Kiko Casilla

[Another Northern Soul]

I had an American girlfriend twenty years ago and it took us about three hours to get through The Full Monty because we had to pause it every minute or two for me to translate

Do you have something against British girls Rigger? American, Spanish and if I remember correctly, you had a French girlfriend a good few years ago?

The first girl I ever kissed was French.
Since then I have been out with English girls, but generally I've preferred foreign women.

French x 2
Spanish x 2
Italian x 2
American
South African
German
Turkish
Iranian
Thai
Malaysian (current)

I don't mind English women but I find they tend to be more interested in gossip, social status, soap operas and money than I am.
Foreign women enjoy more cultural pursuits like music, art, sport and .. er .. sex
The mere fact they are in a different country automatically hardwires their brain - or it reflects the personal traits that allowed them to move abroad in the first place - and I very much prefer spending time on those activities than the things most English women in my experience like to do.

Also, when you first start seeing them it's really fun playing the comparison game about everything. It's fascinating to me. I love learning new languages, customs and accents, etc, plus the music, art, food and films are opened up if someone you know can lead you through them.

I know I'm not the only one that thinks like this too

Oh, and English women tend to dress the age they wish they were rather than the age they are : foreign women are almost always more elegant IMHO.

Sounds like you have more problems with non-British women looking at that list of exes, mate . All the women I have truly loved have been British, and not one of them fits your stereotype British woman.

[Deleted User 728]

Congratulations John, to you and the lovely Mrs John

I think it says as much about me as your anniversary does about you, to be honest.
Different strokes and all that ..

[Deleted User 728]

Sounds like you have more problems with non-British women looking at that list of exes, mate . All the women I have truly loved have been British, and not one of them fits your stereotype British woman.

It's just the experiences I've had with British women that I've been involved with.
I've got plenty of women friends who are English that I can happily spend time with who don't fit the same description.

And what makes you think I've had problems with the foreign women, anyway ?

I'm 52 and never been married.
If you start at 16, that means I've had 36 years of dating .. I'm not exactly putting it about, am I ?

[Another Northern Soul]

Sounds like you have more problems with non-British women looking at that list of exes, mate . All the women I have truly loved have been British, and not one of them fits your stereotype British woman.

It's just the experiences I've had with British women that I've been involved with.
I've got plenty of women friends who are English that I can happily spend time with who don't fit the same description.

And what makes you think I've had problems with the foreign women, anyway ?

I'm 52 and never been married.
If you start at 16, that means I've had 36 years of dating .. I'm not exactly putting it about, am I ?

With respect, genuinely, I see a list of 12 women of varying nationalities - to me, 12 relationships IS quite a number mate

[HalifaxWhite]

new liberal world.
Yet there is absolutely no difference

I think there is a difference and it's every person's right to be offended if they find something offensive.
Some may ignore it, some may laugh at it, some may not care, it might be water off a duck's back to others while some might feel sorry for the ignorance of the person saying it .. it's all about the individual, the situation, the words and the intent.

And it's not up to anyone else to decide other than the person it's being done to ...

... IMHO.

Eyup, what you've done there is quote two lines of a much larger post, removing all context of what I was actually saying (are you a politician ) The two were also on very different parts of the post.

My liberal statement was about how people are offended by everything (fair enough they have the right to be) but then that the rest of the country have to pander to their every need. It's all about who can be the biggest snowflake, I saw some guy (or should I say person these days) on good morning Britain telling us that they should stop teaching about the wars as it is damaging to mental health. I mean COME ON!. As an ex-forces man myself I find that offensive, but it doesn't matter as it wasn't about anybody considered a minority group so it is fine to offend. That is what bothers me when I say new liberal world, rules for one and not for another. As a side note this guy turned up (a so called influencer) with his top lip done and a head full of botox. I say in fact 'influencers' like him are damaging to mental health.

Then the no difference part was all theoretical based on what theoretically may have occured as we don't actually know yet and if he had been pointing out a white guy next to a black guy rather than the other way around, despite it being the same thing we would not be in this situation. What I am trying to say there is surely if it is the case that he was pointing him out and describing him then that is not offensive and shouldn't be considered to be. IF that is what happened and Leko still says he is offended simply because the word 'black' was used to describe him then he should no longer ever attend or take an interest in any 'black history' events or 'music of black origin' awards etc.

Do you see what I am saying? All ifs and buts. So please don't quote out of context to make it look like I am justifying racism. If he was insulting him in anyway whilst describing his skin colour then it is indeed a completely different story, but again I feel the case would have been resolved by now if that were the case.

[yorkfan]

[Another Northern Soul]

new liberal world.
Yet there is absolutely no difference

I think there is a difference and it's every person's right to be offended if they find something offensive.
Some may ignore it, some may laugh at it, some may not care, it might be water off a duck's back to others while some might feel sorry for the ignorance of the person saying it .. it's all about the individual, the situation, the words and the intent.

And it's not up to anyone else to decide other than the person it's being done to ...

... IMHO.

Eyup, what you've done there is quote two lines of a much larger post, removing all context of what I was actually saying (are you a politician ) The two were also on very different parts of the post.

My liberal statement was about how people are offended by everything (fair enough they have the right to be) but then that the rest of the country have to pander to their every need. It's all about who can be the biggest snowflake, I saw some guy (or should I say person these days) on good morning Britain telling us that they should stop teaching about the wars as it is damaging to mental health. I mean COME ON!. As an ex-forces man myself I find that offensive, but it doesn't matter as it wasn't about anybody considered a minority group so it is fine to offend. That is what bothers me when I say new liberal world, rules for one and not for another. As a side note this guy turned up (a so called influencer) with his top lip done and a head full of botox. I say in fact 'influencers' like him are damaging to mental health.

Then the no difference part was all theoretical based on what theoretically may have occured as we don't actually know yet and if he had been pointing out a white guy next to a black guy rather than the other way around, despite it being the same thing we would not be in this situation. What I am trying to say there is surely if it is the case that he was pointing him out and describing him then that is not offensive and shouldn't be considered to be. IF that is what happened and Leko still says he is offended simply because the word 'black' was used to describe him then he should no longer ever attend or take an interest in any 'black history' events or 'music of black origin' awards etc.

Do you see what I am saying? All ifs and buts. So please don't quote out of context to make it look like I am justifying racism. If he was insulting him in anyway whilst describing his skin colour then it is indeed a completely different story, but again I feel the case would have been resolved by now if that were the case.

TBH I don't think he was trying to make it look like you were justifying racism, mate.

Also, talking of context, is it possible the person saying we shouldn't teach about wars and referring to war damaging health was referring to PTSD?

And on a football pitch it is against the sport's law to refer to a player by his skin colour or ethnicity etc, therefore Casilla broke a football rule and an opposing player reported it. It's all flimsy but I'd rather have that law than not.

We're talking football pitch matters here, not professional commentators or music awards, too many people jumping to conclusions trying to compare an actual incident which may/may not be racialist in essence to that of observers pointing out simple facts about, for instance, the first black South African RU team captain.

[Deleted User 728]

new liberal world.
Yet there is absolutely no difference

I think there is a difference and it's every person's right to be offended if they find something offensive.
Some may ignore it, some may laugh at it, some may not care, it might be water off a duck's back to others while some might feel sorry for the ignorance of the person saying it .. it's all about the individual, the situation, the words and the intent.

And it's not up to anyone else to decide other than the person it's being done to ...

... IMHO.

Eyup, what you've done there is quote two lines of a much larger post, removing all context of what I was actually saying (are you a politician ) The two were also on very different parts of the post.

My liberal statement was about how people are offended by everything (fair enough they have the right to be) but then that the rest of the country have to pander to their every need. It's all about who can be the biggest snowflake, I saw some guy (or should I say person these days) on good morning Britain telling us that they should stop teaching about the wars as it is damaging to mental health. I mean COME ON!. As an ex-forces man myself I find that offensive, but it doesn't matter as it wasn't about anybody considered a minority group so it is fine to offend. That is what bothers me when I say new liberal world, rules for one and not for another. As a side note this guy turned up (a so called influencer) with his top lip done and a head full of botox. I say in fact 'influencers' like him are damaging to mental health.

Then the no difference part was all theoretical based on what theoretically may have occured as we don't actually know yet and if he had been pointing out a white guy next to a black guy rather than the other way around, despite it being the same thing we would not be in this situation. What I am trying to say there is surely if it is the case that he was pointing him out and describing him then that is not offensive and shouldn't be considered to be. IF that is what happened and Leko still says he is offended simply because the word 'black' was used to describe him then he should no longer ever attend or take an interest in any 'black history' events or 'music of black origin' awards etc.

Do you see what I am saying? All ifs and buts. So please don't quote out of context to make it look like I am justifying racism. If he was insulting him in anyway whilst describing his skin colour then it is indeed a completely different story, but again I feel the case would have been resolved by now if that were the case.

I wasn't trying to insinuate you were justifying anything and certainly not racism.
I do get what you're saying but I seriously resent the term "snowflake".
John Cleese recently said of it : "Yes I've heard this word. I think sociopaths use it in an attempt to discredit the notion of empathy."

It's right up there with "remoaner" in unoriginality, too.

I get that you're ex-military.
I understand how that informs everything you are today.
But these things have to start somewhere.
Do you not agree that everyone being treated equally is a good thing ?
Male, female, young, old, gay, straight, trans, asexual, pansexual .. whatever sexuality, whatever race, whatever religion, whatever colouring, persuasion, inside leg measurement, height, weight, etc .. all should be given the same chances, right ?
I take it you do, because of your comments about ginger, black, white, etc.

If that's the case, then the line of discrimination has to be drawn somewhere.
The line of what's acceptable and what isn't.

Remember in the 60s and 70s before homosexuality was legalised ?
The woolly woofters ? The benders ? Those playing for the wrong team ?
What about now ? Some of them are great guys, right ? Some them aren't, same as everyone else. I wouldn't have a problem if a Leeds player came out, would you ?
So the line's been moved over time from what was socially acceptable to say or call someone or behave around someone. We've all grown as people. Society has grown. Moved on. Improved. For everyone.

It's only the ones who can't move on themselves who have a problem and in a generation or two they will massively be in a tiny minority.
Putting Brexit and feelings of nationalism aside, we've come a long way with racism, for example. Generally, up until three years ago things had improved immensely for non-whites in this country. There was - and bloody well is - a long way to go to parity (if that's possible at all) but we've made progress.

Same for LGBT+ people.

It's not a "new liberal world" : it's the world, end of.
It might be new and liberal to you but it's not. It's been evolving for decades.

What's wrong with someone getting botox and having your "top lip done" (whatever the hell that means !? Please explain).
If someone wants to do that, or get tattoos, piercings, hair dye, nails, clothes, whatever .. it's up to them.
We live in the west : we can do these things and have the right not to be discriminated for it.

You used the phrase "the rest of the country have to pander to their every need" which I found interesting.
I think you have to think of it in terms of the line again, like a common denominator. Nobody's pandering to them at all : they're just being allowed to do what they want, be who they want and act how they want, same as everyone else. In the past it may have been weird or abhorrent behaviour to the majority, but today it's not. It's acceptable.
Punk shocked people, but now I barely notice if I see one walking down the street.
Being gay in the past meant hiding and risking your life to be who you were.
That's not right, is it ?
Being black and sitting at the back of the bus. That's not right, is it ?
Your son wanting to be a nurse. Your daughter wanting to be a mechanic. In the past they couldn't do those jobs. That wasn't right, was it ?

All these things are possible because that line has been all but erased. The goalposts have been moved and we're all playing a glorious, technicolour World Cup of life.

Don't get left in the 1950s watching The Festival of Britain in black and white (but mostly white) ...


I don't think you're a racist at all.
But nobody should use the word snowflake - it's the same thing when you think about it ..

[Deleted User 728]

The mental health issue is a whole other kettle of fish and I didn't particularly want to discuss it here.
We're decades behind lots of other countries in how we care for it here, and I've seen it up close and personal when a friend committed suicide seven years ago.
I'm sure most ex-military can tell similar tales of woe, which is why I left it alone in the post above.

[HalifaxWhite]

The mental health issue is a whole other kettle of fish and I didn't particularly want to discuss it here.
We're decades behind lots of other countries in how we care for it here, and I've seen it up close and personal when a friend committed suicide seven years ago.
I'm sure most ex-military can tell similar tales of woe, which is why I left it alone in the post above.

You are a very empathetic and understanding person to think so clearly when posting In fact it is something I have experienced as much post-forces.

The mental health part from the post above though wasn't as somebody else mentioned about PTSD. If it were there would be some sense in it. I watched the whole interview and this guy was saying that teaching young people about what actually happened in the war is bad for the child's mental health. That it shouldn't be taught at all, it should be resigned to history and move one, that is what he said. Now as for the lip and botox etc. My point there wasn't that he shouldn't have them, it was that he was talking about things impacting young minds and mental health. The biggest thing for that at the moment is this obsession with the perfect look, getting the prefect angle on the picture, looking at images from influencers who look perfect (yet nothing like that in real life) filters, poses, surgery etc. The point is he as an 'influencer' who does these very things is (widely acknowledge) part of one of the biggest negative impacts on young minds of the current generation and was not only being insulting, ignorant and down right disrespectful about heroes of the past but was just there to shift the blame - anyway i digress.

I absolutely do agree what you said, yes equality for all is absolutely correct regardless of anything setting them apart from others. But it still doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to describe. Yes there is a line of course, those terms you used from teh 70's to describe homosexuals obviously are over that line. Anyway lets move on, it sounds like we dont agree because of the amount of posts but in fact I think we do, we just have a slightly different view on it.

Also, the terms 'snowflake' I don't use lightly. I am actually a lot younger than you seem to think (31 in fact) so I know a lot of these young people myself and trust me there is a serious issue. The biggest being that usually it isn't the person who would have the right to be offended (as someone else said in this post earlier) but in fact someone on behalf on them who thinks they might find it offensive. Not raising it to say, eyup he might find that offensive, but to say that they themselves find it offensive. I don't mean actual offensive things either like racism or homophobia but ridiculous things, everybody wants a drama. I speak from what I have seen and know, honestly the world has gone mad.

I have two beautiful little girls and dread the day one of them turns around to me and complains about they way they look. That is what the current crop are bringing things to.