Jump to content
IGNORED

Rainbow coloured corner flags at football matches starting Saturday


Never to the dark side

Recommended Posts

I'll tell you a story.

My brothers two boys attend a school, where the head mistress is not straight. 

From the age of 7 they have been fully made aware at school about LBGT issues.

Now I'm not being funny. But why the *^&% do kids need to know about this? At the age of 7? When I was that age I was busy out on my bicycle, playing football and ar5eing about with me mates. Do they really need to know that some people born as a girl can have hormones and an operation to give them balls and a dick rather than tits and a fanny?

No wonder there's so many depressed and confused kids out there. They can choose to kiss boys, girls, both or change gender completely. What's wrong with being a boy or a girl? and kissing the opposite sex. I would term this healthy (not that anything else is unhealthy).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

Doing a quick google search suggests that the actual percentage albeit in 2013, was just 1.5%! 

It does say that almost 5% refused to answer or “didn’t know” so even if you “credit” that percentage to the debate, you are probably looking at 6% MAX as a national ratio. 

So, even without allowing for higher percentages within other industries, which is undoubtably the case, you COULD suggest that 1-1.5 players per first team squad COULD be gay. 

Now consider that it’s a male dominated, traditionally working class sport, with players rarely excelling academically and probably not very influenced by the theatre or arts.... is it starting to look slightly more plausible that there aren’t actually that many footballers waiting to come out..?!  

I can see where you are coming from but the highlighted paragraph I think is a bit of a nonsense, and perhaps shows a bit of  insensitivity if I'm being honest. I know I'm taking what you are suggesting to an extreme, but gay men are not all prancing about entertainers cooing look at me, nor are they middle class highly educated folk... they are simply persons who find what they see in the mirror sexually attractive. Whilst I accept and acknowledge what you are saying - football might be an industry which attracts fewer gay men - I think there is nothing really to substantiate that conclusion, especially if that conclusion is based on machismo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DaveInSA said:

I'll tell you a story.

My brothers two boys attend a school, where the head mistress is not straight. 

From the age of 7 they have been fully made aware at school about LBGT issues.

Now I'm not being funny. But why the *^&% do kids need to know about this? At the age of 7? When I was that age I was busy out on my bicycle, playing football and ar5eing about with me mates. Do they really need to know that some people born as a girl can have hormones and an operation to give them balls and a dick rather than tits and a fanny?

No wonder there's so many depressed and confused kids out there. They can choose to kiss boys, girls, both or change gender completely. What's wrong with being a boy or a girl? and kissing the opposite sex. I would term this healthy (not that anything else is unhealthy).

 

 

Royal family at Christmas, playing twenty questions...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 29AR said:

I can see where you are coming from but the highlighted paragraph I think is a bit of a nonsense, and perhaps shows a bit of  insensitivity if I'm being honest. I know I'm taking what you are suggesting to an extreme, but gay men are not all prancing about entertainers cooing look at me, nor are they middle class highly educated folk... they are simply persons who find what they see in the mirror sexually attractive. Whilst I accept and acknowledge what you are saying - football might be an industry which attracts fewer gay men - I think there is nothing really to substantiate that conclusion, especially if that conclusion is based on machismo.

I sort of understand what you are saying, but I am one of those who fall in to the category highlighted (in fact, I probably look at myself in the mirror several times a day) and, apart from being sexually attractive, vain and egotistical, I am most certainly heterosexual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DaveInSA said:

I'll tell you a story.

My brothers two boys attend a school, where the head mistress is not straight. 

From the age of 7 they have been fully made aware at school about LBGT issues.

Now I'm not being funny. But why the *^&% do kids need to know about this? At the age of 7? When I was that age I was busy out on my bicycle, playing football and ar5eing about with me mates. Do they really need to know that some people born as a girl can have hormones and an operation to give them balls and a dick rather than tits and a fanny?

No wonder there's so many depressed and confused kids out there. They can choose to kiss boys, girls, both or change gender completely. What's wrong with being a boy or a girl? and kissing the opposite sex. I would term this healthy (not that anything else is unhealthy).

 

 

Not entirely sure how learning about the existence of LGBT people will stop your nephews riding their bicycles, playing football, arsing about with their mates, or indeed kissing girls?

They're being taught about it because it's an everyday part of life, and the more knowledge they have, the more likely they are to become tolerant open-minded members of society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, El Hombrecito said:

Not entirely sure how learning about the existence of LGBT people will stop your nephews riding their bicycles, playing football, arsing about with their mates, or indeed kissing girls?

They're being taught about it because it's an everyday part of life, and the more knowledge they have, the more likely they are to become tolerant open-minded members of society.

Sure, but at 7 years old?

Seriously, I agree with the sentiment of your argument, but just think 7 is too young to start 'educating' children as they risk being confused.

Some young boys wear girls' clothing and their mother's make-up, whilst some young girls play with 'Action Man', wear jeans and, heaven forbid, climb trees.

That's just fine. Let them get on with it.

Why clutter up their minds with what, at that age, must surely be a difficult subject, rather than let them enjoy themselves while they still young and innocent?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really don't see the point. If I was gay I'd hardly be more encouraged to go and see a game of football if it was forced upon clubs to display a flag, that I'm supposed to associate with, in a relatively meaningless part of the ground. I have no serious opinions for or against, I just really don't see why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Sure, but at 7 years old?

Seriously, I agree with the sentiment of your argument, but just think 7 is too young to start 'educating' children as they risk being confused.

Some young boys wear girls' clothing and their mother's make-up, whilst some young girls play with 'Action Man', wear jeans and, heaven forbid, climb trees.

That's just fine. Let them get on with it.

Why clutter up their minds with what, at that age, must surely be a difficult subject, rather than let them enjoy themselves while they still young and innocent?  

yes that was my point. At 12 maybe. Kids need to be kids for longer. Living in South Africa I've given my kids the benefit of a Steiner education and let them be kids for as long as I can. At ten and thirteen, they are now just starting to experience "teenage" life. And that is a gift I am proud of giving them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

Doing a quick google search suggests that the actual percentage albeit in 2013, was just 1.5%! 

It does say that almost 5% refused to answer or “didn’t know” so even if you “credit” that percentage to the debate, you are probably looking at 6% MAX as a national ratio. 

So, even without allowing for higher percentages within other industries, which is undoubtably the case, you COULD suggest that 1-1.5 players per first team squad COULD be gay. 

Now consider that it’s a male dominated, traditionally working class sport, with players rarely excelling academically and probably not very influenced by the theatre or arts.... is it starting to look slightly more plausible that there aren’t actually that many footballers waiting to come out..?!  

So you’re saying working class uneducated men are less likely to be gay? Keep digging. There may indeed be a higher percentage of gay dancers than footballers, but I suspect you are just reinforcing your own prejudices here, and Robbored is probably closer to the truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Sure, but at 7 years old?

Seriously, I agree with the sentiment of your argument, but just think 7 is too young to start 'educating' children as they risk being confused.

Some young boys wear girls' clothing and their mother's make-up, whilst some young girls play with 'Action Man', wear jeans and, heaven forbid, climb trees.

That's just fine. Let them get on with it.

Why clutter up their minds with what, at that age, must surely be a difficult subject, rather than let them enjoy themselves while they still young and innocent?  

I get your point but I think two key things are:

1) A lot of LGBT people would say that, even as young as seven, they knew they felt different from other children.

2) At the age of seven, kids will be picking up a lot of messages and language from older brothers and sisters, TV, the media, their parents etc. It's daft to pretend that children aren't being "educated" and made aware anyway, regardless of what schools do.

Of course you don't want intensive detailed teaching, and you certainly don't want kids that age having to start to define themselves in any way but what you certainly do want is

a) Kids who already feel that they are different to other kids to feel that it is okay that they feel different and not to start to feel low self-esteem over it.

b) Kids who want to ask why it is that their friend has got two Mummies or two Daddies rather than a Mummy and a Daddy to feel able to ask why that tis

and

c) Kids who have LGBT parents or other relatives to feel able to talk to other kids about their family lives in the same way anyone else would.

Going back to what @DaveInSA says above, I think you get far more depressed, unhappy and confused kids when children feel like they have to act in a certain way and schools do not acknowledge that they might not be like everyone else. Besides, when I was in primary school, I knew my teacher was married and he would occasionally talk about places that he and his wife went or hobbies that he and his wife had when giving examples of things in class. I don't see anything political in an LGBT teacher wanting to do the exact same thing.

I think half the problem, as this thread shows, is that many people seem to feel that every time someone who is LGBT wants to talk about their life, their home life, their relationships and the partner that it is some kind of political statement. In reality, it is just what people do. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Leveller said:

So you’re saying working class uneducated men are less likely to be gay? Keep digging. There may indeed be a higher percentage of gay dancers than footballers, but I suspect you are just reinforcing your own prejudices here, and Robbored is probably closer to the truth. 

Indeed. I suspect that 

a) LGBT people who are involved in the arts are likely to move in circles where they feel more comfortable discussing their sexuality and

b) Some LGBT people might be drawn to a career in the arts because it is an environment where it is easier to talk about their sexuality and because, if you have grown up feeling you are different to everyone else, you might be more drawn to finding an outlet to express yourself in a way you may not find you are able to do with people in day to day conversation.

But I don't think there is any inherent reason why middle-class artsy people and more likely to be LGBT than working class blue collar people. I think you might just feel more comfortable and able to talk about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I get your point but I think two key things are:

1) A lot of LGBT people would say that, even as young as seven, they knew they felt different from other children.

2) At the age of seven, kids will be picking up a lot of messages and language from older brothers and sisters, TV, the media, their parents etc. It's daft to pretend that children aren't being "educated" and made aware anyway, regardless of what schools do.

Of course you don't want intensive detailed teaching, and you certainly don't want kids that age having to start to define themselves in any way but what you certainly do want is

a) Kids who already feel that they are different to other kids to feel that it is okay that they feel different and not to start to feel low self-esteem over it.

b) Kids who want to ask why it is that their friend has got two Mummies or two Daddies rather than a Mummy and a Daddy to feel able to ask why that tis

and

c) Kids who have LGBT parents or other relatives to feel able to talk to other kids about their family lives in the same way anyone else would.

Going back to what @DaveInSA says above, I think you get far more depressed, unhappy and confused kids when children feel like they have to act in a certain way and schools do not acknowledge that they might not be like everyone else. Besides, when I was in primary school, I knew my teacher was married and he would occasionally talk about places that he and his wife went or hobbies that he and his wife had when giving examples of things in class. I don't see anything political in an LGBT teacher wanting to do the exact same thing.

I think half the problem, as this thread shows, is that many people seem to feel that every time someone who is LGBT wants to talk about their life, their home life, their relationships and the partner that it is some kind of political statement. In reality, it is just what people do. 

 

Exactly this. You've put it far more articulately than I ever could, so I'm glad I didn't reply straight away!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do people think football and other sports. Will start to become unisex and transgender. If that makes sense. On a side note my wife rang a company today and they asked her . Are you male female transgender gay lesbian or bi . My wife sort of laughed as in shocked. Also the woman asking said she felt really embarrassed asking but it’s now policy. It was the council. Me I couldn’t give a shit who or what you are . But the world is going mad . The way it’s going. You won’t be able to have all male teams or competition 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I get your point but I think two key things are:

1) A lot of LGBT people would say that, even as young as seven, they knew they felt different from other children.

2) At the age of seven, kids will be picking up a lot of messages and language from older brothers and sisters, TV, the media, their parents etc. It's daft to pretend that children aren't being "educated" and made aware anyway, regardless of what schools do.

Of course you don't want intensive detailed teaching, and you certainly don't want kids that age having to start to define themselves in any way but what you certainly do want is

a) Kids who already feel that they are different to other kids to feel that it is okay that they feel different and not to start to feel low self-esteem over it.

b) Kids who want to ask why it is that their friend has got two Mummies or two Daddies rather than a Mummy and a Daddy to feel able to ask why that tis

and

c) Kids who have LGBT parents or other relatives to feel able to talk to other kids about their family lives in the same way anyone else would.

Going back to what @DaveInSA says above, I think you get far more depressed, unhappy and confused kids when children feel like they have to act in a certain way and schools do not acknowledge that they might not be like everyone else. Besides, when I was in primary school, I knew my teacher was married and he would occasionally talk about places that he and his wife went or hobbies that he and his wife had when giving examples of things in class. I don't see anything political in an LGBT teacher wanting to do the exact same thing.

I think half the problem, as this thread shows, is that many people seem to feel that every time someone who is LGBT wants to talk about their life, their home life, their relationships and the partner that it is some kind of political statement. In reality, it is just what people do. 

 

I don't think I disagree with any of your post, indeed I think it corresponds largely with my own.

I just think perhaps what I might best describe as 'passive education' is the key, especially in so far as it concerns the highlighted section. 

Using your primary school experience as an example, when the primary school pupil asks his male or female teacher what they mean when they say, e.g. they went for a walk with their boyfriend/girlfriend, the teacher should feel comfortable in explaining that, just as boys and girls fall in love with each other, so do boys with other boys and girls with girls, and simply reassure the pupils that all scenarios are absolutely fine.   

The children receive the correct message, but in answer to their curiosity rather than being 'forced' upon them when, at 7 (despite your point 1), I maintain they are too young to be 'taught' about such such subjects unless and until they have raised the matter themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, DaveF said:

A friend of mine @WolfOfWestStreet, smartest bloke I know, IQ of 142, certainly the smartest bloke you know @We.Will.Rock.You innit? He was in an argument once and he went ‘how can I hate gays? My dads one’. Yeah? There’s a lot of truth in that.

My dad, for example, he's not as cosmopolitan or as educated as me and it can be embarrasing you know. He doesn't understand all the new trendy words - like he'll say "poofs" instead of "gays"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, DaveF said:

A friend of mine @WolfOfWestStreet, smartest bloke I know, IQ of 142, certainly the smartest bloke you know @We.Will.Rock.You innit? He was in an argument once and he went ‘how can I hate gays? My dads one’. Yeah? There’s a lot of truth in that.

Gas head acquaintance of mine has a similar IQ score. I've been pressing him to tell me exactly what it is. I know it's either 1, 2 or 4.:cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

I sort of understand what you are saying, but I am one of those who fall in to the category highlighted (in fact, I probably look at myself in the mirror several times a day) and, apart from being sexually attractive, vain and egotistical, I am most certainly heterosexual.

If only modesty was a visible trait..! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Yet despite there being considerably more builders than professional footballers, I have never seen Rainbow bricks outside my local Wickes!

Why so much pressure on one profession? I still think a lot stems from the media’s obsession with ‘outing’ a big name player to sell newspapers (or more to the point in this day and age to generate clicks)

Thing is, millions of people don't watch live building supplies retailer action, or visit Wickes in their tens of thousands everyday Saturday, read about in the papers, discuss it on forums etc 

Football's being used to further agendas by appealing to the masses IMO. 

Wish they'd #### right off to be honest, leave footy alone FFS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...