Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Charlton Women to rebrand as "Charlton Ladies" - turned down by FA (p28)

1568101131

Comments

  • Leuth said:
    Grapevine has written very eloquently and persuasively in the past in favour of women's rights and against workplace harassment. But his greater fealty lies elsewhere...woe betide anybody who steps in the path of structured corporate governance ;) 
    Superiority Complex.
    Uh-oh! The worm has turned! Expertise is so 2015! Grapevine, you have lost your people! 
  • edited December 2021
    "What does this cover? What the history between 2000-2007 when we we disbanded the club? That history? Any pictures of supporters protesting at Greenwich Town Hall in 2007? How many references are there in Colin Cameron’s records or Tom Morris photographs?"

    Tom wasn't the only photographer covering the club and he didn't cover the youth/academy teams, the later years of the reserve team, away games after the early 2000s, commercial activity post 1998 or anything at all after 2005 until 2018. The fact that he didn't (often or at all) cover the women's team is evidence of nothing, particularly as other Charlton photographers regularly did. His absence away from The Valley hardly meant that away games weren't significant - it meant he couldn't do everything and prioritised the men's first team home matches.

    Colin died in 2012. I did have this conversation with him, as his initial view was that he wouldn't keep any records, although he did worry that if they became more popular then he would regret not having done so from the early 2000s. The earlier "Charlton Ladies" team was never formally affiliated to the club.

    I am baffled as to why anyone should have protested to Greenwich Council about a decision wholly taken by the Charlton board. From my limited recollection, the council may have raised concerns with the club at the time. 
  • Am I right in thinking there’s a fans forum tonight and Thomas Sandgaard will be attending? I’m not aware of who on here, if anyone, will be in attendance, but maybe a good opportunity to get his thoughts on this out in the open.
  • edited December 2021
    [A long post that really didn't need quoting in full for a one line gag]

    TLTR
    No excuses it’s compulsory reading otherwise you can’t contribute the debate 😉.
  • WSS said:
    What's happened to @AFKABartram's "Guys..."?
    You cannot use the term "Guys" now just in case you offend someone, hence why it's missing from this thread.

    Well done @AFKABartram for setting the standard
  •  In Sporting terms it has to be Charlton Woman; in business as well. 

    Dr Rayelyn Maloney PHD and the Girlfriend/ woman friend/lady friend/squeeze/partner/
    Lover/companion/sweetheart/confidant/
    flame/intimate/better half/bed associate/significant other:

    Should advise Thomas, not to swim against the tide on this or else he will be caught in a maelstrom of his own making.

    He will be drowning not waving. 

  • .soapboxsam said:
     In Sporting terms it has to be Charlton Woman; in business as well. 

    Dr Rayelyn Maloney PHD and the Girlfriend/ woman friend/lady friend/squeeze/partner/
    Lover/companion/sweetheart/confidant/
    flame/intimate/better half/bed associate/significant other:

    Should advise Thomas, not to swim against the tide on this or else he will be caught in a maelstrom of his own making.

    He will be drowning not waving. 
    What evidence is there that he listens to the views of Dr Rayelyn Maloney?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Just don't change the name or colours of any football team. It never goes down well! 

    It's as simple as that!
  • Rothko said:
    Rothko said:
    on 'Girls' this is one that I've seen the research on when I was at Sport England, and This Girl Can was being put together, and it was only once the focus groups and market testing with women was done, that 'Girls' stayed in, and was seen as ok, and an acceptable term for women to describe themselves and group activities. 
    That’s very interesting.
    That particular campaign I feel no connection with because it seems to be aimed at a younger audience.
    Maybe that’s another reason why ‘women’ is better?
    More all encompassing?
    It was seen as ok right through the age groups, and was particularly ok with women in what was described as the 'Mumsnet' group, which was the main target audience (30-45). 
    So you stop exercising once you past 45? 🤔
  • edited December 2021
    N01R4M said:

    .soapboxsam said:
     In Sporting terms it has to be Charlton Woman; in business as well. 

    Dr Rayelyn Maloney PHD and the Girlfriend/ woman friend/lady friend/squeeze/partner/
    Lover/companion/sweetheart/confidant/
    flame/intimate/better half/bed associate/significant other:

    Should advise Thomas, not to swim against the tide on this or else he will be caught in a maelstrom of his own making.

    He will be drowning not waving. 
    What evidence is there that he listens to the views of Dr Rayelyn Maloney?

    I spelt Dr Maloney name wrong;
    It's Raelynn Maloney.

    I believe the relationship they have, and having read articles from Raelynn, I sense he does listen to her views because they wouldn't be together if he didn't.
    She is a successful business woman in her own right.

    He may have run with this himself and not shared this with his Partner; We don't know.




  • RedChaser said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    Croydon said:
    A lot of men showing themselves up on this thread. You haven't got to understand why it's offensive, and it doesn't have to matter to you.
    Incorrect. Understanding why something is offensive can help reduce further misunderstandings and help people to grow.

    It does matter to understand change.  
    It certainly does. I thought this might just be an age thing but clearly it’s not and this link has well and truly enlightened me.

    https://helloclue.com/articles/culture/lets-talk-about-word-lady
    Thank you for the link. A helpful read.
  • Rothko said:
    Rothko said:
    on 'Girls' this is one that I've seen the research on when I was at Sport England, and This Girl Can was being put together, and it was only once the focus groups and market testing with women was done, that 'Girls' stayed in, and was seen as ok, and an acceptable term for women to describe themselves and group activities. 
    That’s very interesting.
    That particular campaign I feel no connection with because it seems to be aimed at a younger audience.
    Maybe that’s another reason why ‘women’ is better?
    More all encompassing?
    It was seen as ok right through the age groups, and was particularly ok with women in what was described as the 'Mumsnet' group, which was the main target audience (30-45). 
    So you stop exercising once you past 45? 🤔
    The point being there are two major drop off from sports points for women, one is around 13/14, the other is around becoming a mother, and it was aimed very much at addressing those points in life. 
  • edited December 2021
    Dazzler21 said:
    Croydon said:
    A lot of men showing themselves up on this thread. You haven't got to understand why it's offensive, and it doesn't have to matter to you.
    Incorrect. Understanding why something is offensive can help reduce further misunderstandings and help people to grow.

    It does matter to understand change.  
    I agree, but you don't need to understand why they don't want you to call them ladies. Them asking should be enough.

    It's the right thing to do to try to learn and understand it, of course.
  • What about a combination of the two;

    Charlton Womdies or;
    Charlton Ladmen.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I am a season ticket holder for the womens team. I sent a private Tweet to Thomas and Raelynn requesting a change of mind yesterday but have not received a reply.

    It may have to come that there is a season ticket boycott for next season but hopefully the FA will refuse to accept the change.
  • Just don't change the name or colours of any football team. It never goes down well! 

    It's as simple as that!
    These matters (and others) would be covered by the "golden share" for fans, as recommended in the FLR report.

    Is this matter of wishing to rename Charlton Women perhaps reason TS has not yet commented publically on the Fan Led Review?  I am sure there are plenty of other things in the FLR, such as the changes to the directors and owners tests, which are a good fit with things he was saying last autumn about club ownership.
  • seth plum said:
    I opened this thread due to curiosity, every few messages are interspersed with an advertisement for Boux Avenue women’s brassiers and keks.
    Well we know what you google In you’re spare time then ! 
  • seth plum said:
    I opened this thread due to curiosity, every few messages are interspersed with an advertisement for Boux Avenue women’s brassiers and keks.
    That's possibly linked to your other browsing!
  • seth plum said:
    I opened this thread due to curiosity, every few messages are interspersed with an advertisement for Boux Avenue women’s brassiers and keks.
    If ever there was a post worth deleting, it may be this one. Perhaps that's why a few people are quoting it, in order to preserve it. 
  • content://com.android.chrome.FileProvider/images/screenshot/16390615251141256432535.jpg

    To this was my last ad.

    Must be because I'm a real man who works out a lot 🤔
  • seth plum said:
    I opened this thread due to curiosity, every few messages are interspersed with an advertisement for Boux Avenue women’s brassiers and keks.
    Well we know what you google In you’re spare time then ! 
    Led Zeppelin reaction videos.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!