Mole Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 Let's hope it doesn't effect one of your family eh. It has already, but i wouldn't try to score political points like certain posters have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 From Answers.com 2. A pernicious, spreading evil: A cancer of bigotry spread through the community. Also cancer is my star sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoswellSaint Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 There was a debate about the use of the word last year, that time with a pro-Lowe person using it to describe someone else's affect on the club. For the record I lost my father to the disease and will likely lose my wife to it (mother of two young children). To my mind, SaintRobbie was using the word in a generally accepted way. Nothing offensive. An example of people being too sensitive these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 It has already, but i wouldn't try to score political points like certain posters have. Political points????? WTF are you on? Anyone trying to use Cancer to get there point accross needs there fecking head examined. And your comments are in even more poor taste than the original Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 There was a debate about the use of the word last year, that time with a pro-Lowe person using it to describe someone else's affect on the club. For the record I lost my father to the disease and will likely lose my wife to it (mother of two young children). To my mind, SaintRobbie was using the word in a generally accepted way. Nothing offensive. An example of people being too sensitive these days. I didnt like the comments and said my peice, i dont think saintrobbie was trying to be offensive but its obviously going to offend some so a better choice of word may have been needed. some of the comments after it wound me up more but im not going to argue it any more as it just drags it on further. A bit of respect sometimes wouldnt go a miss IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 I have to say I think the sancitmonious possee have saddled up again. 2. any evil condition or thing that spreads destructively; blight. 3. like a cancer; an evil that grows and spreads; "remorse was cancerous within him"; "pornography is cancerous to the moral development of our children" 2. A pernicious, spreading evil: A cancer of bigotry spread through the community. 3. an evil influence that spreads dangerously: their country would remain a cancer of instability 3. fast-spreading bad phenomenon: something, usually something negative, that develops or spreads quickly and usually destructively There are enough definitions of "cancer" to show it can be used in this context without it being deemed offensive or indeed insensitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 I have to say I think the sancitmonious possee have saddled up again. 2. any evil condition or thing that spreads destructively; blight. 3. like a cancer; an evil that grows and spreads; "remorse was cancerous within him"; "pornography is cancerous to the moral development of our children" 2. A pernicious, spreading evil: A cancer of bigotry spread through the community. 3. an evil influence that spreads dangerously: their country would remain a cancer of instability 3. fast-spreading bad phenomenon: something, usually something negative, that develops or spreads quickly and usually destructively There are enough definitions of "cancer" to show it can be used in this context without it being deemed offensive or indeed insensitive. Sanctimonious or not I didnt like it as this past year has ruined 3 familys close to me and I wont appologies for being ****ed off about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 Sanctimonious or not I didnt like it as this past year has ruined 3 familys close to me and I wont appologies for being ****ed off about it And as someone who too has lost people close to them, then I can sympathise with your loss, but when used in this context it is not being used in that manner. We are not talking about the physical illness, instead it is being used as a metaphor in one of the guises highlighted above (e.g. fast-spreading bad phenomenon: something, usually something negative, that develops or spreads quickly and usually destructively). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 And as someone who too has lost people close to them, then I can sympathise with your loss, but when used in this context it is not being used in that manner. We are not talking about the physical illness, instead it is being used as a metaphor in one of the guises highlighted above (e.g. fast-spreading bad phenomenon: something, usually something negative, that develops or spreads quickly and usually destructively). well when i think Sundance used it? some of the anti RL didnt like it at all. I respect that, but it doesnt offend me but I wanted to be considerate to all about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 Sanctimonious or not I didnt like it as this past year has ruined 3 familys close to me and I wont appologies for being ****ed off about it I for one wouldnt suggest you should apologise. This has been traumatic stuff for you and people close to you. But there is enough anecdotal evidence out there of "cancer" being used in other contexts that its pure physiological context, so I think that although your offence is genuine enough, there has been some band-wagon jumping going on within this thread by others who simply dislike Stanley's general viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 Let's hope it doesn't effect one of your family eh. You really are just on a permanent wind-up, arent you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 When you can see that he has ****ed up this season royally. Turned us into relegation candidates,when it is quite obvious that we have enough talent in the squad to at least have challenged for the play-offs. Having cost us christ-knows how many millions with relegation. He now costs us the chance of god-knows how many more millions from promotion. And some would have us believe he is great businessman with financial prudence and acumem. I thought the club were relegation candidates last season as well, before Lowe took over? Wouldn't any finish above 20th be an improvement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 I thought the club were relegation candidates last season as well, before Lowe took over? Wouldn't any finish above 20th be an improvement? ultimately, yes, but do you not wonder what may have been possible ? Its simply not enough to say that this bunch of players only just scraped back into the CCC last year. the were left bewildered, demotivated and unfit by the managerial shennanigans prior to Pearson's arrival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 ultimately, yes, but do you not wonder what may have been possible ? Its simply not enough to say that this bunch of players only just scraped back into the CCC last year. the were left bewildered, demotivated and unfit by the managerial shennanigans prior to Pearson's arrival. Bewildered? They're grown men not bunny rabbits ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 You really are just on a permanent wind-up, arent you ? In which way was it a wind up unles of course you didn't read the post to which I replied. When you do perhaps you may come to your senses but I won't hold my breathe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 I for one wouldnt suggest you should apologise. This has been traumatic stuff for you and people close to you. But there is enough anecdotal evidence out there of "cancer" being used in other contexts that its pure physiological context, so I think that although your offence is genuine enough, there has been some band-wagon jumping going on within this thread by others who simply dislike Stanley's general viewpoint. Like I said, I dont think SaintRobbie meant to offend by it and he hasnt been back on bleating on like it was nothing so I can only assume he didnt mean to offend and has kept out of it since so it doesnt escalate. It was stanleys comments that really got under my skin as he didnt seem to give a toss who he offended or who had been affected by it. SaintRobbies comments touched a nerve and I said my bit, maybe I over-reacted as he didnt mean to offend but I felt I said my peice and it could be left there. Cancer is a disease that is effecting more and more people all over the place and I see less and less reason to use it to discribe anything else. I dont want to fall out with anyone over it and as you and others have pointed out there are other meanings for it. To me its like lighing a stick of dynomite with a very short fuse and the dont give a toss attitude of some makes me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 (edited) I would just say that maybe in this case because we all differ in our experience and sensitivities, it might just be common courtesy to avoid using a word if we 'know' it it going to offend fellow posters? We all tend to use words on here that describe what we think and feel that are OTT really when viewed in the graeter context, taht when seen in that light do tend to trivulise more important things than football - just think we should maybe be sensitive to it really, its just being a decent bloke. Edited 6 March, 2009 by Frank's cousin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 ultimately, yes, but do you not wonder what may have been possible ? Its simply not enough to say that this bunch of players only just scraped back into the CCC last year. the were left bewildered, demotivated and unfit by the managerial shennanigans prior to Pearson's arrival. Its an interesting debate but doesnt carry the weight that 1965 tried to give it. What if we got Strachan earlier? What if Strachan stayed longer? What if Hoddle didnt ditch us? What if we never tried Wigley and Gray? What if Sturruck had been give more of a chance? What if Dodd and Gorman didnt get a look in? What if Pearson had more time? What if Pearson was given this season? What if we had a bigger overdraft? What if we were still in the prem with this team? Its annoying that this team seem to be able to perform, yet for almost 2 seasons they have been a waste of space. But you can look at clubs that have got things right year on year and watch them climb compared to our fairly recent history of continualy getting things wrong. Pearson seemed to be getting some things right and should have been given the season instead of the usual stop start changes we have had to suffer for years. How long will Wotte get should his form continue? History says he will probably be gone after at best another season and we will be back to the dross again while waiting for our next 5 mins of fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 9 March, 2009 Share Posted 9 March, 2009 (edited) well when i think Sundance used it? some of the anti RL didnt like it at all. I respect that, but it doesnt offend me but I wanted to be considerate to all about it. Not a question of Anti Lowe or Anti Crouch, Nick as it was me who took offence first time round. Point is that people take things so very seriously on here and using the word cancerous when refering to an old man who you feel may or may not earn too much or the chairman of a bloody football club just shows how het up some people get over nothing. Is cancerous a legitimate word to used? Of course it bloody is. Is it applicable to small dramas played out on this messageboard? No, not really. Some people really need to get out more... Edited 9 March, 2009 by Daren W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now