984+1]

Sorry BW misread your post. I thought you were talking about the recruitment issue.

My position on the quotas is stated earlier. In summary, reluctantly in favour of quotas as a means to a desirable end.

I was talking about recuitment in general. I am firmly against this quota system being used currently because all it has done is turned the tables on the average white male. In the past women & ethnic groups were overlooked in favour of the majority white male in the workplace. If someone has one position to fill and they have decided to go down the route of not employing a white male, in favour of a coloured or female person, they will know full well any bloke the turns up for the job won't get it. Just like in the past where the white male had preference, which was totally wrong. Not only that it is against the law to employ, or not to employ, anyone because of their gender or colour.

Then there is the so called 'diversity' issue. If the idea is to make the ethnicity representative then they are missing the target. Adverts on TV will have you believe that something like 20 percent of the population are white when the actual figure is more than 85%. They would have you believe most people are in mixed race relationships when the actual figure is in low single figure percentage. Pre Millennials the figure is below one percent but much higher post Millennial. There is absolutely nothing wrong with mixed race relationships but trying to give the impression that it's the norm is misguiding. The the gay representation is ridiculously shown. It seems that the general population are being groomed into believing what is shown is normality.

I have come to the conclusion that the white male is now the most oppressed section of our community. Tables certainly turned.

Maybe it's just me, but when I watch adverts I don't sit there thinking, "there's a black person. There's a white person. There's an Asian person. Oooo there's a man putting his cock in another man's mouth" (I'm just being silly here to keep the mood light). These things just don't register with me. I see people. I see interactions between people. I see products. I couldn't tell you if one demographic is being represented more than another or not as it just doesn't matter. People are people and the sooner the human race realises this, the sooner we can move away from hatred and discrimination and just treat everyone equally.

That's quite a simplistic way of looking at it Chris, we might as well have open borders in that case. The UK is predominantly a white, christian country, and of course a measure of diversity is a good thing but the way things are going we'll be under Shariah Law in a few decades or less. I have no problem with ethnicity but when you watch tv or see advertising you would be forgiven for thinking that we are living in a mixed race country with whites in the minority, and most people are gay.

There is more chance of Pompey winning the premier League before the UK becomes the 16th country to adopt Sharia Law.

[Sam_Brown]

I am curious why I see Sharia Courts getting dragged through the mud all the time but never hear a peep over the Jewish equivalent which is a lot more wide spread.

[BlueinPLtwenty]

The Muslim population in this country according to the Census of 2021 is only about six or seven per cent of the total, so Sharia Law is a long way away. However obviously the impression is that it is much much higher and the question is, why is that?

[Portchesterblue2]

Probably because I'm an old curmudgeon.

Nail on the head here. The older people get, the more resistant to change and the less adaptable they get. They get used to how things were and don't like it when things become different. We all need to remember that change is neither good, nor bad, it's just different.

But why have women commentating on the men's game? Oh I know....wokism.

so obviously if there is a "womens" event in whatever sport, only women should be allowed to commentate yeah?

Spoken by a man...I wonder what the majority of women's choice would be?

my point was that if a woman commentating on mens sport is wokism then surely the same applies to men commentating on womens ??
for me as long as they know what they are talking about who cares

[Blue Walter]

I am curious why I see Sharia Courts getting dragged through the mud all the time but never hear a peep over the Jewish equivalent which is a lot more wide spread.

Jewish law, Hahaha or Bet Din, is used sometimes to resolve disputes in business negotiations if both parties agree with the use of it. More in the way of arbitration and can be legally binding, again with the agreement of both participating parties. It is not lawfully binding without agreement whereas the constitution law of this country is.

Sharia law is in place to keep the Islamic ideals and ideology and is not consensual where it exists. If it is applied in this country it is not legal. Up to 2019 36 English boroughs had declared Shariah law in their boundaries by councils run by Muslim councillors. They are not legally bound. The only law in this country that is legal is the state law as laid out by government past and present.

Shariah law would sort out some of the anti social behaviour though that we see on a daily basis. Unfortunately not being a Muslim is against the law in some places. So maybe not a good idea in this country, except for Saints supporters of course.

[Pompey1984+1]

I am curious why I see Sharia Courts getting dragged through the mud all the time but never hear a peep over the Jewish equivalent which is a lot more wide spread.

Jewish law, Hahaha or Bet Din, is used sometimes to resolve disputes in business negotiations if both parties agree with the use of it. More in the way of arbitration and can be legally binding, again with the agreement of both participating parties. It is not lawfully binding without agreement whereas the constitution law of this country is.

Sharia law is in place to keep the Islamic ideals and ideology and is not consensual where it exists. If it is applied in this country it is not legal. Up to 2019 36 English boroughs had declared Shariah law in their boundaries by councils run by Muslim councillors. They are not legally bound. The only law in this country that is legal is the state law as laid out by government past and present.

Shariah law would sort out some of the anti social behaviour though that we see on a daily basis. Unfortunately not being a Muslim is against the law in some places. So maybe not a good idea in this country, except for Saints supporters of course.

I've read this a number of time and I still have no idea what you are on about.

Councils don't declare laws - they have powers to create certain by laws but they don't declare laws.

[Blue Walter]

I am curious why I see Sharia Courts getting dragged through the mud all the time but never hear a peep over the Jewish equivalent which is a lot more wide spread.

Jewish law, Hahaha or Bet Din, is used sometimes to resolve disputes in business negotiations if both parties agree with the use of it. More in the way of arbitration and can be legally binding, again with the agreement of both participating parties. It is not lawfully binding without agreement whereas the constitution law of this country is.

Sharia law is in place to keep the Islamic ideals and ideology and is not consensual where it exists. If it is applied in this country it is not legal. Up to 2019 36 English boroughs had declared Shariah law in their boundaries by councils run by Muslim councillors. They are not legally bound. The only law in this country that is legal is the state law as laid out by government past and present.

Shariah law would sort out some of the anti social behaviour though that we see on a daily basis. Unfortunately not being a Muslim is against the law in some places. So maybe not a good idea in this country, except for Saints supporters of course.

I've read this a number of time and I still have no idea what you are on about.

Councils don't declare laws - they have powers to create certain by laws but they don't declare laws.

No, you are absolutely right and I didn't present that post very well, so apologies for that. I was reading an article that was talking about anti social behaviour and how certain areas are dealing with the problem. These boroughs that I mentioned wanted to deal with it by introducing Shariah law but due to the legalities of it could not impose it. Their response was, apparently, to take out elements from it that could be passed as by laws. These included such things as drinking alcohol on the street and a female dress code. In many ways it is hard to criticise them for not wanting to have groups of men walking round the streets becoming more intoxicated by the cans of drink they carry. Some of these boroughs, according to the article, pushed the boundaries of their legitimate authority.

This situation is not new or, indeed, confined to Islamic areas by any means. There is an area in Western Super Mare that was owned by the Quakers. They sold some of this land to the local council for house building. In doing so they imposed a covenant in the purchase agreement that no alcohol outlets or shops were to be allowed in this particular area. That was in place to my knowledge 25 years ago because I was a regular visitor there.

[Sam_Brown]

The Muslim population in this country according to the Census of 2021 is only about six or seven per cent of the total, so Sharia Law is a long way away. However obviously the impression is that it is much much higher and the question is, why is that?

Im not sure people really understand what a sharia court is. It’s essentially just an arbitration service much like Beth Din or any work place tribunal. You raise a very good point about why it seems to be so well known compared to the Jewish Beth Din which is essentially the same.

[Blue Walter]

The Muslim population in this country according to the Census of 2021 is only about six or seven per cent of the total, so Sharia Law is a long way away. However obviously the impression is that it is much much higher and the question is, why is that?

Im not sure people really understand what a sharia court is. It’s essentially just an arbitration service much like Beth Din or any work place tribunal. You raise a very good point about why it seems to be so well known compared to the Jewish Beth Din which is essentially the same.

Sorry to disagree with you on this but saying Sharia Law is simply an arbitration service is not quite right. It can be, perhaps, in its mildest form but very brutal in its harshest form. Islamic leaders describe it as a code to live by. Much like the 10 commandments in the Christian faith and it was never intended to be as brutal as some Islamic regimes have imposed. The brutality is from the way some Islamic leaders interpret this code. The same way as Christians did in the past in order to keep the population under control. What is not is a form of arbitration in the same way as the 10 commandments are not.

[phat_chris]

Sorry BW misread your post. I thought you were talking about the recruitment issue.

My position on the quotas is stated earlier. In summary, reluctantly in favour of quotas as a means to a desirable end.

I was talking about recuitment in general. I am firmly against this quota system being used currently because all it has done is turned the tables on the average white male. In the past women & ethnic groups were overlooked in favour of the majority white male in the workplace. If someone has one position to fill and they have decided to go down the route of not employing a white male, in favour of a coloured or female person, they will know full well any bloke the turns up for the job won't get it. Just like in the past where the white male had preference, which was totally wrong. Not only that it is against the law to employ, or not to employ, anyone because of their gender or colour.

Then there is the so called 'diversity' issue. If the idea is to make the ethnicity representative then they are missing the target. Adverts on TV will have you believe that something like 20 percent of the population are white when the actual figure is more than 85%. They would have you believe most people are in mixed race relationships when the actual figure is in low single figure percentage. Pre Millennials the figure is below one percent but much higher post Millennial. There is absolutely nothing wrong with mixed race relationships but trying to give the impression that it's the norm is misguiding. The the gay representation is ridiculously shown. It seems that the general population are being groomed into believing what is shown is normality.

I have come to the conclusion that the white male is now the most oppressed section of our community. Tables certainly turned.

Maybe it's just me, but when I watch adverts I don't sit there thinking, "there's a black person. There's a white person. There's an Asian person. Oooo there's a man putting his cock in another man's mouth" (I'm just being silly here to keep the mood light). These things just don't register with me. I see people. I see interactions between people. I see products. I couldn't tell you if one demographic is being represented more than another or not as it just doesn't matter. People are people and the sooner the human race realises this, the sooner we can move away from hatred and discrimination and just treat everyone equally.

That's quite a simplistic way of looking at it Chris, we might as well have open borders in that case. The UK is predominantly a white, christian country, and of course a measure of diversity is a good thing but the way things are going we'll be under Shariah Law in a few decades or less. I have no problem with ethnicity but when you watch tv or see advertising you would be forgiven for thinking that we are living in a mixed race country with whites in the minority, and most people are gay.

As we've discussed before, Christianity is no longer the majority religion in the country. Fret not though, Islam is not going to be what replaces it. No religion is the fastest growing group and if trends continue, will be the majority within the next 20 years. Your irrational fear of Shariah Law taking over this country is unfounded and your troubles with witnessing peoples of colour or different sexual orientation on TV is a you problem. Must be exhausting doing a head count every time you turn on the TV to see if you need to be outraged or not. Maybe try to just enjoy watching whatever it is without these worries. It'll do you some good.