| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason 14:06 - Dec 2 with 77723 views | chicoazul |
Now that the club has confirmed Morsy chose not to wear the armband, how do our LGBTQ fans feel about this?
Like I say I would continue the interesting conversation we were having but that thread is locked. |  |
| |  |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:21 - Dec 5 with 1915 views | Europablue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 12:12 - Dec 5 by FrimleyBlue |
Personally, i think IF morsy was in the supportive category then whilst I appreciate there may be family reasons why he did not want to wear the armband, he could have requested to the club that they made someone else captain and he could have followed that up with a personal statement about him being accepting of the change of captain to enable the club to support the occasion.
I'm still absolutely baffled though that the crowd were singing his song early on like he was some form of victim in this, ( I also read about it before the game on socials ) for me, that showed how far away the society is when that's the message they've taken from this whole situation. |
This was definitely a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. I think the club did the best they could in the situation. Changing the captain would have been weird. I believe that it is good leadership for Morsy to stick to his beliefs even if they are unpopular and not being abusive in any way. He is showing tolerance for gay people (he has not come out against the initiative or campaign), and that is all we can reasonably demand.
I think there is a lot of unvocalized resentment of a lot of social pressure to conform to "modern thinking" on a lot of topics and people are sick of being painted as bigots when their views are in line with most people they know. Whether you agree with it or not, there is a sense among young people especially that there is a new stigma of being a straight white male. That accounts for some of those people cheering for Morsy (unrelated to his footballing performance). The indigenous population of England has been becoming less and less religious, but with immigration there are a significant number of Muslims and Christians from Africa or even Eastern Europe who are less progressive so that probably accounts for another chunk of the people supporting Morsy.
Frankly, there are some very authoritarian policing practices including "non-crime hate crimes" where the government is trying to change social attitudes. The government has no place telling people what to think and believe. The only relevant place they have is to prosecute against violence and some other forms of discrimination, without violating the rights of people exercising free speech. |  | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:26 - Dec 5 with 1880 views | redrickstuhaart |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 11:01 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
What you are asking for is basically compelled speech (speech has a very broad legal meaning). People have to get involved with a campaign regardless of their feelings on the issue.
In the case of Morsy, he has not come out and said anything he has simply declined to take part in the campaign. It is obviously for religious reasons, but the details of that are unclear. he clearly does not have such a hardline stance that he will refuse to play for a team that gets involved in the campaign.
There are so many reasons not to support the campaign and each person has the right to their own freedom of thought. It is deeply troubling that a movement that is supposed to be against persecution of a lifestyle is so intent on persecuting non-believers.
Who gets to determine what we are compelled to support? Where do you draw the line?
Are gay people who don't like Stonewall allowed to not support the campaign?
The only sane way to do it is to be able to opt out. The club can fine Morsy if he speaks out against the campaign.
Personally, I don't like the idea of singling out gay people in any way even if it is supposed to positive. Just let them be normal fans of the clubs they support without pledging to be part of a political movement. |
Blx.
No one is compelling speech. Simply forming views on the opt out and the real tension between captaincy and not supporting inclusivity. | | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:28 - Dec 5 with 1858 views | FrimleyBlue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:21 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
This was definitely a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. I think the club did the best they could in the situation. Changing the captain would have been weird. I believe that it is good leadership for Morsy to stick to his beliefs even if they are unpopular and not being abusive in any way. He is showing tolerance for gay people (he has not come out against the initiative or campaign), and that is all we can reasonably demand.
I think there is a lot of unvocalized resentment of a lot of social pressure to conform to "modern thinking" on a lot of topics and people are sick of being painted as bigots when their views are in line with most people they know. Whether you agree with it or not, there is a sense among young people especially that there is a new stigma of being a straight white male. That accounts for some of those people cheering for Morsy (unrelated to his footballing performance). The indigenous population of England has been becoming less and less religious, but with immigration there are a significant number of Muslims and Christians from Africa or even Eastern Europe who are less progressive so that probably accounts for another chunk of the people supporting Morsy.
Frankly, there are some very authoritarian policing practices including "non-crime hate crimes" where the government is trying to change social attitudes. The government has no place telling people what to think and believe. The only relevant place they have is to prosecute against violence and some other forms of discrimination, without violating the rights of people exercising free speech. |
"He is showing tolerance for gay people "
Not sure how you come to that considering he hasn't actually said anything.
"Whether you agree with it or not, there is a sense among young people especially that there is a new stigma of being a straight white male"
Im sorry, what now... I would love any link at all to such a thought, seriously, that's ridiculous. |  |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:35 - Dec 5 with 1824 views | DJR |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:02 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
I get that you have had a lot of negative interactions with intolerant over your life and you might be primed to see intolerance where there is none. How you live your life is your lifestyle so whether you are straight or gay it is a lifestyle. There is even an element of choice in there at least historically there has been in that if a person is gay they can choose to be out or not, obviously if we are talking about historical cases, it was often not much of a choice because there was a lot of discrimination, often violent.
"I live my life having to be careful where i live in case my neighbours do not accept me for who I am and not who I want to be." Is that currently a major concern, or do you think that feeling might be ingrained in your thinking? Tell me if I'm ignorant, but I don't hear from any gay people I know that there are places that they can't live. To a certain extent people are always going to judge you and everyone else and we all have to have a thick enough skin. If my neighbours don't like me for some reason, that it fine because we just have to get on as neighbours and we don't have to be friends.
In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist.
I feel like society is ready to move past these performative "inclusion" of a specific group which is inherently exclusive even if it is meant as a positive in giving preferential treatment like having the club provide LGBT football sessions.
I think we are ready for the default attitude that gay people are welcome to play football and we can move on from campaigns highlighting gay people (the Stonewall activists will hate this idea). Of course, there can still be inclusivity campaigns, but it shouldn't be based on race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. Basically, unless there is an incident of abusive chanting, then no specific action is necessary. I really do think that we risk planting seeds of discrimination when we tell young people that historically this group is the victim class. |
This from a 2021 survey.
Two-thirds (64%) of LGBT+ people had experienced anti-LGBT+ violence or abuse.
Of these, 9 in 10 (92%) had experienced verbal abuse, 3 in 10 (29%) had experienced physical violence and 2 in 10 (17%) had experienced sexual violence.
Only 1 in 8 LGBT+ people surveyed had reported the most recent incident that they had experienced to the police.
Less than half of those who did report their experienced to the police were satisfied with the response. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 13:37]
|  | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:42 - Dec 5 with 1789 views | DJR |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:21 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
This was definitely a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. I think the club did the best they could in the situation. Changing the captain would have been weird. I believe that it is good leadership for Morsy to stick to his beliefs even if they are unpopular and not being abusive in any way. He is showing tolerance for gay people (he has not come out against the initiative or campaign), and that is all we can reasonably demand.
I think there is a lot of unvocalized resentment of a lot of social pressure to conform to "modern thinking" on a lot of topics and people are sick of being painted as bigots when their views are in line with most people they know. Whether you agree with it or not, there is a sense among young people especially that there is a new stigma of being a straight white male. That accounts for some of those people cheering for Morsy (unrelated to his footballing performance). The indigenous population of England has been becoming less and less religious, but with immigration there are a significant number of Muslims and Christians from Africa or even Eastern Europe who are less progressive so that probably accounts for another chunk of the people supporting Morsy.
Frankly, there are some very authoritarian policing practices including "non-crime hate crimes" where the government is trying to change social attitudes. The government has no place telling people what to think and believe. The only relevant place they have is to prosecute against violence and some other forms of discrimination, without violating the rights of people exercising free speech. |
I'm a straight white male and don't feel any stigma. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 13:44]
| | | |
| I'd be "extremely disappointed".... on 13:43 - Dec 5 with 1782 views | Europablue |
| I'd be "extremely disappointed".... on 12:21 - Dec 5 by Vegtablue |
I want to avoid replying to most of your points because they've already been addressed in great detail and in various directions, both for and against, but this is poorly considered on two levels. Firstly, your version of tolerance, of what tolerance was in your nostalgic past, is intolerant in its design. 'You do have to respect it', whatever that something is. You have zero tolerance for not respecting something. The difference between allowing the existence or practice of various things, which do not meet the threshold of illegality, and being compelled to respect all these things, is huge.
Secondly, the views held, which you believe should be respected, clearly meet your definition of intolerance. They are views that do not respect something, in this instance LGBTGIA+ inclusion. Racist views do not respect their targets. Homophobic views do not respect their targets. There is no respect for homosexuals in the tenets of homophobia, it is the rejection of them. These 'somethings' were antithetical to your idea of tolerance in their conception, and you then compound the misstep through your intolerant command that they be respected, in order to achieve tolerance ("the idea is that you don't have to like something, but you do have to respect it").
As for not forcing things on others, that is why pretty much everyone accepts, embraces even, Morsy's right in our society to refuse to provide his support to this message of inclusion. Some have been intolerant of the consequential criticism - criticism of Morsy, of the club, or of both - and some have disagreed with that criticism, while tolerating the right of others to make it. |
From what you have said I don't think you understand what tolerance means. It is "the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with"
Homophobia is not a creed, it has no tenets. The whole concept of -phobia is really shaky ground. It is really just persecuting someone for not liking something. This is not a support of or opposition to anything. I get why people are so sensitive about homosexuality because I believe it is not a choice to be homosexual. The one that most concerns me is anti-Islamophobia legislation because that would be literal blasphemy legislation. It is an essential human right to be allowed to dislike something, that applies equally to people disliking homophobic comments.
Respect has two distinct meanings: 1. "a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements."
2. "due regard for the feelings, wishes, or rights of others"
You are talking more about the first meaning. The government has no legitimate role in policing this area. I was talking about the second meaning. The government and police have a legitimate role to ensure rights of the people. There is no legitimate government or police role in policing thoughts or opinions.
As you allude to it is entirely legitimate for people and organizations to respect people's rights to hold and express opinions and choose not to associate with them or criticize them.
My main issue is with government interference where they are not guaranteeing rights or they are guaranteeing ridiculous rights like the right not be offended or the right not to be discriminated against in an intangible way. | | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:45 - Dec 5 with 1767 views | tractorboy7777 |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:02 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
I get that you have had a lot of negative interactions with intolerant over your life and you might be primed to see intolerance where there is none. How you live your life is your lifestyle so whether you are straight or gay it is a lifestyle. There is even an element of choice in there at least historically there has been in that if a person is gay they can choose to be out or not, obviously if we are talking about historical cases, it was often not much of a choice because there was a lot of discrimination, often violent.
"I live my life having to be careful where i live in case my neighbours do not accept me for who I am and not who I want to be." Is that currently a major concern, or do you think that feeling might be ingrained in your thinking? Tell me if I'm ignorant, but I don't hear from any gay people I know that there are places that they can't live. To a certain extent people are always going to judge you and everyone else and we all have to have a thick enough skin. If my neighbours don't like me for some reason, that it fine because we just have to get on as neighbours and we don't have to be friends.
In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist.
I feel like society is ready to move past these performative "inclusion" of a specific group which is inherently exclusive even if it is meant as a positive in giving preferential treatment like having the club provide LGBT football sessions.
I think we are ready for the default attitude that gay people are welcome to play football and we can move on from campaigns highlighting gay people (the Stonewall activists will hate this idea). Of course, there can still be inclusivity campaigns, but it shouldn't be based on race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. Basically, unless there is an incident of abusive chanting, then no specific action is necessary. I really do think that we risk planting seeds of discrimination when we tell young people that historically this group is the victim class. |
Firstly, I feel it is quite offensive to suggest that you think a gay person would want to live their life ‘choosing to not come out’. Unless you have had the experience of being ‘in the closet’, you wouldn’t understand the fear you would have wondering whether your family, friends, colleagues would disown you for being your true self. This fear also starts at a young age and initiatives like the one at the weekend are there to help those, not to constantly tell straight people to be gay.
I only left school just over 10 years ago and there wasn’t any support at all, in fact I recall in sex education that a teacher point blankly ignored a question regarding homosexuality from another student.
In answer to your question about whether I still feel the need to be careful where to live, yes. Albeit they are less common now but you do still hear homophobic crimes against people.
Your 3rd comment sums up why there is the initiative. Players who don’t want to feel they need to come out currently have the fear that if someone were to find they are in a relationship/married to another gay person will they receive abuse. They shouldn’t have to have come out to the public, but they shouldn’t have the fear of abuse if someone were to find out and share it out of their control.
For the record, I don’t believe you are homophobic or against gay people but you need to understand how the realisation for someone who is gay at a young age can still affect their future life mentally and they then remove themselves from activities like football that they enjoy. | |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:48 - Dec 5 with 1748 views | Europablue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:26 - Dec 5 by redrickstuhaart |
Blx.
No one is compelling speech. Simply forming views on the opt out and the real tension between captaincy and not supporting inclusivity. |
It's only compelled speech if he is being told that he has to wear the armband.
Most people are forming views on the opt out, and that is where the legitimate discussion is. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:49 - Dec 5 with 1742 views | pointofblue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 11:21 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
There is no such thing as an LGBTQ+ person. There are gays, lesbians, bisexuals and whatever, but they are distinct people and mostly sexual preference is not a defining feature.
LGBTQ+ is a political movement. Talking about "societies" is political. In my view there is only one society and everyone is part of it. There are different demographics. |
I can only speak for myself but my sexual preference feels like a defining feature. If I was heterosexual, I think I would be actively looking for and might already be in a relationship. As it is I don't want to enter one where I cannot be my true self, and I do not feel ready to be. I may never do.
No one, rightly, pours scorn or doubt on heterosexual relationships, but I do on others which shows how far we have to go for everyone to be treated the same. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 14:16]
| |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:59 - Dec 5 with 1706 views | lowhouseblue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:35 - Dec 5 by DJR |
This from a 2021 survey.
Two-thirds (64%) of LGBT+ people had experienced anti-LGBT+ violence or abuse.
Of these, 9 in 10 (92%) had experienced verbal abuse, 3 in 10 (29%) had experienced physical violence and 2 in 10 (17%) had experienced sexual violence.
Only 1 in 8 LGBT+ people surveyed had reported the most recent incident that they had experienced to the police.
Less than half of those who did report their experienced to the police were satisfied with the response. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 13:37]
|
sorry i'm very bored and trying to put off tedious tasks.
i dislike surveys like this (again i'm not denying the reality of homophobic violence or harassment). but generally surveys based on very vague and broad categories don't allow any simple interpretation. 'violence and abuse' can mean a whole range of things. at the high end there is clearly defined criminality. at the low end it can be highly subjective and cover a whole range of things that may be open to interpretation. there are many reasons for low reporting to the police - but one may be that the incidents were not considered that significant even by the person affected by them. equally almost half of people being satisfied following a report to the police seems quite high - I bet you that fewer people reporting burglaries to the police (mainly met by a shrug of the shoulders) feel that. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:07 - Dec 5 with 1635 views | Europablue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:28 - Dec 5 by FrimleyBlue |
"He is showing tolerance for gay people "
Not sure how you come to that considering he hasn't actually said anything.
"Whether you agree with it or not, there is a sense among young people especially that there is a new stigma of being a straight white male"
Im sorry, what now... I would love any link at all to such a thought, seriously, that's ridiculous. |
Tolerance is "the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with".
Morsy is demonstrating tolerance by not commenting on the issue, now you could argue that that is because he is homophobic or because he doesn't want to get into a discussion on a losing issue that would be a distraction from football, but that doesn't change the fact that by not making a statement against anything his is being tolerant.
You might not agree with those people, but you don't have to look far on youtube to find people expressing those views and they aren't that extreme. Look up the progressive stack. There are clear examples of discrimination based on race. Look up Asian students lawsuit against Harvard for racial discrimination. In the Premier League, there are targets for more black managers and coaches, which by definition means a reduction in the proportion of white managers and coaches (if that is organic is certainly not a bad thing). I don't like the idea of "positive discrimination" I prefer taking away barriers to all groups than boosting another group. The BBC has race targets, I believe the Conservatives even instituted DEI reporting. Whether you agree with the sentiment, there is no denying that that sentiment exists and it is based on something concrete even though it could ultimately be misguided based on your opinion. | | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:07 - Dec 5 with 1632 views | DJR |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:59 - Dec 5 by lowhouseblue |
sorry i'm very bored and trying to put off tedious tasks.
i dislike surveys like this (again i'm not denying the reality of homophobic violence or harassment). but generally surveys based on very vague and broad categories don't allow any simple interpretation. 'violence and abuse' can mean a whole range of things. at the high end there is clearly defined criminality. at the low end it can be highly subjective and cover a whole range of things that may be open to interpretation. there are many reasons for low reporting to the police - but one may be that the incidents were not considered that significant even by the person affected by them. equally almost half of people being satisfied following a report to the police seems quite high - I bet you that fewer people reporting burglaries to the police (mainly met by a shrug of the shoulders) feel that. |
Surely the key statistic is the first one because I can't imagine 64% of heterosexual people have suffered anti-heterosexual violence or abuse? | | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:10 - Dec 5 with 1609 views | J2BLUE |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:42 - Dec 5 by DJR |
I'm a straight white male and don't feel any stigma. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 13:44]
|
I just spent far too long looking for a gif of Homer Simpson saying oh look at me, i'm straight, la di da! |  |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:17 - Dec 5 with 1560 views | FrimleyBlue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:07 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
Tolerance is "the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with".
Morsy is demonstrating tolerance by not commenting on the issue, now you could argue that that is because he is homophobic or because he doesn't want to get into a discussion on a losing issue that would be a distraction from football, but that doesn't change the fact that by not making a statement against anything his is being tolerant.
You might not agree with those people, but you don't have to look far on youtube to find people expressing those views and they aren't that extreme. Look up the progressive stack. There are clear examples of discrimination based on race. Look up Asian students lawsuit against Harvard for racial discrimination. In the Premier League, there are targets for more black managers and coaches, which by definition means a reduction in the proportion of white managers and coaches (if that is organic is certainly not a bad thing). I don't like the idea of "positive discrimination" I prefer taking away barriers to all groups than boosting another group. The BBC has race targets, I believe the Conservatives even instituted DEI reporting. Whether you agree with the sentiment, there is no denying that that sentiment exists and it is based on something concrete even though it could ultimately be misguided based on your opinion. |
I mentioned the tolerence thing, not because of Morsy's non comment or action, but because you feel the need to say he's showing tolerence, it's not about being tolerent, there shouldn't be a need for anyone to be tolerent of it, that's the point. It should and will hopefully in the future be something that's not even a discussion let alone people having to be tolerent of it.
Your second paragraph for me is incredible in it's naivety | |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:21 - Dec 5 with 1526 views | J2BLUE |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:17 - Dec 5 by FrimleyBlue |
I mentioned the tolerence thing, not because of Morsy's non comment or action, but because you feel the need to say he's showing tolerence, it's not about being tolerent, there shouldn't be a need for anyone to be tolerent of it, that's the point. It should and will hopefully in the future be something that's not even a discussion let alone people having to be tolerent of it.
Your second paragraph for me is incredible in it's naivety |
To be fair, you of all people know that views on this kind of thing can change for the better over time. | |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:29 - Dec 5 with 1489 views | vapour_trail |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:59 - Dec 5 by lowhouseblue |
sorry i'm very bored and trying to put off tedious tasks.
i dislike surveys like this (again i'm not denying the reality of homophobic violence or harassment). but generally surveys based on very vague and broad categories don't allow any simple interpretation. 'violence and abuse' can mean a whole range of things. at the high end there is clearly defined criminality. at the low end it can be highly subjective and cover a whole range of things that may be open to interpretation. there are many reasons for low reporting to the police - but one may be that the incidents were not considered that significant even by the person affected by them. equally almost half of people being satisfied following a report to the police seems quite high - I bet you that fewer people reporting burglaries to the police (mainly met by a shrug of the shoulders) feel that. |
Hmm. There’s a pattern here. Very keen to downplay experiences of victims. You could keep it to the thread where you’re defending gregg wallace.
There’s also the tiny possibility that victims of abuse and violence have little to no faith in institutionally racist, misogynistic, and yes, homophobic police forces to do anything but exacerbate their experience. |  |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:32 - Dec 5 with 1455 views | redrickstuhaart |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:07 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
Tolerance is "the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with".
Morsy is demonstrating tolerance by not commenting on the issue, now you could argue that that is because he is homophobic or because he doesn't want to get into a discussion on a losing issue that would be a distraction from football, but that doesn't change the fact that by not making a statement against anything his is being tolerant.
You might not agree with those people, but you don't have to look far on youtube to find people expressing those views and they aren't that extreme. Look up the progressive stack. There are clear examples of discrimination based on race. Look up Asian students lawsuit against Harvard for racial discrimination. In the Premier League, there are targets for more black managers and coaches, which by definition means a reduction in the proportion of white managers and coaches (if that is organic is certainly not a bad thing). I don't like the idea of "positive discrimination" I prefer taking away barriers to all groups than boosting another group. The BBC has race targets, I believe the Conservatives even instituted DEI reporting. Whether you agree with the sentiment, there is no denying that that sentiment exists and it is based on something concrete even though it could ultimately be misguided based on your opinion. |
You really are slippery. And bright enough for it to be deliberate.
Its not about morsy showing tolerance by not commenting. Its about the message sent by not joining in, and whether that is compatible with being captain of a club which most of us hope is inclusive.
And then you deflect to farageish stuff about positive discrimination which simply usnt relevant. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 14:43]
| | | |
| I'd be "extremely disappointed".... on 15:04 - Dec 5 with 1325 views | Vegtablue |
| I'd be "extremely disappointed".... on 13:43 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
From what you have said I don't think you understand what tolerance means. It is "the ability or willingness to tolerate the existence of opinions or behaviour that one dislikes or disagrees with"
Homophobia is not a creed, it has no tenets. The whole concept of -phobia is really shaky ground. It is really just persecuting someone for not liking something. This is not a support of or opposition to anything. I get why people are so sensitive about homosexuality because I believe it is not a choice to be homosexual. The one that most concerns me is anti-Islamophobia legislation because that would be literal blasphemy legislation. It is an essential human right to be allowed to dislike something, that applies equally to people disliking homophobic comments.
Respect has two distinct meanings: 1. "a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements."
2. "due regard for the feelings, wishes, or rights of others"
You are talking more about the first meaning. The government has no legitimate role in policing this area. I was talking about the second meaning. The government and police have a legitimate role to ensure rights of the people. There is no legitimate government or police role in policing thoughts or opinions.
As you allude to it is entirely legitimate for people and organizations to respect people's rights to hold and express opinions and choose not to associate with them or criticize them.
My main issue is with government interference where they are not guaranteeing rights or they are guaranteeing ridiculous rights like the right not be offended or the right not to be discriminated against in an intangible way. |
The key word you perhaps misunderstand in the definition you paste of 'tolerance' is the verb 'tolerate', which doesn't place restriction on one's ability to criticise and doesn't demand that a view be respected. As you demonstrate with your paste of 'respect''s secondary definition, there is a clear difference between respecting a view and respecting a person, and that person's right to hold a view that you may not respect.
I agree I misused 'tenets' in reference to homophobia as it isn't a creed, I should have referred to the religion, but not all wings of Islam believe that homosexuals are sinful beings who warrant persecution. I didn't want to generalise, but I did want to touch on the core issue we're dealing with in this case, that it is religious beliefs that caused Morsy to refuse the inclusivity message. And we know the widely held beliefs and teachings in Islam on homosexuality, as much as we don't know Morsy's own thoughts beyond that his views are instructed by his faith. Islam's teachings on homosexuality are widely available; sometimes the conversation indicates that it is shrouded in secrecy.
It impossible for you to reconcile the core problem with your nostalgic conception of tolerance, that intolerance has to be respected, because intolerance is in its nature the disrespect of something else. I accept that you don't like -phobia categories, so we'll consider examples in practice instead. The view that homosexuals live in sin and shouldn't be included in society, that is disrespectful of the group it is opposed to. Zero respect for gay people exists in that view. The view that white people are inferior and should be treated differently for the colour of their skin, that is the antithesis of respecting that group of people. These views directly, vehemently disrespect others, and yet in a warped version of tolerance they must be respected. No, unpalatable views must be endured in civilised society, providing they operate within the confines of legality, and that is tolerance. | | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 15:19 - Dec 5 with 1263 views | lowhouseblue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 14:29 - Dec 5 by vapour_trail |
Hmm. There’s a pattern here. Very keen to downplay experiences of victims. You could keep it to the thread where you’re defending gregg wallace.
There’s also the tiny possibility that victims of abuse and violence have little to no faith in institutionally racist, misogynistic, and yes, homophobic police forces to do anything but exacerbate their experience. |
i'm questioning whether very broad survey categories allow the experience of victims to be accurately understood. it's not a novel question about survey methodology. response subjectivity in the range of things that might amount to 'violence or abuse' means that we then have quite a hazy picture. wallace is another interesting example. telling crude and laddish jokes (the initial accusation) is very different from touching and groping (the new accusations). not being able to distinguish between the two would make it hard to assess the seriousness of the accusations. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 16:50 - Dec 5 with 1117 views | leitrimblue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 19:00 - Dec 4 by GlasgowBlue |
In fairness to JC, he didn't write the rules. That was done by a conclave in 4th century Rome*.
I stand to be corrected as it's not something I'm particularly knowledgeable about. |
Unlike you to be excusing Corbyn..  |  | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 17:17 - Dec 5 with 1046 views | urbanpenguin |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:02 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
I get that you have had a lot of negative interactions with intolerant over your life and you might be primed to see intolerance where there is none. How you live your life is your lifestyle so whether you are straight or gay it is a lifestyle. There is even an element of choice in there at least historically there has been in that if a person is gay they can choose to be out or not, obviously if we are talking about historical cases, it was often not much of a choice because there was a lot of discrimination, often violent.
"I live my life having to be careful where i live in case my neighbours do not accept me for who I am and not who I want to be." Is that currently a major concern, or do you think that feeling might be ingrained in your thinking? Tell me if I'm ignorant, but I don't hear from any gay people I know that there are places that they can't live. To a certain extent people are always going to judge you and everyone else and we all have to have a thick enough skin. If my neighbours don't like me for some reason, that it fine because we just have to get on as neighbours and we don't have to be friends.
In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist.
I feel like society is ready to move past these performative "inclusion" of a specific group which is inherently exclusive even if it is meant as a positive in giving preferential treatment like having the club provide LGBT football sessions.
I think we are ready for the default attitude that gay people are welcome to play football and we can move on from campaigns highlighting gay people (the Stonewall activists will hate this idea). Of course, there can still be inclusivity campaigns, but it shouldn't be based on race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. Basically, unless there is an incident of abusive chanting, then no specific action is necessary. I really do think that we risk planting seeds of discrimination when we tell young people that historically this group is the victim class. |
This is an astonishing load of gaslighting, offensive garbage.
Frankly, I've had enough of a lot of the people on this thread not interested in listening, who have no empathy or care, but feel that they can speak on behalf of somebody else's lived experiences.
I also acknowledge it's a minority in this thread, however loud and ignorant, and I thank the few little who have privately messaged to express shock at the views and solidarity with those of us who are angry at the club and its captain
However, I will pick up on one bit of your bonfire of a post:
"In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist."
How on earth, in any conceivable way, could you possibly assert this with such assurance. You have repeatedly shown that you have no interest or empathy for the experiences of gay people, yet here you confidently explain why a gay footballer has not come out. I can't express how angry you make me, please stand down from talking on behalf of other people you clearly have no care or compassion for. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 17:20]
|  | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 17:22 - Dec 5 with 1015 views | Swailsey |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 17:17 - Dec 5 by urbanpenguin |
This is an astonishing load of gaslighting, offensive garbage.
Frankly, I've had enough of a lot of the people on this thread not interested in listening, who have no empathy or care, but feel that they can speak on behalf of somebody else's lived experiences.
I also acknowledge it's a minority in this thread, however loud and ignorant, and I thank the few little who have privately messaged to express shock at the views and solidarity with those of us who are angry at the club and its captain
However, I will pick up on one bit of your bonfire of a post:
"In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist."
How on earth, in any conceivable way, could you possibly assert this with such assurance. You have repeatedly shown that you have no interest or empathy for the experiences of gay people, yet here you confidently explain why a gay footballer has not come out. I can't express how angry you make me, please stand down from talking on behalf of other people you clearly have no care or compassion for. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 17:20]
|
Please try not to let them get to you. Many of us are here in solidarity. I wanted to reply to that post but it made me incredibly angry. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 17:22]
|  |
| Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 17:49 - Dec 5 with 924 views | DropCliffsNotBombs |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 17:17 - Dec 5 by urbanpenguin |
This is an astonishing load of gaslighting, offensive garbage.
Frankly, I've had enough of a lot of the people on this thread not interested in listening, who have no empathy or care, but feel that they can speak on behalf of somebody else's lived experiences.
I also acknowledge it's a minority in this thread, however loud and ignorant, and I thank the few little who have privately messaged to express shock at the views and solidarity with those of us who are angry at the club and its captain
However, I will pick up on one bit of your bonfire of a post:
"In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist."
How on earth, in any conceivable way, could you possibly assert this with such assurance. You have repeatedly shown that you have no interest or empathy for the experiences of gay people, yet here you confidently explain why a gay footballer has not come out. I can't express how angry you make me, please stand down from talking on behalf of other people you clearly have no care or compassion for. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 17:20]
|
As soon as I saw that absolute cretin appear on the thread, this was sadly inevitable.
The poster in question is truly a terrible person and has shown it many times and on many subjects. Please PLEASE don't let his warped, vile post get to you - everybody can see it for what it is. This has been a thread largely full of empathy and it has been really refreshing to see people's views evolve as they have gained understanding - I've definitely learnt from it.
The vast majority of people here are decent, understanding and supportive - even where disagreement may exist as to elements of the debate. Do not let Europablue sully that. |  | | |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 18:44 - Dec 5 with 822 views | Mullet |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 17:17 - Dec 5 by urbanpenguin |
This is an astonishing load of gaslighting, offensive garbage.
Frankly, I've had enough of a lot of the people on this thread not interested in listening, who have no empathy or care, but feel that they can speak on behalf of somebody else's lived experiences.
I also acknowledge it's a minority in this thread, however loud and ignorant, and I thank the few little who have privately messaged to express shock at the views and solidarity with those of us who are angry at the club and its captain
However, I will pick up on one bit of your bonfire of a post:
"In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist."
How on earth, in any conceivable way, could you possibly assert this with such assurance. You have repeatedly shown that you have no interest or empathy for the experiences of gay people, yet here you confidently explain why a gay footballer has not come out. I can't express how angry you make me, please stand down from talking on behalf of other people you clearly have no care or compassion for. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 17:20]
|
Have you not come across this one before? His back catalogue is special to say the least |  |
| |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 19:18 - Dec 5 with 740 views | Whos_blue |
| My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 13:02 - Dec 5 by Europablue |
I get that you have had a lot of negative interactions with intolerant over your life and you might be primed to see intolerance where there is none. How you live your life is your lifestyle so whether you are straight or gay it is a lifestyle. There is even an element of choice in there at least historically there has been in that if a person is gay they can choose to be out or not, obviously if we are talking about historical cases, it was often not much of a choice because there was a lot of discrimination, often violent.
"I live my life having to be careful where i live in case my neighbours do not accept me for who I am and not who I want to be." Is that currently a major concern, or do you think that feeling might be ingrained in your thinking? Tell me if I'm ignorant, but I don't hear from any gay people I know that there are places that they can't live. To a certain extent people are always going to judge you and everyone else and we all have to have a thick enough skin. If my neighbours don't like me for some reason, that it fine because we just have to get on as neighbours and we don't have to be friends.
In today's society there is a unique group of people who would not be comfortable coming out: male professional footballers. The reason for that is partly to avoid abuse, but mostly because players want to be judged on their football and sexuality is irrelevant and even positive coverage would be intolerable. Maybe an average footballer can come out while playing, but he's going to have to be an activist.
I feel like society is ready to move past these performative "inclusion" of a specific group which is inherently exclusive even if it is meant as a positive in giving preferential treatment like having the club provide LGBT football sessions.
I think we are ready for the default attitude that gay people are welcome to play football and we can move on from campaigns highlighting gay people (the Stonewall activists will hate this idea). Of course, there can still be inclusivity campaigns, but it shouldn't be based on race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. Basically, unless there is an incident of abusive chanting, then no specific action is necessary. I really do think that we risk planting seeds of discrimination when we tell young people that historically this group is the victim class. |
Deary me.
You're having a shocker here.
What complete bobbins.
I just dispair when I read garbage like this.
What are you talking about when you're referencing historical cases.
LGBT+ around the world are experiencing prejudice and violence TODAY.
This item might help you to educate yourself that the lived experience of some is nothing but fear and in some cases death. Death. For loving someone society (or religion) deems illegal or a sin, people are imprisoned, flogged or executed for identifying as LGBT+ every day.
I know you won't change your view, publically at least, but I think some of your posts on this most sensisitive of subjects have been terrible to read.
https://database.ilga.org/criminalisation-consensual-same-sex-sexual-acts |  |
| Distortion becomes somehow pure in its wildness. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
