Play Nice Society, Religion & Politics Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

GotTheGoodes said:
What's the problem MarkyMark?
Click to expand...

Easy we are a football club.

And as can be seen from the the disaster and basket case of the NFL and places like ESPN it really does not help the code, business, supporters or the club in the long term.

Just play football. That is all the club should do and be seen to do. It ain't hard.

Everyone has an axe to grind. Part of the beauty of sport is to forget that and just watch the game.

100% against all these themed weekends and what not. Just play and do the sport. Forget the other s**t. I have oodles of time to do that other stuff.

The politicization of everything, even your leisure hours, is not a good thing.

And a terrible thing for equality.
 
Kummerspeck said:
What about those who can't because they have to face homophobia in the sport they love?
Click to expand...

So many points here. But let me keep it shortish....I deleted so much and I really want to keep this forum to football because this does not need to be politicized as well as everything else even though that is what is desired by so many so this is the last on this particular topic.

In a nutshell, taking your absolutely hypothetical point about someone in the sport facing homophobia, why do you think a football club entering a float in what has become a social event divorced from its original purpose (I know people at the original mardi gras by the way) will have any positive effect on them?

Our club cannot even police its own players to have them avoid being around the sale of coke (putting it politely). The AFL employs diversity officers that assault people on the field. Its morals in head office descend to the level of openly power imbalanced affairs.

If you want these institutions to be the moral and cultural guardians is it too much to ask they clean up their own bedroom and house a bit?

In any event let us return to this hypothetical powerless actor devoid of being able to "do something" in the face of homophobia in this sport.

This actor of your has the following on his side against homophobia;

The AFL
All clubs at every level
Popular culture
The MSM and huge portions of both left and right media - essentially 99% of ALL media
Hollywood
"A" lister's everywhere and all the rest of the alphabet too boot
The zeitgeist
Musicians form indy acts to international powerhouses
Something like 40 years of solid affirmative action
The vast majority of people around him in the sport - players, spectators, supporters and rule makers
Laws in the game
The whole legal system
Actual (draconian) worded laws
Parliament
The whole of the education system from kindy to post graduate with internal rules and systems that defy logic and the rule of (actual) law
That disgusting human rights tribunal
The UN for crying out loud

Probably missed a few

And against this stands, in your hypothetical, some moron either too dumb, or totally without self worth, making a gay joke or saying, SAYING, something that hurts their feelings

Yes. I can see how the Swans putting a float in the local street parade and all the virtue that signals is going to tip the balance.

Just be a football club. I reckon your hypothetical guy has a bit of power on his side he can harness apart from this ridiculous float.
 
MarkP said:
So many points here. But let me keep it shortish....I deleted so much and I really want to keep this forum to football because this does not need to be politicized as well as everything else even though that is what is desired by so many so this is the last on this particular topic.

In a nutshell, taking your absolutely hypothetical point about someone in the sport facing homophobia, why do you think a football club entering a float in what has become a social event divorced from its original purpose (I know people at the original mardi gras by the way) will have any positive effect on them?

Our club cannot even police its own players to have them avoid being around the sale of coke (putting it politely). The AFL employs diversity officers that assault people on the field. Its morals in head office descend to the level of openly power imbalanced affairs.

If you want these institutions to be the moral and cultural guardians is it too much to ask they clean up their own bedroom and house a bit?

In any event let us return to this hypothetical powerless actor devoid of being able to "do something" in the face of homophobia in this sport.

This actor of your has the following on his side against homophobia;

The AFL
All clubs at every level
Popular culture
The MSM and huge portions of both left and right media - essentially 99% of ALL media
Hollywood
"A" lister's everywhere and all the rest of the alphabet too boot
The zeitgeist
Musicians form indy acts to international powerhouses
Something like 40 years of solid affirmative action
The vast majority of people around him in the sport - players, spectators, supporters and rule makers
Laws in the game
The whole legal system
Actual (draconian) worded laws
Parliament
The whole of the education system from kindy to post graduate with internal rules and systems that defy logic and the rule of (actual) law
That disgusting human rights tribunal
The UN for crying out loud

Probably missed a few

And against this stands, in your hypothetical, some moron either too dumb, or totally without self worth, making a gay joke or saying, SAYING, something that hurts their feelings

Yes. I can see how the Swans putting a float in the local street parade and all the virtue that signals is going to tip the balance.

Just be a football club. I reckon your hypothetical guy has a bit of power on his side he can harness apart from this ridiculous float.
Click to expand...


I agree with this, I do not think some float changes the opinion of anyone who was causing an issue of inclusiveness anyway. In this instance you can see the reaction now from someone who was homophobic, I wont type some guesses, but I have heard plenty from our rainbow socks etc.

Lets just play footy and be good people and leave political causes outside, focus on the performance of the team.

Having said that I wont be protesting a float or any other cause the club wants to involve themselves in either, just seems all a bit pointless to me personally.
 
Think about it guys, if we put a float in the Mardi Gras is it more likely that people in the LGBTI community will invest their very high disposable income in the Swans or an NRL side?

We can keep saying that a footy club is just about playing footy but that is nonsense - a footy club is about getting enough income to compete with other clubs so we can play footy on a level playing field (or a non-level playing field in our favour).

Having a float in the Mardi Gras fits with the clubs stance on inclusiveness but is also a very sound business decision.
 
MarkP said:
In a nutshell, taking your absolutely hypothetical point about someone in the sport facing homophobia
Click to expand...
Homophobia occuring in sports and in the crowds at the football is a bit beyond just a hypothetical point. It happens quite regularly. It's pretty easy for you to say "oh I just want to watch football without worrying about anything else ☹️☹️☹️", but there are groups of people who can't do that through no fault of their own.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kummerspeck said:
Homophobia occuring in sports and in the crowds at the football is a bit beyond just a hypothetical point. It happens quite regularly. It's pretty easy for you to say "oh I just want to watch football without worrying about anything else ☹️☹️☹️", but there are groups of people who can't do that through no fault of their own.
Click to expand...

1. I think the Mardi Gras float, whilst it makes me cringe, is probably good PR and will get us some members.
2. Homophobia hasn't been prevalent in footy for nigh on 20 years. The occasional instances of it in crowds of supporters won't be eradicated by participation in a parade.
3. People, by and large, would like to be able to just get on with their lives irrespective of their skin colour, gender, sexuality or the rest without being constantly badgered at by a small group of others who seem dedicated to perpetuating a sense of victimhood in society.
4. It does seem that going to the footy now seems to necessarily include some sort of sermon from someone about something largely no longer existent.
 
BruceFromBalnarring said:
4. It does seem that going to the footy now seems to necessarily include some sort of sermon from someone about something largely no longer existent.
Click to expand...

I would like to see your sources for this.
 
Kummerspeck said:
Lol.
Click to expand...

Why is that "Lol"? And why did you only respond to the first phrase in a more detailed sentence?

Do you have any sources that show that further lecturing, themed rounds, virtue signalling by players and confected human rights commission prosecutions are going to stop the few remaining bigots from conducting themselves atrociously?
 
sataris said:
I would like to see your sources for this.
Click to expand...

The country just voted overwhelmingly in favour of marriage equality, and the first ever pride game played at the SCG for premiership points enjoyed widespread support. Homophobia might still exist, but it's much less than it used to be.
 
I've seen jokes on here every week or two that infer that homosexuality is bad. "we were bent over" etc etc. The point of this turns of phrase is that its demeaning to be that, its less than a "normal man". Not saying these are the same people who beat up and yell abuse at queer people on the weekends but it is part of the same continuum and that stuff does still happen despite the significant changes our society is going through in regards to homosexuality.

Saying that you don't hear or see homophobia at the footy is way less meaningful than you think. It just says you don't hear and see it. But every time I go to the footy I hear people calling players ******s and NTTAWWTters pretty regularly. Both what you say and I say can be true, but we probably have pretty different understanding and relationships to homophobia.
 
Deccas said:
I've seen jokes on here every week or two that infer that homosexuality is bad. "we were bent over" etc etc. The point of this turns of phrase is that its demeaning to be that, its less than a "normal man". Not saying these are the same people who beat up and yell abuse at queer people on the weekends but it is part of the same continuum and that stuff does still happen despite the significant changes our society is going through in regards to homosexuality.

Saying that you don't hear or see homophobia at the footy is way less meaningful than you think. It just says you don't hear and see it. But every time I go to the footy I hear people calling players ******s and NTTAWWTters pretty regularly. Both what you say and I say can be true, but we probably have pretty different understanding and relationships to homophobia.
Click to expand...
IMO, this is absolutely true. It is much reduced from what it was when I was young, but it is definitely still out there. My sons are in their 30s and neither of them are homophobic, but they still use references like 'bent over'. The Sydney thread, and probably the whole forum, continue to use terms such as MILF. As long as we continue to use sex-related terms in a demeaning or degrading manner, the issues will continue.

Adam Goodes stood up against casual racism and look how the public reacted. They were happy to have indigenous round as a concept, but not happy to have the idea enforced.

From the moment the AFL became a business rather than a sport, it was always headed this way. Whether or not you like the political stances taken, the concept is here to stay.
 
Kummerspeck said:
Because you legitimately think that your experience as an old straight man is representative of the state of homophobia in society.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't it be representative? Homophobia describes subjectively the "sense" of the person fearing or otherwise the homosexuality. As an "old, straight, white" man why wouldn't I have a handle on it?

I'm disappointed, though, that you seem to have excised a quite small segment of a much broader series of contentions in order to attack my argument.
 
BruceFromBalnarring said:
Why wouldn't it be representative? Homophobia describes subjectively the "sense" of the person fearing or otherwise the homosexuality. As an "old, straight, white" man why wouldn't I have a handle on it?
Click to expand...
Because you'd have no experience being subjected to homophobia of any kind. How on earth can you claim that something you'd never have to experience is no longer an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top