Liverpool FC bring Sharon Tuff on board as the club seeks global partnerships

[McDermotX]

'Ah.......that's alright then'

(At least when we don't want to get a point across). Mods, it's time to scrub the site of any references to anyone, ever, that might be interpreted by someone else, anywhere, anytime, as maybe, someway, somehow, of being a slight against a way more serious subject.
It's the only way to be completely fair.

Speaking of which, no-one has yet provided any discussion on what this employee's boring role means for the future of the club, and the universe.

My fault of course for seeking out a photo of someone, newly attached to the club. That's something that's never happened before here. Of course I apologise for calling her a redser, and quite frankly, deserve to be boiled in acid by the Red-Headed League. I'll call my red-headed better half to tell here I'll be late home tonight.

Me bollocks.

[baitman]

the world has gone mad

[McDermotX]

Mad I tell ya. Mad.

Madder than Mad Jack McMad, the winner of last year's Mr Madman competition.

[badpiggy]

The amount of hassle the burqa sorts out. I've been totally wrong.

[Norbs]

You lot are so busy covering your own arses that you just don't get it.

I'm not interested in arses, just boobs. I thought I'd covered that in my original observation

[Cormack74]

As are most jokes regarding people's appearances, comments around other's appearances for the purpose of raising a smirk.
That's all well and good for the likes of people of forums, but maybe Ayre would feel its unfair to make jokes regarding his appearance.
Maybe Ayre would feel slighted more than the Tuff one would regarding some of the things put up here ? I've no idea, and neither do any of you.

Quite frankly, I don't care one jot that we've appointed a woman in the role, if she's up to the job, then fair enough. The same would go for any fella appointed in the same position. Frankly its a relatively uninteresting position for discussion, which is why this thread has attracted next to nothing in discussion presumably.
She should get no more or less jokes put forward about her than everyone of this site has felt comfortable about posting about any other employee before.
Lets just not try to spin arguments out of control, or make things out to be more than what they are.
If we are, then I'm afraid we should implement the same degree of high-horsing throughout the site IMO.

Agree with this

I get it, I just regard it as mild naughtiness that need not be dwelled upon.

Good point, succinctly made

The amount of hassle the burqa sorts out. I've been totally wrong.

Delightfully politically incorrect

[Neil Young]

You guys can all convince yourselves that everything's all right, that you're all totally non-sexist, that you don't lazily objectify women and that all you want is the same right to, er, objectify women as they sometimes seem to have when talking about blokes they fancy because, as we all know, equality for women is all in the mind and the lack of it is not at all a continuing issue in the world today.

You can tell yourselves that your immediate reactions to the news of Sharon Tuff's appointment, her arrival in your world, is no different to how you'd react if it had been a man appointed.

You can all be up in arms when there's even a hint that someone has - no doubt deliberately - mistaken your gentle humour for something with a less appealing undertone.

You can huff and puff about people being on their high horses when the humourless *******s dare to call you out on your banter denigrating a woman's appearance rather than anything to do with her ability to do the job, just like you all doubtless immediately called John Henry a speccy **** and Tom Werner a fat tosser rather than concentrating on their money and connections and business records and of course everyone here immediately said Linda Pizzuti must have a lot of good qualities and no one ever obsessed solely about the way she looks.

And who knows, maybe you'd even be right about all that.

But whether or not that's true, what puzzles me is if you're so affronted to be told that, er, maybe this sort of banter isn't quite the innocent, harmless fun you all believe it to be, why are you so keen to shoot at the people suggesting it might be a good idea to tone it down? Don't you think it could be worth considering that they might actually have a point? I mean, if you're all so enthusiastic to defend your non-sexist credentials then maybe, just maybe, it would be worth being cautious about immediately judging a woman on her looks...

[Kenneth]

She hasn't really been judged on her looks, her looks have been judged. I don't think anyone can discuss her suitability for the job as we've never heard of her.

[Neil Young]

Do you really think that distinction, which I'm not sure is anything other than legalistic quibbling at most, was worth making? Hmm, I guess you do.

Instead of engaging with the point though, yes, I see now...

[Kenneth]

It's a valid distinction. People are not judging her ability or appropriateness for her new job based on her looks.

[Assassin]

It's a valid distinction. People are not judging her ability or appropriateness for her new job based on her looks.

This. She is very good at what she does. However, she is a ginger *****r

[Neil Young]

It's a valid distinction. People are not judging her ability or appropriateness for her new job based on her looks.

Quite. You're not saying she isn't qualified to do the job. You're saying you don't want to **** her. I'm not sure how it's ok to judge her as a sexual object first but I don't doubt the blind spot is mine. I mean, it has to be. Right?

The sad part is that if only the Suffragettes had shown a bit of ankle, Emily Davison might still be alive today.

[little dave hedgehog]

[Kenneth]

Quite. You're not saying she isn't qualified to do the job. You're saying you don't want to **** her. I'm not sure how it's ok to judge her as a sexual object first but I don't doubt the blind spot is mine. I mean, it has to be. Right?

The sad part is that if only the Suffragettes had shown a bit of ankle, Emily Davison might still be alive today.

I havne't said it's right, or that I don't want to **** her. In fact I've said the opposite in this thread on both counts

I think everyone knows what you think on the matter Neil, some people have said something sexist on the Internet but that's not enough is it? The point needs to be laboured to the point that you shut down/control the conversation. A bit like Craig used to, only you have a valid point.

[Alex]

FWIW Kenneth, I agree with most of the things Neil is saying, it's just that he can articulate it better than I could.