TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

The anti-homophobic launch that means all 92 clubs of the football league have been sent rainbow laces to wear for games 21/22 September

There are 29 clubs taking part, correct at 18th March 2013:
•Premier League: Arsenal, Aston Villa, Crystal Palace, Liverpool, Manchester City, Norwich, Sunderland, West Ham, West Brom
•Championship: Birmingham, Blackburn, Doncaster, Huddersfield, Ipswich, Leicester, Millwall, Sheffield Wednesday
•League One: Carlisle, Crewe, Gillingham, Leyton Orient, MK Dons, Peterborough, Preston, Tranmere
•League Two: Bristol Rovers, Excretia, Dagenham & Redbridge, Northampton


Anyone know if the Gulls are going to turn out with rainbow laces, or are we not joining in to support anti-homophobia ?

......I mean, we were the last English club that Justin Fashanu played for after all.

Nonsense like this is all well and good, but it's a token gesture from the people who are neither the problem, nor in a position to affect change. Those right at the top of both politics and sport had an opportunity to show the bigots the error of their ways by boycotting Saachi. They choose instead to do nothing. This is yet more empty rhetoric which will allow us all to tick our 'support anti-homophobia' life box, without actually having to tackle the problem at all.

We've had banners for years preaching to 'kick racism out of football', yet, a bloke calls another bloke a **** and his 'punishment' is a few games on the sidelines while still collecting £250,000/week.

Action such as this does nothing except give a warm, fuzzy feeling to those stupid enough to believe it will make a difference.

So, no, I won't be wearing rainbow laces and nor will I have greater respect for anyone who does.

Matt.

The club has been sent the rainbow laces for the players to wear for the match, as a gesture of support, they're not for the fans

I think you will agree that there is a lot less racism in football now. But then again, there is a lot less racism throughout society, so you may have a point. But I do think 'kick racism out of football' had a significant general or overall effect.

ferrarilover wrote:Nonsense like this is all well and good, but it's a token gesture from the people who are neither the problem, nor in a position to affect change. Those right at the top of both politics and sport had an opportunity to show the bigots the error of their ways by boycotting Saachi. They choose instead to do nothing. This is yet more empty rhetoric which will allow us all to tick our 'support anti-homophobia' life box, without actually having to tackle the problem at all.

We've had banners for years preaching to 'kick racism out of football', yet, a bloke calls another bloke a [racist term removed] and his 'punishment' is a few games on the sidelines while still collecting £250,000/week.

Action such as this does nothing except give a warm, fuzzy feeling to those stupid enough to believe it will make a difference.

So, no, I won't be wearing rainbow laces and nor will I have greater respect for anyone who does.

Matt.

I'm not homophobic but i'm sure there are lots of people out there who are. If they are then a rainbow band won't suddenly stop them in their tracks and make them not homophobic anymore, just like a racist won't suddenly stop being racist just because there are kick racism out of football signs up at grounds. Sure it may make them stop shouting foul and disgusting abuse but they'll still be anti gay or racists when the match has finished.

I'm all for pro-activeness and highlighting issues but i'm afraid homophobia is just one of those things in life that you can't change in people, they've either got a brain or they haven't.

Can I just say that I do detest overly camp people (not for being gay) but who ram it down our throats, ok you're gay, no big deal, shut up and carry on being gay - no need to exaggerate it all the time and make double entendres every 2 seconds.

Just to balance up the argument, I also don't care much for blokes who spend their entire lives proving that they are straight by ogling women, talking about shagging every two minutes, clocking every woman who has a pulse and remarking about their body parts. It is tiresome. The boilers thread is ok as it's a bit of fun and we would all show respect for women if we were out in the pub together. Sure we'd have discreet looks and make passing comment on how beautiful a certain woman was but certainly not like oikish losers who think anything with a hole needs them to give it ' a good seeing too'. Would they shag a putting green? I think not so there are limitations.

Don't drive your white vans around wolf whistling as that belongs in an era when humans were slaying mammoths. Don't have a copy of the Daily Sport or Star on your dashboard as any prospective customers will immediately render you as unemployable and stop spitting on the floor you dirty bast*rds!!

Anyway, Emet might be able to back me up on this but I believe the mayor of Donny cancelled a gay pride march a few years back claiming it was a waste of money and they wouldn't have had one for straight people. He got slaughtered for it but I think he was right. It was a waste of taxpayers cash and if people are gay they are gay. I can't recall black people having marches to highlight how proud they are at being black? I can't recall white people doing the same, I can't recall transsexuals, pagans or people who only eat spaghetti doing similar so why gays?

Agreed Andy. The thing is, I guess the marches and parades have become a tradition as much as anything, and yes it's all a bit naff really. Twenty or 30 years ago, I would say that those marches/parades were a good thing as it was educational, and it helped change attitudes in some. These days there is a lot less homophobia and there is a lot less racism and sexism too. People are a lot more excepting and more 'live and let live' in these respects.

AustrianAndyGull wrote:Anyway, Emet might be able to back me up on this but I believe the mayor of Donny cancelled a gay pride march a few years back claiming it was a waste of money and they wouldn't have had one for straight people. He got slaughtered for it but I think he was right. It was a waste of taxpayers cash and if people are gay they are gay. I can't recall black people having marches to highlight how proud they are at being black? I can't recall white people doing the same, I can't recall transsexuals, pagans or people who only eat spaghetti doing similar so why gays?

I believe the current terminology is LGB&T so transsexuals would be included in a "gay pride" march.

Agree about the flaunting of any persuasion, nothing more off-putting than teenage chavs noshing on each others faces in the "bus shelters" on Paignton seafront.
Scares the gulls away though I suppose

If someone refuses to wear the laces will they be called a lacist?

chardie wrote:If someone refuses to wear the laces will they be called a lacist?

I actually thought it was a thread mocking me about a particular type of sweet that I had missed out of my Rochdale thread!

ferrarilover wrote:Nonsense like this is all well and good, but it's a token gesture from the people who are neither the problem, nor in a position to affect change. Those right at the top of both politics and sport had an opportunity to show the bigots the error of their ways by boycotting Saachi. They choose instead to do nothing. This is yet more empty rhetoric which will allow us all to tick our 'support anti-homophobia' life box, without actually having to tackle the problem at all.

I'm assuming you're talking about Sochi, here.

Anyway, boycotts of sporting events don't work. It didn't work for the Russians in 1984, it didn't work for the Americans in 1980. There's a much stronger argument (at least I think so) that going and making a point there is more effective. Jesse Owens at the 1936 Olympics springs to mind. Far better to go to the event, do well, and possibly make a point on the podium. Can you imagine the Russian government arresting some dude who just won a gold medal because he carried a rainbow flag? That would be brilliant, if only to highlight the uselessness and outdatedness of the Russian legislation. The only way to combat bigotry is to force those who practice it to look at it in the face. hiding away does more harm.

An excellent point Happy and it reminded me of a deep chat I had with a friend not so long ago about the Dogs Trust and protocols and practices there really staggering me and also p*ssing me off to the point that I ended up packing my job in out of principal of my views. He said that 'on the outside looking in' I would always be looked upon as a troublemaker / whistleblower / militant which I was, I reported my concerns and took things as far as I could but there is nothing I could do from 'the outside'. He said I should have stayed and bit my tongue and tried to change things gradually from the inside. Words of wisdom I think.

It's like boycotts and things like that, by participating and then highlighting issues from the inside it is much more effective and gives a stronger signal than just not turning up out of protest or whatever. I'm not sure if i'm making myself clear with this but what i'm trying to say in a round about way is that you are 100% right Happy.

="happytorq" I'm assuming you're talking about Sochi, here.

Anyway, boycotts of sporting events don't work. It didn't work for the Russians in 1984, it didn't work for the Americans in 1980. There's a much stronger argument (at least I think so) that going and making a point there is more effective. Jesse Owens at the 1936 Olympics springs to mind. Far better to go to the event, do well, and possibly make a point on the podium. Can you imagine the Russian government arresting some dude who just won a gold medal because he carried a rainbow flag? That would be brilliant, if only to highlight the uselessness and outdatedness of the Russian legislation. The only way to combat bigotry is to force those who practice it to look at it in the face. hiding away does more harm.

brilliant post.

some great points there.

jesse owens is a great example of courage in the face of prejudice and getting the better of your oppressors.

you hear players and people from football clubs spouting off in the news a lot about racism and what should be done, saying if there is any racism the players should walk off the pitch. but is that the right way? players like ian wright and john barnes got loads of abuse, i remember barnesy getting bananas thrown at him, he played keepy up with one and kicked it back into the crowd. the main point is they didnt let the bigot a$$holes get to them, they tormented their opposition with their skill, they scored goals and won the game. that is the best way to hit back! do what you do well, shut the b@st@rds up and let them choke on their own bile.

as for the gay thing, it is sad if people do not feel they cannot just be who they are, live and let live etc. however as mentioned earlier in the thread and this subject has been talked about before, why is the whole coming out thing mentioned so much? if you are gay, nothing wrong with that, but to be fair, why does everyone have to be told. so you're gay, and?

if there is a situation where it would be best that your details have to be shared then ok, but why is it this big urgency or neccessity that everyone has to be told. so you are gay, no problem, get on with it then, makes no difference.

us hetrosexuals dont wear straight and proud t shirts or go on straight pride marches, we dont announce to the world we are straight every chance we get. i reckon if everytime i met someone new at work or in general i introduced myself and then added oh, um, im hetrosexual/straight by the way, i would get looked at like i had just said i was from mars (or plymouth). is there really any need to make sure everyone knows?

i can see where footballers would be worried about coming out because of the stick they would get from opposition and even a few of their own fans, but if its because of their club or team-mates they are worried, then that is another matter and very sad, but then unless you are put in an awkward spot where it is best your circumstances are revealed then why do you have to make a big deal of it and make sure everybody knows. everybody has the right to keep their private life, private.

Sochi, not sure how my phone made Saachi out of that! Direct action would be lovely, but it won't happen. If the whole world boycotted the games, it would go down in history to be remembered forever. It would be studied by school children for the next 100 years. It would be in textbooks and it would be the subject of much literary and academic work. A couple of athletes sufficiently bothered by this to actually do something about it (perhaps, as you suggest, carrying a rainbow flag) won't have the same effect.
Jesse Owens is famous because his actions are inextricably linked with Hitler, not so much for the message it was intended to convey.
Add to this the idea that any athlete taking action might well be subject to criminal legal action by the Russians and I think you'll find the whole thing passes by without much of a whimper.
Typical British response, sit and tut rather than do anything meaningful about it.

Matt.