Footballing gay #3

[Soar Fox]

Bet he loved having a perv in the showers.

[Mike the Metal Ed]

Bet he loved having a perv in the showers.

Are you attracted to every female co-worker you've ever had then?

[Soar Fox]

Are you attracted to every female co-worker you've ever had then?

When I worked at USC and All saints. Yes

[Bettsj2]

😂😂😂

[Guest BlueBrett]

And I suppose Leicester being a "town full of Pakis" is merely poor banter too; In fact maybe it can't even be racist as its simply a reference to the well known fact that there are a lot of people of a South-Asian ethnic background living in Leicester.

OK, it doesn't have the word "faggot" in there, but its still pretty damn unpleasant.

Well It's pretty different. The word 'pakis' is in itself offensive. The word 'boyfriend' is not.

We do this every time. It's not fvcking hard (It might be for thick as pig shit people like you) but here it is again:

It's the negative connotations that chanting that shit brings. Why should the number of gay people living there even be worth mentioning? Why should the number of Asians in Leicester be worth mentioning? It all comes down to the same fvcking thing, it's not the 70's any more, there's no room for this shit, period.

Also, it's not even remotely funny, if you're going to chant about poofters and pakis you deserve a decking for not only being a neanderthal **** but an unfunny cvnt as well.

Whatever. Didn't mention pakis or poofters.

[Les-TA-Jon]

I'm not trying to have a go but:

- A lot of people have said something along the lines of "why is this even a story?"

Well I think if you take into account the fact that world football must include 10's of thousands of players and there is only a handful that are finding themselves able to come out as gay, paints a picture that football is still pretty backward. This is the real story, we're in a world where a lot of progress for gay people has been made - particularly in flexibility gay people now have in being public about their sexuality - many in prominent public roles. But despite that there pretty much no publicly gay footballers.

The rhetoric a lot of the time is that football has come on a long way since the 60s,70s and 80s - and progress has been made - but we shouldn't all be patting ourselves on the back yet. It's not time to get complacent - gay people still face a hell of a lot of barriers in life and I think it's not crazy to imagine that gay footballers would be targeted by chants and abuse etc (in the similar way that Brighton gets targeted, as does leicester as an area containing a higher than average proportion of people of asian descent, and we've also seen issues with Millwall fans and Tottenham fans recently too).

I agree with a lot of posters in that it shouldn't matter and that it shouldn't 'be a story' - yes in an ideal world no one would care about people's sexuality and there'd be no such thing as 'coming out' but the fact remains that it does matter - because a lot of people make it matter

That's the story - Football is way behind the times in terms of accepting gay people - a fact backed up by the incredibly small amount of gay footballers that feel capable to come out.

- The general content of this thread highlight's the reason why gay footballers are discouraged in coming out

"Footballing Gay #3"

"Football's 3rd fudgepacker"

"3 gay men! A footballing scandal"

"Bum bandits on the rise"

"Russia thought a meteor smashing their windows was bad, spare a thought for the anuses of this man's team mates"

"3's a crowd: faggery in football"

"Wasn't Kisnorbo queer?"

"they had half a team of them"

"the shower story about Francis Benali and 'Big' Ken Monkou, couldn't control themselves"

"he's retiring because he's 'BEEN IN THE' shit"

"Bet he loved having a perv in the showers"

A nice sample. It's this kind of stuff. Football fans come from a background of working class men - but football fan 'demographics' have changed a fair bit since those days, with much greater diversity, young and old, male and female, increased levels of ethnic minorities. But let's face it - football and the culture that surrounds it is still one that is dominated by a male, masculine discourse. Just check foxestalk in general for the sexist, sexualised, masculine language/debate on show. I'd wager this forum is pretty heavily representing males from age 12-40 odd and not really anyone else. This isn't totally fair in that obviously the forum will disproportionally attract younger people more used to the internet - but my point is that this forum is similar to wider footballing support in that it is very masculine and male in tone and content.

You may well say that it's just 'banter' or it's only words/language - but I think in a lot of cases the few hundred words you spontaneously spout onto twitter or a forum or indeed in the pub or at the ground are actually indicative of your real thoughts and feelings on the matter.

- Also regarding the homophobic chants:

One could argue that it's not offensive to use the word boyfriend or that it's merely banter, but as Act Smiley and Haydos say - why should it matter? Why should it matter that Brighton contains a supposedly higher than average amount of gay people? The mere fact that you're bringing it up in a chant means that you think it matters - you're the one placing the emphasis on gay people in brighton and so you are the one that is being offensive to gay people by using the chant.

You can analyse it further in that - assuming that the chant is banterous at least or at least trying to cause offense it's homophobic/offensive - i.e "You've got loads of gays in brighton (I think that's a bad thing, haha banter)" The chants aim is to promote the idea that Brighton having lots of gay people as a bad thing = offensive. Simples

[Carl the Llama]

You seem to have severely missed the point with a lot of the posts you quoted, you've had a mare there. Coincidentally you seem to have another mare, one which is very tall and seems to make it hard for you to read our posts from way up there.

[Les-TA-Jon]

You seem to have severely missed the point with a lot of the posts you quoted, you've had a mare there. Coincidentally you seem to have another mare, one which is very tall and seems to make it hard for you to read our posts from way up there.

I've had the mare? Ok

I'm on a high horse? Is that what you mean?

You can personalise this if you want - but I think the general points of my post are still valid - whether I'm on a high horse or not. I'd like an explanation of that too - how am I?

[Carl the Llama]

I've had the mare? Ok

I'm on a high horse? Is that what you mean?

You can personalise this if you want - but I think the general points of my post are still valid - whether I'm on a high horse or not. I'd like an explanation of that too - how am I?

Step ladder would be my guess.

I am 90% confident that if a gay person were to read those posts you decided to quote, they'd see them for the jests/'banter'(shudder) that they are. For what it's worth I agree with you concerning the chanting, but you seem to have taken to this thread in full PC mode, which very often causes someone to be overly sensitive to things that the people they think they're protecting aren't offended by at all. I know we have a couple of gays on the forum so hopefully one of them will tell us if they've taken offence to any particular post here to clear things up.

[Les-TA-Jon]

Step ladder would be my guess.

I am 90% confident that if a gay person were to read those posts you decided to quote, they'd see them for the jests/'banter'(shudder) that they are. For what it's worth I agree with you concerning the chanting, but you seem to have taken to this thread in full PC mode, which very often causes someone to be overly sensitive to things that the people they think they're protecting aren't offended by at all. I know we have a couple of gays on the forum so hopefully one of them will tell us if they've taken offence to any particular post here to clear things up.

Ok fair enough - Still don't know how any of puts me on a high horse - but anyhow...

Re the quotes - as I said I wasn't having a go at any individuals (hence I didn't attribute them to anyone in particular), also when I criticised the tone of the forum at times, that was again not personal and I was talking in general terms. I was quoting them as an example of what you'd here throughout football culture - as a reason for why coming out is difficult.

Re the emboldened - this is a common mistake that the anti-PC crowd get into (not that I'm saying you're part of it) - it's not as simple as merely asking whether the target group/individual finds it offensive or not. Social inequality/marginalisation and oppression comes in many forms and has many targets - and all of those forms and groups that suffer should be burdened by us all, not just those directly affected by them - we should aim to have a shared interest, a common investment - it's our problem, not just theirs.

[Carl the Llama]

Ok fair enough - Still don't know how any of puts me on a high horse - but anyhow...

Re the quotes - as I said I wasn't having a go at any individuals (hence I didn't attribute them to anyone in particular), also when I criticised the tone of the forum at times, that was again not personal and I was talking in general terms. I was quoting them as an example of what you'd here throughout football culture - as a reason for why coming out is difficult.

Re the emboldened - this is a common mistake that the anti-PC crowd get into (not that I'm saying you're part of it) - it's not as simple as merely asking whether the target group/individual finds it offensive or not. Social inequality/marginalisation and oppression comes in many forms and has many targets - and all of those forms and groups that suffer should be burdened by us all, not just those directly affected by them - we should aim to have a shared interest, a common investment - it's our problem, not just theirs.

Let me make it simple for you to understand why I'm affronted: You used the quotes to highlight "why gay footballers are discouraged in coming out", taking them as "indicative of [our] real thoughts and feelings on the matter". I'm saying you must have misinterpreted the intentions behind the posts before using them thus. I'm strongly anti-homophobia, so using my posts in that way, and making the assertion that followed them, does me (and I suspect the others you quoted) a strong injustice.

As for "it's our problem, not just theirs". I agree. But again I say - I really don't think in the case of the 'offending' quotes that it is their problem, so it's not yours either.

It would have been a lot easier if you'd just said something like "I agree, it is ridiculous that being gay is over scrutinised" and left it at that.

[Les-TA-Jon]

Let me make it simple for you to understand why I'm affronted: You used the quotes to highlight "why gay footballers are discouraged in coming out", taking them as "indicative of [our] real thoughts and feelings on the matter". I'm saying you must have misinterpreted the intentions behind the posts before using them thus. I'm strongly anti-homophobia, so using my posts in that way, and making the assertion that followed them, does me (and I suspect the others you quoted) a strong injustice.

As for "it's our problem, not just theirs". I agree. But again I say - I really don't think in the case of the 'offending' quotes that it is their problem, so it's not yours either.

It would have been a lot easier if you'd just said something like "I agree, it is ridiculous that being gay is over scrutinised" and left it at that.

Ok I accept that I took the quotes out of context a bit, and for that I apologise - I didn't mean to target any individuals, nor was I calling individuals out for it, again hence the anonymous way I did it. I did it to merely make my point that they are representative of the kind of thing we hear throughout football culture, and it is the common practice of that kind of stuff being used by football fans that discourages gay players from coming out.

Also forgive me for expressing myself on an internet forum...plus "it's ridiculous that being gay is over scrutinised" wasn't really my point anyhow if you read my posts again.

[Captain...]

Are you attracted to every female co-worker you've ever had then?

No, but if I had the opportunity to shower/get changed with members of the sex I am attracted to, I would perve on them, I wouldn't be able to help, not going to lie, I love a good perve.

I do think that attitudes in the changing room are just as big an issue, if not more so, than the fans. All players receive stick off fans, their own and opposition fans and deal with it, even when it is very personal.

But if you lose the trust of your teammates that is something different. I honestly have no idea how I would react if there was someone gay in the changing room, if there was a women in there I would do my best to make sure she didn't see my pecker, and wouldn't feel comfortable walking around in various states of undress. Then there are others who are more brazen, and would actively wave their wang in her general direction, and others who just wouldn't care.

I do think it would make a difference, and that is why you get a lot more gay sportsmen and women in single sports rather than team sports, team sports require trust and if you lose that then it will be difficult to perform in that team.

[Guest]

If you are looking for limp wristed apologies you are speaking to the wrong man.

No Matt we know that you and Mossey are ALL man.

It's the negative connotations that chanting that shit brings. Why should the number of gay people living there even be worth mentioning? Why should the number of Asians in Leicester be worth mentioning? It all comes down to the same fvcking thing, it's not the 70's any more, there's no room for this shit, period.

Also, it's not even remotely funny, if you're going to chant about poofters and pakis you deserve a decking for not only being a neanderthal **** but an unfunny cvnt as well.

What about the "get your tits out for the lads" type chants. what do you think of them?

Well It's pretty different. The word 'pakis' is in itself offensive. The word 'boyfriend' is not.

the word Pakis isn't offensiveunless the intent to make it so there. Many people from pakistan use the word Pakis, just as it's become cool to use the word "nigger/nigga" in certain black communities.

It's always the intent that is offensive not the word.

[acooling08]

I bet it's great being a gay footballer.

Imagine the showers after a match. You're surrounded by young and physically fit men.

Bet his wank bank was constantly full.

[Thracian]

Some good missing the point there. The story is that all the famous gay players are in the closet.

Re the above and LesTAjon

a) What had the story to do with anyone "famous"?

b) If they're "in the closet" how does anyone know they're "gay".

c) And so what if they are? Why is it important - any more than what they might choose to have on their cornflakes?

Seems to me that "gays" just want to talk about themselves. As if it will somehow serve to make them more supposedly "normal". LesTAJon talks about so few gays coming out about their sexuality but how many "straights" have come out about theirs? Why would they? What the hell has it got to do with football?

And what about those who might "swing" in any and every direction direction? Will we have placards of declaration from all of them - and then perhaps placards for kids stating whether they believe their parents should still be interested in sex at all?

I really don't care if footballers bonk rustic lamposts or shove their dicks into scooped out cucumbers. But at least that might qualify as a story, from the novelty aspect if nothing else.!

[Voll Blau]

I bet it's great being a gay footballer.

Imagine the showers after a match. You're surrounded by young and physically fit men.

Bet his wank bank was constantly full.

The blood's just rushing to your cock thinking about it isn't it?

[VLC86]

Re the above and LesTAjon

a) What had the story to do with anyone "famous"?

b) If they're "in the closet" how does anyone know they're "gay".

c) And so what if they are? Why is it important - any more than what they might choose to have on their cornflakes?

Seems to me that "gays" just want to talk about themselves. As if it will somehow serve to make them more supposedly "normal". LesTAJon talks about so few gays coming out about their sexuality but how many "straights" have come out about theirs? Why would they? What the hell has it got to do with football?

And what about those who might "swing" in any and every direction direction? Will we have placards of declaration from all of them - and then perhaps placards for kids stating whether they believe their parents should still be interested in sex at all?

I really don't care if footballers bonk rustic lamposts or shove their dicks into scooped out cucumbers. But at least that might qualify as a story, from the novelty aspect if nothing else.!

Lovely generalisation there about all gays wanting attention. Maybe they just want to lead a normal life without having to hide things?

The reason gay people come out is because everyone is presumed straight

[Captain...]

Lovely generalisation there about all gays wanting attention. Maybe they just want to lead a normal life without having to hide things?

The reason gay people come out is because everyone is presumed straight

But that is Thrac's point, they don't have anything to hide because nobody is looking for it, or at least that is how it should be.

[Thracian]

The reason gay people come out is because everyone is presumed straight

That's one of the daftest comments I've ever read on here.

[Thracian]

Lovely generalisation there about all gays wanting attention. Maybe they just want to lead a normal life without having to hide things?

There's nothing new about "gays". They've been around since man first walked this planet. What is relatively new is pressure groups using football and other convenient, highly publicised activities to promote their cause.

If that is not wanting attention I don't know what is.

As for living a "normal life", I'm not sure there's any such thing. But who the hell is stopping them, any more than there are always some who will seek to stop people doing all sorts of things - including playing conkers?

Who are these hidden people who stop gays going to work, being footballers, attending football matches, going to the theatre, the horse-racing, the cricket, the rugby or wherever?

What I don't think is "normal" is people going public - almost obsessively so - about whether they prefer guys or gals, or horses for that matter.

So-called "straight" people don't go on about it and they don't have a parade through the City.

Sexuality used to be something "normal" people kept to themselves - out of good manners as much as anything. Now we get sexuality rammed down our throats by "gay" campaigners in football circles when the whole subject is totally inappropriate to football as such.

"Gay" football fans don't have to declare their sexuality at the turnstile nor is there any other mechanism in place to disuade "gays" from watching football. So what's the problem for "gays" either in the stands, at the bars, in joining the club or in having a shower?

There isn't one.

[VLC86]

How is that a daft comment? I agree that the way this guy has came about in public wasn't necessary but my comment about generalising is that your every day person doesn't create a blog and publish it to millions of people therefore not all gays feel the need to come out.

[AyewJoking]

I think all gay footballers should be forced to come out. We could be watching the game and all the while a gay footballer is checking you out and stuff.

[21st Century Fox]

[Alf Bentley]

There's nothing new about "gays". They've been around since man first walked this planet. What is relatively new is pressure groups using football and other convenient, highly publicised activities to promote their cause.

If that is not wanting attention I don't know what is.

You've answered your own rhetorical question: pressure groups do not highlight football because they want personal attention, but to promote their cause - the right of gay people not to face abuse for being themselves. About 25 years ago, a similar campaign highlighted racist abuse, otherwise it might still be acceptable for fans to throw bananas at Wes Morgan and to make monkey noises at Lloyd Dyer.

As for living a "normal life", I'm not sure there's any such thing. But who the hell is stopping them, any more than there are always some who will seek to stop people doing all sorts of things - including playing conkers?

Who are these hidden people who stop gays going to work, being footballers, attending football matches, going to the theatre, the horse-racing, the cricket, the rugby or wherever?

I'm not a footballer, so do not know why hardly any gay footballers come out, but my guess is that they suspect they might be subject to abuse and discrimination from club management and/or teammates and/or fans. Certainly, my gay nephew was subject to sufficient abuse, even violence due to his sexuality that my brother had to move home - and, although I happen to be straight, at school I got a lot of unpleasant abuse from people who guessed otherwise. Likewise, in most sports where gay men have come out, they've mainly done so at the end of their careers...suggesting similar fears. They are not stopped from being footballers, they just have to cover up part of their identity - which straight footballers do not. That's not to mention the (now hopefully rare) phenomenon of "gaybashing" - even murders of gay people for their sexuality....ever heard of "straightbashing"?

As a sidetrack, I have a hunch that there are probably proportionally fewer gay people in football than the average, just as there are proportionally more in some other professions, but it beggars belief that there are almost none...and I'm not talking about people shouting it from the rooftops, just maybe being seen out for a meal or drink with a same-sex partner.

What I don't think is "normal" is people going public - almost obsessively so - about whether they prefer guys or gals, or horses for that matter.

So-called "straight" people don't go on about it and they don't have a parade through the City.

Sexuality used to be something "normal" people kept to themselves - out of good manners as much as anything. Now we get sexuality rammed down our throats by "gay" campaigners in football circles when the whole subject is totally inappropriate to football as such.

There is massively more publicity about the sexuality of straight footballers than about that of gay footballers: we've all heard of WAGs, but not of HABs ("Husbands and Boyfriends"!); some footballers earn megabucks for having their wedding photos (to women!) published in magazines, while others are always having their photos printed with a glamour model on their arm or are in the gossip columns for scoring in nightclubs....in other words, they can and do "parade" their sexuality without fear, whereas historically (and to a large extent still) gay people have not been able to do likewise without fear of abuse, even violence, hence the historic need for strength in numbers through Gay Pride-type events.

"Gay" football fans don't have to declare their sexuality at the turnstile nor is there any other mechanism in place to disuade "gays" from watching football. So what's the problem for "gays" either in the stands, at the bars, in joining the club or in having a shower?

There isn't one.

Nobody is compelled to declare their sexuality, but some feel compelled to conceal it. There is sometimes gossip on here about so-and-so's wife/girlfriend...Can you imagine if, say, Andy King and Lloyd Dyer were in a relationship? Many, hopefully most, wouldn't give a shit, but quite a number would express disgust or abuse...and not just opposing fans. Likewise, while I don't want to watch a gay couple slobbering over one another in the stands any more than I want to watch a straight couple doing so ("inappropriate", as you say), I reckon that a significant minority would react more strongly to the former than to the latter...

Good luck to any gay footballer who comes out; even now, when there are fewer homophobic bigots than there used to be, they'd have to be very brave or very reckless.