Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Charlton v. Homophobia Tournament
SDAddick
Posts: 14,467
Not seen this posted already, this weekend the Proud Valiants are celebrating one year in existence by hosting a three team tournament.
http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/charlton-athletic-vs-homophobia-proud-valiants-3120954.aspx#IyLzIZPjilUu8IXz.99
The fact that this group is recognized is one of the things that makes me incredibly proud to be Charlton. It is a great way to both show that the club does not accept homophobia, and, I imagine, to give LGTBQ+ people a solidified, formal place to go and be around people who both love football and are like themselves.
http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/charlton-athletic-vs-homophobia-proud-valiants-3120954.aspx#IyLzIZPjilUu8IXz.99
The fact that this group is recognized is one of the things that makes me incredibly proud to be Charlton. It is a great way to both show that the club does not accept homophobia, and, I imagine, to give LGTBQ+ people a solidified, formal place to go and be around people who both love football and are like themselves.
14
Comments
-
It's had plenty of airings on Twitter.3
-
0-3 I'll say.19
-
Is that another Network club?10
-
Yup, seen it a fair bit on thereKBslittlesis said:It's had plenty of airings on Twitter.
0 -
I'm happy to use LGTBQ+, if such a description is needed, but it would be better if someone could come up with a better acronym or even word that was easier to say or spell than the above although why its needed I'm unsure. You wouldn't say my mate Mark, you know, the heterosexual one, so why is this needed? In some way by using such terms its discriminating, if you get my drift.2
-
I reckon we'll come from behind.28
-
PatheticArry Addick said:I reckon we'll come from behind.
15 -
You can't say anything these days!12
-
Wait till @Chizz sees that little gem, hopefully he won't open the thread6
-
I've heard they're a nightmare to organise tactically as they all want to play in the hole.
Do they lift each others shirts when they score a goal?
Etc. etc.
Good to hear about things like this still going on at the club, despite the general shambolic state it is in. Hopefully some of these things can go on at other clubs and start to debunk the myth that it's the fans that are stopping any gay footballers from coming out publically.6 - Sponsored links:
-
Potentially interesting thread.0
-
5 -
Legitimate target for CARD..........3
-
"Time to target Proud Valliants?"Addickted2TheReds said:Legitimate target for CARD..........
Is the correct form : -
Not that they should be a target anymore than the Community Trust, who are playing, or the many other groups who've had charity matches this month.1 -
Fair dos (I've not been on Twitter much of late), and to be fair we don't always have threads for charity matches.stonemuse said:
Yup, seen it a fair bit on thereKBslittlesis said:It's had plenty of airings on Twitter.
Nonetheless, it's something to be proud of. If I had gay friends who were starting to get interested in football I would say "look at Charlton, we have a group for supporters who are like you. We're loving and accepting."
Regarding the whole thing that this group is here to vindicate the supporters from the notion that they are what keeps footballers from coming out, I don't think that's what they're here for at all. There is still a lot of homophobia in football, and going on the bits I've read that's what they're here to tackle first. Frankly, the don't owe you, or me, anything. This is a group for them where they can be around people and have a support network of other humans who have the same experience as them.
@LargeAddick (Sorry Henry, accidentally tagged you by mistake) regarding nomenclature, part of me wants to tell you to "get over it and learn to say letters." But on a serious note, this is a community where large numbers of their "members" (for lack of a better term) are still struggling to be included at all. I was chuffed that the club uses the "Q+," as that is a relatively new development.
In the States, we're currently having a national discussion about bathrooms, which is a distraction from the larger conversation that individual states are revoking the rights of the LGTBQ+ community as protected from being discriminated against (i.e. North Carolina's new bill makes it legal for anyone to discriminate against people based on their sexual or gender orientation).
I have a friend who is in academia, "Queer Studies" as she refers to it, and she uses the term "Queer" as an overarching one. Given that it was once a slur, it's still not broadly accepted (and I warn you against using it), but I do see more and more using it as a blanket term.10 -
0
-
Excuse my ignorance but what does the Q+ stand for?
I always thought it was LGBT.
Now I've also heard LGBTQIA - with I = intersex(?) and A = (asexual).
Hard to keep up with the latest thinking on this subject!2 -
-
Q=QueerDavo55 said:Excuse my ignorance but what does the Q+ stand for?
I always thought it was LGBT.
Now I've also heard LGBTQIA - with I = intersex(?) and A = (asexual).
Hard to keep up with the latest thinking on this subject!
+=groups left out, intersexual, asexual, pansexual, etc.
Again, these are not unsubstantial groups of people who are only starting to be recognized, so you will see a fluctuation in accronyms and such given that there isn't (and may never be) an overarching term.
Thanks for asking, it's always nice when someone takes the time to say "I don't know can you please explain."6 - Sponsored links:
-
I'd heard the term asexual but not intersexual or pansexual before. on googling the definitions I think I knew intersexual by a different term but have never heard pansexual before.SDAddick said:
Q=QueerDavo55 said:Excuse my ignorance but what does the Q+ stand for?
I always thought it was LGBT.
Now I've also heard LGBTQIA - with I = intersex(?) and A = (asexual).
Hard to keep up with the latest thinking on this subject!
+=groups left out, intersexual, asexual, pansexual, etc.
Again, these are not unsubstantial groups of people who are only starting to be recognized, so you will see a fluctuation in accronyms and such given that there isn't (and may never be) an overarching term.
Thanks for asking, it's always nice when someone takes the time to say "I don't know can you please explain."0 -
user name relevance overloadArsenetatters said:
I'd heard the term asexual but not intersexual or pansexual before. on googling the definitions I think I knew intersexual by a different term but have never heard pansexual before.SDAddick said:
Q=QueerDavo55 said:Excuse my ignorance but what does the Q+ stand for?
I always thought it was LGBT.
Now I've also heard LGBTQIA - with I = intersex(?) and A = (asexual).
Hard to keep up with the latest thinking on this subject!
+=groups left out, intersexual, asexual, pansexual, etc.
Again, these are not unsubstantial groups of people who are only starting to be recognized, so you will see a fluctuation in accronyms and such given that there isn't (and may never be) an overarching term.
Thanks for asking, it's always nice when someone takes the time to say "I don't know can you please explain."18 -
Good luck to them, hopefully Charlton can actually win this one given the opposition !1
-
I thought it was hilariousstonemuse said:
PatheticArry Addick said:I reckon we'll come from behind.
3 -
9am????? On a Sunday?
Bit early1 -
I didn't know it was currently illegal in the US to discriminate based on sexual orientation etc. but for that to be the case and now have states wanting to turn the clock back is very worrying. What's next, saying it's OK to discriminate on grounds of sex or colour?SDAddick said:
...
In the States, we're currently having a national discussion about bathrooms, which is a distraction from the larger conversation that individual states are revoking the rights of the LGTBQ+ community as protected from being discriminated against (i.e. North Carolina's new bill makes it legal for anyone to discriminate against people based on their sexual or gender orientation).
...1 -
.0
-
Unfortunately, in around 30 states it is still LEGAL to discriminate against people for their sexuality. Basically you can not hire them, fire them, etc if they're gay.AddicksAddict said:
I didn't know it was currently illegal in the US to discriminate based on sexual orientation etc. but for that to be the case and now have states wanting to turn the clock back is very worrying. What's next, saying it's OK to discriminate on grounds of sex or colour?SDAddick said:
...
In the States, we're currently having a national discussion about bathrooms, which is a distraction from the larger conversation that individual states are revoking the rights of the LGTBQ+ community as protected from being discriminated against (i.e. North Carolina's new bill makes it legal for anyone to discriminate against people based on their sexual or gender orientation).
...
The federal Government, at the order of President Obama, has just made it illegal for anyone doing business with the federal Government to discriminate against people for their sexuality or gender identity. The end goal in this is to hopefully make it so that it is illegal in all of the US to discriminate on these ground.
That's a very simplified version of what's going on. There is a lot of back and forth between state and federal governments, and this is also a big part of the "culture war" in the US. I don't want to get into it here, because it's quite complex just from the legal perspective and I want to keep this about the Valiants and the general accepting culture around CAFC. Happy to start another thread if there's interest to go into what's going on in the US surrounding these issues at present.1 -
I think one's attitudes can be shaped to a large extent by early life experience/awareness and parental attitudes.
When I was about seven, in the early sixties (when homosexuality didn't officially exist), one of my aunts (Ollie) left her husband and started living with another woman - Joyce.
Some of the many family members were appalled and shunned her but my parents remained close and she quickly came back into the wider family circle and was accepted. To me it was simply Auntie Ollie and Uncle Joyce (not taking the piss, honest, that's what we knew her partner as) - and still is. They are still together, now in their late 80s and living in Eltham. And I always like "Uncle Joyce" a hell of a lot more than my aunt's husband.11 -
M.
Should we also add an 'M' for monosexual? And a 'C' for celibate?
LGBTQMC+0
