Arlene foster to attend ulster final

Trasna1

lawred2 wrote: »

I'd be happy enough to see it dropped. It's anachronistic and divisive. And I am a GAA person.

You could make that argument about flags and anthems in general to be honest.

FrancieBrady

Charles Babbage wrote: »

By this do mean the ban abolished 50 years ago, or not renting out grounds to competitors? Lots of organisations do not rent their facilities to competitors.

Alan frequently has to go back decades to avoid giving examples of the modern GAA being a nationalistic organisation.
A organisation that welcomes all creeds, religious and political.

Still waiting for examples of an organisation that has nationalists as members being nationalistic itself.

Zebra3

Trasna1 wrote: »

There is nothing in the slightest bit racist (quasi or anything) about not ground sharing with other sports.

You need to learn what racism is.

There is when the main reason for not making facilities available is based on where those sports are from.

Trasna1

Zebra3 wrote: »

There is when the main reason for not making facilities available is based on where those sports are from.

Racism is discrimination based on ethnicity. Abusing a white Frenchman because he is french is not racism, but abusing a black Irishman because he is black is racism.

Please learn what racism is.

Dyr

So just to sum up, unionists label all them 'un's as feenyans and the complain that they act too feenyan for their liking.

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Still waiting for examples of an organisation that has nationalists as members being nationalistic itself.

Still never troubled to read the Gaa rulebook, then.

FrancieBrady

alaimacerc wrote: »

Still never troubled to read the Gaa rulebook, then.

When was the last time the GAA refused the use of a ground for another sport?

You should know this about the 'nationalistic GAA'.

*Time machine use is restricted on this question.

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Alan frequently has to go back decades to avoid giving examples of the modern GAA being a nationalistic organisation.

Who's Alan? And who has been citing decades-old examples? And "frequently", at that? Which would those be? When did the proposition shift, first from "nationalist" to "exclusively nationalist", and now to "nationalistic"?

There's straw-man arguments, and then there's someone who appears to be shadow-boxing entirely with notions that remain confined to their own head, to the point of making attempts to deal with them essentially redundant...

A organisation that welcomes all creeds, religious and political.

What're religious creed to do with anything? Are you struggling to distinguish between "nationalist" and "Catholic" now?

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When was the last time the GAA refused the use of a ground for another sport?

No idea. "Please do not ask for exceptions to Rule 42, as a refusal often offends"? As far as I know, there's been no "foreign field sports" in Croker since 2010, after Lansdowne Road reopened, and none at all elsewhere. Unless you count American football, which the Gaa apparently doesn't.

You've alternately denied that this rule exists, and loudly approved of it. Could you maybe pick one, and stick with it? Just to ration the comedy, mind.

You should know this about the 'nationalistic GAA'.

Why? Sure it's only yerself that's ever used the phrase you just quoted.

FrancieBrady

alaimacerc wrote: »

No idea. "Please do not ask for exceptions to Rule 42, as a refusal often offends"? As far as I know, there's been no "foreign field sports" in Croker since 2010, after Lansdowne Road reopened, and none at all elsewhere. Unless you count American football, which the Gaa apparently doesn't.

You've alternately denied that this rule exists, and loudly approved of it. Could you maybe pick one, and stick with it? Just to ration the comedy, mind.



Why? Sure it's only yerself that's ever used the phrase you just quoted.

:D Yes, you have never said that the correct term for people calling the GAA a nationalist organisation was 'realists'.

The original Rule 42 was:

Grounds controlled by Association units shall not be used or permitted to be used, for horse racing, greyhound racing, or for field games other than those sanctioned by Central Council.

Now Central Council have the power to decide what other sports are allowed to be played or not.

You will be able to show when they have refused to allow 'foreign' games to be played, and what is 'nationalistic' about these refusals.

Gets hard to stick to preconceptions when asked to back them up isn't it Alan?

alaimacerc

Trasna1 wrote: »

Racism is discrimination based on ethnicity. Abusing a white Frenchman because he is french is not racism, but abusing a black Irishman because he is black is racism.

Please learn what racism is.

Being French isn't an ethnicity?

"Please learn what ethnicity is." Here, I'll even help:

OED wrote:

The fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition.

So, no, not just a 'polite' word for skin colour.

JohnnyFlash

I’d suggest some of the Gaels around here go outside and take part in some athletic activity - even a walk. It’s a glorious day and the same few head-the-balls are taking part in Republican outrage episode 3654.

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

:D Yes, you have never said that the correct term for people calling the GAA a nationalist organisation was 'realists'.

Yeah, that was something I said. And also something that's obviously true. Unlike the nonsense you just wheeled out.

You will be able to show when they have refused to allow 'foreign' games to be played, and what is 'nationalistic' about these refusals.

Gets hard to stick to preconceptions when asked to back them up isn't it Alan?

"Alan", and "nationalistic" again. You're banging on about other's supposed "preconceptions" when you're only arguing with a person that doesn't exist, about things only you actually said.

Mutant z

Why is it even remotely who attends a GAA game or not especially someone who's actually from Ulster attending an Ulster final.

FrancieBrady

alaimacerc wrote: »

Yeah, that was something I said. And also something that's obviously true. Unlike the nonsense you just wheeled out.



"Alan", and "nationalistic" again. You're banging on about other's supposed "preconceptions" when you're only arguing with a person that doesn't exist, about things only you actually said.

Sorry, didn't look at your name properly.


So no facts to back up your contention that seeing the GAA as a nationalist organisation is realistic.

Okey doke.

Taytoland

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

Or you believe in the Union.

The DUP have been a boon for nationalism, a united Ireland, and are well on their way to helping the Tories tear the UK asunder.

Congratulations.

 Whatever helps you sleep.

FrancieBrady

Taytoland wrote: »

 Whatever helps you sleep.

At least there are facts to back up that contention.

Taytoland

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

 Whatever helps you sleep.

At least there are facts to back up that contention.

Such as what?

FrancieBrady

Taytoland wrote: »

Such as what?

The Scots moving towards another Indy Referendum.
Taosigh talking about a UI and border polls?
Public opinion in UK would rather Brexit to the UK staying unified.
The devastation that the DUP backed Brexit is going to cause on this island?

alaimacerc

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry, didn't look at your name properly.

Which is confusing, when you're also ascribing things to "Alan" that I didn't say. I was a while looking through the thread for this person saying any of these things!

So no facts to back up your contention that seeing the GAA as a nationalist organisation is realistic.

... other than the copious evidence already mentioned, that only you seem to have any trouble at all seeing. And maybe even there the scales are slowly falling from your eyes, given the repeated attempts to shift from "not nationalist" to "not exclusively nationalist", "not nationalistic", "not Catholic", "not a nationalist political party", etc. What's next, "maybe slightly nationalist"?

I ask again. If the Gaa isn't a nationalist organisation, what on earth does a nationalist organisation look like to you? If your theory is that it used to be a nationalist organisation, but isn't any more, any rough idea when this supposedly ceased?

Read their dang rulebook! I'd post big chunks of it, but that would spam everyone else, who seem clear enough on this already. And reading things posted here doesn't seem to be your strong suit, anyway. Look at any broadsheet journalist's or academic's take on the topic.

FrancieBrady

alaimacerc wrote: »

Which is confusing, when you're also ascribing things to "Alan" that I didn't say. I was a while looking through the thread for this person saying any of these things!



... other than the copious evidence already mentioned, that only you seem to have any trouble at all seeing. And maybe even there the scales are slowly falling from your eyes, given the repeated attempts to shift from "not nationalist" to "not exclusively nationalist", "not nationalistic", "not Catholic", "not a nationalist political party", etc. What's next, "maybe slightly nationalist"?

I ask again. If the Gaa isn't a nationalist organisation, what on earth does a nationalist organisation look like to you? If your theory is that it used to be a nationalist organisation, but isn't any more, any rough idea when this supposedly ceased?

Read their dang rulebook! I'd post big chunks of it, but that would spam everyone else, who seem clear enough on this already. And reading things posted here doesn't seem to be your strong suit, anyway. Look at any broadsheet journalist's or academic's take on the topic.

You need to post 'facts'. Do you understand what a 'fact' is?

Nationalists in the GAA is a different thing to the GAA is nationalist.

So we are still waiting for you to post some.

Ash.J.Williams

alaimacerc wrote: »

Which is confusing, when you're also ascribing things to "Alan" that I didn't say. I was a while looking through the thread for this person saying any of these things!



... other than the copious evidence already mentioned, that only you seem to have any trouble at all seeing. And maybe even there the scales are slowly falling from your eyes, given the repeated attempts to shift from "not nationalist" to "not exclusively nationalist", "not nationalistic", "not Catholic", "not a nationalist political party", etc. What's next, "maybe slightly nationalist"?

I ask again. If the Gaa isn't a nationalist organisation, what on earth does a nationalist organisation look like to you? If your theory is that it used to be a nationalist organisation, but isn't any more, any rough idea when this supposedly ceased?

Read their dang rulebook! I'd post big chunks of it, but that would spam everyone else, who seem clear enough on this already. And reading things posted here doesn't seem to be your strong suit, anyway. Look at any broadsheet journalist's or academic's take on the topic.

You're mixing up nationalist with just being Irish. I'll give you an example, is wicklow gaa nationalistic... No, is kildare... No.... Is any other county below the border counties.... No.... Are the border counties and Northern counties... Not officially but things are complex there and that's obvious.

Trasna1

alaimacerc wrote: »

Being French isn't an ethnicity?

"Please learn what ethnicity is." Here, I'll even help:



So, no, not just a 'polite' word for skin colour.

My point still stands. Discrimination against a white Frenchman for being from France is not racism. It's xenophobia. And it's not racism for the GAA to not permit "foreign" games in it's grounds, for those that play those games in Ireland are of the same race to those that play GAA. You could at a stretch call it cultural xenophobia but that would be a distortion of the truth.

The truth is that this rule was created at a time when the GAA was up against it in creating an organisation and faced particularly stiff competition from cricket for players. A combination of cultural and political factors allowed the GAA to take hold and this rule prevented the gains being lost (as well as other prohibitions placed on GAA members). In fact those same risks are present today, where clubs have to compete with other sports for players. The GAA had an advantage in that it had built up good facilities over the years and while the original purpose of the rule (what we have we hold) is no longer relevant - new manifestations of old pressures remain, hence the ban is retained.

And not all GAA grounds are vested in the GAA, and those clubs are free to do what they want with their grounds. And they find, that generally there is no pressure to open up their grounds to outsiders from their members so others can take advantage of all the work that they have put in fundraising and building even if they were to pay a rent - since it undermines the foundation of the very same club.

FrancieBrady

Trasna1 wrote: »

My point still stands. Discrimination against a white Frenchman for being from France is not racism. It's xenophobia. And it's not racism for the GAA to not permit "foreign" games in it's grounds, for those that play those games in Ireland are of the same race to those that play GAA. You could at a stretch call it cultural xenophobia but that would be a distortion of the truth.

The truth is that this rule was created at a time when the GAA was up against it in creating an organisation and faced particularly stiff competition from cricket for players. A combination of cultural and political factors allowed the GAA to take hold and this rule prevented the gains being lost (as well as other prohibitions placed on GAA members). In fact those same risks are present today, where clubs have to compete with other sports for players. The GAA had an advantage in that it had built up good facilities over the years and while the original purpose of the rule (what we have we hold) is no longer relevant - new manifestations of old pressures remain, hence the ban is retained.

And not all GAA grounds are vested in the GAA, and those clubs are free to do what they want with their grounds. And they find, that generally there is no pressure to open up their grounds to outsiders from their members so others can take advantage of all the work that they have put in fundraising and building even if they were to pay a rent - since it undermines the foundation of the very same club.

The rule has long been amended. It is now up to Central Council to decide on requests.

We are still awaiting facts showing denial of requests and analysis of what was nationalistic about them specifically.
One might further ask what was nationalistic about banning greyhound and horse racing originally but I suspect that will be clouded by some invective about mistaken names or such too.

irelandrover

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

You're mixing up nationalist with just being Irish. I'll give you an example, is wicklow gaa nationalistic... No, is kildare... No.... Is any other county below the border counties.... No.... Are the border counties and Northern counties... Not officially but things are complex there and that's obvious.

I'd argue that the fact that the Irish National Anthem is played before games and the Irish flag are flown makes it nationalist.

Trasna1

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The rule has long been amended. It is now up to Central Council to decide on requests.

We are still awaiting facts showing denial of requests and analysis of what was nationalistic about them specifically.
One might further ask what was nationalistic about banning greyhound and horse racing originally but I suspect that will be clouded by some invective about mistaken names or such too.

I would have always considered the GAA to be a culturally nationalist apolitical organisation, though in and around NI the line gets blurred between the culture and the political. Hardly surprising, since the GAA is a product of it's members and the society it exists in.

I'd that a bad thing? Hardly. Does it mean that it prevents the apprentice boys of Derry setting up a team? No.
There are far more complex reasons around identity that means unionists generally don't play GAA, than a song and a flag.

FrancieBrady

irelandrover wrote: »

I'd argue that the fact that the Irish National Anthem is played before games and the Irish flag are flown makes it nationalist.

I'd argue that is being 'Irish', just like the English team or the French team play their anthems and use their flags in support.

Taytoland

Trasna1 wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The rule has long been amended. It is now up to Central Council to decide on requests.

We are still awaiting facts showing denial of requests and analysis of what was nationalistic about them specifically.
One might further ask what was nationalistic about banning greyhound and horse racing originally but I suspect that will be clouded  by some invective about mistaken names or such too.

I would have always considered the GAA to be a culturally nationalist apolitical organisation, though in and around NI the line gets blurred between the culture and the political. Hardly surprising, since the GAA is a product of it's members and the society it exists in.

I'd that a bad thing? Hardly. Does it mean that it prevents the apprentice boys of Derry setting up a team? No.
There are far more complex reasons around identity that means unionists generally don't play GAA, than a song and a flag.

Would love to see a Unionist team in the GAA.

FrancieBrady

Trasna1 wrote: »

I would have always considered the GAA to be a culturally nationalist apolitical organisation, though in and around NI the line gets blurred between the culture and the political. Hardly surprising, since the GAA is a product of it's members and the society it exists in.

I'd that a bad thing? Hardly. Does it mean that it prevents the apprentice boys of Derry setting up a team? No.
There are far more complex reasons around identity that means unionists generally don't play GAA, than a song and a flag.

It is an Irish sporting and cultural organisation that welcomes and has all creeds and political persuasions as members and leaders.
It has done a lot to step away from nationalism.

It's a bit like trying to tag FG as fascist Blueshirts today, they aren't.

Some people need their bogeymen. They'll beat the 'nationalist' drum as long as they can. Arlene can't get away with it anymore so hence her attendance.

irelandrover

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'd argue that is being 'Irish', just like the English team or the French team play their anthems and use their flags in support.

But they play the English anthem for the English team. They do not play the English anthem before a premiership match.