Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Legion on September 20, 2013, 02:49:28 PM
-
Footballers from Aston Villa, West Bromwich Albion and Birmingham City are among those supporting a campaign addressing homophobia this weekend by wearing rainbow laces in their boots.
Laces have been sent to all 92 Premier League and Football League clubs by gay rights charity Stonewall.
The focus is on changing attitudes rather than urging players to come out.
-
Clappy emoticon thingy for all the clubs involved.
The last list I saw had several high profile teams shown as not participating. All all clubs now taking part ?
-
Excellent campaign.
And, he may be a prick most of the time, but well done Joey Barton on this, too. He seems to have stuck his neck out.
-
Man U, Spurs, Norwich, Sunderland and Southampton are not supporting this because they were not "consulted".
-
Man U, Spurs, Norwich, Sunderland and Southampton are not supporting this because they were not "consulted".
Actually, the Guardian reported today that Norwich aren't taking part because they have a deal with Paddy Power which conflicts with Stonewall's partnership with SBOBET. I wonder which would give the best odds if I was betting on Stephen Fry's mood.
-
On a different note, another campaign group, Football v Homophobia, has criticised the campaign for "using language which reinforces the very stereotypes and caricatures that ... ensure that homophobia persists".
I think they're referring to the "Right Behind Gay Players" line, and I have to say I thought it was a strange choice of wording myself.
-
I have heard on WM this morning that we are not participating which is disappointing but I understand why.
It has been done at short notice without consultation and is in conjunction with Paddy Power. The problem for Villa is that they have not had any opportunity to clear his with Dafabet. They didn't say that in so many words - something about 'commercial conflicts given the involvement of Paddy Power'.
To me it is pretty clear that giving free advertising to your shirt sponsor's competitors is not something you can just do.
Villa have said they have already been in contact with Stonewall about what else they can do to promote this cause.
Its a shame - if he laces had just come from Stonewall there'd be no dilemma, but I can see their problem - & I think Paddy Power have done very well at making clubs look like bastards for not giving them a free plug.
-
I think any campaign like this should be left up to individual players to decide rather then be pushed on them by the club anyway. I feel the same with the poppy issue.
-
It's a pair of laces....who gives a crap who is marketing it or who supplied them? It's to support something that everyone should be behind (yes, I know) so why can't everyone just put commercial interests aside for once?
-
So what happens if
afabet withdraw their sponsorship because we're in breach of contract?
With more notice Villa could have consulted with their sponsors and maybe reached a resolution, but I can understand them not launching straight in on this occasion.
Why the big rush? It would have been better on many levels with few weeks notice. clubs could have made a lot more of it than just laces. It honestly smacks of Paddy Power pullng a fast one to get some cheap publicity on the back of a good cause.
Publicity that they'll get whatever happens.
-
I understand that and I agree - I'm bemoaning the commercialism of everything and yes, that includes Paddy Power pulling a fast one, if that's indeed what they are doing.
-
It is sad because I was really excited when I heard about the rainbow laces this morning! I was going to get some, but the door staff at The Holte Pub already think Jane & I are a couple!
Although the amusement potential of that alone probably makes it worth doing!
-
Does there really need to be a huge campaign on this in Football? There's far too much politics, ulterior motives and distractions in football. It strikes me as more of a publicity stunt than anything else. I'm all for cutting out homophobia, but is the problem really huge in football?
If clubs take part, then fair enough. At the same time, I don't see why people should get up in arms if they don't. This is a wholly different issue to racism in football, which really blighted the game in the 70's and 80's, and in certain parts of the footy world is still sadly prevalent.
There's also not really a huge gay following with football. Is it going to make a blind bit of difference to the majority of folk who's bread is buttered the other way up? I don't think so really. I don't know, I guess I'm not into all this, "wear this to show..." stuff. Certain things have a long standing meaning and tradition, like Poppies so it has it's place. But I think it just gets taken too far sometimes. It reminds me of the episode in Seinfeld when Kramer gets continually hounded, and chased because he refuses to wear an Aids ribbon.
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be the reaction to when a player openly comes out (if ever).
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
-
Paddy Power have played a blinder here.How many teams in the PL are sponsored by betting compaines?
They knew it would cause a fuss and he even got 5 minutes on five live.Got a feeling Stonewall are being used here and that's a shame.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/05/gay-footballers-fear-reaction-of-fans
This article might shed a bit of light.
It does seem strange that, out of thousands of professional footballers, apparently nobody is gay. Apart from Justin Fashanu who I remember coming out whilst still playing and the reaction he got.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/05/gay-footballers-fear-reaction-of-fans
This article might shed a bit of light.
It does seem strange that, out of thousands of professional footballers, apparently nobody is gay. Apart from Justin Fashanu who I remember coming out whilst still playing and the reaction he got.
I've got Justin Fashanu's autograph
just saying
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
Agree. Expletives will always be heard at any football ground because football is such a passion-driven game. As long as such language is used as an outlet of anger rather then used maliciously against any individual or group, then I don't have any problem with it really.
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
Agree. Expletives will always be heard at any football ground because football is such a passion-driven game. As long as such language is used as an outlet of anger rather then used maliciously against any individual or group, then I don't have any problem with it really.
I don't see any difference between someone using homophobic language and someone using racist language. They're both as offensive as the other and neither should have any place in football.
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
Agree. Expletives will always be heard at any football ground because football is such a passion-driven game. As long as such language is used as an outlet of anger rather then used maliciously against any individual or group, then I don't have any problem with it really.
I don't see any difference between someone using homophobic language and someone using racist language. They're both as offensive as the other and neither should have any place in football.
Completely agree.
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
I totally disagree, and that's the sort of approach that used to get taken to racism as well "it's just people letting off steam".
And there is a difference between "offensive" language along the lines of people effing and blinding and people chanting about how Upson "takes it up the arse". I can't see how anyone can fail to spot the difference there, but that's precisely what you're doing if you're just filing it under offensive language.
Your story about the two gay guys you know is of no real relevance. I know plenty of gay people, and some of them like football. The fact you know some who don't like it at all means absolutely nothing.
It's right up there with "what's the point with trying to get Asian fans to attend games, they all like cricket anyway, they hate football".
-
I don't see any difference between someone using homophobic language and someone using racist language. They're both as offensive as the other and neither should have any place in football.
I think the difference is that certain words that can be deemed homophobic can be used without the one saying it intending to use it in such a way. For example, I heard someone describe Westwood as a 'fairy' the other day due to that person considering him to be lightweight in midfield. Was he intending to be homophobic in doing so?...no. Whereas if he was making the same point about Delph let's say and decided to call him a 'n****r', then obviously that can be taken in no other way then a racist comment.
Technically calling a player a 'c**t' could be deemed as sexist and offensive to women. Should we lump that in with racist language too?
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
I totally disagree, and that's the sort of approach that used to get taken to racism as well "it's just people letting off steam".
And there is a difference between "offensive" language along the lines of people effing and blinding and people chanting about how Upson "takes it up the arse". I can't see how anyone can fail to spot the difference there, but that's precisely what you're doing if you're just filing it under offensive language.
Your story about the two gay guys you know is of no real relevance. I know plenty of gay people, and some of them like football. The fact you know some who don't like it at all means absolutely nothing.
It's right up there with "what's the point with trying to get Asian fans to attend games, they all like cricket anyway, they hate football".
Bang on.
-
I don't see any difference between someone using homophobic language and someone using racist language. They're both as offensive as the other and neither should have any place in football.
I think the difference is that certain words that can be deemed homophobic can be used without the one saying it intending to use it in such a way. For example, I heard someone describe Westwood as a 'fairy' the other day due to that person considering him to be lightweight in midfield. Was he intending to be homophobic in doing so?...no. Whereas if he was making the same point about Delph let's say and decided to call him a 'n****r', then obviously that can be taken in no other way then a racist comment.
Technically calling a player a 'c**t' could be deemed as sexist and offensive to women. Should we lump that in with racist language too?
Do you shout a sexist word when sitting next to or near a female supporter? Or do you wait to see if she uses it first!
Really, what is the bit you don't get about not using racist or homophobic language, no matter what you might 'mean' by it? It's outdated, out of place, inappropriate, insulting and unacceptable.
Sexist chanting, now, that doesn't have a campaign. Yet :)
-
No because I don't really use such language anyway but many around me do when there are many women present. Do they hesitate to use it because there are women present? No. Why? Because they and everyone around them knows it is not being used in a sexist manner. A little common sense in these situations wouldn't go amiss.
-
No because I don't really use such language anyway but many around me do when there are many women present. Do they hesitate to use it because there are women present? No. Why? Because they and everyone around them knows it is not being used in a sexist manner. A little common sense in these situations wouldn't go amiss.
The common sense defence went out in the 1970's.
-
I took umbrage with a friend of mine, whilst playing golf on Wednesday. I left a putt short, and he said "that's really gay".
It was a weak putt, but the use of the word gay to describe something as bad is something that happens routinely amongst many blokes, without it necessarily being homophobic. It is something that we need to get away from, my friend eventually agreed, although looked a bit bored after my lecture
-
Here in London (I'm not sure about other parts of the country) it is quite common for the word gay to be used in that way. Mainly amongst younger people I should add. Which goes back to my point about understanding the intention when such words are used.
-
Sick, for example.
-
Here in London (I'm not sure about other parts of the country) it is quite common for the word gay to be used in that way. Mainly amongst younger people I should add. Which goes back to my point about understanding the intention when such words are used.
I'm in London as well. Sorry. Still outdated.
-
I'm glad we now have progressed enough to have this debate. It was only a couple of years ago that people were justifying the chants against Matthew Upson as just a bit of banter.
-
The idea of working on sexism in football is an odd one.
I think the reason I don't get offended is because when I first started going to football there weren't that many women there. It's like I was a guest in a male environment so it didn't seem right for me to decide there were ways people couldn't speak, or songs they couldn't sing around me.
Strangely, men have often apologised for swearing around me at football, but thought nothing of launching into a chorus of 'Get your tits out for the lads!'.
The whole thing is full of contradictions.
However, the truth is that there are lots of gay fans at football who don't find some of the chants and language amusing or inoffensive, and Dtonewall have said today that they are in touch with several Premiership footballers who cannot come out for fear of the abuse they will get.
In 2013 should we really be leaving gay people to live the best years of their life as a lie?
-
The obvious answer is, No.
Bollox to the rest, quite frankly. I have accessed wiki on Anglo Saxon profanity and find this expletive refreshingly acceptable to express whatever. So, Bollux!!!
-
Agree with most of that supertom. Other, then some chants from away fans at Brighton, is there really anything else truely homophobic in the English game? The barometer I guess will be (if ever) when a player openly comes out.
I mean to some extent you'll always get a few fans in the stands calling players "poofs" or whatever, but it's not that common. And honestly, as footy fans, when we're pissed off we can use far more colourful language that that.
Obviously though, if you cant take a bit of risque, potentially offensive language then you've got no place being at a football ground, because I don't care where you are, you'll hear something. Obviously there are certain things truly unacceptable, like racist chants but that's thankfully a rarity in the English game now.
I know two gay guys and seriously, you couldn't pay them a million quid to watch a football match, even if Beckham played the entire match in nothing but his budgie smugglers. They'd rather go shopping. That said...if we play like we did against Newcastle again, I might have to join them!
I totally disagree, and that's the sort of approach that used to get taken to racism as well "it's just people letting off steam".
And there is a difference between "offensive" language along the lines of people effing and blinding and people chanting about how Upson "takes it up the arse". I can't see how anyone can fail to spot the difference there, but that's precisely what you're doing if you're just filing it under offensive language.
Your story about the two gay guys you know is of no real relevance. I know plenty of gay people, and some of them like football. The fact you know some who don't like it at all means absolutely nothing.
It's right up there with "what's the point with trying to get Asian fans to attend games, they all like cricket anyway, they hate football".
But my point is the problem of homophobia in football is not nearly at the same level as racism once was. In all honesty I think we've all got bigger things to worry about.
I'm I'd still stand by the fact that the majority of gay men probably don't have that much interest in football. I'm not suggesting there aren't any gay gentleman interested in the footy.
As for the interest of Asian people in football, again, it's a cultural thing and I know there's still probably an innert racism that's effecting young Asian players being able to make it through the youth levels, into pro football in this country, which is a shame, but they're predominently more interested in cricket. Again, I can only use my personal experience. I've known and worked with a lot of asian lads over the years and I'd say well under half couldn't be arsed with football, and almost all of them loved cricket. A couple of my Asian mates are huge footy fans though and there's a good multi-cultural turn out in the stands at many clubs.
Homophobia is an issue. I'm not sure wearing a wrist band will make much difference. I'm sure there'll be some rage directed at some clubs/players who refuse to take part for whatever reason.
If you look at the whole history of football and figure it's took from the 1890's to get to the point in the early 90's where, on the whole foreign players/black players were welcomed and accepted at their clubs by the fans, that's quite a while. Football will never be without degrees of racism but we're one of the most accepting countries in the world. I don't think though we'll never get to this point where suddenly, hundreds of players will come out. I mean it's very traditionally a very working class game, gruff, stereotypically manly men (okay maybe not some of these pampered poster boy footballers these days). I think there's still an strong element of homophobia in the working class. In the same way footballers wouldn't want to come out, you'll have hard working gents down the building sites or whatever not wanting to come out. It's just a part of society that still has a little way to go.
I think in all honesty there's more important things at this time to look at with football, for instance how money is effecting the game, the way our league is going, the power the TV companies have over clubs. The start of the national side. Though in all honesty with this campaign itself, the involvement of a bookie just kind of makes you question the motive.
Above all though, I wish there was a bit more appreciation in this country for just how accepting we are. For whoever you are, where-ever you're from, whatever tickles your fancy, Britain is one of the best countries in the world to be. Sometimes among all the furor that surrounds some of these campaigns, people forget that.
-
Could there be a case too that perhaps some people who aren't gay get more offended by this than people who actually are? I mean we Brits we do relish the opportunity to complain about things which are offensive, or make an issue of it.
-
Love the rant but nahhhhh.
I do not accept that denigrating any player, racial group or sexuality will make anything better about their football.
I just want Villa to be the best!
-
The term 'gay' is being used by the kids as the new bad.As in 'not happy'.Yep.i don't get it either.
Time to stop hanging with the kids I think.
-
Some gay people hide their sexuality in fear of being ostracised, ridiculed, humiliated and even beaten up, yet there's still people (even on here) that think homophobia isn't as bad as racism. Get a grip for crying out loud.
-
Could there be a case too that perhaps some people who aren't gay get more offended by this than people who actually are? I mean we Brits we do relish the opportunity to complain about things which are offensive, or make an issue of it.
The very same argument could have been labeled at black people in years gone by. Absolute cobblers.
-
Homophobia is and has always been a problem in football. I know it's a long time ago, but the sport actually prospered so much early on because a Master at Eton, Rev. E.J.Thring, thought team sports were good, because they prevented solipsism which leads to masturbation which leads to perversity, blindness and atheism. And yes, 'perversity' is a very common Victorian euphemism for homosexuality.
Now? Well, we're not so far from when Graeme Le Saux was called gay just for reading the Guardian instead of the Daily Tits or whatever - an event which says many things about the English game even now - nor from Justin Fashanu's suicide, and certainly not from Robbie Rogers saying that being openly gay was 'impossible' in professional sport. However, the fact that Rogers has since found himself a club (albeit in California) is encouraging to a certain degree. However, the problem is persistent here, and it's a problem which is largely so obvious, so assumed, that it has taken a very long time to identify.
Supertom, the main problem with what you say is that you're very ready to say 'they' and 'them', as if gay people can be homogenised. That's what's unhelpful, and indicative - gay people have not been accepted as part of the mainstream football culture. It will change, but it'll be a tough old slog along the way.
-
What the hell does Homophobia in football have to do with Paddy Power? I'm sorry, it strikes me as a bit of publicity stunt.
-
Could there be a case too that perhaps some people who aren't gay get more offended by this than people who actually are? I mean we Brits we do relish the opportunity to complain about things which are offensive, or make an issue of it.
I am offended by bigoted language and/ or actions wherever I see or hear them.
Because they are bigoted.
Hope that is clear,
UTV
-
What the hell does Homophobia in football have to do with Paddy Power? I'm sorry, it strikes me as a bit of publicity stunt.
But it shouldn't be ignored just because Paddy Power is involved. Stonewall are also involved and they are a fantastic organisation. I'd hate to think the Power link gives a convenient excuse for haters to ignore this. (I'm not suggesting you are of course).
-
What the hell does Homophobia in football have to do with Paddy Power? I'm sorry, it strikes me as a bit of publicity stunt.
But it shouldn't be ignored just because Paddy Power is involved. Stonewall are also involved and they are a fantastic organisation. I'd hate to think the Power link gives a convenient excuse for haters to ignore this. (I'm not suggesting you are of course).
I agree it shouldn't be ignored, but I'm sure Paddy Power will find some way of making a few quid from it. Profiteering on good causes is not something that sits well with me.
-
Homophobia is and has always been a problem in football. I know it's a long time ago, but the sport actually prospered so much early on because a Master at Eton, Rev. E.J.Thring, thought team sports were good, because they prevented solipsism which leads to masturbation which leads to perversity, blindness and atheism. And yes, 'perversity' is a very common Victorian euphemism for homosexuality.
Now? Well, we're not so far from when Graeme Le Saux was called gay just for reading the Guardian instead of the Daily Tits or whatever - an event which says many things about the English game even now - nor from Justin Fashanu's suicide, and certainly not from Robbie Rogers saying that being openly gay was 'impossible' in professional sport. However, the fact that Rogers has since found himself a club (albeit in California) is encouraging to a certain degree. However, the problem is persistent here, and it's a problem which is largely so obvious, so assumed, that it has taken a very long time to identify.
Just wanted to say that Montbert has said far more eloquently what I thought of saying. Along with the Victorian attitudes, which I didn't know.
-
I am uncomfortable with this one. It is the same sort of discomfort I feel about the sky high profile of breast cancer campaigns and appeals. My wife is a victim of breast cancer but the singling out of a narrow strand of public concern in my view skews compassion and understanding into too easily exploited and manipulated channels.
Why "rainbow" laces? The inference is that gay men are flambouyant and colourful. Many are but homosexuality is a normal thing and should not, in my view be stereotyped. Our postman is gay and a harder, tougher nut I have never met. He was captain of our village football team when they were feared far and wide. One of my best friends is in the middle of a sex change and a more level headed, sensible person never put on a frock for the first time in middle age.
The whole thing cheapens and commercializes an issue which is an open door which does not need shoving least of all by a publicity hungry bookmaker.
-
The rainbow thing has long been a symbol of the gay rights movement, and it has nothing to do with flamboyance - after all, that's hardly the stereotype of gay women, is it?
-
With all respect to you Montbert the word "rainbow" is one which has been used in a number of public awareness drives. It is a portmanteau word which latterly is tagged onto any situation which requires an acceptance of diversity.
As for gay women not being colourful or flambouyant we are, or at least I am, thinking about gay men playing football. Sepp Blatter would love to promote gay women football players wearing rainbow laces along with the shorter shorts he advocates.
-
Technically it's a compound word rather than a portmanteau, but that's pedantry. More seriously, you're right - it's nothing to do with flamboyance, it's about diversity, 'the full spectrum' if you like. My point about gay women is relevant because the rainbow is a symbol of the entire gay rights movement, and has nothing to do with flamboyance. The rainbow laces would represent that.
-
Surely it would not be in contravention of the rules for players to wear their own rainbow coloured laces, which they could easily do if they truly believed in the cause. More to the point, I've only ever heard one homophobic chant at a Villa game, directed at Matthew Upson, which although unacceptable, is proof to me that people who make out homophobia to be rife within the game are trying too hard to find something that isn't really there.
South Park, very shrewdly, addressed the issue of using "homophobic language" in a non-homophobic context. "Just because someone's gay, it doesn't mean they're a fag"
I'm certain that almost 99% of the time that "homophobic" language is used, it is used with no homophobic intent but more because the working class, middle-aged people who make up the vast majority of the crowd are desensitised to the original meaning of the words that they are using. Not making excuses for it, but that's how it appears to me.
I also feel that as soon as a player does come out as gay, we will all see what a none issue homophobia in football actually is. It seems to be this "us and them" attitude so typical in modern society. "I'm not homophobic, but everybody else is".
Finally, and this is probably the biggest and most important point, I'm not sure how much weight we can place upon morality within the game when we support a team that plays in the Barclay's Premier League, the most unethical and frankly evil corporation in this country.
-
Here in London (I'm not sure about other parts of the country) it is quite common for the word gay to be used in that way. Mainly amongst younger people I should add. Which goes back to my point about understanding the intention when such words are used.
But surely young people need to be educated/should know already that the use of the word gay to describe something as bad shouldn't be acceptable (its also a sad reflection of many peoples vocabulary)
I doubt anyone would ever call one of my horrendous putts "really straight" as way of an insult, so the word gay should not be used in such circumstances.
-
We are all human beings after all. Who gives a shit.
-
I also feel that as soon as a player does come out as gay, we will all see what a none issue homophobia in football actually is.
Justin Fashanu?
-
And football players have to feel free to play and do what they are best at doing.
'Whether you wear the laces or not, I understand that you are a team', is about where I am on this issue. The laces being problematical from a commercial rather than an ideological p.o.v. This weekend.
-
I also feel that as soon as a player does come out as gay, we will all see what a none issue homophobia in football actually is.
Justin Fashanu?
Go back a couple of pages.
-
I think to be honest it reflects badly on the FA/Premier League/Clubs, that it's taken a bookmaker to join forces with Stonewall to try to make a statement about it.
-
I think to be honest it reflects badly on the FA/Premier League/Clubs, that it's taken a bookmaker to join forces with Stonewall to try to make a statement about it.
Or a betting company pulling the pants down of a charity for a bit of self publicity.If you want to blame anyone blame Stonewall.Paddy power have form on advert Highjacking,it looks like they have done it again.The more I think about it Stonewall should of said to PP 'thanks but no thanks'.
-
I think to be honest it reflects badly on the FA/Premier League/Clubs, that it's taken a bookmaker to join forces with Stonewall to try to make a statement about it.
Or a betting company pulling the pants down of a charity for a bit of self publicity.If you want to blame anyone blame Stonewall.Paddy power have form on advert Highjacking,it looks like they have done it again.The more I think about it Stonewall should of said to PP 'thanks but no thanks'.
I'm not looking to blame Stonewall or Paddypower, my point is that someone within British football should have come up with a similar idea many many years ago
-
I think to be honest it reflects badly on the FA/Premier League/Clubs, that it's taken a bookmaker to join forces with Stonewall to try to make a statement about it.
Or a betting company pulling the pants down of a charity for a bit of self publicity.If you want to blame anyone blame Stonewall.Paddy power have form on advert Highjacking,it looks like they have done it again.The more I think about it Stonewall should of said to PP 'thanks but no thanks'.
I'm not looking to blame Stonewall or Paddypower, my point is that someone within British football should have come up with a similar idea many many years ago
Didn't they try something a few years ago but scrapped it because they couldn't find any players willing to front the campaign?
-
I think to be honest it reflects badly on the FA/Premier League/Clubs, that it's taken a bookmaker to join forces with Stonewall to try to make a statement about it.
Or a betting company pulling the pants down of a charity for a bit of self publicity.If you want to blame anyone blame Stonewall.Paddy power have form on advert Highjacking,it looks like they have done it again.The more I think about it Stonewall should of said to PP 'thanks but no thanks'.
I'm not looking to blame Stonewall or Paddypower, my point is that someone within British football should have come up with a similar idea many many years ago
Didn't they try something a few years ago but scrapped it because they couldn't find any players willing to front the campaign?
I remember they cost that twat from Arsenal 100 grand at the Euro's with his PP boxers.
-
Or get behind it. Sorry in advance.
-
Or get behind it. Sorry in advance.
Looks like you are up shit creek without a paddle Legion.
-
Rainbow laces? I remember Rainbow drops.
-
I think to be honest it reflects badly on the FA/Premier League/Clubs, that it's taken a bookmaker to join forces with Stonewall to try to make a statement about it.
Or a betting company pulling the pants down of a charity for a bit of self publicity.If you want to blame anyone blame Stonewall.Paddy power have form on advert Highjacking,it looks like they have done it again.The more I think about it Stonewall should of said to PP 'thanks but no thanks'.
I'm not looking to blame Stonewall or Paddypower, my point is that someone within British football should have come up with a similar idea many many years ago
Didn't they try something a few years ago but scrapped it because they couldn't find any players willing to front the campaign?
To answer my own question, the answer is sort of.
The FA wanted to launch a campaign in 2010 with a member of each squad speaking out about homophobia, but the Premier League vetoed it.
According to Gordon Taylor, "It's not a straightforward issue and it would be unfair to ask an individual player to back a campaign like this in case they got targeted by football crowds".
So much for there not really being an issue.
-
Rainbow laces? I remember Rainbow drops.
Rainbow sherbert ?
-
I can see where the commercial stance on non-participation is coming from, but it is frankly, to pinch Louzie's phrase, bollux.
The club don't insist that e.g. Stoke City players and travelling support (yes, ho ho!) remove Bet365's logo from their shirts when they come to Villa Park because Dafabet won't like it, do they?
Yet there they are on the pitch and in the stands, displaying a commercial rival's logo all over the world on the telly ON OUR BLOODY PITCH!
I mean, seriously - how big can you actually get the words "Paddy Power*" on a pair of bloody bootlaces?
Does it really matter, given the cause??
I sincerely hope that all the non-participating clubs relent before KO tomorrow.
*Paddy Power may well be a bunch of robbing bastards, but they're not major sponsors in the Prem (minor deal with the Arse, RedScouse and BlueScouse), and have in fact just saved Farnborough FC from administration: http://blog.paddypower.com/2013/08/13/paddy-power-turns-farnborough-fc-into-the-greatest-team-of-all-time/ (http://blog.paddypower.com/2013/08/13/paddy-power-turns-farnborough-fc-into-the-greatest-team-of-all-time/)
-
What is the latest? Are Villa participating or not?
-
I also feel that as soon as a player does come out as gay, we will all see what a none issue homophobia in football actually is.
Justin Fashanu?
I hope things have moved on from the 80s, but you never know.
I'm not saying the "banter" of villa fans signing about Upson is correct but do you think we would still sing the song if he was openly gay? I've never sung the song so I'm not sure what the motivation is/was but I suspect that part of the insult/banter is calling a player gay when they're not.
-
I also feel that as soon as a player does come out as gay, we will all see what a none issue homophobia in football actually is.
Justin Fashanu?
I hope things have moved on from the 80s, but you never know.
I'm not saying the "banter" of villa fans signing about Upson is correct but do you think we would still sing the song if he was openly gay? I've never sung the song so I'm not sure what the motivation is/was but I suspect that part of the insult/banter is calling a player gay when they're not.
I don't get that argument. Imagine a genuine gay footballer hearing that song and thinking, "Christ, Upson isn't even gay and still they humiliate him". What's the chance of him coming out then?
And yes I do think Villa fans would have sung that song if Upson was openly gay, basically because casual homophobia still seems to be acceptable where as racism isn't.
-
I'm not saying the "banter" of villa fans signing about Upson is correct but do you think we would still sing the song if he was openly gay?
Yes they would, and probably a whole lot worse.
I have absolutely no faith in a hell of a lot of football fans including many of those of Aston Villa.
-
It's a relief being coloured at least it's open and everyone has to deal with. Surely same should apply to sexuality. Come out and deal head on with these who have a problem with it.
-
Disappointing to see the organisers, teams and league bungle this rainbow thing.
-
I can't believe this. Five pages before someone gets a Bungle reference in.
-
I can see where the commercial stance on non-participation is coming from, but it is frankly, to pinch Louzie's phrase, bollux.
The club don't insist that e.g. Stoke City players and travelling support (yes, ho ho!) remove Bet365's logo from their shirts when they come to Villa Park because Dafabet won't like it, do they?
Yet there they are on the pitch and in the stands, displaying a commercial rival's logo all over the world on the telly ON OUR BLOODY PITCH!
I mean, seriously - how big can you actually get the words "Paddy Power*" on a pair of bloody bootlaces?
Does it really matter, given the cause??
I sincerely hope that all the non-participating clubs relent before KO tomorrow.
*Paddy Power may well be a bunch of robbing bastards, but they're not major sponsors in the Prem (minor deal with the Arse, RedScouse and BlueScouse), and have in fact just saved Farnborough FC from administration: http://blog.paddypower.com/2013/08/13/paddy-power-turns-farnborough-fc-into-the-greatest-team-of-all-time/ (http://blog.paddypower.com/2013/08/13/paddy-power-turns-farnborough-fc-into-the-greatest-team-of-all-time/)
They only saved Farnborough from admin for a bit of publicity. They've turned the club into a laughing stock with this name change stunt.