One for the grammar crew too!
[img] 
?imwidth=450[/img]
The country is becoming more ridiculous by the day, I want someone to be offended on my behalf as I'm not offended and I'm beginning to feel offended by it
Lol @ firestarter! Bang on.
I'm more outraged at the lack of apostrophe.
Can't believe one anyone would buy it for their kid, why anyone would wear it so why did somebody at the NT waste money on something that will end up in the bin?
It's just a sad joke for fat old blokes really.
Look on the bright side. Once upon a time you had to stick a safety pin through your nose or dye your hair bright blue to get noticed - nowadays you can get into the papers or go viral on-line for just about nothing!
well, you could tell your wife to embroider one onI'm more outraged at the lack of apostrophe.
Why is it sexist? Isn't a Wife, by definition, a Woman? 😉
Why force my daughter to wear pink, forget the slogan
Howsyourdad you don't have to force her to wear it you know. If she likes it then she likes it if not the who cares, a boy could also wear it if they chose
My daughter likes pink my son likes football, I like pink I hate football, life is all about choices not being offended
I'm moar offended because it looks like it doesn't line up correctly 😐
What's the fuss for? It is in the Tatton Park giftshop, and this is a traditional and respectable career option for many Cheshire lasses.
Telegraph clickbait, designed to raise the blood pressure of angry little Englanders every where..
As a 45 year old, balding, tubby, father of 3, I'd wear that.
Just for teh lolz.
Why is it sexist? Isn't a Wife, by definition, a Woman?
Very homophobic.
It's low level sexism.
Whilst the current trend for huge overreactions to minor slights on social media is getting a bit tiresome, I think on balance it is a good thing that this sort of thing is called out - it's tackling the discriminatory attitudes entrenched in our society.
Why homophobic? GlennQuagmire mentioned nothing about being scared of his house.
Well I am tired howsyourdad and tbh you really can't tell one here. Plus I still don't believe you 😉
[i]Can't believe one anyone would buy it for their kid[/i]
Oh I can! Haven't you seen the kind of dimwits that live in this world?
but there are lady footballers too - or are you so sexist you'd overlooked that?Kryton57 - Member
Why is it sexist? Isn't a Wife, by definition, a Woman?Very homophobic
😉
It's a bloody awful ugly design
but there are lady footballers too - or are you so sexist you'd overlooked that
I was busy identifying with transgender sports personalities.
I'm more outraged at the lack of apostrophe.
Me too.
😳
but there are lady footballers too - or are you so sexist you'd overlooked that?
<sexist generalist hat>
Aren't most of them generally interested in other ladies though?
</sexist generalist hat>
it's tackling the discriminatory attitudes entrenched in our society.
The hat isn't discriminatory. It's just stereotyped and a bit stupid.
Horrible hat and quite rightly should be called out, but feel wrong as the Torygraph is hating the NT at the moment
Torygraph is hating the NT at the moment
Intersting. Why is that?
Footballer's or footballers' depending upon the level of ambition.
Torygraph is hating the NT at the momentIntersting. Why is that?
It dwarfs the membership of the political parties and therefore could run for government and take over from the Torys, so they need to bash them to keep the status quo. Possibly.
Plus there is a campaign about their (NT's) campaign for acessibility. It's messy, like it always is with poshos.
but feel wrong as the Torygraph is hating the NT at the moment
Intersting. Why is that?
Cos the gay pride thing they hated.
Helen Ghosh, the outgoing CEO, is also a bit lefty for their taste on things like windfarmage and climate change.
Basically - National Trust as aspic preserver and musty heirloom purveyor = good.
Spotted, today
[img] 
[/img]
geetee1972 - Member
it's tackling the discriminatory attitudes entrenched in our society.
The hat isn't discriminatory. It's just stereotyped and a bit stupid.
Your two comments are contradictory. It's stereotyped because it's based on a discriminatory attitude that women are in some way inferior to men. By dismissing it as "a bit stupid" it marginalises the underlying issue.
It's stereotyped because it's based on a discriminatory attitude that women are in some way inferior to men.
It doesn't remotely suggest women are inferior; it merely suggests that the person wearing it, being female, might end up being married to someone who was very keen on football.
You can't even argue that it assumes that women are less likely to appreciate football than men (which is a stereotype but not discrimination and in my view would make women superior anyway), because that would entirely depend on also assuming that the woman was married to a man. These days, that is far from certain.
The only meaning you can derive from the cap is that the woman in question is likely to marry a dedicated football fan. But feel free to feel aggrieved by it.
Yes DezB, I was thinking that too 🙂
The only meaning you can derive from the cap is that the woman in question is likely to marry a dedicated football fan
it's not the only meaning and i'm fairly sure most people don't take it to be that meaning, if i'm honest.
As a 45 year old, balding, tubby, father of 3, I'd wear that.
Photo please! 😀
kimbers - Memberlittle Englanders
Is this some bizarre form of Tourette's?
Enquiring minds want to know...
it's not the only meaning and i'm fairly sure most people don't take it to be that meaning, if i'm honest.
It's ironic that the negative meaning most people are likely to derive from it (and I accept that this happens even if I argue that it is incorrect) is itself based on assumptions, stereotypes and cultural bias.
The liberal minded among us, who are also likely the ones expressing their disapproval for the hat, can only be offended if we interpret the slogan based on the assumption that women can only marry men, that football is only something that men like and that not liking football is something that makes you inferior. i.e. your liberal outrage actually belies your own cultural biases. Which make you a hypocrite (technically).
[i]Yes DezB, I was thinking that too[/i]
Thanks! The ultimate hate criminal 😉
I'm sorry? what outrage?
This is an outrage!
the assumption that women can only marry men,
The assumption was that only women can be wives.
Men married to men would still be husbands.
Women married to women would still be wives.
Surely the "joke" is that the wearer of the hat is a bit of a gold digger (sorry if I've misunderstood the meaning of "footballer's wife").
Both males and females do marry other people for their wealth and fame.
The hat does not imply that all females are gold diggers (or even that gold digging is a bad thing).
The hat isn't sexist, the joke is just quite poor. (especially if you have just bought it for your 6 year old daughter).
The assumption was that only women can be wives.
Ah good point, I has misread the text for 'widow' rather than 'wife'. It doesn't change anything though. The 'wife' could still be married to a female footballer and only the assumption that women can't be footballers would then lead you to conclude that the suggestion was discriminatory.
Meh.
I suppose it does [i]sort of[/i] support the dated notion that a woman is after a successful husband to be the breadwinner and that she is somehow defined by who she is married to, rather than her own career and life.
But honestly, pretty low on my FaxGivn score.
(I'm assuming they also stock a blue [i]"Future Footballers Husband"[/i] hat of course?)
I'm more outraged at the lack of apostrophe
I'm more offended by that font
Really, beyond the catasrapostrophe situation, there's further grammar fail with the ambiguity of it - they should clarify whether the wearer intends to be the wife of a footballer in the future (a future "footballer's wife"), or whether they are currently the wife of someone who will be a footballer in the future (a "future footballer's" wife).
It is, as has been pointed out, an outrage!
Surely the "joke" is that the wearer of the hat is a bit of a gold digger (sorry if I've misunderstood the meaning of "footballer's wife").
That was the inference I took from it. "When I grow up I want to be a WAG."
That and it's obvious crimes against design.
[quote=howsyourdad1 ]
The only meaning you can derive from the cap is that the woman in question is likely to marry a dedicated football fan
it's not the only meaning and i'm fairly sure most people don't take it to be that meaning, if i'm honest.
It's not even a possible meaning. Football fans aren't footballers.
The obvious meaning is obvious. There is only one possible context in which somebody would be "proud" of being a footballer's wife.
Whats Eootball?
(missing ' deliberate BTW)
(missing ' deliberate BTW)
You think it means the wearer wants to be a future wife to many footballers? 😯
Isn't "footballers wife" a compound noun in the same way as hot dogs eater (polite version of my first thought)? 💡
If there is an apostrophe it would surely have to go after the s. ❓
I'm more outraged at the lack of apostrophe
I'm more offended by that font
Frankly, it's a really ugly hat, and anyone caught wearing it should be arrested and fined for crimes against aesthetics.
Also small children should point at them in the street and laugh, subjecting them to public ridicule.
At the very least.
If there is an apostrophe it would surely have to go after the s.
Only if we legalised bigamy.
bikebouy - Member
I'm moar offended because it looks [s]like[/s] as though it doesn't line up correctly
FTFY 😉
[quote=Cougar ]Only if we legalised bigamy.
Not in a country where divorce (and death) is legal.