BoxRec

boxingknockout wrote:Posters who say 'I don't care' 'it's not relevant' etc may be right from a sporting perspective, but socially it doesn't hold water.

We live in an era where the public is obsessed with slebs' lives and everything about them.

We're interested in who they are having sex with, how they behave, whether they get high and party, how they dress etc.

To suggest that no one is interested in whether Canelo is a batty man is nonsense. Tell me it's not relevant to know about Orlando Cruz's sexuality or Emile Griffith. Or tell me that it's not interesting that Oscar likes to wear women's underwear and sniff Charlie with hookers?

It's part of the interesting characters in boxing.

Orlando Cruz's sexuality isn't at all interesting. Emile Griffith's sexuality is only interesting because of the circumstances surrounding it.

And whilst OP/the general public may be interested in what celebrities do or how they dress etc, they are welcome to discuss that inane shi!t on Facebook without polluting this place.

Too be fair. Whether he's homo or heterosexual makes no difference. But is a fair question, is he a sausage jockey, or not?

johnnygreaves wrote:Too be fair. Whether he's homo or heterosexual makes no difference. But is a fair question, is he a sausage jockey, or not?

johnnygreaves wrote:Too be fair. Whether he's homo or heterosexual makes no difference. But is a fair question, is he a sausage jockey, or not?

You've said what I wanted to say Jonny.

It isn't the thing being discussed that's the nark for me, it's the way it's introduced. 'Bats left handed' 'sausage jockey' are all those old fashioned phrases that carry a certain old fashioned attitude with them, though obviously I couldn't speak for the OP's motives, for whatever reason he couldn't pick a neutral way of asking the question 'is Canelo gay?'

Although the last time I asked of someone if they were homosexual or not (to a third party) I used the phrase 'he's, uh, a bit lavender isn't he?' so I do the same myself

danconnollyeire wrote:

Tarkus wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:Are you suppressing your gay side so much that you think about a man having sex with other men so much that you'd discuss it on a forum. I've never got people who actually cared, even one little bit, about if a man prefers to have sex with another man rather than a woman. You must clearly think about it... a lot

What I dont get is why people care about people who care about man having sex with other man. If you truly are not interested then ignore it. It reveals some kind of mental block that wont let you be curious about those things yourself. You must be very insecure about your own sexuality.

Or more likely you are just another fascist who dont want others to discuss subject someone told you is bad.

Well you're so stupidly wrong, it's funny. I worked in a gay bar for 18 months, as you can imagine a lot of people discuss gay sex, of which I had no problems with. It was the obvious homophobic tone of the question (unless you're thick, you won't understand)

Also, I've literally been arrested for fighting fascists on marches. What the fvck you ever done apart from throw around the word?

You clearly dont understand irony. I dont make judgment on someones sexuality based on a forum post, unlike simpleton like yourself.

As for fighting fascism, I dont know who you fought, but people who fight fascists in the streets most of them are themselves fascists. Historical fact.

dalcumly wrote:Define fascist.
Is that someone who doesn't accept extreme left wing views?

Left and right has nothing to do with it. Fascist is someone who considers ideology and behavior different from his own inferior, unacceptable and something to be suppressed. Have you watch CNN recently, a "liberal" fascism on rampage?

As for Canelos sexuality, I dont care about it slightest. However I am curiose about it like every normal human being would be and are. Nothing wrong with cracking a joke or two on a discussion forum I would think. But no, you cant make a joke these days because some deluded fascist is there waiting to get on your case.

Tarkus wrote:

dalcumly wrote:Define fascist.
Is that someone who doesn't accept extreme left wing views?

Left and right has nothing to do with it. Fascist is someone who considers ideology and behavior different from his own inferior, unacceptable and something to be suppressed. Have you watch CNN recently, a "liberal" fascism on rampage?

As for Canelos sexuality, I dont care about it slightest. However I am curiose about it like every normal human being would be and are. Nothing wrong with cracking a joke or two on a discussion forum I would think. But no, you cant make a joke these days because some deluded fascist is there waiting to get on your case.

Spot on pal

Boxerbeetle wrote: Orlando Cruz's sexuality isn't at all interesting. Emile Griffith's sexuality is only interesting because of the circumstances surrounding it.

And whilst OP/the general public may be interested in what celebrities do or how they dress etc, they are welcome to discuss that inane shi!t on Facebook without polluting this place.

I agree this thread is not one to please the boxing purist who wants to discuss the merits of the check left hook or whether timing beats speed but as a regular poster on the forum I don't think it's beyond the pale to pose the question given that perhaps the defining fight of Canelo's whole career is approaching. It's probably not the most inane thread ever started on here.

The 24/7 shows focus as much on the private lives of the fighters as they do on the boxing but to me they're always engaging. Isn't it always interesting to find out more about the characters and motivations of great sportsmen ? Sexuality is after all a big part of peoples' lives.

Counter-puncher wrote: It isn't the thing being discussed that's the nark for me, it's the way it's introduced. 'Bats left handed' 'sausage jockey' are all those old fashioned phrases that carry a certain old fashioned attitude with them, though obviously I couldn't speak for the OP's motives, for whatever reason he couldn't pick a neutral way of asking the question 'is Canelo gay?'

The way I asked the question wasn't intended to be perjorative.

I don't aim this comment at you but it's truly pathetic how people on social media, the danconnelyeire poster on here is a prime example, take offence on other peoples' behalf and infer prejudice where there is none. These morons try to stifle normal debate by screaming foul at every opportunity and because normal people can't be arsed arguing against their trivial little points their crazy ideas seep insidiously into the mainstream.

For example your typical white left wing liberal loony finds the word coloured to be deeply offensive yet in the states a hugely respected civil rights organization is called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Canelo obviously isn't but I've wondered about GGG before. He also never has said how his brothers died, what's that all about?

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote: It isn't the thing being discussed that's the nark for me, it's the way it's introduced. 'Bats left handed' 'sausage jockey' are all those old fashioned phrases that carry a certain old fashioned attitude with them, though obviously I couldn't speak for the OP's motives, for whatever reason he couldn't pick a neutral way of asking the question 'is Canelo gay?'

The way I asked the question wasn't intended to be perjorative.

.

sure, but if you didn't intend as perjorative, its interesting you couldn't use a neutral phrasing like simply 'gay' or 'homosexual', no?

Counter-puncher wrote:
sure, but if you didn't intend as perjorative, its interesting you couldn't use a neutral phrasing like simply 'gay' or 'homosexual', no?

Fair comment, it's just a phrase I use

Tarkus wrote:

dalcumly wrote:Define fascist.
Is that someone who doesn't accept extreme left wing views?

Left and right has nothing to do with it. Fascist is someone who considers ideology and behavior different from his own inferior, unacceptable and something to be suppressed. Have you watch CNN recently, a "liberal" fascism on rampage?

As for Canelos sexuality, I dont care about it slightest. However I am curiose about it like every normal human being would be and are. Nothing wrong with cracking a joke or two on a discussion forum I would think. But no, you cant make a joke these days because some deluded fascist is there waiting to get on your case.

I get what you're saying, but you do hear a lot of people say things like 'you're not allowed to talk about muslims/you're not allowed to talk about the right wing/they're trying to silence debate' and so on, yet people seem to talk about these things without censure all the time.

It seems to be the latest equivalent of 'you're not allowed to order black coffee/you can't call it a blackboard/you have to say 'festive season' instead of Christmas as it offends people.' All of which was and still is patently a load of bollocks.

As for Canelo being gay, people are interested and rightly so because an athlete in a sport like boxing with the stature he is at would be newsworthy. It's the same with football; there are obviously gay players out there and if someone like Ronaldo came out he's suddenly the most high profile gay man on the planet. It's a human interest story. Nobody is really saying being gay is bad unless they're a deeply odd fringe movement.

I didn't know Mexicans played cricket, but it's certainly an advantage against LBW decisions when facing a right-handed bowler...

I've heard he's a strong cricketer.

veriton wrote:Canelo obviously isn't but I've wondered about GGG before. He also never has said how his brothers died, what's that all about?

They were in the Russian army and died in action, not at the same time. If he hasn't elaborated it's either because he doesn't know, or doesn't want to talk about it.