Steve Elkington on Twitter

[hopefulhacker]

And why's that got to be the "bad' list, huh?

You can slice this stuff so thin that we all fall through the cracks. I like the Irish approach to making new friends:

Go fcuk yourself ya long string of Stretch

Fancy a pint?

[Stretch]

That I do yer muck savage gobshite!

[boogielicious]

Bogans do struggle with social media at the best of times.

I had to look that up in my handy Aussie Slang dictionary!

http://www.koalanet.com.au/australian-slang.html#S

[misty_mountainhop]

This guy Sam, or whatever his name is....has he said anything about this? Has he come out as insulted? Oriental an insult? FFS! What is the World like these days? Isn't there more going on (Ukraine anyone????) that's more important than what some one-time decent golfer has to blather on about?

Maybe Elkington has a point re. the description of someone as an 'oriental athlete' etc when it should really only be 'athlete'. Who cares that some sportsperson says they're gay?? Why is that news? Is that what Elkington is drawing attention to? The fact that there's some implied news in this kind of announcement?

Fauxffence - made-up word describing people being professionally offended on behalf of other parties when there's no evidence that those parties are, in fact, offended.

Moving on...

[jamo]

Maybe Elkington has a point re. the description of someone as an 'oriental athlete' etc when it should really only be 'athlete'. Who cares that some sportsperson says they're gay?? Why is that news? Is that what Elkington is drawing attention to? The fact that there's some implied news in this kind of announcement?

Here's why Elk's analogy is bullshit: Assigning a race to a spectator (and leaving the word "oriental" out of this), as Elk mentioned, essentially does nothing. If Nick Faldo had called that guy who fell into the cactus after Rory's shot last week "German," none of us would have lost or gained any compassion for the guy. It's just an indication of his nationality. No little German kids are at home watching, thinking that for the rest of their lives they should avoid cacti because Germans just can't stay out of 'em. But that's not the case for Michael Sam, who'll be the NFL's first openly gay player. If he improves the life of even one football-playing gay teenager (by fostering a world where gay kids who want to play football aren't ridiculed), his public coming out is a wonderful thing, and the media should support and celebrate that. Identifying him as the first gay NFL play will undoubtedly improve the lives of some people, and it's the first step to making the world of sports more inclusive to gay people. And while the first Michael Sam might receive a bit of extra attention, that's only to ensure that the 50th Michael Sam won't. No more than the 50th gay Grammy winner (who has the first gay Grammy winner to thank) gets treated any differently.

[misty_mountainhop]

Here's why Elk's analogy is bullshit:

Assigning a race to a spectator (and leaving the word "oriental" out of this), as Elk mentioned, essentially does nothing. If Nick Faldo had called that guy who fell into the cactus after Rory's shot last week "German," none of us would have lost or gained any compassion for the guy. It's just an indication of his nationality. No little German kids are at home watching, thinking that for the rest of their lives they should avoid cacti because Germans just can't stay out of 'em.

But that's not the case for Michael Sam, who'll be the NFL's first openly gay player. If he improves the life of even one football-playing gay teenager (by fostering a world where gay kids who want to play football aren't ridiculed), his public coming out is a wonderful thing, and the media should support and celebrate that. Identifying him as the first gay NFL play will undoubtedly improve the lives of some people, and it's the first step to making the world of sports more inclusive to gay people.

And while the first Michael Sam might receive a bit of extra attention, that's only to ensure that the 50th Michael Sam won't. No more than the 50th gay Grammy winner (who has the first gay Grammy winner to thank) gets treated any differently.

A fair point, eloquently stated and I have no problem with the point you're making. Personally though, I'm getting bored stupid with the headlines surrounding this sort of thing. Whooppee! Michael Sam is gay. Maybe I'm surprised that this sort of announcement should be considered as news? I don't think Elkington's analogy is "bullshit" if he feels the same way. Maybe he just hankers for a World that doesn't see news or anything unusual in this sort of announcement?

[iacas]

A fair point, eloquently stated and I have no problem with the point you're making. Personally though, I'm getting bored stupid with the headlines surrounding this sort of thing. Whooppee! Michael Sam is gay. Maybe I'm surprised that this sort of announcement should be considered as news? I don't think Elkington's analogy is "bullshit" if he feels the same way. Maybe he just hankers for a World that doesn't see news or anything unusual in this sort of announcement?

So Elkington should be allowed to make jokes about "throwing handbags"?

I'm sorry, but no.

[misty_mountainhop]

So Elkington should be allowed to make jokes about "throwing handbags"?

I'm sorry, but no.

So you're suggesting he shouldn't be "allowed" to make such comments? He can say pretty much what he likes although he has to accept the consequences - I imagine he's aware of this and chooses to make these remarks anyway. Pretty sure Michael Sam can speak for himself - he might actually find that comment amusing. Who knows?

Don't get me wrong, I think that sort of comment is potentially insensitive and doesn't do Elkington any favours but I don't think those comments remotely deserve the sort of agitated comment that they seem to draw these days. As I suggested earlier, there's far more important things to talk about.

[Valleygolfer]

[QUOTE name="iacas" url="/t/72721/steve-elkington-on-twitter/54#post_955833"]   So Elkington should be allowed to make jokes about "throwing handbags"? I'm sorry, but no. [/QUOTE] So you're suggesting he shouldn't be "allowed" to make such comments? He can say pretty much what he likes although he has to accept the consequences - I imagine he's aware of this and chooses to make these remarks anyway. Pretty sure Michael Sam can speak for himself - he might actually find that comment amusing. Who knows? Don't get me wrong, I think that sort of comment is potentially insensitive and doesn't do Elkington any favours but I don't think those comments remotely deserve the sort of agitated comment that they seem to draw these days. As I suggested earlier, there's far more important things to talk about.

You can make whatever comments you want but the people you do business with and tournaments you participate in can also choose not to do business with you.

[misty_mountainhop]

You can make whatever comments you want but the people you do business with and tournaments you participate in can also choose not to do business with you.

Of course. A possible consequence of shooting one's mouth off when perhaps a bit more thought would have been beneficial...

[Valleygolfer]

[QUOTE name="Valleygolfer" url="/t/72721/steve-elkington-on-twitter/54#post_955966"] You can make whatever comments you want but the people you do business with and tournaments you participate in can also choose not to do business with you.[/QUOTE] Of course. A possible consequence of shooting one's mouth off when perhaps a bit more thought would have been beneficial...

I think he is typical of someone who says controversial statements that entertain a multitude of people. The envelope keeps getting pushed and they feel like they can get away with more. Plus as men get older, their filter gets thinner. He needs to apologize and hideout for a while.

[boogielicious]

Here's why Elk's analogy is bullshit:

Assigning a race to a spectator (and leaving the word "oriental" out of this), as Elk mentioned, essentially does nothing. If Nick Faldo had called that guy who fell into the cactus after Rory's shot last week "German," none of us would have lost or gained any compassion for the guy. It's just an indication of his nationality. No little German kids are at home watching, thinking that for the rest of their lives they should avoid cacti because Germans just can't stay out of 'em.

But that's not the case for Michael Sam, who'll be the NFL's first openly gay player. If he improves the life of even one football-playing gay teenager (by fostering a world where gay kids who want to play football aren't ridiculed), his public coming out is a wonderful thing, and the media should support and celebrate that. Identifying him as the first gay NFL play will undoubtedly improve the lives of some people, and it's the first step to making the world of sports more inclusive to gay people.

And while the first Michael Sam might receive a bit of extra attention, that's only to ensure that the 50th Michael Sam won't. No more than the 50th gay Grammy winner (who has the first gay Grammy winner to thank) gets treated any differently.

@jamo ,

You are destroying the myth that engineers cannot write well.  Keep it up!

[iacas]

So you're suggesting he shouldn't be "allowed" to make such comments?

You know what I meant. And if you don't, here it is: he should not be "allowed" to make such comments without people rightfully and strongly objecting to them. I thought that was a logical "given" since that's what you're objecting to - our objections to Elk's comments.

Obviously I support the right to free speech. I don't even care to get into the idea of hate speech (this ain't that IMO). But you suggested that his comments were fine, even compared them to comments made here (that may have been another person), and I disagree.

Don't get me wrong, I think that sort of comment is potentially insensitive and doesn't do Elkington any favours but I don't think those comments remotely deserve the sort of agitated comment that they seem to draw these days. As I suggested earlier, there's far more important things to talk about.

If we held that standard, we wouldn't spend time here talking about golf. Seriously. So it's a straw man type of argument, because there's almost always something more important to talk about than golf.

[Golfingdad]

If we held that standard, we wouldn't spend time here talking about golf. Seriously. So it's a straw man type of argument, because there's almost always something more important to talk about than golf.

Yeah, I heard a guy give the perfect response to a similarly ridiculous argument the other night.  In response to people suggesting that the government shouldn't be wasting their time passing laws giving gay people rights and legalizing marajuana, he said "the government should be worrying about more important things."  His response was that we are all smart enough (American people, government, etc) "to walk and chew gum at the same time."

The idea that we should only talk about the one most important thing in the world is beyond absurd.

[misty_mountainhop]

You know what I meant. And if you don't, here it is: he should not be "allowed" to make such comments without people rightfully and strongly objecting to them. I thought that was a logical "given" since that's what you're objecting to - our objections to Elk's comments.

Obviously I support the right to free speech. I don't even care to get into the idea of hate speech (this ain't that IMO). But you suggested that his comments were fine, even compared them to comments made here (that may have been another person), and I disagree.

If we held that standard, we wouldn't spend time here talking about golf. Seriously. So it's a straw man type of argument, because there's almost always something more important to talk about than golf.

Yeah, I guess I knew what you meant. By the same token, my implication re. there being other more important things to talk about is that this doesn't even amount to the proverbial storm in a tea cup and is another, increasingly frequent, example of people getting hot under the collar about nothing. FWIW, I don't think I ever said his comments were fine; I just think the reaction to them is way OTT.

Yeah, I heard a guy give the perfect response to a similarly ridiculous argument the other night.  In response to people suggesting that the government shouldn't be wasting their time passing laws giving gay people rights and legalizing marajuana, he said "the government should be worrying about more important things."  His response was that we are all smart enough (American people, government, etc) "to walk and chew gum at the same time."

The idea that we should only talk about the one most important thing in the world is beyond absurd.

You're extrapolating a bit far there I think.

[jclark]

People can think what they want on homosexualality. But when they say derogatory statements that shows ignorance. I'm a huge Mizzou fan and have watched Michael Sam play. He was a heck of an athlete. I would not make a derogatory "hand bag toss" statement to his face because he's a very big man. Maybe Sam needs to humble Elk by balling his a** up and humbling him.

[saturday]

Looks like he's trying to put sprinkles on a turd.

[mvmac]

Pretty sure Michael Sam can speak for himself - he might actually find that comment amusing. Who knows?

Uhhh, I'm guessing no