NRL Players and family members in hot water

Morkel said:
I fucking love it. If you’re offended, you’re part of the problem.
Click to expand...

No not much offends me I just find it odd they would choose to give unwanted moral advice to their target audience. Do you think a tampon ad that lectured women not to be gold-diggers would go down well with females?
 
On the violence of men vs women, I saw a post one day that sums it up well. Can’t remember the exact wording but along the lines of:

“We always here stories about the crazy ex-girlfriend. Why don’t we ever hear about the crazy ex-boyfriend? Oh, that’s right, because the girl got raped or murdered”.

There is just so much disparity between men and women not only in their physical capability, but also mindset, to not see who is more vulnerable.

Psychologically it’s a different story of course. But that’s not what we’re here for.
 
Tom said:
No not much offends me I just find it odd they would choose to give unwanted moral advice to their target audience. Do you think a tampon ad that lectured women not to be gold-diggers would go down well with females?
Click to expand...

Tampon ads no. But a more apt comparison would be perfume.

Shaving ads, like cologne etc, are generally about being physically attractive, about being able to impose your will over women. In the same way, perfume etc claims a similar thing, in being able to attract a male and have him wrapped around their finger.

I could see a similar sentiment being viable for a women’s perfume - stating that using your feminine wiles to be a **** tease or a gold digger is not good positive for relationships or society - so use the product to lure or reward the man you love and respect.
 
Tom said:
Just had a watch. Didn't see anything off about it. I don't get it, what was the controversy?

Click to expand...

He kneeled during the anthem, so he was already hated by a certain section of the US population. Then Nike used him in the ad, referencing the kneeling. Morons then proceeded to burn their Nike shoes, cut up their socks etc.
 
Tom said:
Just had a watch. Didn't see anything off about it. I don't get it, what was the controversy?

Click to expand...


He started the whole kneel thing for the anthem thing. Lots of patriotic muricans were pissssssed. Burning shoes and shit.

Edit. Ninjaed while watching the tele
 
Last edited:
I don't really get 'Mericans.

Kneeling has always been a sign of submission, respect or servitude. Seems kind of a shitty protest? And the other side seems to think that kneeling is unpatriotic. Tell that to Knights who got knighted in the swordy times. Just makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Attacking other member
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huge said:
You're entitled to your opinion. I wasn't being facetious . I think your opinion is shit. I've forgotten more than you've ever known. **** the distinction, violence is violence and should simply be condemned. If you want to keep the soft **** new age shit going, demonizing men at every turn, fine.
Click to expand...
Woah... someone needs more of "the best a man can get".

Nothing @holdzy89 said is demonising men. It demonises violent people, while alerting to the fact that the majority of those are men, not only because genetics gives them the advantage of size, but because male superiority (patriarchy) is ingrained in most cultures.

Portraying the above (or the Gillette ad) as an attack on men or taking offense to it, is as @Morkel said, generally because you're part of the problem. I choose to believe that's not your case in terms of violence towards the weaker members of society, but I do dispense with your pseudo-masculinity defense, which only serves to perpetuate this idea that white males are under attack (I'm not saying that's what drives you, at least the white part).
We're not, but too many seem uncomfortable with non-white males getting the same rights as we've always historically had, and they don't understand they're the ones giving voice to a small minority of idiot feminazi (and other stupid extremists) out there.

P.S. I recently saw a guy commenting on the Gillett ad as an attack on men, and then went on to claim that women should instead respect men for going to war, and dying on the beaches of Normandy and the shores of Gallipoli for them, while they stayed home knitting...
 
Last edited:
ivanhungryjak said:
I'm pretty sure if it was a Bronco, it'd be front and centre on page one of the DT.
Click to expand...

Like that time there was video evidence of one of the broncos doing drugs in a bathroom stall or something? Broncos have the best sweep/rug department in the biz, next to the Roosters.
 
That said, the media will of course report on it, rumour or otherwise. I just think less comes of it at the Broncos.
 
As long as he comes out next season playing like Andrew Johns he can do whatever he wants in the off-season.
 
Unbreakable said:
As long as he comes out next season playing like Andrew Johns he can do whatever he wants in the off-season.
Click to expand...

According to my sauce, it isn’t a Bronco anyway...

It allegedly happened in Brisbane and so some journos are leaping to conclusions, but as usual, these leaps aren’t correct.

He plays for another club...
 
Last edited:
Dude you can't name names even speculatively. Bhq will get into shit.
 
Last edited:
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 445
1:29:23
1992 World Club Challenge - Brisbane Broncos vs Wigan Warriors
View full media list »

Active Now

  • Broncosarethebest
  • BroncosFan_Corey
  • Financeguy
  • MrTickyMcG
  • Foordy
  • Justwin
  • winslow_wong
  • Wolfie
  • Astro
  • bazza
  • Sproj
  • Manofoneway
  • Allo
  • theshed
  • Morkel
  • mrslong
  • Behold
  • Old Mate
  • Jedhead
  • BroncosAlways
... and 13 more.
Total: 124 (members: 33, guests: 91)
Robots: 530
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.