And it's man of the match

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

How do gender neutral toilets have a negative effect on some young peoples lives ?
Well Frank, think back to when you were at school. If the girls had been using the same bogs as you and your mates, do you honestly believe you’d have respected their privacy? Then imagine you and your mates, carrying a camera 24hrs a day?
I imagine kids of your era were a little more resilient than they are today, but I’m sure you can imagine that for some, the simple task of going to the toilet could become a source of unnecessary concern.
 

Well Frank, think back to when you were at school. If the girls had been using the same bogs as you and your mates, do you honestly believe you’d have respected their privacy? Then imagine you and your mates, carrying a camera 24hrs a day?
I imagine kids of your era were a little more resilient than they are today, but I’m sure you can imagine that for some, the simple task of going to the toilet could become a source of unnecessary concern.
Take it you've never been in a unisex toilet ?
 
Get that completely. As I said, I'm not really that bothered either way personally...

I don't think anyone is actually getting offended at the reference being changed to player of the match from man of the match, (lets stick to the topic of the thread) and personally I think you must be a pretty sad individual to get offended by something that is supposed to be more inclusive. I think it is more so the relevance when it is clearly 11 men v 11 men, ergo "man" of the match and where does it stop? As others have said, will it lead to the end of phrases like "man marking" and "he's got to get sent off, he was the last man" as well? You can bet it is being heavily discussed in the BBC Boardrooms!

Some people will naturally question it (you mentioned freedom of speech) and not wish to embrace it and that is their right, and they shouldn't be shot down in flames for disagreeing with something they don't agree with, it doesn't automatically make them knuckle dragging Neanderthals.

It is clear we are starting to go backwards in certain areas now and there is a real danger that the whole minority/inclusivity thing will end up eating itself. You watch any TV program tonight, there is a very fine line between inclusivity and tokenism....which I thought we had got rid of decades ago...

Going round in circles now, but it isn’t clearly 11 men versus 11 men. You might think it is, but how do you know what those 22 people identify as? Do you know that for all 2,000 professional players and the multitude more non-professional players?

And - to repeat the point - nobody is saying that you (or anyone else) can’t say “man of the match”. It won’t lead to the end of those phrases. As I said elsewhere, I’ll certainly continue saying them - it’s habit. Nobody is shooting you (or me) down in flames for saying it. Just that the BBC should be allowed to use their preferred phrase too.

I don’t doubt that there is plenty of tokenism out there. It’s a shame because it undermines genuine well-meaning attempts to be inclusive. I disagree that it’s a fine line though - anyone with half a brain can spot the difference between real inclusivity and tokenism.
 
Course I have Frank, but I’m not a 12 year old schoolgirl?
So I’m not sure I understand the relevance ?
All the unisex toilets I've been in are isolated rooms/ cubicles you can't take pictures under or over the door
 
Some people will naturally question it (you mentioned freedom of speech) and not wish to embrace it and that is their right, and they shouldn't be shot down in flames for disagreeing with something they don't agree with, it doesn't automatically make them knuckle dragging Neanderthals.
This is a fair point and I’ll hold my hand up to rushing to judgement on some comments.
 
It is a bit daft purely because it's man's football played by men and I doubt there's a single pro player who doesn't identify as a man.

And even if there was, changing MOTM to POTM won't do one iota to make them feel more included.

Not something to feel angry about imho but it's just a gesture to pacify those who look for these things.
Yeah to pacify the woke lobby, with all their massive influence in our sport. They always get their way, like during the World Cup. Oh wait...

Clunky?

Would you prefer coaches to say 'person mark them'?
Man mark her doesn't really work, is the point I was making. All my football vocabulary is gendered towards men, yet I run an after-school club for girls.
 
As others have said, will it lead to the end of phrases like "man marking" and "he's got to get sent off, he was the last man" as well? You can bet it is being heavily discussed in the BBC Boardrooms!
By the same tory plants that want to fight the next election on the 'culture war' and trans issues? They will be you're right, just not for the reasons you think!
 
- As we’ve seen, criticism of a non-gendered term is followed by support of that criticism and leads to ‘jokes’ about gender neutral pronouns. ‘Themchester City’ (which doesn’t even scan, our semi-final opponents aren’t ‘Himchester City’) is intentionally poking fun at people who use gender neutral pronouns, which is totally unnecessary and could be quite triggering. I like to think we’ve moved past throwing ‘gay’ in as a ‘joke’ and this is very much the same thing. It normalises a negative attitude towards non binary people.
But we can all agree that Don Goodperson is a twat, yes?
 
Think I’ll just go ahead and file this under ‘things not really worth getting upset about’…

😉
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom