Gareth Thomas: Hate in the beautiful game

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am

Excellent programme on BBC2 last night. Shows that English Football (men's game) has a long way to go with respect to homosexuality.

Gareth Thomas was very good.

Gordon Taylor, representing PFA, was poor.

Greg Clark, FA, seemed to spend most of the programme not returning Gareth's phone call - and then would only meet with no cameras present. That also gets a "poor" from me.

Gareth posted on Crystal Palace message board - asking to meet to discuss views posted re Brighton. No one showed up for the meeting in a pub.

Anyone else watch it?

Real ale 2 · Post by **Real ale 2** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:55 am

Yes ..Paul .pretty depressing ,a sport that pays lip service to equality and core values like respect

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:57 am

I haven't watched it but I probably will. Sounds like a decent programme. If there's any doubt how far we have to go with homosexuality in football, you only have to read some of the comments on this forum - which I'm sure will pop up on this thread from the usual suspects soon.

Hendrickxz · Post by **Hendrickxz** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:53 am

Gordon Taylor was poor was he? You could knock me down with a feather! That guy (irrespective of his football past) strikes me as a right drip....

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:21 pm

Speaks volumes that a former rugby player had to present it.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:28 pm

Maybe people just want to get on with watching and appreciating sport without having this rammed down their throat all the time. The fact nobody turned up and the lack of replies since this thread started might highlight that.

Walton · Post by **Walton** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:50 pm

I've always wondered what the homophobe obsession with things getting rammed down throats is all about.

TractorFace · Post by **TractorFace** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:08 pm

Yes, it does seem odd.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:24 pm

So, how would we feel if we had a "young star" in the academy - but he decided to throw in football because he wanted to let people know he was gay?

Are we for or against what Gareth Thomas is speaking about?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:31 pm

Most people would've wanted us to sign Hitzlsperger when he was playing.

Would that opinion change if he was still playing and had announced he was gay?

Woodleyclaret · Post by **Woodleyclaret** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:54 pm

Gordon Taylor really dropped on on his job after a mediocre playing career.He seems to be as much use as a chocolate fireguard yet picks up a six figure salary for representing his members.

JohnDearyMe · Post by **JohnDearyMe** » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:47 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Most people would've wanted us to sign Hitzlsperger when he was playing.

Would that opinion change if he was still playing and had announced he was gay?

You would really hope not.

But clearly there are a sizeable number of football players who are still too scared to be open about their sexuality.

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:50 am

Watched this earlier and my thoughts were that it would take A LOTTTT for the opinions in the stands to change.

With the "kick it out" campaign having been going for over a decade ... And having lots of high profile players championing it (I remember the mad dash to get the black and white interlinked wristbands years ago when I was at school). There was still an incident in the programme where racial abuse was still in the stands.

So even with a big push backed massively by players and governing bodies would we be looking at 20/30 years before things were tatting to change.

There are a lot less racist comments made from the stands nowadays but it still happens up and down the country - I'm with whay the FA' spokesperson said and that it's maybe a bit too soon still for big chages to be made as the world isn't a rosy, happy place we all wish it was and that a lot of people would feel the need to actually shout more abuse if it wasnt allowed (similar to the spurs fans and the controversy of them singing yid army etc).

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:32 am

Personally think its irrelevant and this is tbe problem. Everyone seems to think everybody needs to know their private business these days.

Doesnt matter to me whether they are straight, gay, bisexual, whatever. Black, white, yellow, orange... actually them orange birds get on my nerves.

As long as that person can do their job who cares what goes on behind closed doors as long as its harming nobody?

The amount of diversity we have forced on us is in my eyes the problem.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:36 am

Forced on you?

SO when one of those people who're more diverse than others feels forced to be 'normal'?....

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:02 am

Rammed down our throats: tick.
Goes on behind closed doors: tick.
Forced on us: tick.

Good start on the bingo card.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:10 am

Call me old fashioned. But what someone does in the bedroom is none of my business. Its only a big deal because people make it one.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:23 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p057nmkt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

'Against the Law' was on a few weeks ago. It was pretty interesting. Part of it illustrated the problem that seems to trouble some these days.

You have the ordinary man who lives an ordinary life and happens to fancy men, and all he wants is what most of the rest of us want, a loving stable relationship with Mr Right.

Then you have your 'in your face' gay, mincing around and screaming out his sexuality. Whilst these can be funny when you get to know them, many find them uncomfortable, and I think it is these that those that object to gay sexuality don't like.

Homosexuality has been wrongly maligned in the past - both by our laws and our social attitudes. I think it is great that we are getting away from this and that they can take their rightful place in our community without fear, but the gay community needs to be a bit more reserved in their approach if they really want to win over the whole population.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:26 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Personally think its irrelevant and this is tbe problem. Everyone seems to think everybody needs to know their private business these days.

Doesnt matter to me whether they are straight, gay, bisexual, whatever. Black, white, yellow, orange... actually them orange birds get on my nerves.

As long as that person can do their job who cares what goes on behind closed doors as long as its harming nobody?

The amount of diversity we have forced on us is in my eyes the problem.

But that's entirely the point. Why should a homosexual relationship have to be "private business" and "behind closed doors" when a heterosexual relationship doesn't?

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:26 am

In team sport I imagine the issue is highly relevant and difficult. There's a lot of physicality (on and off the pitch - showers for example) and banter going on. I've no idea how you can deal with that.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:29 am

Common sense posts from Cricketfieldclarets.
Others have a different slant on it so the usual suspects take offence tick

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:31 am

Blackrod wrote:Common sense posts from Cricketfieldclarets.
Others have a different slant on it so the usual suspects take offence tick

Who's taking offence? The only thing I'm taking offence at is you implying I'm taking offence. I'm very offended.

ClaretEngineer · Post by **ClaretEngineer** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:44 am

HelloHiGoodbye wrote:But that's entirely the point. Why should a homosexual relationship have to be "private business" and "behind closed doors" when a heterosexual relationship doesn't?

Its funny how you only picked out homosexual from that list.

Like Cricketfield, I have no interest in what A N Other gets up to in the privacy of their own home or in public/

I just do see the necessary for some (and that encompasses all areas of the society) to shout about how different they are from others.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:11 am

Hipper wrote:In team sport I imagine the issue is highly relevant and difficult. There's a lot of physicality (on and off the pitch - showers for example) and banter going on. I've no idea how you can deal with that.

Hi Hipper, interesting comment. Yes, a lot of physical contact in football. As fans, I'm sure we are all encouraged by the "team togetherness" when the players exchange their "group hugs" before the game and again when they celebrate a goal and "fall on top of each other in a heap."

We can deal with that. The players can deal with that.

Do any of us think it would be any different if one or two of the players had declared that they were homosexual? Gareth Thomas demonstrated that it didn't make a bit of difference to his rugby team mates (or players on the team). And, it doesn't make any difference in any other team sport.

LeadBelly · Post by **LeadBelly** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:46 am

"In team sport I imagine the issue is highly relevant and difficult. There's a lot of physicality (on and off the pitch - showers for example) and banter going on. I've no idea how you can deal with that."

They seem to manage it OK in rugby where physicality and the need to support each other is probably greater.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:52 am

ClaretEngineer wrote:Its funny how you only picked out homosexual from that list.

Like Cricketfield, I have no interest in what A N Other gets up to in the privacy of their own home or in public/

I just do see the necessary for some (and that encompasses all areas of the society) to shout about how different they are from others.

Sorry, what? It was an example. Many think it's okay for a heterosexual couple to be public and a homosexual couple to be private. It comes up every single time when this subject is raised. "I don't want it rammed down my throat." Oo er.

If a man is in love with a man, they should be able to shout it from the rooftops - just like a man in love with woman can. Likewise, if a man is in love with a man and wants to keep it more private then brilliant. It's this weird opinion that gay couples (FOR EXAMPLE) should be restricted to "the privacy of their own homes". We never, ever say that about heterosexual couples. And that's homophobia.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:59 am

Paul Waine wrote: Do any of us think it would be any different if one or two of the players had declared that they were homosexual? Gareth Thomas demonstrated that it didn't make a bit of difference to his rugby team mates (or players on the team). And, it doesn't make any difference in any other team sport.

No, it shouldn't make a difference. Because, and this might shock some - you can't catch gay. I've hugged an actual gay person, I know right? Been for a drink with a gay, even actually lived with a gay and you know what? Still straight. Weird innit?

LeadBelly · Post by **LeadBelly** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:01 am

As HHG alludes - I think the "rammed down your throat" issue with homosexuality is absurd.

On this forum we have loads of "I'd like to do her" type comments, sometimes whole threads devoted to a particular female. Is that people "ramming" their heterosexuality down people's throats? I don't find it so (though sometimes it can get pretty tasteless).

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:07 am

LeadBelly wrote:As HHG alludes - I think the "rammed down your throat" issue with homosexuality is absurd.

On this forum we have loads of "I'd like to do her" type comments, sometimes whole threads devoted to a particular female. Is that people "ramming" their heterosexuality down people's throats? I don't find it so (though sometimes it can get pretty tasteless).

Yes it is but that's okay because those people are NORMAL™ .

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:41 am

HelloHiGoodbye wrote:But that's entirely the point. Why should a homosexual relationship have to be "private business" and "behind closed doors" when a heterosexual relationship doesn't?

But why do people have to come out as gay? I dont come out as straight?

If I see a gay couple I shouldnt have to think that oh thats a bit different. I shouldnt even notice.

People make an issue that isnt there. 'Oh I never expected him or her to be gay!'

If someone is gay the reaction should be 'and?' or 'so what', 'big deal'. But because people feel the need that everyone must know it is what causes the problem.

Anyway thats my take on things, will not post on this again because people will try and twist your opinion or thoughts on something.

I respect people for who or what they are. Shouldnt matter what sexual orientation they are. I am not surprised people didnt commit to the program for a variety of reasons.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:58 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:But why do people have to come out as gay? I dont come out as straight?

If I see a gay couple I shouldnt have to think that oh thats a bit different. I shouldnt even notice.

People make an issue that isnt there. 'Oh I never expected him or her to be gay!'

If someone is gay the reaction should be 'and?' or 'so what', 'big deal'. But because people feel the need that everyone must know it is what causes the problem.

Anyway thats my take on things, will not post on this again because people will try and twist your opinion or thoughts on something.

I respect people for who or what they are. Shouldnt matter what sexual orientation they are. I am not surprised people didnt commit to the program for a variety of reasons.

Agree. We shouldn't expect people to come out etc but the fact you never had to come out as straight is the exact problem. Because you're "normal". It'd be fantastic if people could be themselves all the time but unfortunately that's not the way it is - probably because of a binary patriarchal society we have.

Fact is - homosexual people are persecuted by heterosexual people. It's not the other way around. That in turn creates this Pride movement which I am all in favour of. And sure - to some Pride may seem over the top but when your identity has been supressed and made a crime - I think you're allowed to take back some ownership.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:19 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:But why do people have to come out as gay? I dont come out as straight?

If I see a gay couple I shouldnt have to think that oh thats a bit different. I shouldnt even notice.

People make an issue that isnt there. 'Oh I never expected him or her to be gay!'

If someone is gay the reaction should be 'and?' or 'so what', 'big deal'. But because people feel the need that everyone must know it is what causes the problem.

Anyway thats my take on things, will not post on this again because people will try and twist your opinion or thoughts on something.

I respect people for who or what they are. Shouldnt matter what sexual orientation they are. I am not surprised people didnt commit to the program for a variety of reasons.

We live in a society where being straight was deemed to be the minimum requirement until quite recently and anything else was shameful.
A large part of the reason for this was religion.
In about a generation or 2, no one will be that bothered if someone announces their sexuality, but equally so people of different sexualities may not feel the pressure of being different.

You're correct in saying the reaction should be "so what" etc, but unfortunately it isn't the standard reaction, some people still attach a stigma to it.
Social barriers are still there and still need knocking down.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:51 pm

Why should anyone have to 'announce' anything ?
Also what someone perceives as normal and shameful are quite different things. Maybe they weren't once which is wrong. People shouldn't be ashamed of being gay but why the need for the trumpets and fanfares.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:54 pm

Some people make gay people feel ashamed, or try too.

This is something many people can't get their heads around.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:15 pm

I've always been confused by straight people's concentration on gay people's sex lives. As if being gay is just reduced to the physical act of sex.

It isn't how you'd define a heterosexual relationship, so why does it happen for a gay couple?

All this talk of behind closed doors and finding it disgusting (which we've seen on this board before).

What if, behind those closed doors, a gay couple come home from work and eat good food together, watch films and tv, play with their pets, talk crap to strangers on football messageboards, and then go to bed, go to sleep and wake up the next day for work? How is that disgusting? They're normal people who love who they love.

It's not just an endless sexfest of rubber and grindr for the vast majority of gay people. Yes, of course it might be for some people, but only in the same way there are lads going out on a Friday with the "any hole's a goal" credo and bringing home a 3/10 lass just because it's a shag. That's virtually inscribed in male culture.

I saw a Stephen Fry documentary a while ago where he was talking to someone who was disgusted by the physical act of gay sex. Stephen Fry told him that, as a gay man, he had never had penetrative sex. He's just gay, he's not a sex obsessive. It's those who are against homosexuality who obsess over it.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:01 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:I've always been confused by straight people's concentration on gay people's sex lives. As if being gay is just reduced to the physical act of sex.

It isn't how you'd define a heterosexual relationship, so why does it happen for a gay couple?

All this talk of behind closed doors and finding it disgusting (which we've seen on this board before).

What if, behind those closed doors, a gay couple come home from work and eat good food together, watch films and tv, play with their pets, talk crap to strangers on football messageboards, and then go to bed, go to sleep and wake up the next day for work? How is that disgusting? They're normal people who love who they love.

It's not just an endless sexfest of rubber and grindr for the vast majority of gay people. Yes, of course it might be for some people, but only in the same way there are lads going out on a Friday with the "any hole's a goal" credo and bringing home a 3/10 lass just because it's a shag. That's virtually inscribed in male culture.

I saw a Stephen Fry documentary a while ago where he was talking to someone who was disgusted by the physical act of gay sex. Stephen Fry told him that, as a gay man, he had never had penetrative sex. He's just gay, he's not a sex obsessive. It's those who are against homosexuality who obsess over it.

Great post.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:04 pm

Blackrod wrote:Why should anyone have to 'announce' anything ?
Also what someone perceives as normal and shameful are quite different things. Maybe they weren't once which is wrong. People shouldn't be ashamed of being gay but why the need for the trumpets and fanfares.

Some gay people perhaps feel that they have to 'announce' their sexuality because so for long (and still) being gay has been judged. It's fantastic that we have open people on television and, albeit less, in sport. People need to have role models who are like them. It's okay for us - white, straight me. We've been privileged in that situation forever - and still are. If I ever have children and if they're gay - I want them to live in a world where they can be proud of themselves. Not hidden. It's not that world yet.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:02 pm

Thanks, all. Some good debate and good views shared. Maybe Gareth Thomas will find encouragement in what we've discussed.

Question was asked "why come out?" I think the answer is because the world, or at least the football world, has a very strong bias towards a heterosexual world and a world where the male footballer who is gay must hide his gay identify (and the same with many of the fans). That can't be good for the footballer and the footballer's team. It also cannot be good for the fans who are gay and see that in a football world gay identities must be hidden.

If you watched Gareth Thomas's programme you will know how the Crystal Palace message board discussed BHA's promotion. There would be outrage today if the CP fans had been racist. It should be the same if any of us are homophobic.

HHG sums it up very well: "I want them to live in a world where they can be proud of themselves."

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:32 pm

A lot seems to be made about what other players would think which I don't think would be the big problem.

Mentioned in the programme how the fans have a pack mentality and one of the big things football fans more than fans of other sports will try and do is get under an opposition players skin. If one of our players was gay, I don't think it would be our fans that would be giving them grief but as Burnley fans did to Terry, Gerrard, Sterling, Lallana ... and lots more... It would be the opposition fans making chants etc to throw them off their game.

That would be a huge problem for the player/s, the FA, clubs, PFA and so on..... Which is why it was mentioned repeatedly that it was not the right time for players to "come out". Someone mentioned above that in a couple of generations that it probably won't be a problem as being gay will be as "normal" as being straight. TV shows, films and a whole host of documentaries such as this one will change the younger generations opinions of it. But for your typical working class, meat eating, beer swilling football fan it would take more than a documentary to stop the urge of starting a chant against an openly gay opposition player. Then a lot more fans would join in with it being "banter". It's easy to say that we can change a whole demographics mindset by introducing a few by-laws that clubs have to sign..... but in reality it would be very hard to implement.

That doesn't mean that all football fans are homophobic animals..... Just that a lot are set in their ways of Saturday 3pm being a place they can say/do what they want (which they obviously cannot) which wouldn't be able to be managed just yet.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:16 pm

bfccrazy wrote:A lot seems to be made about what other players would think which I don't think would be the big problem.

Mentioned in the programme how the fans have a pack mentality and one of the big things football fans more than fans of other sports will try and do is get under an opposition players skin. If one of our players was gay, I don't think it would be our fans that would be giving them grief but as Burnley fans did to Terry, Gerrard, Sterling, Lallana ... and lots more... It would be the opposition fans making chants etc to throw them off their game.

That would be a huge problem for the player/s, the FA, clubs, PFA and so on..... Which is why it was mentioned repeatedly that it was not the right time for players to "come out". Someone mentioned above that in a couple of generations that it probably won't be a problem as being gay will be as "normal" as being straight. TV shows, films and a whole host of documentaries such as this one will change the younger generations opinions of it. But for your typical working class, meat eating, beer swilling football fan it would take more than a documentary to stop the urge of starting a chant against an openly gay opposition player. Then a lot more fans would join in with it being "banter". It's easy to say that we can change a whole demographics mindset by introducing a few by-laws that clubs have to sign..... but in reality it would be very hard to implement.

That doesn't mean that all football fans are homophobic animals..... Just that a lot are set in their ways of Saturday 3pm being a place they can say/do what they want (which they obviously cannot) which wouldn't be able to be managed just yet.

Hi bfcc, you may be right - but it is very depressing to read that "because it can't be managed, we shouldn't try to manage it..." (my words, not anyone else's). Aren't we condoning the wrong - and I'm sure we are all in no doubt that it is wrong - to use sexual preference, or race, or so many other areas of "difference" to create "grief" for others, whether they are the opposing team's footballers or the opposing team's fans (or our own fans, or own players). No one today is in any doubt about the wrongness of "monkey chants" and the like, why not exactly the same with homophobic chants?

Yes, for most teenagers, and 20 somethings, and probably 30 somethings sexual preference is a "non-issue." (Note that these are also the ages of our football players). So, why should the ignorant views of older generations be allowed to continue and rule in this area? (Ignorant, definition: "lacking knowledge or awareness" and "discourteous or rude"). Surely, the older generations also have the capacity to educate themselves, to learn what is wrong about their own behaviours and to know how they can correct their behaviour. And, maybe the rest of us can know not to join in "the banter" as you describe it, nor to condone their wrong behaviour by our silence, but actually speak out against this wrong?

I'm one of the older generation. Gareth Thomas's programme has helped educate me and has encouraged me. I'm sure that is what Gareth Thomas is aiming at, not the youngsters but me and others of my generation and the generations both older and a decade or two younger than me.

Saxoman · Post by **Saxoman** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:28 pm

If 2 men kissed in front of me, as a heterosexual couple might, I'd find it unususal. I think it needs to become more open and common place and people would then get used to it. That's my very simple view. Back to your complex assessments now..

basil6345789 · Post by **basil6345789** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:31 pm

Saxo - that's because you're a Rovers weirdo.
What concerns me is that this Gay thing has become big corporate money making stuff. How much is Gareth Thomas making out of it, how much did the Gay Pride organisers make out of it. It's become marketable like drinking gin, proseco and eating macaroons. There will be a small number with genetics leaning that way but a whole lot of not genuine people laking about at it.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:43 pm

basil6345789 wrote:There will be a small number with genetics leaning that way but a whole lot of not genuine people laking about at it.

BLOODY PLASTICS!

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:57 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi bfcc, you may be right - but it is very depressing to read that "because it can't be managed, we shouldn't try to manage it..." (my words, not anyone else's). Aren't we condoning the wrong - and I'm sure we are all in no doubt that it is wrong - to use sexual preference, or race, or so many other areas of "difference" to create "grief" for others, whether they are the opposing team's footballers or the opposing team's fans (or our own fans, or own players). No one today is in any doubt about the wrongness of "monkey chants" and the like, why not exactly the same with homophobic chants?

Yes, for most teenagers, and 20 somethings, and probably 30 somethings sexual preference is a "non-issue." (Note that these are also the ages of our football players). So, why should the ignorant views of older generations be allowed to continue and rule in this area? (Ignorant, definition: "lacking knowledge or awareness" and "discourteous or rude"). Surely, the older generations also have the capacity to educate themselves, to learn what is wrong about their own behaviours and to know how they can correct their behaviour. And, maybe the rest of us can know not to join in "the banter" as you describe it, nor to condone their wrong behaviour by our silence, but actually speak out against this wrong?

I'm one of the older generation. Gareth Thomas's programme has helped educate me and has encouraged me. I'm sure that is what Gareth Thomas is aiming at, not the youngsters but me and others of my generation and the generations both older and a decade or two younger than me.

I'm late 20s and honestly dont care if somebody prefers male or female company. I mentioned in an earlier post about how the race thing was dealt with by "kick it out" but it's taken almost 2 decades and in this programme it still occured.

It's the same thing with the homophobia maybe - that these small steps now will build up over the years as the kick it out campaign did and is still doing after all these years..... There still must be a problem if the organisation is still campaigning after so long after all the good work they have done.

It'll always cause a divide as it's may be the macho thing to be a little homophobic even subconsciously - "stop being a puff" etc... Said without a 2nd thought to a mate for doing something shows that it'e a mindset which will have to be changed quite drastically. I can say I have no problem with a gay person but I am probably guilty of calling a mate a "puff" or probably something more derogatory when it's broken down without a 2nd thought in the moment. I've heard dads say it to their lads on a Sunday morning over nonsical things even.

To just say "well we shouldnt do it" is the easy thing but as a whole it would be extremely difficult to control in whatever way it was dealt with. If there was a magic button to stop all discrimination then it would be brilliant but maybe the FA are rightly or wrongly trying to protect players from what seems would be the obvious outcome of them being openly gay until more background work is done to educate people and maybe change all generations opinions and maybe "habbits".

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:42 am

You can't just not like something - Thought Police

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:20 am

I used to think of myself as young but in less than a week I will enter my fourth decade on this earth...

I have so much hope for those younger than me who've grown up in an interconnected world who don't see people by their skin colour or sexual orientation.
I look forward to generations who do not see the bloodbaths of the early 20th century as a source of pride or judge someone solely on the place of their birth.

Good luck to them, I hope they make the world a better place and the generations in power at present do not fail them.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:20 am

Bin Ont Turf wrote:You can't just not like something - Thought Police

You can just not like something.

I think the issue is the various forms of oppressing someone .

JohnMac · Post by **JohnMac** » Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:34 am

Sadly it will always be a problem, maybe not in every Country but someone, somewhere will continue to persecute and prosecute normally in the name of religion.

Religion is the cause of most problems throughout the planet yet somewhat misguidedly always sees itself as the cure.

As regards UK we are decades away from general acceptance and education is the only way to alter peoples mindset. The younger people are being educated and have a different perspective to older people who aren't so well schooled in these matters, the reality is were told it was wrong and immoral by all and sundry including the law.

Slightly off track but we were also taught things that some (but not all) of the younger generation find strange. You know like standing up to let a female sit down on a bus, I still do it and I'm in my 60's yet many youngsters wouldn't even give it a thought.

All I'm saying is you can't change mindsets overnight.

HelloHiGoodbye · Post by **HelloHiGoodbye** » Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:53 am

basil6345789 wrote:Saxo - that's because you're a Rovers weirdo.
What concerns me is that this Gay thing has become big corporate money making stuff. How much is Gareth Thomas making out of it, how much did the Gay Pride organisers make out of it. It's become marketable like drinking gin, proseco and eating macaroons. There will be a small number with genetics leaning that way but a whole lot of not genuine people laking about at it.

Yeah coz no-one's ever marketed and made money out of heterosexual relationships.

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:25 am

HelloHiGoodbye wrote:Yeah coz no-one's ever marketed and made money out of heterosexual relationships.

The documentary mentioned in the thread talked about how marketable the first gay player would become. It would be a massive thing and make the player a lot of money - It seemed almost like it was egging on a player to come out as they would recieve huge endorsements.

Gareth Thomas was a nobody to most of the UK before he came out as gay so you can't say that it isn't marketable. A footballer doing it would be a much bigger deal than a rugby player doing it.