They are not.
LGBTQ+ inclusion and Religion Debate in Football
- Thread starter SilentWitness
- Start date
Dude wears a shirt with the devil on it but won't wear a rainbow for "religious reasons". Get the feck out of here.
It's actually extremely simple. Live and let live. If someone is not allowing another to live, they should be stopped. It's not like gay people have a millennium and a half old script saying that anyone who isn't gay should be discriminated against. Some gay people hold abhorrent views as well and should be confronted about them. Generally though, gay people, like most others just want to live in peace and allowed to be themselves.
Probably there was somebody's job before they got fired.
What are you basing this on?
That's a good point.
Genuinely, a Muslim being tolerant (not even supportive necessarily) with this issue would have sent a tremendous message.
I've been involved in a variety of left wing political campaigns since 2010. Openly gay and other members of the LGBTQ community are always among the first to lead campaigns when they see an injustice happening.
Come on...I think even you know that is an oversimplified comment.
There’s a bang of pink washing off this whole thing (is that a word? it should be) It’s not just any coat. It’s an “adidas coat”. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if some marketing gimp at adidas tried to find a way to use LGBTQ solidarity as a way to give their brand more exposure. They contacted the club with the suggestion. The club consulted the players and told adidas it was a non-runner, as at least one player would refuse. Then the story got leaked and the rest is history. So the club never really stood a chance.
The hypocrisy out of these "respect my religion" sorts is breathtaking.
You know what's an oversimplified comment.
Manchester United is a club for everyone. If you can't back a message of tolerance, go and have a night out in the village. If you're still homophobic after a 5am rendition of the YMCA outside G.A.Y or New Union, you're welcome to your bigoted views.
The fact Maz was named means it wasn't handled as deftly as even that.
I'd usually agree about the so called "pink washing" but I actually take a different position here. Large corporations tend to change their market strategies based on location, for example, the likes of coca cola, McDonald's, etc, would never even consider using rainbow imagery in the ME. United players wearing the jacket would be beamed directly to people all over the planet and it is a powerful statement for gay people in parts of the world where they are persecuted.
My experience being born and bred in the second "gay" city in France which has been a refuge for many across the country and having been involved with a few associations. The ease with which you stumble on racism, misogynist or intolerance toward other LGBTQ members is almost amusing.
Also with the "not the whole dressing room agreed with the decision" suggests some were upset at the change. Sloppy either way. But the leak could be either from adidas or within the club.
I'm sure Maz agrees that Manchester United a club for everyone.
I have done the same since 2008 and your statement isn't correct in my experience. They are not actually different to the rest of the population when it comes to being prejudiced.
It almost like they are human!!
Exactly.
Yep, INEOS haven't sorted out long running PR problems.
Absolutely true.
Someone brought up freedom of religious expression somewhere. I think that goes way too far in society; it's basically the remaining loophole for discrimination and hate speech. I really disagree with the philosophical and societal pedestal that religion is put on.
What specific aspect of Islam does wearing that rainbow jacket go against though? Cause the band basically just asks us to be nice to everyone.
How did he not make a statement? All the rainbow stuff stands for inclusivity and Mazraoui actively chose to not wear the jacket - it's not a low-key thing that he just went 'nah, can't be bothered today' about.
So if he's not wanting to wear that jacket, what's his point? And don't tell me he doesn't have one, cause then he could have just worn the jacket; that would have been least conspicuous and least outspoken.
And that's where you are wrong. Tolerance can only survive if it is paired with intolerance towards intolerant views; or there's a real risk those eventually win out. This is known as the Paradox of Tolerance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance. That's the same logic that dictates that freedom of expression has to be tempered with rules against hurtful expression.
I can’t even begin to imagine how emotionally triggering and unsettling this might be for those that identify as being part of the LGBTQ community - when your own identity is being so casually dismissed by the club you love.
Pathetic decision by United on rest of the team not wearing the jackets.
Pathetic decision by United on rest of the team not wearing the jackets.
A little bit of recency bias creeping in. Xhaka and Sakho have worn the rainbow armband previously and the dial didn't change on the topic. There's far greater uproar on non-participation than actual participation.
A right wing media editor somewhere is having a good old chuckle. Football masses gave been divided on religious lines. Just what they love reporting in this day and age in good old Blighty
If that's the case then he should have backed a simple message of tolerance.
You cruel and remorseless destroyer of catchphrases.
Only after the same right wing editor has a go at the selective tolerant of the woke left who don't respect Max's freedom of expression. What a day for them!
That's a great point.
I'm just terrible at brevity. Also, why be brief if you can spend half an hour writing a post that says the exact same thing?
It was a bad idea in the first place (born from a good place, but not thought through). Rainbow armband, great. Video of support, great. You don't need every player to openly participate in something that in Mazraouis situation, could be a lose lose either way given where he is from. So that's why it was scrapped. Either the others wear it and he gets shit on, or nobody wears it and they hoped nobody would find out about the possible idea. The idea was leaked, so he gets shit on anyway.
We are still wearing the rainbow armband which is the standard move of support, just not doing the "above and beyond" move. It's sloppy, but IMO isn't the club dismissing it. Just choosing to protect their player and looking for an alternative way to do it.
As I mentioned before... Liverpool and Salah have never received criticism for something like this because they've just managed it well and have never asked every member of their team to participate in it. It was always the captain as with most clubs (including us).
I really, really dont care about Mazraoui. I care that he's defined the entire club's approach to the issue.
Its the idea that we can disguise him being opposed to LGBT issues or that the entire squad dropped it because of one player. Its shameful for the rest of the squad to throw it away so casually. It reflects terribly on them that there wasn't one person in there who said 'feck that, i'm wearing it and supporting it'.
Crying about leaks is dumb as feck too. We're under a microscope, you dont get to hide.
Its the idea that we can disguise him being opposed to LGBT issues or that the entire squad dropped it because of one player. Its shameful for the rest of the squad to throw it away so casually. It reflects terribly on them that there wasn't one person in there who said 'feck that, i'm wearing it and supporting it'.
Crying about leaks is dumb as feck too. We're under a microscope, you dont get to hide.
Well yes, but I meant the silliness you were arguing against. It's become a bit of a sound bite for the day.That's a great point.
I'm just terrible at brevity. Also, why be brief if you can spend half an hour writing a post that says the exact same thing?
Right there in the second paragraph it says:
"The paradox has been widely discussed within ethics and political philosophy, with varying views on how tolerant societies should respond to intolerant forces. John Rawls, for instance, argued that a just society should generally tolerate the intolerant, reserving self-preservation actions only when intolerance poses a concrete threat to liberty and stability."
So there is some room for disagreement.
Sure I even get a jolt of 'comfort' (for want of a better word...acceptance perhaps?) when I see my college flying a pride flag for a week or two in the year, and this is in a relatively progressive country in Europe. I would agree generally that corporations don't really care about the cause, but it's still nice to see on an instinctual level.
I would love that people stop putting people of certain group/religion in same bucket because of individuals. I know many, many that accept, have friends and support people from LGBTQ. Why wouldn’t they. We are all humans and equal.
How is homophobia not a concrete threat to liberty and stability of gay people?
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,828
- Supports
️
So if I’m understanding this correctly one persons views on homosexuality has meant an entire organisation has not taken part in a campaign designed to promote acceptance?
And some people are defending this decision?
Mazraoui has every right in the UK to not want to publicly support this campaign. He does not have a right though to not be judged for that decision.
We should have respected his right to freedom of expression and supported the cause with the rest of the squad.
And some people are defending this decision?
Mazraoui has every right in the UK to not want to publicly support this campaign. He does not have a right though to not be judged for that decision.
We should have respected his right to freedom of expression and supported the cause with the rest of the squad.
I think there has been a massive increase in homophobia since media and entertainment industry started pushing LGBTQ aggressively.
It's probably expected to have the same effect when sport does it.
The world certainly is a lot more hateful today, compared to 20 years ago.
It's probably expected to have the same effect when sport does it.
The world certainly is a lot more hateful today, compared to 20 years ago.
I thought we were all working on the premise that these leaks have always come from the players?
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,828
- Supports
- ️
He did say all religion so it’s actually inclusive when you think about it.
I suppose you stopped reading there because it suited your views? Cause if you had continued on, you'd have read this about Rawls:
The question is, then, where you out the threshold, but of course that was already inherent in Popper's original point.