I guess I’m fatphobic then. I don’t think what I posted is an unreasonable opinion to have.
No just common sense.
it's just the nature of the clothing industry and fast fashion. they heavily cater to slim body sizes and make it ridiculously hard to find clothing for fat people. if they had it their way they wouldn't even manufacture clothing for fat people.
Did you read the tweet that started this discussion? It implied that being fat makes it harder to shop ethically (I think? Was hard to interpret). Surely the most ethical way of dressing at all is to skip fast fashion altogether?
Pretty much how I see it. I get it, it sucks if you can’t find anything in your size. But if your size is so big even XXXL stuff doesn’t fit you then I don’t think the problem is the manufacturer.
she's likely a bot designed to post shit like this and have it amplified to generate engagement among the outraged types.
if reasonably priced clothing is made widely available for fat people, then yes.
you also said this
which is what I was reacting to.
That applies to any novel not written in the present day, right? You don’t have to go back that far to learn about the society a novel was written for.
Yeah well you would, surely? Nobody who is so big that they can’t clothe themselves believes that they’re in tip top shape. They’re just shifting the issue onto someone else.
Yeah I just went to Shakespeare because I saw it on the list in the tweet and it seemed an obvious example. To be clear though, I'm not saying the only valid reason for reading or watching Shakespeare is to study how it reflects on attitudes of the time. I was just giving an example of what I think I'd have lost if I'd avoided it altogether on political grounds. For someone else it might be an understanding of love or something.
Not exactly Shakespeare, but the five or so Agatha Christie novels I've read primarily for nostalgic reasons, have provided a stark reminder of social attitudes of the 1930s and it is fascinating. Anyone lower class or 'swarthy foreigners' immediately jump to the top of the suspects list, women are generally seen as flighty and frivolous, and maids etc...are considered automatons, mere extras defined by their uniform, not personality.
I think it was change a while ago. It's been done in a most sports which have a women's game. Cricket did it back in 2018 or something. There's one name for the award across the men's and women's games.I see that Sky have now changed their “Man of the Match” award to “Person of the Match”
Is this after the Souness thing?
Ridiculous, they're not people, they're MEN.I see that Sky have now changed their “Man of the Match” award to “Person of the Match”
Is this after the Souness thing?
I've heard the Manchester Evening News is having to change their name because of the acronym MEN too.
It's it not player of the match? I didn't notice that's what they'd written in their post. I agree person sounds crap, it's usually called player of the match.
It is player of the match.
Person or Player?I see that Sky have now changed their “Man of the Match” award to “Person of the Match”
Is this after the Souness thing?
Oh my god they have done WHAT?!I see that Sky have now changed their “Man of the Match” award to “Person of the Match”
Is this after the Souness thing?
Why, though? This seems fine.
What if they don't identify as man or woman?
I don’t think there was anything wrong with man of the match, given that everyone on that pitch is a man. Obviously you’d want something else for women’s football .
Not everyone in the world that plays ‘men’ or ‘womens’ football will identify as a ‘man’ or ‘woman’. It is a small change that helps football become more inclusive on the biggest stage.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It's also mostly a great point scoring change that doesnt actually chance anything in the ridiculously backward and conservative industry that is football.
Surely it shouldn’t be called men’s football either then.
It's also easier to just call it the same thing no matter who's playing. Same graphic, same wording on the little trophy etc.
I don’t know many people that go around calling it mens football, do you? If I’m talking about Everton I don’t usually reference what side I’m talking about etc. either way the majority of people that play ‘mens’ or ‘womens’ football will identify as that. This just helps that specific type of being more gender neutral and it’s really nothing major that needs to be called out as such.
Ah OK, I knew it had changed anyway
No I don’t personally, but that’s what it’s called colloquially I guess. If someone who doesn’t identify as a man was to get offended by man of the match, they’d also be offended by men’s football, you’d think. I don’t think anyone has complained, it’s just sky getting out in front of it probably. It’s not a big deal either way.
I don’t think people need to be offended for us as a society to be more inclusive.
