 |
 |
On Sat, 30 Jan 1999 07:57:25 -0500 Maria Barile <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > M.G.Peckitt wrote: > > > > Bill and all > > > > Bill Abert confuses respect for content of ideas for > > respect just saying those ideas at all. I did not agree > > with Powell's politics, his method of putting his message > > across and the messasge itself, but if he was being honest, > > there is a kind of integrity in that. > > > > So when Mr. Hoddle is asked for his views I prefer > > politically incorrect honesty to watered down, > > condescending, patronising rubbish. > > > > ---------------------- > > M.G.Peckitt > > [log in to unmask] > I do not like patronizing statement or political correctness for the > sake of political correctness it's self. However, ableism at this point > plays different role in society. Mr. Hoddle's statement as present > by Bill does not seem very honest or thoughtout, just another person > in position of "perceived power " being a jerk. I don't know if > British football encourages as much violence against women as North > American football does . If yes, then lest add that his opinion stems > from chauvinism and should not be applauded. I do not applaud the statement, I am displeased that anyone should say what Mr. Hoodle has said. It did not appear thoughout, but he did not HAVE to say it. So why did he, if it was not partly what he thought. I find it hard to believe that Mr.Hoodle has somkind kind of vendetta against disabled people. If it was not what he believed, even though it was badly articulated, why didn't just churn out the PC rubbish? Why lie, when, for the sake of argument you true feelings are more popular, more PC? Michael ---------------------- M.G.Peckitt [log in to unmask] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%