Meet the Skanks

[Mad Dogg]

I'm fairly sure I get it. By using terms like skank and s**t to insult a woman we know nothing about, you get the impression we're casting negative implications on female sexuality.

Maybe I just don't see skank as truly negative in a sexual way. I certainly wouldn't use s**t, whore or ho, as they are linked directly to sexual promiscuity. Whereas skank certainly doesn't have that same connotation amongst the people (men and women) I know. It's an offensive term for a woman who acts like a cheap low-life, which these women certainly did.

 

[God-King Dean]

I'm sick of it getting turn into a female standards of insults thread.

We all know women don't have feelings.

 

[mozza91]

Sorry I upset you Pusssy, you didn't get any again this weekend, the picture of the boxer must mean you like to take it in the ring

You did it wrong get someone to hold your head down

 

[God-King Dean]

FTR...

If I saw a Shaks player getting upto mischief, & I knew they were playing Saints next week, I'd pay them.

 

[Miller was a legend]

Soliola

Someone is on the high horse.

Whilst your underlying intention has some credit, your terminology and expression leaves a lot to be desired.

Seymour fugged up and is a repeat offender yes. But he is a human being with a problem that many in society have, alcohol abuse. He needs to turn that around, not for RL but for his own well being.

This guy has taken responsibility for his actions and agreed he needs help (unlike one named Carney). Just like that young bloke from your club, these guys need to learn how to control themselves.

Both have copped their punishment and Seymour (not sure about your bloke) has sought the help he needs. Time will tell how he goes with that.

As for these women and your own morals, well you are all welcome to them. I know I wouldn't stoop to being lower than a snakes arse and profiteering from the troubles of another human being. Being able to live with one self I guess comes to our own moral standards. yours are basic, selfish and underhanded, jsut like the gold digging bitches that having recognised Seymour, decided it was an opportunity to make some cash. Good for you. I am just glad you are not anyone I would ever want to rely on in a time of need. I;m sure your parents are proud of you, you snake

 

[maxpower3000]

I'm still trying to work out what she actually did that one could call her a "skank" for?

Did she sleep with him prior to take the video? If so, then you could look at that as a sign of being a skank, sure.

However, from what we (the public) have heard, all we know is that both him and her (as well as a few others) were out drinking, she took a video of him falling over intoxicated and acting like a knobhead, and then cashed it in.

How does that make her a skank? :lol:

Do we know if she had any relations with him? No, did the video show her making out with him? not that I saw. How is she a skank? lol

You should be rename yourself to Solioa the butterfly, you are such a gentleman, quick go to hooters and show your liitle SKANK how much you are defending her, this could be a great love story developing here.
quickly run because there are other pusssies here that me beat you to it

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

How about.."meet the cronulla idiot...Seymour...not the first time... who does this after the manly incident!"..pfft

 

[Soliola the Monster]

Someone is on the high horse.

Whilst your underlying intention has some credit, your terminology and expression leaves a lot to be desired.

Seymour fugged up and is a repeat offender yes. But he is a human being with a problem that many in society have, alcohol abuse. He needs to turn that around, not for RL but for his own well being.

This guy has taken responsibility for his actions and agreed he needs help (unlike one named Carney). Just like that young bloke from your club, these guys need to learn how to control themselves.

Both have copped their punishment and Seymour (not sure about your bloke) has sought the help he needs. Time will tell how he goes with that.

As for these women and your own morals, well you are all welcome to them. I know I wouldn't stoop to being lower than a snakes arse and profiteering from the troubles of another human being. Being able to live with one self I guess comes to our own moral standards. yours are basic, selfish and underhanded, jsut like the gold digging bitches that having recognised Seymour, decided it was an opportunity to make some cash. Good for you. I am just glad you are not anyone I would ever want to rely on in a time of need. I;m sure your parents are proud of you, you snake

I'm assuming the above post is in reply to mine? If so, then fair enough mate. That is your opinion and I shall respect it.

If you believe Seymor has an illness (through your own diagnosis), then I shall take your word for it through freedom of speech However, I am interested in knowing how you'd know this? Do you have any qualifications in mental illness? :roll:

Regardless of all of that, you have still failed to reply on the current debate. How does taking a video of a drunken bigot falling over in the streets of sydney qualify one as a "skank"

 

[adamkungl]

Read the words... defence of players charged with violent acts toward women.

Whatever. If you feel like having sensible discussion instead of snide comments the thread is there.

 

[Soliola the Monster]

You should be rename yourself to Solioa the butterfly, you are such a gentleman, quick go to hooters and show your liitle SKANK how much you are defending her, this could be a great love story developing here.
quickly run because there are other pusssies here that me beat you to it

So she is a skank because she works at hooters?

Would you call your mother a skank if she turned up to the cougar club wearing nothing but a thong? Honest question, no disrespect to your mother either, I'm just curious to see what you "as a self proclaimed hard man" would do in that situation? Assuming of course you have a good relationship with your mother?

 

[Kiki]

I just see this as overly-PC to women though. Guys don't get worked up when other guys are called numerous gender-specific titles. I honestly don't see the difference, and think anyone who does has crossed from gender equality to gender bias.

well look I'm not bringing up words like dickhead or c*ckhead because I can't speak for men. I dunno how it makes them feel. I don't usually use those words and if someone explained a legit reason why they hate it, I'd stop.

I guess maybe you just can't really get why it annoys me if you haven't experienced it. As a girl you grow up being judged on sexuality by boys - your whole school always knows whether people are calling you a frigid bitch or an easy lay or a skank or s**t or a whore. it's pretty sh*t, to be honest. especially because if you have a big rack at all then from the age of about 14 that's it - you're a skank.

I dunno if it's different for guys - but I'm just sick of everything about women having to do with f**king or not f**king. none of you are idiots - I know you all have big enough brains to use a different word.

at least consider it why don't you and make all our lives a little bit easier?

 

[Miller was a legend]

I'm assuming the above post is in reply to mine? If so, then fair enough mate. That is your opinion and I shall respect it.

If you believe Seymor has an illness (through your own diagnois), then I shall take your word for it through freedom of speech However, I am interested in knowing how you'd know this? Do you have any qualifications in mental illness? :roll:

Regardless of all of that, you have still failed to reply on the current debate. How does taking a video of a drunken bigot falling over in the streets of sydney qualify one as a "skank"

If you bothered to read back, you would have seen that I have not only not described them as that, rather gold digging bitches. I have also suggested that using the term is offending other women posters.

If you were involved with Cronulla, you may know a little about what has actually been said and done. You are not, so please don't suggest you know what is going on with Seymour.

Maxpower is rightly annoyed. buster is by all accounts a good bloke. He has not hurt anyone and did not jump behild the wheel of a car. He got tanked and it's not the first time. He had ADMITTED to having a problem with the ale and that my friend is the FIRST step to addressing the problem.

I think accepting he fugged up, let his club, team and fans down is comendable. Many have never had the balls to admit anything and have gone on to drag this game further into the gutter.

You may not like Cronulla, you may not like Seymour, but at least people should look at these things in an objective manner.

Take your player for example. In my opinion the penalty is too harsh. This kid fugged up, he is what 19? FFS Fugging up is how 19 year olds learn. He is on what 50 grand and gets fined 10 of it. Then the NRL adds a ban. now the kid will have court and more fines. A little excessive if you ask me. Just my opinion though.

 

[bartman]

Whatever. If you feel like having sensible discussion instead of snide comments the thread is there.

:lol: Since when does expressing an opinion become a snide comment?

My opinion is it's funny to read so many people getting so irate about this girl's mobile phone footage - instead of putting the blame for the footage at Seymour, where it should surely lie. And secondly while also coming up with any excuse under the sun for why Stewart, Seymour, Bird and any other whose behaviour comes to attention have been so harshly dealt with. Just an observation...

 

[bartman]

Take your player fir example. In my opinion the penalty is too harsh. This kid gugged up, he is what 19? FFS Fugging up is how 19 year olds learn. He is on what 50 grand and gets fined 10 of it. Then the NRL adds a ban. now the kid will have court and more fines. A little excessive if you ask me. Just my opinion though.

It should be added that the ban doesn't do anything other than embarrass the guy. He will remain on full pay. It's just he gets a bit of time to reflect and hopefully learn for the future about the impact of his actions.

Same for Seymour, and I've seen you post that perhaps it took this for Seymour to learn a valuable life lesson, and hopefully improve as a person. Hence these girls have probably done Seymour a favour that he should be thankful for, and that fans of the club should be thankful for if it helps Seymour come to grips with his life and make a better contribution to his club in the future.

The NRL bans for Seymour (or anyone else) are just part of that who learning and development thing, and won't do any additional damage that the player hadn't already got themselves into.

 

[adamkungl]

:lol: Since when does expressing an opinion become a snide comment?

My opinion is it's funny to read so many people getting so irate about this girl's mobile phone footage - instead of putting the blame for the footage at Seymour, where it should surely lie. And secondly while also coming up with any excuse under the sun for why Stewart, Seymour, Bird and any other whose behaviour comes to attention have been so harshly dealt with. Just an observation...

Actually, you're half right. Specifically in this case (because Seymour has done nothing wrong imo), it isn't ENTIRELY this idiot woman's fault. The media are the ones who are paying losers for phone videos of footballers drinking. The story "Seymour got drunk during the week" should never have made the papers, because it is a non story. Because of rabid media outlets, a bloke has got suspended for having too much to drink and not hurting anyone but his liver, and Sharks have missed a potential sponsor.

I didn't defend Bird. Mainly because of his complete lack of honesty. He didn't even come out and say he didn't do it. He blamed it on a mate, then refused to talk. Had he said "I didn't do it" from the start I probably would have defended his right to keep playing until his court case.

As for Stewart, I defended his right to innocence until proven guilty, which apparently no longer exists in the NRL.

 

[Soliola the Monster]

If you bothered to read back, you would have seen that I have not only not described them as that, rather gold digging bitches. I have also suggested that using the term is offending other women posters.

No worries, good to hear.

If you were involved with Cronulla, you may know a little about what has actually been said and done. You are not, so please don't suggest you know what is going on with Seymour.

Could you please refer me back to where I "stated" that I knew what was going on with Seymour? Thanks

Maxpower is rightly annoyed.

At what? Himself? From what I have seen, his childish statements are that of a 15 year old boy that has no clue.

buster is by all accounts a good bloke. He has not hurt anyone and did not jump behild the wheel of a car. He got tanked and it's not the first time. He had ADMITTED to having a problem with the ale and that my friend is the FIRST step to addressing the problem.

I remember him admitting that he likes the drink back at the broncos too (before he got fired for the very same reason). Yet, here we are again, in the same situation, however only this time, he didnt knock someone out. How many times does he have to admit that he likes the grog before he whales on someone again? Same with all NRL players. VERY SOON, it's going to happen. Someone is going to be killed through this idiocy.

I think accepting he fugged up, let his club, team and fans down is comendable. Many have never had the balls to admit anything and have gone on to drag this game further into the gutter.

Exactly my point. You're a biased sharks fan, fair enough. HOWEVER, you cannot tell me any other way that these players are FORCED by the club to apologise for their actions. This is business, the question mark is that how many of them truthfully are apologetic?

You may not like Cronulla, you may not like Seymour, but at least people should look at these things in an objective manner.

Mate you are deadset throwing out assumptions left right and center based on previous possible debates you have had with other individuals from other clubs, all probably on this forum.

Show me where I said I disliked Cronulla?
Show me where I said I disliked Seymour?

Seymour is a drunken idiot, does that mean I dislike him? Hmm? Only I can tell you that.

Take your player fir example. In my opinion the penalty is too harsh. This kid gugged up, he is what 19? FFS Fugging up is how 19 year olds learn. He is on what 50 grand and gets fined 10 of it. Then the NRL adds a ban. now the kid will have court and more fines. A little excessive if you ask me. Just my opinion though.

Absolutely rubbish mate. So in your defence, it's ok if they're 18-21, they can go out and assault people willy nilly because they're young and naive? That's what you're saying in the above mate. And I'm as diehard a rooster as you'll get.

Take my love for Caesar Soliola. Same thing, if he went out and beat his lovely girlfriend up, I'd hang on him as well (however he's quite a classy young bloke with good family values, unlike your friend maxpower who seems to believe that he's a true man because he can call his girlfriend a skank whilst holding hit nuts in the palm of his hands)

You are unfortunately, just another "fan" that is happy to allow these kids to get away with this rubbish yet in "real life", a normal 18 year old will get hung out to dry by authorities and public in general by committing the very same crimes that they idiots are committing (that's in relation to the Cherrington case as well).

It's hypocrisy of the highest order.

You commit the crime, you do the time.

 

[Miller was a legend]

It should be added that the ban doesn't do anything other than embarrass the guy. He will remain on full pay. It's just he gets a bit of time to reflect and hopefully learn for the future about the impact of his actions.

Same for Seymour, and I've seen you post that perhaps it took this for Seymour to learn a valuable life lesson, and hopefully improve as a person. Hence these girls have probably done Seymour a favour that he should be thankful for, and that fans of the club should be thankful for if it helps Seymour come to grips with his life and make a better contribution to his club in the future.

The NRL bans for Seymour (or anyone else) are just part of that who learning and development thing, and won't do any additional damage that the player hadn't already got themselves into.

Cheers bartman. common sense stuff.

 

[bartman]

Actually, you're half right. Specifically in this case (because Seymour has done nothing wrong imo), it isn't ENTIRELY this idiot woman's fault. The media are the ones who are paying losers for phone videos of footballers drinking.

So the player is not to blame for stories arising out of his own behaviour, or damage to the game and the sponsorship revenue of his club arising out of his own behaviour. This is what I was saying, the players can do no wrong, everything is always someone else's fault...

As for Stewart, I defended his right to innocence until proven guilty, which apparently no longer exists in the NRL.

You're right, innocent until guilty is for a court of law, not the NRL.

What is for the NRL is employment standards that apply to protect the interests of the industry as a whole - that is, the image and potential revenue streams of the game. Those standards, or code of conduct in players contracts, are totally separate from charges, and innocence or guilt of said charges. Seymour and Stewart (and the others) have broken their codes, and so the NRL and its clubs are within their rights to take action with regards to the employment of the players within the industry.

No suspensions the NRL have put in place for behaviour this year have directly cost a player a cent, they remain on full pay. Hence they are not hard done by, and are learning (slowly) that it is a privelege to earn above average pay to play every weekend in the NRL, and that there are sacrifices to make for the sake of the industry if they wish to continue to play and earn their lifestyle from that.

The only bit I'm dirty on the NRL for this year in its stance on behaviour is that Watmough seems to have copped less than the others for his behaviour that brought the game into disrepute. Sure, the fine on Manly was said to include penalty for Watmough, but he could have done with a match off to think it over imo. Would have been more consistent with the penalty meted out to others.

 

[Mad Dogg]

You are unfortunately, just another "fan" that is happy to allow these kids to get away with this rubbish yet in "real life", a normal 18 year old will get hung out to dry by authorities and public in general by committing the very same crimes that they idiots are committing (that's in relation to the Cherrington case as well).

It's hypocrisy of the highest order.

You commit the crime, you do the time.

It's the exact opposite. I want the players to be treated exactly the same as a normal person. In Seymour's case here, he did nothing except get a bit too drunk. I've been there. I'm sure you've been there. Virtually everybody over 18 (and quite a few under) have been there.

If they are accused of a crime, they should get the 'innocent until proven guilty' that everyone else is. If they are then proven guilty, then they should be locked up just like everybody else would have been.

Read the biographies of any player from 15+ years ago and you'll see that they went out and drunk themselves silly far more that the players of today do. But because the media generally didn't force them to live in a fishbowl, nobody really complained then.

 

[Newcastlerabbit]

I think these women will regret cashing in on a quick buck. Rugby League fans hold grudges. I know I do, being an Eagles supporter. Imagine living in the Shire, Cronulla fans everywhere. Good luck eating at your next fast food restaurant. "Does this look like spit on my burger?"

Spot on.