On loan from Chelsea.
LGBT issues in Football
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Here:
Don't think there can be a clearer explanation than that. Should put the entire debate to rest.
I think it's a million times worse. These homophobic slurs are usually actually directed at men in general, not necessarily gay men,. The intention is to insult them by implying that they are gay, as if there is something wrong with being gay.
So the definition isn't gay male prostitute then, just your assumption that whoever sells sexual services to other men are homosexuals.
Why are you determined to die on this hill?
Where does it explain why the term is homophobic, the poster simply states it is.
Some people seem to really want to keep calling me a rent boy.
Chants that are not "meant as a compliment" are essentially meant to be offensive or insulting.
Insults that boil down to "hah you're gay and being gay is bad/funny" are clearly homophobic.
A rent boy fecks men for money. A whore fecks men for money. They are both insults, "rent boy" has added homophobia.
I've read that last sentence on here multiple times and it boggles the mind.
They can't change their gender, race or sexuality so that's the line? Why should they want to? Whether they could change it or not is irrelevant. The point is that it should make absolutely no difference to how they are treated.
Is it ok to be misogynistic towards Kaitlyn Jenner or racist towards Michael Jackson?
The belief that abuse on one side of this arbitrary line is fine but on the other side is unacceptable really confuses me.
To me, discrimination and tolerance is the same no matter what it's based on. It's the degree of the abuse or discrimination that is important, not whether the victim can change themselves to make their abuser happy.
Yeah, this dawned on me approximately 3 seconds after clicking reply, so I deleted the post. Do'h.
Chelsea player. It's something that thrown at Chelsea players and fans for decades.
How the feck are you this contrarian? What's broken in your brain?
If you have to apply mental gymnastics to try and defend something as not being homophobic, think about it deeply again. It was, is, and will always remain homophobic.Let's just conclude that the usage of the term "rent boys" towards Chelsea players started out as a distasteful and objectionable homophobic slur yet over the year morphed in its signification to mean an astute and pointed critique of the club's unhinged and ridiculous loan army practice.
I doubt @Brightonian was arguing that the line between insult and discrimination is whether you can change that aspect of you or not. It's more to do with whether the abuse is based on the targeted person belonging to a particular group rather than some individual trait.
For instance the definition of hate speech (at the extreme end, but I think the definition itself is a succinct explanation):
"abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation."
Are straight male prostitutes even a thing?
Just what the feck.
It's blatantly obviously a homophobic chant because its the homosexuality that is being insulted, and shock horror (and understandably) people are offended by it.
Maybe you should not get so upset by people being offended by it?
Let's just conclude that the usage of the term "rent boys" towards Chelsea players started out as a distasteful and objectionable homophobic slur yet over the year morphed in its signification to mean an astute and pointed critique of the club's unhinged and ridiculous loan army practice.
No, let's not conclude that. Because it has at no point stopped being the homophobic slur it began as. If people want to critique Chelsea's loan policy they should do so in a way that doesn't involve trying to tack that meaning onto pre-existing homophobic slurs.
You don't get a pass on homophobia by describing it as a "critique" rather than "abuse".
Why don't you grow up and realise that, while these terms were used and deemed 'ok' at times in the past, they're becoming less and less acceptable. And for good reason too - we can't have a fully tolerant society with these slurs still in use.
And then feck off.
I remember that that troglodyte Robbie Fowler implying that Graeme ale Saux was gay for having the temerity to enjoy reading. In the unreconstructed Liverpudlian mind, both reading and being gay are things to be abhorred.
I can’t remember anything homophobic being mentioned in connection with Chelsea before that.
I can’t remember anything homophobic being mentioned in connection with Chelsea before that.
Haven't you seen Deuce Bigalo male gigolo?!
I mean I haven't, but it's a thing.
Yes, they exist. But hardly on a grand scale.
Does it scare you that society isnt accepting homophobia and racism like it used to? Is your world crashing down because others stand up for what is right and for the ones abused for many years? Go piss off back down to whatever hellhole you crawled from if you don't like the betterment of society.
In looking up the term rentboy, I came across the saying; Big hat, no cattle. That's awesome. I will start using this.
Can’t see the big deal here. Have heard this chant for years and it’s a laugh. Even if I was with one my gay mates, I’d think they were a bit soft to take this chant seriously. The argument that “you don’t choose to be gay” might be right but scousers don’t choose to be scousers. Would we say they shouldn’t get stick for it at a game? It’s a laugh and most good jokes will annoy some people.
British version is "all fur coat and no knickers".
Do you not think that is a safe assumption to make, that the vast majority of male sex workers offering sexual services exclusively to gay men are homosexual or bisexual? I would certainly think it is. There's plenty of reading material and documentaries out there about gay escorting if you really do want to find out more about this topic. There was a Dispatches episode on the gay escorting agencies in London a few years ago which might answer some of your questions, it might be on All4. The term in question was denounced by the people being referred to as 'rent boys', which should give you an inkling as to whether or not it is an acceptable term.
But at this point, I believe you're being purposefully obtuse and contrarian. There's numerous explanations as to why it is homophobic in this thread, but you're claiming that there aren't any. You could also have Googled all of this and got answers within seconds, instead of this thread doing the work for you. LGBTQ inclusion groups, GFSN, Kick It Out and others have called for football fans to not use the term. Liverpool FC have condemned their own fans for the use of the term, and I'm sure any club would do the same. Actual gay male prostitutes have made it clear the term is offensive and belittling. I'm not sure what else you need to have tacked on to this. 'Rent boy' is homophobic. It not only has no place in football, but wider society.
It's a discussion forum, i don't see much of a problem with asking people to explain the reasoning behind a claim, no matter what it is.
Does the term rentboys get thrown at Chelsea cause its a posh area of London?
What's a non-homophobic way of saying somebody sells their dignity to anybody willing to pay?
Because if rentboy is offensive to a persecuted minority, it's reasonable to ask for the term to stop being used. That's fair enough.
But if Chelsea are just piggybacking on somebody else's victimhood, that's kind of offensive in its own right. It's equating unconnected stadium chants to real world oppression.
Football tribalism still needs to be able throw around pejoratives at each other as a part of the pantomime of sporting competition.
Because if rentboy is offensive to a persecuted minority, it's reasonable to ask for the term to stop being used. That's fair enough.
But if Chelsea are just piggybacking on somebody else's victimhood, that's kind of offensive in its own right. It's equating unconnected stadium chants to real world oppression.
Football tribalism still needs to be able throw around pejoratives at each other as a part of the pantomime of sporting competition.
Last edited:
Somehow I believe you.
You as a heterosexual not being offended by a slur used to paint homosexuality as something bad has no bearing on if it is homophobic. Hint: it is and shouldn’t be used.
Just start using complimentary chants instead, it's how things should be in 2021. Maybe "rich boys" or "pretty boys" should be the new term, make them feel class or body positivity.
What about ripping scousers, then? Is that also so something that shouldn’t be used? Also the term doesn’t necessarily paint homosexuality as bad, it paints being a (male) prostitute as bad. In any case, it’s funny and how sterile does football need to get?
What on eearth does being a scouser have to do with homosexuality? You really are not making the intelligent point that you think you are.
just shows how entrenched the homophobia is in the UK is that some people don't think calling someone a rent boy an an insult is homophobic
we have a long way to go
we have a long way to go
You don't really realise the horrible analogy you are making there, do you?
its decades old for sure, I remember singing it in the 90s
it dates back to a specific incident where a Chelsea fan was caught in bed with another man (I can't remember the context)
soon after that the Chelsea chant was changed to "chelsea rent boys, chelsea rent boys"...
not that it really matters, but it's become so synonymous with slagging off Chelsea I don't think anyone really considers the homophobic nature of it - but that doesn't make it okay, of course
It’s got nothing to do with homosexuality. The point is that should we stop calling scousers “dippers”, given that being a scouser isn’t a choice (like homosexuality)? It probably offends some scousers but the vast majority wouldn’t give a toss.
we should definitely stop calling them dippers as well, yeah