Gary Lineker and the man who had his willy chopped off

Hammer89

So, a wife in South Korea has chopped off her husband's penis and flushed it down the toilet because he was spending so much time on the golf course. Gary Lineker saw the funny side, Tweeting: "FORE....skin gone" and a lot of his followers also got in on the act. His followers responded with a plethora of golf-related puns - including some women - and you could be forgiven for thinking that it's not such a horrific story.

Except for the fact it is a horrific story and can you imagine the outrage if a man mutilated his wife's genitals? Can you imagine Lineker making puns about the clitoris in that scenario? No, because he'd be strung up by his ears and rightly so, but it's okay if a man's genitals are destroyed by a woman with a kitchen knife, isn't it?

Not only is it okay, but it's a source of humour and I'm sickened by the whole thing. I honestly am. Perhaps I'm wrong to be annoyed because this is simply the world we live in and there are great examples of hypocrisy out there, but that doesn't mean the lesser examples should be ignored.

Hande hoche!

His Twitter use has really lowered the regard I held for that man, he should stick to flogging crisps.

Samaris

Nah, I agree, it's an awful thing to do to someone. Lineker could have not gotten involved in that and it shouldn't be treated as a joke because holy ****, someone cut his penis off and that is a life-changing injury to do to someone. Sex aside (and let's face it, it's being treated as funny because there's a sexual aspect to it), that does damage to the human need to urinate which is pretty fundamental and no-one would want to deal with happening to them. Let alone with global mockery being directed at them for being attacked and mutilated. I -assume- he wouldn't have found an injury resulting in the need for a colostomy bag funny. I hope.

vicwatson

Lineker is, and always has been, a twat

Spider Web

Yeah it's a bizarre phenomenon - horrific violence against a man, humiliation and ridicule of a man... being utterly "hilarious". It's in certain contexts too - e.g. if Isis did that to a man it would be recognised for the atrocity that it is, but his partner or wife doing it - side-splitting.

Omackeral

A dick move by Lineker.

murpho999

At least she left him his balls to play with.

OnDraught

Hammer89 wrote: »

Can you imagine Lineker making puns about the clitoris in that scenario? No, because he'd be strung up by his ears and rightly so, but it's okay if a man's genitals are destroyed by a woman with a kitchen knife, isn't it?

His ears were created for a good stringing up.

Also, shat on pitch.

Benjamin Buttons

OnDraught wrote: »

His ears were created for a good stringing up.

Also, shat on pitch.

Still managed to score that day, and against us too!

Richard Hillman

Typically hypocritical from virtue signaller extraordinaire

suicide_circus

virtue is only valuable when it's on-trend virtue

The Backwards Man

But can you imagine that face contorted in the throes of sexual ecstasy?

vicwatson

The Backwards Man wrote: »

But can you imagine that face contorted in the throes of sexual ecstasy?

Ah stop, I like me breakfast where it is thanky you sir

BillyBobBS

Has Lineker blamed Tommy Robinson yet?

The Backwards Man

vicwatson wrote: »

Ah stop, I like me breakfast where it is thanky you sir

That's my point, as sure as eggs is eggs.

Samaris

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Typically hypocritical from virtue signaller extraordinaire

What does that even mean? Please explain, because I keep seeing what looks like a hodge-podge of terms of dismissal rammed together to appear as an an argument, generally when someone doesn't actually have an argument, but wants to be a bit obnoxious.

Are you saying that the OP doesn't believe that chopping someone's penis off is vicious?
Are you saying that it's right that people with a wide following should encourage people to have a go at an injured man and it's funny?
Are you saying that the OP finds it funny and is saying he doesn't for Reasons?


What, in short, are you even on about?

Spider Web

Samaris wrote: »

What does that even mean? Please explain, because I keep seeing what looks like a hodge-podge of terms of dismissal rammed together to appear as an an argument, generally when someone doesn't actually have an argument, but wants to be a bit obnoxious.

Are you saying that the OP doesn't believe that chopping someone's penis off is vicious?
Are you saying that it's right that people with a wide following should encourage people to have a go at an injured man and it's funny?
Are you saying that the OP finds it funny and is saying he doesn't for Reasons?


What, in short, are you even on about?

Think he means Gary Lineker rather than the OP.

I don't like the term "snowflake" (unless in reference to lovely droplets of snow) and can't stand "SJW" but "virtue signaller" is a pretty fair term in my opinion - it refers to certain people who keep letting everyone know how virtuous they are in relation to a certain set of issues but only certain ones... e.g. feminism but having a laugh at abuse of a man. As a person who was for many years on the left of the political spectrum (and while I'm more in the centre now, I'm still pretty left-leaning and liberal... I'd be considered an utter commie by American conservatives ) I think it's ok to point out the inconsistency and inequality of this type of binary political approach.

weldoninhio

Hammer89 wrote: »

So, a wife in South Korea has chopped off her husband's penis and flushed it down the toilet because he was spending so much time on the golf course. Gary Lineker saw the funny side, Tweeting: "FORE....skin gone" and a lot of his followers also got in on the act. His followers responded with a plethora of golf-related puns - including some women - and you could be forgiven for thinking that it's not such a horrific story.

Except for the fact it is a horrific story and can you imagine the outrage if a man mutilated his wife's genitals? Can you imagine Lineker making puns about the clitoris in that scenario? No, because he'd be strung up by his ears and rightly so, but it's okay if a man's genitals are destroyed by a woman with a kitchen knife, isn't it?

Not only is it okay, but it's a source of humour and I'm sickened by the whole thing. I honestly am. Perhaps I'm wrong to be annoyed because this is simply the world we live in and there are great examples of hypocrisy out there, but that doesn't mean the lesser examples should be ignored.

They think clits all over?? It is now!!

Samaris

I get that explanation (more or less, mostly because I see such comments being woefully misapplied to "anything I don't specifically agree with MUST be virtue signalling"), but I do not see how it can possibly apply to Lineker. He wasn't signalling any virtue in his comment - he didn't even refer to women or whatever, he was having a laugh at the expense of a seriously injured man and encouraging his followers to do the same.

The comment makes no sense in that context, unless the poster has dramatically redefined his definition of virtue.

It certainly looked to me like dig at the OP with no back-up, no evidence and no actual argument. In that case it is just lazy insult that means less than nothing.

Spider Web

Samaris wrote: »

I get that explanation (more or less, mostly because I see such comments being woefully misapplied to "anything I don't specifically agree with MUST be virtue signalling"), but I do not see how it can possibly apply to Lineker. He wasn't signalling any virtue, he was having a laugh at the expense of a seriously injured man and encouraging his followers to do the same.

The comment makes no sense in that context, unless the poster has dramatically redefined his definition of virtue.

No, it looks like a dig at the OP with no back-up, no evidence and no actual argument. It is just lazy insult that in this case, means less than nothing.

I think it's definitely only a dig at Lineker - why would it be at the OP?

I think the virtue signalling reference is regarding Lineker's tweets regarding other issues, which this then contradicts.

Samaris

Spider Web wrote: »

I think it's definitely only a dig at Lineker - why would it be at the OP?

I think the virtue signalling reference is regarding Lineker's tweets regarding other issues, which this then contradicts.

God knows why it would be a dig at the OP, but it tends to be usually, often when someone says something that someone else doesn't agree with. That it was someone objecting to what could be regarded as "having a laugh" is one of the topics that tends to draw it out.

Still, I'll take that as an explanation that might be so! Apologies if I misunderstood you, RH. (If I didn't, I stand by the original though! :P)

I don't know why people find multilation funny - particularly gential mutilation like this case.

There was a thread a few years ago about a woman who's partner had used superglue on her genitals and the 'jokes' were stomach turning and not all from expected sources either. Sharon Osbornes take on a similar case to the OP, broadcast on tv, where she thought it was funny when it was a man, but 'different' when it was a woman was similarly stomach turning.

lazybones32

I never hear the Darwin awards criticised for their insensitivity on boards. Those people have families.....

If these things bother you, contact the person who wrote it and contact their employer. Getting them fired is part and parcel of Internet Age justice.

DEFTLEFTHAND

vicwatson wrote: »

Lineker is, and always has been, a twat

Agreed, a deeply unlikable individual.

Know a fellow who knew him when he was at Spurs and said he was just a vile nasty person. He knew a load of sporting celebs in football, snooker etc. back in the 90s and always said Linekar stood out as someone you didn't want to be around, and everyone knew it.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Deleted User wrote: »

Know a fellow who knew him when he was at Spurs and said he was just a vile nasty person. He knew a load of sporting celebs in football, snooker etc. back in the 90s and always said Linekar stood out as someone you didn't want to be around, and everyone knew it.

From reading a vast array of football biographies he's the one chap who you never hear a good word about.

A bit like golf's Nick Faldo, hated by his peers.

_Dara_

vicwatson wrote: »

Lineker is, and always has been, a twat

Exactly. How is this news?

Never forget

selwyn froggitt

The Backwards Man wrote: »

But can you imagine that face contorted in the throes of sexual ecstasy?

Well said Ron!

Hammer89

_Dara_ wrote: »

Exactly. How is this news?

It's not. It's a thread?

_Dara_

Hammer89 wrote: »

It's not. It's a thread?

Let me rephrase: how is this a thread?