Guest BlueBrett Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 So you'd just as happily walk hand in hand through a Glasgow council estate with your boyfriend as you would dye your hair ginger?And you're the guy that believes "the gays" should be refused the right to adopt, so I'm not entirely sure you have a leg to stand on. Especially given one of your arguments against was "bullying." Should ginger couples be allowed to adopt brunette kids? I'm not saying that prejudice against gay people doesn't exist just that it isn't institutionalised like racism was. You are right, I would probably be more likely to get abused if I was openly gay in those surroundinggs than if I was ginger. Would it be more likely though than if I walked through with a top hat and walking stick smoking a fat cigar with 1000 pound shoes on? Bullying was just one of my arguments but I think it still holds. Just because society as a whole doesn't discriminate doesn't mean we can expect that no children will. No matter how tolerant we become as a society kids will still ridicule points of difference. I'd rather not get back into the whole adoption issue anyway.
Finnegan Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 Would it be more likely though than if I walked through with a top hat and walking stick smoking a fat cigar with 1000 pound shoes on? Might get robbed for the shoes. But yes, it would likely be more than if you walked through dressed up posh. I spent nine of the last twelve months working with a bunch of lads from the New Parks and Braunstone estates and I don't think much evoked their prejudice more than homosexuality, except Islam. Out in the fairly civilized media it may be far more "acceptable" but if you think severe homophobia is extinct you're immensely naive.
Foxes Radio Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 We are joined tonight by a director of the Justin Campaign. This follows on from Wednesday nights show when the issue on homophobia on the terraces was raised. Www.simplesite.com/foxesradio 7.30-9.30pm
Houdini Logic Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 Houdini Logic: Don't be a tit for WUMings sakes, you're smarter than that. "Isms" aren't all on a par. We all know this, we're not stupid. We know that prejudice against "people with slightly scruffy hair" isn't as abhorrent as racism. We're all well aware that a few jokes about blondes isn't on the same level as serious religious intolerance or institutional sexism. We might fall in either the "everything is okay to joke about!" or "dont say anything that might hurt someones feelings [becausewe'llprobablygetsued]" categories of people for the sakes of a good argument but I'm fairly confident most of us are aware that the world's far more shades of grey. It's just unfortunately there's still a large segment of society that thinks they can brush homophobia under the carpet alongside "they're discriminating because I have my eyebrow pierced" and "they're prejudiced against me because I like scat sex!" Hang on mate - there's no WUMing going on here, this is my opinion so let's get that straight from the off. You may think that calling people a 'WUM' or claiming they are saying things that have 'become vogue' is a way to instantly write them off and put your own argument on a higher level but I think you need to occasionally curb your e-cynicism and listen to other people's opinions. I have no issue with you but you need to get your head out of your arse on this one and maybe listen to what people are saying. So we're allowed to take the piss out of people for a whole number of reasons but we have to be hush hush about any links to being gay?! And you believe this is the progressive way to deal with this subject? I think you missed the point with my comparisons - it wasn't that they're on a par, of course they're not, it's that although we may sing certain songs we don't actually mean what we say i.e. having a problem with fat people or people with long hair. But if you want to write off my original comparisons then let's have another one - taking the piss out of people because of the deprived town/area that they live in. This is a serious social issue, but noone sees it like that and that's because there's an understanding that this type of football banter is a way of amusing BOTH sets of fans. I am strongly anti-homophobic and anti-racist, but I'll happily laugh along when a comedian makes a gay or racist joke - and that's the same feelings I have about these songs at football. I genuinely believe that the majority of football fans don't have an issue with gay people (we haven't had anyone on here say anything negative so far) and that's why I'm confident people aren't singing these songs with malice. If you prove me wrong then I will happily change my opinion on this. You may have a minority of people who actually like these songs because they have an issue with gay people (which in itself doesn't make sense because homophobic people probably aren't interested in singing gays songs at straight men) but I don't think you should ban a Jimmy Carr DVD just in case a small group of people take pleasure out of his anti-gay jokes. You may draw comparisons to being a gay person in a shitty council estate in Glasgow, but to be honest I think you're probably more likely to get your head kicked in if you were a posh country boy - yet we'll still happily take the piss out of any toffs at a football match. As I said, I have no problem with you, but I do have an opinion on this and I'm not going to let you say 'you're better than that' as if I'm some kid trying to start a fight.
Fox1651 Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 Hang on mate - there's no WUMing going on here, this is my opinion so let's get that straight from the off. You may think that calling people a 'WUM' or claiming they are saying things that have 'become vogue' is a way to instantly write them off and put your own argument on a higher level but I think you need to occasionally curb your e-cynicism and listen to other people's opinions. I have no issue with you but you need to get your head out of your arse on this one and maybe listen to what people are saying. So we're allowed to take the piss out of people for a whole number of reasons but we have to be hush hush about any links to being gay?! And you believe this is the progressive way to deal with this subject? I think you missed the point with my comparisons - it wasn't that they're on a par, of course they're not, it's that although we may sing certain songs we don't actually mean what we say i.e. having a problem with fat people or people with long hair. But if you want to write off my original comparisons then let's have another one - taking the piss out of people because of the deprived town/area that they live in. This is a serious social issue, but noone sees it like that and that's because there's an understanding that this type of football banter is a way of amusing BOTH sets of fans. I am strongly anti-homophobic and anti-racist, but I'll happily laugh along when a comedian makes a gay or racist joke - and that's the same feelings I have about these songs at football. I genuinely believe that the majority of football fans don't have an issue with gay people (we haven't had anyone on here say anything negative so far) and that's why I'm confident people aren't singing these songs with malice. If you prove me wrong then I will happily change my opinion on this. You may have a minority of people who actually like these songs because they have an issue with gay people (which in itself doesn't make sense because homophobic people probably aren't interested in singing gays songs at straight men) but I don't think you should ban a Jimmy Carr DVD just in case a small group of people take pleasure out of his anti-gay jokes. You may draw comparisons to being a gay person in a shitty council estate in Glasgow, but to be honest I think you're probably more likely to get your head kicked in if you were a posh country boy - yet we'll still happily take the piss out of any toffs at a football match. As I said, I have no problem with you, but I do have an opinion on this and I'm not going to let you say 'you're better than that' as if I'm some kid trying to start a fight. Bravo Houdinilogic very well said, you make some good points very well and as you said its your opinion and your entitled to it. Bravo!
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 Can anybody remember a Dick Emery comedy character in the 70's called "Cecil Gayboy" ? i know im in my late 30's / early 40's now but i remember that being as funny as fvck but this certainly doesnt make me homophobic or owt like that, i strongly dislike (hate) Racism / Xenaphobia (although i hate the French (joking) ) and homophobia or sexism or owt like that but come on i do think that an intelligent person can tell the difference between harmless banter and someones genuine hatred of a colour / sex / creed / religion / race / whatever. However footnote to that is legally speaking it is how a comment is percieved that matters as if for example someone shouts across the street "Oi you puff" to either a friend or whoever and someone who is homosexual happens to be walking past and percieves the comment was made against them and reports it to the Police - then the Police would take that on board as homophobic abuse (rightly or wrongly)
fatmando Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 People in general need to stop letting stories like this get the spotlight and so much of their attention. That way the people getting offended so easily will stop whinging so much and the people being homophobic/sexist or whatever will stop being cvnts as much. They will all realise that everyone else in the middle don't give a shit anymore! I certainly stopped caring and am fed up of hearing people on their high horses talking down to people about it. Makes me cringe.
North-LondonFox Posted 4 February 2011 Posted 4 February 2011 People in general need to stop letting stories like this get the spotlight and so much of their attention. That way the people getting offended so easily will stop whinging so much and the people being homophobic/sexist or whatever will stop being cvnts as much. They will all realise that everyone else in the middle don't give a shit anymore! I certainly stopped caring and am fed up of hearing people on their high horses talking down to people about it. Makes me cringe. 100% correct mate.
Finnegan Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 So we're allowed to take the piss out of people for a whole number of reasons but we have to be hush hush about any links to being gay?! And you believe this is the progressive way to deal with this subject? You want to talk about progressive attitudes? What's progressive about "does your boyfriend know you're here", "we can see you holding hands?" Making light of something works if it's applicable to you, "taking it back" works if it's applicable to you, what you're doing is justifying an out of date prejudice by just boxing it up as "a sense of humour" or "banter." There's nothing 'progressive' about refusing to accept that something may very well be offensive. Why are there no publicly homosexual footballers? You think it's because they're worried about their fellow professionals? Shit, there might be a few bigoted footballers out there - course there are - but I imagine most people's team mates would rally round them, respect their bravery and move on. It's bigger than what goes on in the dressing room. It's the entire culture of the sport, it's echoing out from the stands; look at the treatment of Sol Campbell for fucks sakes and nothing's even confirmed there. Don't give me that "there's no REAL homophobia from football fans" bullshit. Just because there's a lot of good, decent, liberally minded people out there who don't give a damn about someone's sexuality it doesn't mean that that's everywhere. And you really don't think that the more benign, passive chants are (subconsciously or otherwise) just enforcing that prejudice? This is a serious social issue, but noone sees it like that and that's because there's an understanding that this type of football banter is a way of amusing BOTH sets of fans. Wrong. It's a way of amusing a section of both sets of fans. Almost pains me to use them as an example, but you think the Fosse Boys are stood there singing homophobic chants of ANY severity? You can have fun and banter without being prejudiced. If you need to justify your ignorance by dressing it up as 'harmless humour' and convincing yourself that no intelligent homosexual would ever be really offended then you go and knock yourself out, mate. I don't care. But don't come telling me I've got my head up my ass just because, ethically, I have a problem with that. I am strongly anti-homophobic and anti-racist, but I'll happily laugh along when a comedian makes a gay or racist joke Then no, son, you're not "strongly" anti-homophobic and anti-racist. You're just one step away from "I'm not racist, I've got some black friends." As I said, I have no problem with you, but I do have an opinion on this and I'm not going to let you say 'you're better than that' as if I'm some kid trying to start a fight. A'ight. You're entitled to your opinion, not going to argue that point. Just a little genuinely surprised at you is all, if that's condescending then so be it.
FuriousFox46 Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 No heterosexual is at any liberty to decide what gay people should or should not find offensive. However, there always has been and always will be 'banter' like this. But logically there's nothing progressive about NO OPENLY GAY PLAYERS IN FOOTBALL in fact the sheer thought of that is shocking in the 21st century. What does it say about the fans of modern football when the mayor of Texas can be openly lesbian and be largely accepted by her people? Texas, for God's sake. I don't understand why it's not okay to chant about being black or white or asian but when it comes to sexuality it doesn't matter? Where is this secret differentation criteria some of you swear by? All of these comments in the stand are going to be regarded as bigoted, some will be offended, some won't, you can't please everyone. But the main issue with chants like these is that a large portion of players are being hindered to live their lives as they wish because of 'harmless banter'.
Haydos Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 You want to talk about progressive attitudes? What's progressive about "does your boyfriend know you're here", "we can see you holding hands?" Making light of something works if it's applicable to you, "taking it back" works if it's applicable to you, what you're doing is justifying an out of date prejudice by just boxing it up as "a sense of humour" or "banter." I've asked a couple of times now but no worries, I appreciate you're a lot of one side of this debate In the most fundamental sense, what is your opinion on where banter turns aggressive/offensive? I realise you have referred to the 'gay meaning derogatory' argument. The fat/willy puller v homosexual thing for example. Realistically, what makes one more acceptable than the other? Apart from your socially dictated opinion? You can argue that the 'homophobic' chanting is worse because of the social acceptance. My point is, I believe other topics of chants (eg. obesity) are just as bad but not commonly criticised, ergo, nobody kicks up a fuss about them. I don't believe they should the same as I don't believe anything should be made out of this case. The minority are always going to be 'targeted' for chanting. If the guy at Bramall lane had been a massive bloke he would have had 'You fat bastard' chanted at him and this thread wouldn't exist. To get it straight (calm down!) I am completely against homophobia and it would be a massive breakthrough if it were accepted. I fear for a while yet though there is going to be at least a small amount of individuals intent on kicking up a fuss about it if/when it became an issue again.
AmyLGK Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 I did wonder why no one addressed my comment about there being no openy gay footballers....
darko2k7 Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 This entire topic is a perfect example of wot is wrong with our country now days , Turning something so small in the context of wot goes on in this world i.e wars murders rapes starving children ect. ect. in to something big or in my case my son was born with a serous heart defect and his life span is unknown therefore i try and live life to the full everyday as should everyone LIFE IS TO SHORT to be conserned with such a nothing event.
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 I did wonder why no one addressed my comment about there being no openy gay footballers.... As far as I am aware there have been a few openly gay footballers. Justin Fashnu and David Oldfield come to mind.
FuriousFox46 Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 As far as I am aware there have been a few openly gay footballers. Justin Fashnu and David Oldfield come to mind. Two? and one of them killed himself because of the shit he got. David Olfield isn't gay either.
FuriousFox46 Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 I've asked a couple of times now but no worries, I appreciate you're a lot of one side of this debate In the most fundamental sense, what is your opinion on where banter turns aggressive/offensive? I realise you have referred to the 'gay meaning derogatory' argument. The fat/willy puller v homosexual thing for example. Realistically, what makes one more acceptable than the other? Apart from your socially dictated opinion? You can argue that the 'homophobic' chanting is worse because of the social acceptance. My point is, I believe other topics of chants (eg. obesity) are just as bad but not commonly criticised, ergo, nobody kicks up a fuss about them. I don't believe they should the same as I don't believe anything should be made out of this case. The minority are always going to be 'targeted' for chanting. If the guy at Bramall lane had been a massive bloke he would have had 'You fat bastard' chanted at him and this thread wouldn't exist. To get it straight (calm down!) I am completely against homophobia and it would be a massive breakthrough if it were accepted. I fear for a while yet though there is going to be at least a small amount of individuals intent on kicking up a fuss about it if/when it became an issue again. You're fat by choice you don't choose to be gay?
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 Two? and one of them killed himself because of the shit he got. David Olfield isn't gay either. Yes he is. Also Fashnu killed himself because he was accused of noncing not because he was gay.
Guest Basildon Fox Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 You're fat by choice you don't choose to be gay? What about people with gland problems?
Guest Bilo Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 As far as I am aware there have been a few openly gay footballers. Justin Fashnu and David Oldfield come to mind. Never knew David Oldfield was gay, did he come out post-retirement? That said, I'd have been a bit young to know or understand if he was openly gay while playing. Justin Fashanu was very unfortunate on a number of level. As a black player in the 1980s, he'd have been abused for his skin colour even if he got through five supermodels a week. However, he was mistreated badly by Brian Clough at Forest when he tried to hide his sexuality for a while and then even refused permission to train with the squad when the rumours turned out to be true. Then his career started to collapse as his sexuality became common knowledge to team-mates wherever he wanted, then his brother disowned him and then the accusations of underage sexual assault that turned out to be false. It all understandably got a bit much for him. The Justin Fashanu example, I think, holds present gay footballers from coming out but it was a very specific set of circumstances that led to his unfortunate end. I'd like to think that football is more enlightened and open-minded than in the 1980s and that any footballer coming out today would have an easier time of it.
Finnegan Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 Top post, Furiousfox. And Zaphod - you think two out of... however many... is proportionate? I've asked a couple of times now but no worries, I appreciate you're a lot of one side of this debate In the most fundamental sense, what is your opinion on where banter turns aggressive/offensive? I don't know, it's difficult to call and I happily put my hand up and admit to that. For somewhat personal reasons, the issue of weight is actually one fairly close to my heart (no, I'm not fat) and I generally find it pretty uncomfortable to listen to people ranting on about health and heaviness, but I won't bore you with that tangent. But at the end of the day, someone has far more control over the length of their hair, the weight of their body, their physical fitness or their diet than they do their sexuality. Football fans are always going to want to create a slightly abusive, edgey atmosphere and I'm all behind that. I accept that it's a venue in which people are going to push the line of abuse as far as they possibly can. But there are some things, race, sexuality, gender & sex, disability - and perhaps, to a lesser extent, religion - that are beyond an individual's lifestyle choices (I appreciate on religion that's far more up for debate) and, for me personally, I think that's when it becomes problematic. I'd like to underline that by pointing out that there's a clear difference between things that are, and have been, serious social issues and things which are just daft. The North South divide, for example. Southern clubs chanting about dirty Northerners, come on, let's not wrap it up with racism or xenophobia. Partly because it's given back with just as much faux-vitriol (as is Welsh-English banter, Cov-Leicester banter or whatever else) and partly because it hasn't been, in recent history, a major point of genuine, serious abuse, prejudice or discrimination away from the football field. Nationally, 'Cymrophobia' isn't a serious issue, is it? And nor has it really been any time in the last century - and that's coming from a Welshman stuck behind enemy lines. Homophobia, racism, religious intolerance, these things are still serious, they are still current and you're never going to change people's attitudes on the bigger issues if they still think it's acceptable to sing silly, condescending songs in the public domain.
FuriousFox46 Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 I don't understand homophobia No one hates people for liking marmite so why the same-sex?
Finnegan Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 I hate people that like marmite. Freaks. Oh look at me, being un-PC!
jonah Posted 5 February 2011 Posted 5 February 2011 all political bollox imo, by people who feel its there right to decide what other people should say, how they should act, or even what there allowed to think. can i call you gay ? - no thats homophobic, ok can i call you straight? - yes ......eeerrr then isnt that hetrosexualophobic?? can i call you black? - no thats racist ok can i call you white - yes .....eerrrr so being racist depends on the colour? can i open the door for your female friend? - no thats sexist ok can let it shut in her face - yes .... actual thats down right fookin rude. terrace banter is part of what makes going to a match such a great day out, i would suggest that the people who want to see it as a matter of political debate swop there walkers stadium ticket for one at the BBC,s Question time studio where they can sit and talk bollox all night if they wish, and i get to turn them off and go too bed
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.