Unpopular Opinions - OP Updated with Threadban List 4/5/21

castletownman wrote: »

Now its great to see Sean Cox on the mend, but I think there is ulterior motives at play with Liverpool inviting him to attend the game this weekend.

If they were playing a mid- to lower table team instead on Sunday, do I think he'd be a guest of honour? I don't. They are the masters at stoking up extra atmosphere from the crowd, and will use the occasion to add a layer of intimidation for City.

Different breed.

What a bizarre post

They're going to intimidate Man City by inviting a disabled person to the game

Ok chief

johnire wrote: »

Women who go on endlessly about gender balance in the workplace but this doesn’t seem to apply to jobs like pest controllers, refuse collectors,couriers,waste disposal depots.....in other words any job that is traditionally seen as extremely hard work-can be messy and not always the most pleasant.
Why are women constantly claiming that there’s lack of gender balance in the media,government,managerial roles etc but there not so quick to want to do jobs in the sectors I’ve given examples of?
I’m all for gender balance but it’s not right to pick and choose where the balance should be. It’s all or nothing.

If I had a choice between being a refuse collector and a cleaner, I’d choose the former. Most cleaners are women. When this argument arises, why do people pretend that women don’t do any tough low-paid jobs?

blinding wrote: »

Don’t forget the menopause .

Why would women bosses not promote women ?

Because they don’t want some younger prettier girl coming and taking what they have.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I think people don’t want anyone taking what they have.

Yes but I told you why women don’t get promoted by men, then somebody asked why they don’t get promoted by women so I told them.

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

what is the name of this thread ?


Its my opinion, and its unpopular, but financially my post has merit, or have you chosen to disregard that ?

How did I indicate I disregard that? You would be discriminating on grounds of sex (do what you want) but it's totally arrogant then to complain about discrimination against men on the grounds of sex.

blueshade wrote: »

Absolutely, that annoying screechy bint Jo Swinson being a prime example. Playing the woman card because she wasn't invited on to a TV debate with Corbyn and Johnson. The only consolation is that next year she'll have been kicked out and replaced with another minority, probably the black chap that defected from Labour or the Tories. Lim Dems got rid of their ''stale pale male'' and replaced him with an ugly gobby bitch, so when the election is an utter disaster for them they can replace her with a more attractive ''minority''. Now, if only there was a black lesbian who identified as a man, who has a bunch of mixed race kids and a disability they'd be quids in. All about the optics.

This one incident means it's absolutely rife? Also, this is the third post about a woman you've written using extremely aggressive language about her. I mean fair enough if you don't like them, but what's with the foaming-at-the-mouth language? Comes across a little crazed.

vriesmays wrote: »

The Chinese must be smarter than the Irish as there are far low common cancer rates there.

Because... China and Ireland are the only two countries in the world? really not seeing the point you're attempting to make. You said funding for cancer research was a waste of money. You were just trolling. Let it go.

Midster wrote: »

If women are excluded from anything, the presumption from them is always that men kept them out. Rather than thinking there’s a chance that there just not good enough to be there

The woman hate on this thread is strong (what the **** are the ramblings from that "BDI" account supposed to signify). Lads, you know the way you object to sexism against men? (And understandably so). How come you express this by... sexism against women? Do you feel the same resentment towards your female relatives?

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

why should I "stfu" ?

Because you have no other comeback ?

Have you trouble reading?

Because it's a massively hypocritical stance, as explained.

"I object to discrimination against men in the workplace but I would discriminate against women in the workplace" - it's not hard to see what I'm saying.

Jesus, a broken record. Nowhere did I say those things are sexist. Nowhere. Please stop making sh1t up. Just grow up and admit you are a massive hypocrite by saying you object to discrimination against men in hiring practices yet you'd discriminate against women if you were hiring... and leave it at that. Crikey.