What about if one believes black people are lesser (but never acts on it). Would that be fine?
Foreign secretary advice to LGBT fans.... Be respectful
- Thread starter GaryLifo
- Start date
I don’t understand why me asking the question is bothering him (or now you).
It’s hardly a pushy question is it?
He’s free not to answer, and I’m free to ask.
If it’s not my business to ask, I very much doubt it’s your business to tell me what I can or can’t do…
So if he says yes. What difference does it make?
Err... well, I work and socialize with gay people, you know. And who the hell are you to ask me that question?
Maybe it would show people engaging with him are wasting their time.
Of course not, but unfortunately there will always be racism and homophobia. It will hopefully get less and less, but never at zero.
It means that those giving their own time to converse with him on the topic of GAYNESS at this World Cup (that’s what this thread is dedicated to) will have a clearer picture of his actual stance on the issue.
I’m not the only poster asking for him to answer this one question.
I’ll make my stance really clear and state that I think people who oppress gay people’s rights to live equally as straight people are immoral pieces of shit.
I’m not gay, but that’s just my personal opinion.
That was pretty easy.
Possibly, but if someone believes it's immoral that much your not going to change thier mind. It's seems it's mainly religious people with me. Religion is stuck in the dark ages.
Maybe it’s to see if the answer flies in concert or conflict with the incessant pontification.
I mean, in a thread where people are discussing lgbt issues, it kinda matters knowing where the other person stands on the topic.
No one’s said they want to change his mind on anything. Just to know the poster’s stance on that simple question.
If we speak to the facts and leave out the opinion/belief; being gay is not a choice and it is not against any natural laws.
If some countries in the 21st century prohibit homosexuality then they open themselves up to ridicule by those of us that deal in a factual world.
That ridicule is not anti muslim or anti-right wing christian - it's just pro-fact.
.
I think it pretty obvious.
He seems to want to keep his true feelings closeted so maybe you are right.
Anyone can believe what they want, but countries shouldn't have laws based on a book that was written thousands of years ago. Time moves on.
Don't be obtuse, I obviously don't.
I don't even expect him to take a stand.
I do, however, expect him to be aware of what kind of position he's in and choose his words carefully. The same goes for Harry Kane. You can't just prattle on about how important something is one day, and then explicitly state that kicking a ball about is more important the next , without people noticing the blatant (and, frankly, grotesque) discrepancy.
Footballers are, whether they realize it or not, in a position to make a difference. They can be a force for good if they choose to be. In this particular case, the latter is not unrealistic at all: wear the armband, take the punishment, tell FIFA to go feck themselves. Symbolically, that would have been huge in the context of this fecked-up tournament.
I'm sorry I did a hit and run on you...
No, Lewis said it well before the Saudi grand prix that he was planning to wear that helmet, and said that he hoped that someone from the LGBT+ community or worked with them would reach out. So the press reached out for comments from the Qatari authorities, and get this....this is only a year ago:
"Nasser Al Khater, chief executive of the 2022 soccer World Cup that Qatar is hosting, was asked about it at a media round table and said: "Nobody can stop anybody from taking a position publicly or privately if they wish.
"But it is something that we feel is not fair, and honestly incorrect.
"There's really not any issue that anybody has to worry about in terms of persecution of any sort. Any sort," he added in response to a question about LGBTQ+ fans coming to the country".
Exactly. Separation of fact from fiction, we call it.
It must be depressing to be so blinded by hatred. They mistook this journalists flag for an LGBT one. It is the flag of Pernambuco.
He asked a simple question for clarity, if you don't wish to engage with a discussion honestly perhaps a blog would suit you better.
It's always pretty obvious.
come on @Roane just rip the band-aid off we all know the answer anyway
All these phobia words thrown around like homophobia and transphobia. The traditional meaning of the word phobia is an irrational fear of something. Nowadays if two people disagree about something people are automatically labelled....not sure how we got to this point but it seems a bit backwards to me.
I think thiis puts the whataboutery in context.
"You know what’s most shocking about the massacre in Colorado Springs? The fact that it felt so inevitable. Over the past year there has been an escalation in dangerously dehumanising anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. The idea that LGBTQ+ people are “groomers” and paedophiles has become a mainstream conservative talking point pushed by everyone from Fox News to Republican politicians. Christina Pushaw, the press secretary for the Florida governor Ron DeSantis, for example, said that a new law preventing Florida schools from teaching kids about LGBTQ+ people should be called the “the anti-grooming bill”. If you’re against it, she tweeted, “you are probably a groomer or at least you don’t denounce the grooming of four- to eight-year-old children”. According to the Human Rights Campaign, the average number of tweets each day using slurs such as “groomer” and “paedophile” in relation to LGBTQ+ people increased by 406% in the month after the Florida bill was passed.
The dehumanising rhetoric has been accompanied by growing violence. The Proud Boys, a far-right group, have been disrupting Drag Queen Story Hour events (in which performers read books to children) across the US, often turning up with guns. In September Boston children’s hospital received bomb threats after sustained far-right harassment sparked by the hospital’s work with transgender youths. The tragedy at Club Q didn’t happen in a vacuum."
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rous-escalation-in-hateful-anti-lgbt-rhetoric
"You know what’s most shocking about the massacre in Colorado Springs? The fact that it felt so inevitable. Over the past year there has been an escalation in dangerously dehumanising anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. The idea that LGBTQ+ people are “groomers” and paedophiles has become a mainstream conservative talking point pushed by everyone from Fox News to Republican politicians. Christina Pushaw, the press secretary for the Florida governor Ron DeSantis, for example, said that a new law preventing Florida schools from teaching kids about LGBTQ+ people should be called the “the anti-grooming bill”. If you’re against it, she tweeted, “you are probably a groomer or at least you don’t denounce the grooming of four- to eight-year-old children”. According to the Human Rights Campaign, the average number of tweets each day using slurs such as “groomer” and “paedophile” in relation to LGBTQ+ people increased by 406% in the month after the Florida bill was passed.
The dehumanising rhetoric has been accompanied by growing violence. The Proud Boys, a far-right group, have been disrupting Drag Queen Story Hour events (in which performers read books to children) across the US, often turning up with guns. In September Boston children’s hospital received bomb threats after sustained far-right harassment sparked by the hospital’s work with transgender youths. The tragedy at Club Q didn’t happen in a vacuum."
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rous-escalation-in-hateful-anti-lgbt-rhetoric
You must be joking! Do you really think it's going to happen? How many international tournaments have been held in the USA after they bombed the hell out and invaded Vietnam?
Like feck that’ll happen. Everyone will be licking their arse as usual. BBC and ITV won’t be able to praise them enough.
Pushaw could be the biggest cnut right now in US politics.
Yeah, Vietnam, famously brushed under the carpet. What actually went on there? We may never know.
I think the US bombing campaign in Asia in WW2 was equally horrific btw. Why don't you make a thread about hypocrisy and history in context, because intentionally or not all you look like you want to achieve here is massive support for oppression of the LGBT community.
Also If you were to compare the structural institutional racism in the states, you might have a clearer and more empathic point rather that appearing in a rush to dismiss the issue at hand.
Last edited:
Is this the same BBC people were slating for being too woke over their support for BLM?
Listen, you are never going to convince most people because they are either ignorant of the facts or biased or both.
I know that Pakistan has transgender rights enshrined in Law but the practice of it is not the same. Yes legally the government had to protect their rights but every country has weirdos. What a lot of people see is the news in many of the western news.
Yes it's the narrow interpretation of what they think is right. It's never black and white in many cases as you have pointed out about the chopping of the hand in Saudi. It's idiotic to encompass a brutal regime and religion. Any religion.
What are you on about? It's the start of many illegal invasions, bombings of other countries etc. Yet no boycott call by anyone. Does it only have to be discrimination against the LGBT community that has to be held accountable? I say Only. The discrimination in Canada against the first nations too and Canada is hosting some games too.
It wasn't a discussion at all. The discussion was between me and a couple of other posters. He came in making demands. As did a few others who I have ignored completely.
I'm open to reasonable discussion with anyone. I have views many disagree with, if I feel it's a respectful genuine discussion I will continue. But I'm not here to comply to demands and shouldn't be expected to be
Right, so Vietnam, which was famously heavily protested in the US and all over the word at the time?
If you were there would you have been calling a halt on the protest because of historical wars in Asia?
On the bolded bit. that's utter hypoicrisy, you are the one making comparisons with other atrocious behaviour instead of just dealing with the oppression at hand. On purpose or not you are on the side of the oppressor in this conversation, if not in reality. This is a thread about LGBT issues so that might explain people's insistence on focusing there.
In case you haven't noticed there is actually no boycott by anyone of Qatar, so you are in reality raging against a hypothetical or some idiots online.
Who is this imaginary person who was for Vietnam but is now upset in solidarity with the LGBT community?
I literally have a picture of Ho Chi Minh and the actual hammer and sickle from a Canadian branch of the communist party in my kitchen. Vietnam was only part of a systematic attack on the poor for geopolitical control under the guise of the war on communism. It doesn't stop me caring about the actual oppresion happening now.
Do you think sexual freedom should be a human right?
Last edited:
This is a discussion and direct questions are part of that.
Reasonable discussion and being obviously evasive don't fit together I'm afraid.
Comply to demands indeed, suddenly we all about personal freedom.
I think you misunderstood. You and me are now engaged in a discussion. You can ask a question as part of the discussion. Obviously I can choose to answer or not but I can't or wont be put out by your question.
A third, fourth or fifth person coming into "our" conversation and demanding an answer can, with respect get to feck.
The irony.
'When in Rome.'
Not really "When in Rome". There is no tradition of homophobic chants in there. But the irony is there indeed. FIFA forbidding Rainbow armbands and at the same pretending to care about these chants...
OK, do you think homosexuality is immoral?
Do you think a non elected government should discriminate against people based on sexual orientation?
Hypocrisy/whataboutery arguments have this issue of being stuck in a weird middle.
The 1994 World Cup was held in the U.S. Vietnam participated in the qualifiers. Iraq participated in the qualifiers. Iran participated in the qualifiers. So... was that wrong? Should they have boycotted it, and they are therefore worse than us?
Or is this some kind of exchange, where because they did not boycott USA 1994 (and will not boycott USA 2026), we have to not boycott Qatar? (which, btw, we haven't)
Well, I did not sign up for this exchange. I will complain about Qatar all I want, and other countries can complain about hosting in the USA and refuse to attend if they so desire.