BJK-Borrowed From Another Site

[Super_Ally 0]

I'm not trying to say whether I agree with the campaign or not.

 

Nor necessarily state that everyone partakes in singing BJK etc because of the reasons I give.

 

I'm just saying, to some extent, I can kind of see why some Rangers fans are "lashing out" as they are. It's not that they are revelling in Celtic's sordid past. But as BD states, we're always getting the shitty end of the stick with no avenues to fight back and perhaps this one way of for once having the blame more favourably apportioned.

 

Hope that makes sense.

 

Essentially I believe many take part because we are hammered for every minor indiscretion, whereas Celtic's are continually swept under the rug. I guess many think that the media, Celtic and other fans cannot ignore the harbouring of Paedophiles in the same way that they look to hide their bigotry under a banner of "politics".

[bmck 117]

to me it's all just excuse making; trying to have your cake and eat it. ireland have been treated pretty shittily; does it justify the ira bombing innocent civilians? no. all this 'oh i think it's bad personally but i can understand it' is, to me, just opting out of taking a stance. everyone who sings this, or finds it regretable but can understand it, better opt out of compaints about songs about the ibrox disaster. unless those who sing it admit they just like singing it to wind up celtic fans, or justify it on those grounds, they're just bullshitters, and not worth listening to regardless of their injustice stories.

 

just because we're always getting the shitty end of the stick doesn't justify anything. just because you can sympathise with people annoyed that we continually get it doesn't translate into giving this implicit approval by refusing to take a stand against it. not saying whether you agree with it or not is the same as agreeing with it. it's already happening. all this 'but we're so hard done by, can you really blame us for a few dodgy digs?' is the exact same reasoning we condemn in celtic fans.

 

not for this bear. people can sing away, i think football should have thick enough skin to deal with jibes of this sort. i wouldnt want it banned. but i wont sing it, unless i feel like it at any given time, but if anyone tells me they're doing it because a) they feel they've been getting the crappy end of the stick and this is their rebellion, or b) they want to raise the issue to bring some sense of justice, then i'll consider that person either a liar or just deluded. that's my own view, but there's got to be standards. either admit its just another who shagged or the boys, and enjoy it, or dont sing it - just dnot furnish it with faux-injustice justification.

 

i wish bjk singers would just have the balls to be cuntish, and acknowledge its for cuntishness, and cuntishness is often fun - masking cuntishness with social injustice stories is timmy techniques, though, and shouldn't happen.

Edited April 15, 2009 by bmck

[Bluedell 5,356]

I don't think anyone in this thread is justifying it. There's a difference between saying what the reason for something is and saying that the reason is acceptable.

 

I've come across people who say they are using it as a way of getting back at what they perceive as unfair treatment and have no reason to doubt that they are being truthful.

[Super_Ally 0]

to me it's all just excuse making; trying to have your cake and eat it. ireland have been treated pretty shittily; does it justify the ira bombing innocent civilians? no. all this 'oh i think it's bad personally but i can understand it' is, to me, just opting out of taking a stance. everyone who sings this, or finds it regretable but can understand it, better opt out of compaints about songs about the ibrox disaster. unless those who sing it admit they just like singing it to wind up celtic fans, or justify it on those grounds, they're just bullshitters, and not worth listening to regardless of their injustice stories.

 

just because we're always getting the shitty end of the stick doesn't justify anything. just because you can sympathise with people annoyed that we continually get it doesn't translate into giving this implicit approval by refusing to take a stand against it. not saying whether you agree with it or not is the same as agreeing with it. it's already happening. all this 'but we're so hard done by, can you really blame us for a few dodgy digs?' is the exact same reasoning we condemn in celtic fans.

 

not for this bear. people can sing away, i think football should have thick enough skin to deal with jibes of this sort. i wouldnt want it banned. but i wont sing it, unless i feel like it at any given time, but if anyone tells me they're doing it because a) they feel they've been getting the crappy end of the stick and this is their rebellion, or b) they want to raise the issue to bring some sense of justice, then i'll consider that person either a liar or just deluded. that's my own view, but there's got to be standards. either admit its just another who shagged or the boys, and enjoy it, or dont sing it - just dnot furnish it with faux-injustice justification.

 

i wish bjk singers would just have the balls to be cuntish, and acknowledge its for cuntishness, and cuntishness is often fun - masking cuntishness with social injustice stories is timmy techniques, though, and shouldn't happen.

 

 

Surely you can't generalise and say 50,000+ people behave in a certain way for one singular reason?

[bmck 117]

I've come across people who say they are using it as a way of getting back at what they perceive as unfair treatment and have no reason to doubt that they are being truthful.

 

i do because it's nonsense. people who think you get back at unfair treatment by singing songs at football games are, if not liars, deluded. the reason for this song isn't unfair treatment, and it doesn't going any way towards addressing any unfair treatment; anyone who entertains that argument are deluding themselves, imho.

Edited April 15, 2009 by bmck

[bmck 117]

Surely you can't generalise and say 50,000+ people behave in a certain way for one singular reason?

 

of course you can. you get at motivation from context. people interested in righting social wrongs don't sing songs at football games. people who say they are doing this are either liars or deluded. there's no other options.

 

singing it isn't getting back at any injustice, no matter what people feel in their hearts, so it leaves only a few options. they're singing it because it's fun (my preferred reason, the one i think best gets at the nature of football crowds, not sacrificing honesty to grab an imaginary moral high ground), or because they think they are addressing social injustice (in which case they're deluded, or they're giving a reason that isn't truthful).

 

i dont believe it when celtic fans say they sing 'fuck the pope and davie cooper' as a decleration of autonomy from britain, and i dont believe it when rangers fan say they sing bjk to redress social ills. i cant make myself believe it, because it's not true.

Edited April 15, 2009 by bmck

[Bluedell 5,356]

i do because it's nonsense. people who think you get back at unfair treatment by singing songs at football games are, if not liars, deluded. the reason for this song isn't unfair treatment, and it doesn't going any way towards addressing any unfair treatment; anyone who entertains that argument are deluding themselves, imho.

 

They may be deluding themselves (they may not), but it doesn't mean that they don't believe it.

 

We may have to agree to disagree on this one.

[bmck 117]

They may be deluding themselves, but it doesn't mean that they don't believe it.

 

just because i beleive i'm the king of england doesn't justify me going around asking peasants to kiss my ring. i'm not one for the if-they-believe-in-their-hearts-they're-doing-good-its-not-right-to-contradict school. same thinking justifies the twin towers, and takings for PIRA in pubs in maryhill.

 

We may have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

i guess so, but it doesn't seem seem we disagree on that much to be honest. the only difference is you entertain the delusions of rangers supporters in a way you don't celtic supporters, and i think if we take that approach that opens us all up to charges of hypocrisy. i don't like this trend - i think if we start buying bullshit justifications, or entertaining delusions, we'll become just like them. who knows, maybe death threats to nacho novo is a legitimate act of war in defiance of unjust oppressors? so long as they believed it....

 

as ever where there's difference of opinion, worth pointing out that it's all just opinions. not stuff that really matters in the grand scale of things.

Edited April 15, 2009 by bmck

[Super_Ally 0]

of course you can. you get at motivation from context. people interested in righting social wrongs don't sing songs at football games. people who say they are doing this are either liars or deluded. there's no other options.

 

singing it isn't getting back at any injustice, no matter what people feel in their hearts, so it leaves only a few options. they're singing it because it's fun (my preferred reason, the one i think best gets at the nature of football crowds, not sacrificing honesty to grab an imaginary moral high ground), or because they think they are addressing social injustice (in which case they're deluded, or they're giving a reason that isn't truthful).

 

i dont believe it when celtic fans say they sing 'fuck the pope and davie cooper' as a decleration of autonomy from britain, and i dont believe it when rangers fan say they sing bjk to redress social ills. i cant make myself believe it, because it's not true.

 

It's not an effective way of achieving it. But they (we?) don't have any other real options.

 

It's like when the papers print bullshit about us. How can we get back at them reaching the same number of people as they do to challenge their bs? We cant.

 

It does stink of the childish arguments of "it's not just me, they did it too". But when you only selectively punish one person, or one group in this case, it's only natural to highlight the ills of the other person/group. It's not an adequate defence for your own behaviour, but when you are being victimised in such a manner it's easy to see how it happens. It's why the so called war on sectarianism will never succeed.

[Super_Ally 0]

Had a look back throught the thread and not to sure we're really disagreeing. Just struglling to see the point each other is making.

 

I'm not arguing these people are some kind of crusaders for social change. Which is what I believe you think I am implying.

 

I merely think they are saying to the authorities, media etc if you're going to start tackling the unsightly side of the OF how about occassionally casting your gaze at the other mob, who aside from being as bad as much to blame the sectarianism issues are paedo harbourers to boot. (The giruy to Celtic is an added bonus :devil:)

 

I think that's where we're at?