I'm actually very surprised to hear that. I have had a couple of very enjoyable nights out in Luton with my old school friend. He has a great group of gay mates and leads a far better social life than I have ever enjoyed. I have never experienced any animosity or threatening behaviour whilst in his company. Likewise my wife and I's best friend in Cape Town, although he is much older and doesn't do the clubbing scene. As for Tony Abbott, it was a total beat up by Gillard (with her infamous misogynist speech) and the left, which thankfully the Australian public eventually saw through and gave them the biggest beating in over 100 years at the recent election. Abbott is not anti gay at all (his sister is gay), he is a religious man who believes in traditional values. Far from being a woman hater, he has three beautiful daughters, a female chief of staff and a female deputy. He is old fashioned in many respects, but a decent man who has always spent one week of his holidays every year doing voluntary work in indigenous communities, he's also a volunteer life saver and firefighter. He also developed the Pollie Pedal, a 1000 klm bike ride that he does every year and that has raised over $2.5 million so far for a range of charities.
If traditional values are to suppress anyone that doesn't share his sexuality and gender, then I hope we move on from those traditional values very quickly. Even his kids are appalled by his anti-gay marriage beliefs.
It's interesting that religious people complain so much about gay people forcing their lifestyles onto religious people, while completely missing the irony of them themselves forcing their religion down gay people's throats and suppressing their sexuality.
If deep in the desert one finds a bottle of water does one check whether it is Evian or Peckham Spring or simply drink it gratefully?
Youngsters with raging hormones similarly crave sexual experience with someone other than themselves. If that happens to be with their own sex it is often because that is what was available not that they are homosexual and an experimental part of the growing up process.
I'm actually very surprised to hear that. I have had a couple of very enjoyable nights out in Luton with my old school friend. He has a great group of gay mates and leads a far better social life than I have ever enjoyed. I have never experienced any animosity or threatening behaviour whilst in his company. Likewise my wife and I's best friend in Cape Town, although he is much older and doesn't do the clubbing scene. As for Tony Abbott, it was a total beat up by Gillard (with her infamous misogynist speech) and the left, which thankfully the Australian public eventually saw through and gave them the biggest beating in over 100 years at the recent election. Abbott is not anti gay at all (his sister is gay), he is a religious man who believes in traditional values. Far from being a woman hater, he has three beautiful daughters, a female chief of staff and a female deputy. He is old fashioned in many respects, but a decent man who has always spent one week of his holidays every year doing voluntary work in indigenous communities, he's also a volunteer life saver and firefighter. He also developed the Pollie Pedal, a 1000 klm bike ride that he does every year and that has raised over $2.5 million so far for a range of charities.
If traditional values are to suppress anyone that doesn't share his sexuality and gender, then I hope we move on from those traditional values very quickly. Even his kids are appalled by his anti-gay marriage beliefs.
It's interesting that religious people complain so much about gay people forcing their lifestyles onto religious people, while completely missing the irony of them themselves forcing their religion down gay people's throats and suppressing their sexuality.
When have his girls ever stated that they are appalled by his stance on gay marriage? They have described him as being "daggy" and a bit old fashioned, but they, and his gay sister have agreed that he is gradually coming around to their way of thinking. He has at least been consistent throughout. Interestingly Gillard was also anti gay marriage, but the lefties ignore this. Rudd was also anti gay marriage until he decided that he might be able to buy a few extra votes by changing his mind. But unfortunately the gay community were taken in by his false promise to introduce gay marriage. All he actually promised was to bring the vote before caucus. What he failed to mention was that such a vote had already taken place only a few months previously, and failed miserably. Like so much that Rudd promised, it was another con.
Some of the views about homosexuality on here are just extraordinary, do you really think that people CHOOSE to be gay?
They choose to be ridiculed? Ostracised from their families? Discriminated against by religious groups? They freely choose that? Really?
Fact is people are born with their sexuality and there ain't a damn thing they can do about it, you certainly can't "pray the gay away" as some Christian groups believe.
The suicide rates among young gay people is shockingly, staggeringly high, why do you think that is? It's simply because they are ashamed of what they are, they are faced with people who tell them that being gay is unnatural and disgusting and so they live in terror of what faces them in the years ahead.
If you don't believe me, then read up on the It Gets Better project run by Dan Savage in the US, which has helped thousands of young gay people, here is an interview with Dan below...
.....some of the stories are heart breaking and could just as easily be any of our children in the future whilst ignorance, prejudice and hatred remain so prevalent.
My best mate at school chose to be gay in his early 20s. He told me so himself. It was a conscious decision because he was lonely and ultimately found that lifestyle worked better for him than trying and failing to find a woman. It suits him to be honest, but it was definitely a choice for him.
Sexuality is a complex thing, probably a mix of genetics, social environment, experiences - and choices. Some genetic links have been proven, but that doesn't mean all people in same-sex relationships got there [just] because of their genetics.
I do tend to sympathise with @kentaddick's view that the idea of 'coming out' might be best consigned to history. People are people regardless of their sexual preferences. In the meantime, it will probably take some high profile sportsmen to take the lead in order to address discrimination - and no higher profile than Premiership footballers. I'd personally still not be any more worried by gay-directed humour from the terraces than I would be about stuff directed at John Terry for his sexual choices.
Agreed. But does repression and bigotry still exist to a huge degree? There are now many industries where being gay, having gay friends and mixing in gay circles would be a clear advantage rather than a disadvantage.
Judging by this thread, I'd say the laces have already done their job. There's the odd WUM and a couple of truly bizarre posts but mostly it's got reasonable people talking about the issue, which I'm sure would have been the aim in the first place (rather than coercing feral youngsters into homosexuality or leading directly to some kind of amnesty weekend for all gay footballers to out themselves!).
rikofold interesting post. I am also mindful that the 'choice' for your best mate was in his twenties, not while he was at school. However I take your point about complexities in this whole debate. It is some credit to Charlton Life that there are people on here engaging in a decent discussion on the matter which is certainly a positive thing.
Queensland - I hope your children aren't gay. For their sake.
Why's that Leroy? I've already stated that two of my dearest friends are gay. My girls will always have my 100% support no matter what. I just don't want them influenced in their development stage by what seems to be a barrage of pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc .
Absolutely rubbish. NO-ONE is saying that being heterosexual is somehow worse than being gay. What people are saying is that being gay is equally as natural as being heterosexual.
I love it when people use the phrase 'pro-gay propaganda'. If you mean trying to encourage children to be gay rather than be heterosexual, then I'd love to see evidence of that. Because no-one's doing it.
If deep in the desert one finds a bottle of water does one check whether it is Evian or Peckham Spring or simply drink it gratefully?
Youngsters with raging hormones similarly crave sexual experience with someone other than themselves. If that happens to be with their own sex it is often because that is what was available not that they are homosexual and an experimental part of the growing up process.
Well said Len. And just to prove your point, my Parrot is currently shagging my big toe. Poor little thing, he really needs a girlfriend!
Edited as others have already made my point. But some of the posts in this thread are shocking, and not the obvious wind up ones. And these self same people don't understand the need for this initiative. And all this from a club renowned for its tollerance - image how its being received by some other fans....
You cannot choose sexuality. People don't decide to be gay because it's the cool thing to do.
Considering the amount of heterosexual relationships on tv, i'm sure they'll be fine. They're called family values because the family are the ones that need to teach it to their children, not the media.
Disagree, some are born gay without a doubt, others like to experiment with both sexes then decide which way to go, or remain bisexual. Wasn't there a study that showed that there was a homosexual tendency in all of us to some degree? I believe that young kids can be influenced by their peers into taking drugs, drinking, even their sexual behaviour, hence the problems we are now experiencing with sexting. An impressionable child or teen could very easily be influenced into doing things that they otherwise would never have considered, had it not been for peer pressure or blanket media coverage. Once your kids leave home, go to uni etc, they are subjected to other forces that you have no control over. Family values that you have instilled can be forgotten if their minds are reconditioned to think in a different way. The media plays a huge role in influencing the way some of us think and behave, as do our teachers, tutors and peer groups.
Extraordinary that these ideas still prevail in today's society. Even down to using the "gay friends" angle to justify them.
You will be talking about curing them next.
I beg your pardon Algarve. Let's try this instead: No one is born gay. No one ever experiments with their sexuality. Kids have never been known to be led astray. Kids have never been known to be brainwashed into joining strange religious sects and such like, and the media plays no role whatsoever in influencing people, neither do teachers or tutors. There you go, I'm sure you now must agree 100% with that. BTW please don't don't try pretending that I ever suggested that homosexuality is an illness that needs curing, when I have never even come close to suggesting such a thing.
One of your previous statements QA.
"...pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc ."
Of course you do not go as far as suggesting it is an illness, but I and others have taken the overriding nature of your posts to be expressing the idea that gay is not good. And the next step of the mad religious right wingers in the USA is to suggest it is an illness, so I made a tongue in cheek comment to point out that your posts were starting to look that way. So don't get all offended when someone pulls you up on it.
It is more akin to the right wing frothing about stuff that isn't actually happening when you look at the facts - the kind of stuff peddled by the right wing tabloids. There is loads in the media about marriage - OK and Hello magazines thrive on it... We had a week of it when William and Kate got hitched. There is no more gay propaganda than anything else in the media.
Your "Let's try this instead..." is a series of unrelated sentences, but you do seem to be suggesting that a gay teacher might "turn" a straight child, which again is a rather old fashioned attitude from where I am sitting.
If deep in the desert one finds a bottle of water does one check whether it is Evian or Peckham Spring or simply drink it gratefully?
Youngsters with raging hormones similarly crave sexual experience with someone other than themselves. If that happens to be with their own sex it is often because that is what was available not that they are homosexual and an experimental part of the growing up process.
Is English your second language as it appears your first language is talking bollocks?
did anyone see the picture of Parrish the Palace Chairman in the Standard alongside an article moaning on about Ashley Young or hear him on Radio Five Live moaning on about Ashley Young ?I could not see or hear whether he was wearing "rainbow coloured" laces .Leave Ashley alone Parrish !
I genuinely don't think gay players would suffer abuse, except for places like Millwall and only then from the most scummy fans.
Leeds, Birmingham, Wolves, Burnley, Forest are just a few places where i can imagine a player would get quite a lot of abuse.
Brighton fans still get homophobic abuse even now. Last week a couple of Derby fans got 3 year banning orders for shouting abuse at Brighton fans.
I agree but I find it offensive that football fans are generalised and stereotyped. I don't see why gay footballers getting abuse from a small number of fans is a football issue or a fans issue. And wearing rainbow coloured laces isn't going to change the views of these type of fans.
If deep in the desert one finds a bottle of water does one check whether it is Evian or Peckham Spring or simply drink it gratefully?
Youngsters with raging hormones similarly crave sexual experience with someone other than themselves. If that happens to be with their own sex it is often because that is what was available not that they are homosexual and an experimental part of the growing up process.
Extraordinary that these ideas still prevail in today's society. Even down to using the "gay friends" angle to justify them.
You will be talking about curing them next.
I beg your pardon Algarve. Let's try this instead: No one is born gay. No one ever experiments with their sexuality. Kids have never been known to be led astray. Kids have never been known to be brainwashed into joining strange religious sects and such like, and the media plays no role whatsoever in influencing people, neither do teachers or tutors. There you go, I'm sure you now must agree 100% with that. BTW please don't don't try pretending that I ever suggested that homosexuality is an illness that needs curing, when I have never even come close to suggesting such a thing.
One of your previous statements QA.
"...pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc ."
Of course you do not go as far as suggesting it is an illness, but I and others have taken the overriding nature of your posts to be expressing the idea that gay is not good. And the next step of the mad religious right wingers in the USA is to suggest it is an illness, so I made a tongue in cheek comment to point out that your posts were starting to look that way. So don't get all offended when someone pulls you up on it.
It is more akin to the right wing frothing about stuff that isn't actually happening when you look at the facts - the kind of stuff peddled by the right wing tabloids. There is loads in the media about marriage - OK and Hello magazines thrive on it... We had a week of it when William and Kate got hitched. There is no more gay propaganda than anything else in the media.
Your "Let's try this instead..." is a series of unrelated sentences, but you do seem to be suggesting that a gay teacher might "turn" a straight child, which again is a rather old fashioned attitude from where I am sitting.
You and Leroy deride me when I use the example of my gay friends to try to illustrate the fact that I have nothing against gay people at all. I don't know of another way of trying to make that point. Please re read my posts and tell me where I have ever said that being gay is wrong, or an illness or any such like. You more or less accuse me of coming from the dark ages, when I have a absolutely nothing against gay people, count them as my friends and deplore any homophobic behaviour against them. Perhaps I have a different perspective on things living here and having just endured a nine month election campaign where gay marriage was a huge issue that consumed every talk show, every newspaper, every radio show, every news bulletin. Overwhelmingly the view portrayed is that being gay is the way to be, because as usual those with a point to make, make it the loudest. There is no counter discussion to balance the debate. As an adult, I am able to have an informed opinion. But only I know the kind of questions that my 9 and 10 year old girls are asking me. I don't want to have to start explaining to them about gay relationships at this stage when they are yet to even learn about the birds and the bees. I am completely over all the publicity that the gay issue is receiving at the moment and I certainly don't want my kids exposed to it. The problem is that even if they are prevented from seeing it at home, it gets discussed amongst kids at school. We live out in the country and there is generally still a wonderful innocence amongst young kids here, unlike that to which I was exposed growing up in Ilford. I want them to enjoy their childhood and innocence for as long as possible. My issue is not with gay people, it is with the amount of exposure that the issue is getting at the moment, especially here. I couldn't believe all the stupid Sharon stuff that was aimed at Darren Ambrose, and he was one of our own. As I've stated on here previously, but which you've obviously chosen to ignore, in my mind a player's sexuality is a non issue to me, just as I'm sure mine is to them. I go to admire their football skills, what they get up to in their private life is not my business, your business or anyone's business, so I don't see why we need to know about it. Anyway I'm finished with this discussion now, I'm obviously failing to make my point.
queensland it is a perfectly legitimate approach to use personal experience to inform your point of view on any debate, after all isn't that what we all do? Phenomenology is even a useful and practical starting point, as you have demonstrated well in relation to your care for your children. There are other points of view to yours and mine on this delicate subject, and even if we never say something out loud, engaging thoughtfully with the debate probably shifts all of our opinions a bit.
Extraordinary that these ideas still prevail in today's society. Even down to using the "gay friends" angle to justify them.
You will be talking about curing them next.
I beg your pardon Algarve. Let's try this instead: No one is born gay. No one ever experiments with their sexuality. Kids have never been known to be led astray. Kids have never been known to be brainwashed into joining strange religious sects and such like, and the media plays no role whatsoever in influencing people, neither do teachers or tutors. There you go, I'm sure you now must agree 100% with that. BTW please don't don't try pretending that I ever suggested that homosexuality is an illness that needs curing, when I have never even come close to suggesting such a thing.
One of your previous statements QA.
"...pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc ."
Of course you do not go as far as suggesting it is an illness, but I and others have taken the overriding nature of your posts to be expressing the idea that gay is not good. And the next step of the mad religious right wingers in the USA is to suggest it is an illness, so I made a tongue in cheek comment to point out that your posts were starting to look that way. So don't get all offended when someone pulls you up on it.
It is more akin to the right wing frothing about stuff that isn't actually happening when you look at the facts - the kind of stuff peddled by the right wing tabloids. There is loads in the media about marriage - OK and Hello magazines thrive on it... We had a week of it when William and Kate got hitched. There is no more gay propaganda than anything else in the media.
Your "Let's try this instead..." is a series of unrelated sentences, but you do seem to be suggesting that a gay teacher might "turn" a straight child, which again is a rather old fashioned attitude from where I am sitting.
You and Leroy deride me when I use the example of my gay friends to try to illustrate the fact that I have nothing against gay people at all. I don't know of another way of trying to make that point. Please re read my posts and tell me where I have ever said that being gay is wrong, or an illness or any such like. You more or less accuse me of coming from the dark ages, when I have a absolutely nothing against gay people, count them as my friends and deplore any homophobic behaviour against them. Perhaps I have a different perspective on things living here and having just endured a nine month election campaign where gay marriage was a huge issue that consumed every talk show, every newspaper, every radio show, every news bulletin. Overwhelmingly the view portrayed is that being gay is the way to be, because as usual those with a point to make, make it the loudest. There is no counter discussion to balance the debate. As an adult, I am able to have an informed opinion. But only I know the kind of questions that my 9 and 10 year old girls are asking me. I don't want to have to start explaining to them about gay relationships at this stage when they are yet to even learn about the birds and the bees. I am completely over all the publicity that the gay issue is receiving at the moment and I certainly don't want my kids exposed to it. The problem is that even if they are prevented from seeing it at home, it gets discussed amongst kids at school. We live out in the country and there is generally still a wonderful innocence amongst young kids here, unlike that to which I was exposed growing up in Ilford. I want them to enjoy their childhood and innocence for as long as possible. My issue is not with gay people, it is with the amount of exposure that the issue is getting at the moment, especially here. I couldn't believe all the stupid Sharon stuff that was aimed at Darren Ambrose, and he was one of our own. As I've stated on here previously, but which you've obviously chosen to ignore, in my mind a player's sexuality is a non issue to me, just as I'm sure mine is to them. I go to admire their football skills, what they get up to in their private life is not my business, your business or anyone's business, so I don't see why we need to know about it. Anyway I'm finished with this discussion now, I'm obviously failing to make my point.
Fair play QA, I don't think either of us is quite getting the other one's point so as you say, let's leave it at that.
If deep in the desert one finds a bottle of water does one check whether it is Evian or Peckham Spring or simply drink it gratefully?
Youngsters with raging hormones similarly crave sexual experience with someone other than themselves. If that happens to be with their own sex it is often because that is what was available not that they are homosexual and an experimental part of the growing up process.
To paraphrase Len; when one is horny (and thirsty) in the desert then one is likely to engage in any kind of sexual experience which becomes available, irrespective of preference.
I think this may be FIFA's master stroke in hosting the World Cup in Qatar, by the time all of those thirsty, horny and desert bound football fans return from the Qatari desert then they'll be totally open minded at the prospect of openly gay footballers!
My only opinion on this is that the issue with coming out will be the abuse from the terraces, not from inside the dressing room. As people have said, there are known gay footballers and I'm sure their team mates just get on with things as normal. Solidarity amongst the players isn't the issue, therefore I don't really see what these laces hope to achieve
I think we're missing part of the issue here. There are two sides to this campaign, the first is that we need to create an environment in which "IF" a footballer wanted to come out publicly then they should be able to feel comfortable doing so, and shouldn't be the subject of abuse because of it. I think most of us agree that that is the right thing.
The second, however, is that it also sends out a message to other people, especially young people, who may be afraid of coming out to their family and friends because they fear the consequences. Whether we are happy about it or not footballers are some of the biggest role models in our society and if one were to come out it may make gay individuals think "he's gay and he's one of the top footballers in the world, what's to stop me feeling comfortable in who I am?" it may make a very difficult thing a little bit easier for them.
My only opinion on this is that the issue with coming out will be the abuse from the terraces, not from inside the dressing room. As people have said, there are known gay footballers and I'm sure their team mates just get on with things as normal. Solidarity amongst the players isn't the issue, therefore I don't really see what these laces hope to achieve
Two things I guess; 1) it will get fans talking about the issue and considering their own attitudes 2) the above may have some, who previously would have used homophobic language casually, even in a non-intended way, to reconsider their actions which will help create a less hostile and homophobic atmosphere at football grounds.
This thread is proof that 1) has worked. Time will tell if we will see 2) work out too.
Comments
I'm actually very surprised to hear that. I have had a couple of very enjoyable nights out in Luton with my old school friend. He has a great group of gay mates and leads a far better social life than I have ever enjoyed. I have never experienced any animosity or threatening behaviour whilst in his company. Likewise my wife and I's best friend in Cape Town, although he is much older and doesn't do the clubbing scene. As for Tony Abbott, it was a total beat up by Gillard (with her infamous misogynist speech) and the left, which thankfully the Australian public eventually saw through and gave them the biggest beating in over 100 years at the recent election. Abbott is not anti gay at all (his sister is gay), he is a religious man who believes in traditional values. Far from being a woman hater, he has three beautiful daughters, a female chief of staff and a female deputy. He is old fashioned in many respects, but a decent man who has always spent one week of his holidays every year doing voluntary work in indigenous communities, he's also a volunteer life saver and firefighter. He also developed the Pollie Pedal, a 1000 klm bike ride that he does every year and that has raised over $2.5 million so far for a range of charities.
If traditional values are to suppress anyone that doesn't share his sexuality and gender, then I hope we move on from those traditional values very quickly. Even his kids are appalled by his anti-gay marriage beliefs.
It's interesting that religious people complain so much about gay people forcing their lifestyles onto religious people, while completely missing the irony of them themselves forcing their religion down gay people's throats and suppressing their sexuality.
I'm actually very surprised to hear that. I have had a couple of very enjoyable nights out in Luton with my old school friend. He has a great group of gay mates and leads a far better social life than I have ever enjoyed. I have never experienced any animosity or threatening behaviour whilst in his company. Likewise my wife and I's best friend in Cape Town, although he is much older and doesn't do the clubbing scene. As for Tony Abbott, it was a total beat up by Gillard (with her infamous misogynist speech) and the left, which thankfully the Australian public eventually saw through and gave them the biggest beating in over 100 years at the recent election. Abbott is not anti gay at all (his sister is gay), he is a religious man who believes in traditional values. Far from being a woman hater, he has three beautiful daughters, a female chief of staff and a female deputy. He is old fashioned in many respects, but a decent man who has always spent one week of his holidays every year doing voluntary work in indigenous communities, he's also a volunteer life saver and firefighter. He also developed the Pollie Pedal, a 1000 klm bike ride that he does every year and that has raised over $2.5 million so far for a range of charities.
If traditional values are to suppress anyone that doesn't share his sexuality and gender, then I hope we move on from those traditional values very quickly. Even his kids are appalled by his anti-gay marriage beliefs.
It's interesting that religious people complain so much about gay people forcing their lifestyles onto religious people, while completely missing the irony of them themselves forcing their religion down gay people's throats and suppressing their sexuality.
When have his girls ever stated that they are appalled by his stance on gay marriage? They have described him as being "daggy" and a bit old fashioned, but they, and his gay sister have agreed that he is gradually coming around to their way of thinking. He has at least been consistent throughout.
Interestingly Gillard was also anti gay marriage, but the lefties ignore this. Rudd was also anti gay marriage until he decided that he might be able to buy a few extra votes by changing his mind. But unfortunately the gay community were taken in by his false promise to introduce gay marriage. All he actually promised was to bring the vote before caucus. What he failed to mention was that such a vote had already taken place only a few months previously, and failed miserably. Like so much that Rudd promised, it was another con.
Sexuality is a complex thing, probably a mix of genetics, social environment, experiences - and choices. Some genetic links have been proven, but that doesn't mean all people in same-sex relationships got there [just] because of their genetics.
I do tend to sympathise with @kentaddick's view that the idea of 'coming out' might be best consigned to history. People are people regardless of their sexual preferences. In the meantime, it will probably take some high profile sportsmen to take the lead in order to address discrimination - and no higher profile than Premiership footballers. I'd personally still not be any more worried by gay-directed humour from the terraces than I would be about stuff directed at John Terry for his sexual choices.
It is some credit to Charlton Life that there are people on here engaging in a decent discussion on the matter which is certainly a positive thing.
I love it when people use the phrase 'pro-gay propaganda'. If you mean trying to encourage children to be gay rather than be heterosexual, then I'd love to see evidence of that. Because no-one's doing it.
But some of the posts in this thread are shocking, and not the obvious wind up ones.
And these self same people don't understand the need for this initiative.
And all this from a club renowned for its tollerance - image how its being received by some other fans....
You will be talking about curing them next.
I beg your pardon Algarve. Let's try this instead: No one is born gay. No one ever experiments with their sexuality. Kids have never been known to be led astray. Kids have never been known to be brainwashed into joining strange religious sects and such like, and the media plays no role whatsoever in influencing people, neither do teachers or tutors. There you go, I'm sure you now must agree 100% with that. BTW please don't don't try pretending that I ever suggested that homosexuality is an illness that needs curing, when I have never even come close to suggesting such a thing.
One of your previous statements QA.
"...pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc ."
Of course you do not go as far as suggesting it is an illness, but I and others have taken the overriding nature of your posts to be expressing the idea that gay is not good. And the next step of the mad religious right wingers in the USA is to suggest it is an illness, so I made a tongue in cheek comment to point out that your posts were starting to look that way. So don't get all offended when someone pulls you up on it.
It is more akin to the right wing frothing about stuff that isn't actually happening when you look at the facts - the kind of stuff peddled by the right wing tabloids. There is loads in the media about marriage - OK and Hello magazines thrive on it... We had a week of it when William and Kate got hitched. There is no more gay propaganda than anything else in the media.
Your "Let's try this instead..." is a series of unrelated sentences, but you do seem to be suggesting that a gay teacher might "turn" a straight child, which again is a rather old fashioned attitude from where I am sitting.
Panda Cola: We're no Coca-Cola, but if you're thirsty, then f*** it. Fill ya boots !
Extraordinary that these ideas still prevail in today's society. Even down to using the "gay friends" angle to justify them.
You will be talking about curing them next.
I beg your pardon Algarve. Let's try this instead: No one is born gay. No one ever experiments with their sexuality. Kids have never been known to be led astray. Kids have never been known to be brainwashed into joining strange religious sects and such like, and the media plays no role whatsoever in influencing people, neither do teachers or tutors. There you go, I'm sure you now must agree 100% with that. BTW please don't don't try pretending that I ever suggested that homosexuality is an illness that needs curing, when I have never even come close to suggesting such a thing.
One of your previous statements QA.
"...pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc ."
Of course you do not go as far as suggesting it is an illness, but I and others have taken the overriding nature of your posts to be expressing the idea that gay is not good. And the next step of the mad religious right wingers in the USA is to suggest it is an illness, so I made a tongue in cheek comment to point out that your posts were starting to look that way. So don't get all offended when someone pulls you up on it.
It is more akin to the right wing frothing about stuff that isn't actually happening when you look at the facts - the kind of stuff peddled by the right wing tabloids. There is loads in the media about marriage - OK and Hello magazines thrive on it... We had a week of it when William and Kate got hitched. There is no more gay propaganda than anything else in the media.
Your "Let's try this instead..." is a series of unrelated sentences, but you do seem to be suggesting that a gay teacher might "turn" a straight child, which again is a rather old fashioned attitude from where I am sitting.
You and Leroy deride me when I use the example of my gay friends to try to illustrate the fact that I have nothing against gay people at all. I don't know of another way of trying to make that point. Please re read my posts and tell me where I have ever said that being gay is wrong, or an illness or any such like. You more or less accuse me of coming from the dark ages, when I have a absolutely nothing against gay people, count them as my friends and deplore any homophobic behaviour against them.
Perhaps I have a different perspective on things living here and having just endured a nine month election campaign where gay marriage was a huge issue that consumed every talk show, every newspaper, every radio show, every news bulletin. Overwhelmingly the view portrayed is that being gay is the way to be, because as usual those with a point to make, make it the loudest. There is no counter discussion to balance the debate. As an adult, I am able to have an informed opinion. But only I know the kind of questions that my 9 and 10 year old girls are asking me. I don't want to have to start explaining to them about gay relationships at this stage when they are yet to even learn about the birds and the bees. I am completely over all the publicity that the gay issue is receiving at the moment and I certainly don't want my kids exposed to it. The problem is that even if they are prevented from seeing it at home, it gets discussed amongst kids at school. We live out in the country and there is generally still a wonderful innocence amongst young kids here, unlike that to which I was exposed growing up in Ilford. I want them to enjoy their childhood and innocence for as long as possible. My issue is not with gay people, it is with the amount of exposure that the issue is getting at the moment, especially here. I couldn't believe all the stupid Sharon stuff that was aimed at Darren Ambrose, and he was one of our own. As I've stated on here previously, but which you've obviously chosen to ignore, in my mind a player's sexuality is a non issue to me, just as I'm sure mine is to them. I go to admire their football skills, what they get up to in their private life is not my business, your business or anyone's business, so I don't see why we need to know about it.
Anyway I'm finished with this discussion now, I'm obviously failing to make my point.
There are other points of view to yours and mine on this delicate subject, and even if we never say something out loud, engaging thoughtfully with the debate probably shifts all of our opinions a bit.
One of your previous statements QA.
"...pro gay propaganda at the moment. I don't want them to grow up thinking that being gay is more natural than being heterosexual or that being heterosexual is so "yesterday". An impressionable kid watching TV or reading magazines or papers in this day and age could easily reach that conclusion. There is very little in the media about tradition family values, marriage between a man and a women etc ."
Of course you do not go as far as suggesting it is an illness, but I and others have taken the overriding nature of your posts to be expressing the idea that gay is not good. And the next step of the mad religious right wingers in the USA is to suggest it is an illness, so I made a tongue in cheek comment to point out that your posts were starting to look that way. So don't get all offended when someone pulls you up on it.
It is more akin to the right wing frothing about stuff that isn't actually happening when you look at the facts - the kind of stuff peddled by the right wing tabloids. There is loads in the media about marriage - OK and Hello magazines thrive on it... We had a week of it when William and Kate got hitched. There is no more gay propaganda than anything else in the media.
Your "Let's try this instead..." is a series of unrelated sentences, but you do seem to be suggesting that a gay teacher might "turn" a straight child, which again is a rather old fashioned attitude from where I am sitting.
You and Leroy deride me when I use the example of my gay friends to try to illustrate the fact that I have nothing against gay people at all. I don't know of another way of trying to make that point. Please re read my posts and tell me where I have ever said that being gay is wrong, or an illness or any such like. You more or less accuse me of coming from the dark ages, when I have a absolutely nothing against gay people, count them as my friends and deplore any homophobic behaviour against them.
Perhaps I have a different perspective on things living here and having just endured a nine month election campaign where gay marriage was a huge issue that consumed every talk show, every newspaper, every radio show, every news bulletin. Overwhelmingly the view portrayed is that being gay is the way to be, because as usual those with a point to make, make it the loudest. There is no counter discussion to balance the debate. As an adult, I am able to have an informed opinion. But only I know the kind of questions that my 9 and 10 year old girls are asking me. I don't want to have to start explaining to them about gay relationships at this stage when they are yet to even learn about the birds and the bees. I am completely over all the publicity that the gay issue is receiving at the moment and I certainly don't want my kids exposed to it. The problem is that even if they are prevented from seeing it at home, it gets discussed amongst kids at school. We live out in the country and there is generally still a wonderful innocence amongst young kids here, unlike that to which I was exposed growing up in Ilford. I want them to enjoy their childhood and innocence for as long as possible. My issue is not with gay people, it is with the amount of exposure that the issue is getting at the moment, especially here. I couldn't believe all the stupid Sharon stuff that was aimed at Darren Ambrose, and he was one of our own. As I've stated on here previously, but which you've obviously chosen to ignore, in my mind a player's sexuality is a non issue to me, just as I'm sure mine is to them. I go to admire their football skills, what they get up to in their private life is not my business, your business or anyone's business, so I don't see why we need to know about it.
Anyway I'm finished with this discussion now, I'm obviously failing to make my point.
Fair play QA, I don't think either of us is quite getting the other one's point so as you say, let's leave it at that.
I think this may be FIFA's master stroke in hosting the World Cup in Qatar, by the time all of those thirsty, horny and desert bound football fans return from the Qatari desert then they'll be totally open minded at the prospect of openly gay footballers!
The second, however, is that it also sends out a message to other people, especially young people, who may be afraid of coming out to their family and friends because they fear the consequences. Whether we are happy about it or not footballers are some of the biggest role models in our society and if one were to come out it may make gay individuals think "he's gay and he's one of the top footballers in the world, what's to stop me feeling comfortable in who I am?" it may make a very difficult thing a little bit easier for them.
Anyway that's my two pence on this campaign.
1) it will get fans talking about the issue and considering their own attitudes
2) the above may have some, who previously would have used homophobic language casually, even in a non-intended way, to reconsider their actions which will help create a less hostile and homophobic atmosphere at football grounds.
This thread is proof that 1) has worked. Time will tell if we will see 2) work out too.