Stan A. Einstein wrote:

rncfc wrote:What I don't understand is why calling someone gay for having long hair, something which is clearly nonsense and therefore obviously just a (poor) attempt at humour, offends someone so deeply? Presumably the person in question is aware that not all gay people have long hair?

I think some people attach a lot of stigma to themselves because it plays up to what they perceive as their identity. Always looking for something to be offended about.

What you fail to understand is the issue of vulnerability. I don't mind people putting photographs up of my face being superimposed on a woman in a dress. I don't mind being called an attention seeking whore. But then again hoards of nameless cowards have never gone around beating up people just because of their name. Brennie bashing isn't a term you'll find in a dictionary, queer bashing, Paki bashing, you'll find them.

So when bullies join gangs and dish it out they are cowards, but the can be dangerous cowards. That they lead pathetic little lives and hide their identities is of no matter. That they boast that a good punch up never did any harm, or that there is nothing worse than a snitch, or that they'll continue to call people attention seeking whores, whilst hiding who they are doesn't really matter, does it?

Do you really not know who I am? I thought it was pretty common knowledge. Pretty much any of your regular contacts at the club will be able to tell you my name, and I couldn't give two shits if you know it. I'll still think you're an annoying twonk.

rncfc wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

rncfc wrote:What I don't understand is why calling someone gay for having long hair, something which is clearly nonsense and therefore obviously just a (poor) attempt at humour, offends someone so deeply? Presumably the person in question is aware that not all gay people have long hair?

I think some people attach a lot of stigma to themselves because it plays up to what they perceive as their identity. Always looking for something to be offended about.

What you fail to understand is the issue of vulnerability. I don't mind people putting photographs up of my face being superimposed on a woman in a dress. I don't mind being called an attention seeking whore. But then again hoards of nameless cowards have never gone around beating up people just because of their name. Brennie bashing isn't a term you'll find in a dictionary, queer bashing, Paki bashing, you'll find them.

So when bullies join gangs and dish it out they are cowards, but the can be dangerous cowards. That they lead pathetic little lives and hide their identities is of no matter. That they boast that a good punch up never did any harm, or that there is nothing worse than a snitch, or that they'll continue to call people attention seeking whores, whilst hiding who they are doesn't really matter, does it?

Do you really not know who I am? I thought it was pretty common knowledge. Pretty much any of your regular contacts at the club will be able to tell you my name, and I couldn't give two shits if you know it. I'll still think you're an annoying twonk.

No of course I don't know who you are. If you want to tell me feel free.

Jesus Christ your bickering makes this board unbearable at times.

njbh86 wrote:Jesus Christ your bickering makes this board unbearable at times.

You'll notice over the course of the time I've been here that it hasn't been a common personality trait.

As for the other guy....

He started it, miss

rncfc wrote:

njbh86 wrote:Jesus Christ your bickering makes this board unbearable at times.

You'll notice over the course of the time I've been here that it hasn't been a common personality trait.

As for the other guy....

That is hopefully correct.
Just a suggestion but you clearly hate with a venom Brendan aka Stan.
Now Stan probably dislikes you and your insults but like he says its water off a ducks back.
Everytime you insult him he will come back at you.
I have no idea who you are, couldn't care less but if you stopped this incessant rant aimed at him, sandwiches, food for goodness sake I think everone would start to enjoy this site again.
God forbid fans may start posting again.
Amberexile & Stan are continually at loggerheads but they have their own views and thats great.
They do not seem to go into childish rants instead state their points of view.
Please just stop insulting the fella and you will get less posts in return.
How hard is that.
Maybe an impossibility but give it a go please.

njbh86 wrote:

UPTHEPORT wrote:
In fact when I'm out with the wife we drink with homosexuality people and they use homophobic language amongst themselves such as shut up you faggot

It's the difference between a black person using the n-slur and a white person doing it. Marginalised/oppressed groups reclaim slurs used against them as a show of solidarity and resistance.

UPTHEPORT wrote: By the way I had a grandmother who was born in the 1890s and she used the term Gay regularly it's a lovely gay day etc so to me the word has been stolen

Presumably you also think that industrial cranes should be renamed because the bird was there first. The same word can have different meanings, which are made clear by context, and this argument is very weak.

rncfc wrote: What I don't understand is why calling someone gay for having long hair, something which is clearly nonsense and therefore obviously just a (poor) attempt at humour, offends someone so deeply? Presumably the person in question is aware that not all gay people have long hair?

I think some people attach a lot of stigma to themselves because it plays up to what they perceive as their identity. Always looking for something to be offended about.

It's about being called "gay" as though being gay is a bad or lesser thing - it's not about the superficial reason why it's being said (hair, clothes etc), but about the implication that being gay is something they should be singled out for, or something negative.

Also worth remembering that just because something happens outside of our sight, or doesn't directly affect us, doesn't mean it's not there or important. Even if you consider there to be more pressing issues at hand, I hope we can all agree that any effort to stop homophobic abuse and discrimination is a positive thing.

Your first point I get that but if someone then in that pub hears them calling themselves that they may not get that point and use it themselves or take offence the homosexual community are then not helping themselves by using such language

Second point I get that as well but I can't go round saying it's a lovely gay day one someone may think I'm taking the pi ss or would think these days I was a homosexual

As I said the word has been stolen from our vocabulary

As far as I'm aware this isn't an issue at Rodney Parade. Should this thread be moved to Everything Else?

excessbee wrote:As far as I'm aware this isn't an issue at Rodney Parade. Should this thread be moved to Everything Else?

No the program tonight is about homophobic abuse in football

That's my point I can't really see an issue homophobic abuse is very rarely used in football matches I've been to but other abuse is rife see my first point

The egg chaser doing the show tonight always seems to want to be the centre of attention of various things

excessbee wrote:As far as I'm aware this isn't an issue at Rodney Parade. Should this thread be moved to Everything Else?

Again 100% agree.
Can we do the favourite sandwich thread similarly as well please

excessbee wrote:As far as I'm aware this isn't an issue at Rodney Parade. Should this thread be moved to Everything Else?

No. It's about how homophobia can affect football and Newport County.

There is also the aspect of there "not being one openly gay footballer".....
Now, at the risk of sounding homophobic myself, I wonder to what extent if any, a player's willingness to "come out" is dictated by the fact that he will have shared changing rooms, in various states of undress, with the gender to which he is sexually attracted. Obviously, it is only natural that there be some reticence on his part to make this very private aspect of his life known.
The changing room issue is a major one, I believe.
If we get a female assistant referee, does she share a changing room with her male counterparts?...does she walk around in the altogether in front of those male colleagues? Now if she does, then fair enough, but I would suggest that the reason there aren't more openly gay players, is fear of the reaction to the fact that they've shared a changing room, however irrational that fear may be.
Would any of us be comfortable walking around naked, in a dressing full of the gender to which we are attracted?

This to me, is the real root of the problem, one of what is appropriate or inappropriate. This I believe is what stops them coming out.

They share same changing room Gar but have a separate room to change/shower in

You have to have a room together to talk pre match instructions etc

UPTHEPORT wrote:They share same changing room Gar but have a separate room to change/shower in

You have to have a room together to talk pre match instructions etc

So they don't walk around in full view of each other?....but do the players? Cos let's face it, a team changing room can be a fairly raucous place I imagine, and not a little bit of crudity one would think. I feel this may be a huge part in why players aren't coming out.

newgroundrodney wrote:

UPTHEPORT wrote:They share same changing room Gar but have a separate room to change/shower in

You have to have a room together to talk pre match instructions etc

So they don't walk around in full view of each other?....but do the players? Cos let's face it, a team changing room can be a fairly raucous place I imagine, and not a little bit of crudity one would think. I feel this may be a huge part in why players aren't coming out.

Yes mate all boys together!

I'm an ex steelworker we used to wash each other's backs in coke ovens it was a dirty job so we all mucked in shower time