Gay cake row.

Honest and interesting post, refreshing to read, and if I'm honest your views you probably represent a large proportion of the straight male population.

All gay people want is equality, we're not asking for anything more or less than what a straight man or woman would expect, the right to have sex at the same age, the right to marry, the ability to walk down a street holding hands without getting abused or attacked (I still can't imagine holding my bf's hand walking down Watford High Street let alone into the Vic!) which through all the progress of gay rights is still pretty indicting. Many of these have been achieved, at least in this country, and attitudes have thankfully started to change, though judging by some of the posts on here, I do wander.

Many people argue gay rights is in your face and militant, but it's had to be. Would equality in parnerships or age of consent just been handed to us without a degree of vocalism, I doubt it. In a similar way civil rights in America in the 60's and South Africa in the apatheid years, there has to be a degree of vocal activism. I would still argue that its disgraceful that there are no openly gay football players, it is particularly surprising given the success in tackling racism and getting more and more ethnic minorities into the sport. Its interesting that no-one on any of these posts in the forum has mentioned this.

Believe me, it's the same the other way round, I tried to kiss a women and it made me feel sick (in fact i was, and she wasn't understandably too happy). Obviously unless bisexual one or other gender will or wont be someones cup of tea.

I don't understand the gay parenting argument, I can't see why a child cannot be brought up with two loving male or female parents. It's an old argument, but I've always believed love and stability in childhood are the most important things , both of these can be ascertained by gay parents and male/female role models found in wider family and friends. I cannot see a problem with it. I'm not going down the religious bxll**** argument against it.

 

This entire thing really has just come from Kelso's example. I know you didn't say that was your opinion on all gay people, but an example is meant to use a single case to represent a much larger or overall case.

If there is a conversation about Mexican rights, and you use the example about a Mexican once being violent robbing somebody, the implicit connection is that you think they deserve fewer rights because they are criminals. The easy way too avoid this is just to put it in context, which if you had done in your example would have taken the whole sting out of it.

In my opinion, discussing men who are overly camp and annoying, or discussing getting with men (ZZ) is misrepresentative and so spectacularly missing the point in a debate about human rights, and that is why people have strongly argued against your example.

ZZ, I'd suggest that a child's ideal development would be with two happily married adults that are always there for them. And with straight divorce rates so high,and the hoops gay people would have to step through to get kids so rigorous that these days, they would probably have a better chance with a gay couple.

And you would be able to refuse to print pro Labour posters, as Labour supporters are not a discriminated group as far as I'm aware (not sure that it works that way here but pretty sure it does in the US.

My supervisor gave a great bit of advice when dealing with behaviour that I do not like. Keep asking why until you come to something that allows you to understand their actions. Why are they potentially too sensitive? Probably through years of insecurity, bullying, questioning, harassment and fears that straight people find their behaviours disgusting and skin crawling.

 

As somebody who works on building sites, I can say that this type of person really gets on my wick.

Thank God they haven't got a political movement behind them, labelling people as 'machophobes'.

 

A brief aside. Gay Marriage referendum vote in the Republic of Ireland today. All political parties are advising to vote Yes. The Catholic church are (surprise, surprise) advising to vote No.

 

My attitude to gay marriage is this: Yes, I personally find the idea of same sex 'marriages' very strange to say the least, but at the end of the day it's not my right to enforce my beliefs and feelings on other people's lives. If a pair of blokes, or a pair of women love each other and want to get married, then they should have every right, and it's only their own beliefs and feelings that should matter.

 

In an ideal world, every kid should have a mum and a dad.

It's not an ideal world though, and Elton and David's kids are MUCH better off than a lot of poor little sods being dragged up by chavvy heterosexual couples, and I'm not thinking of money here.

 

Exactly. Or be dragged through an endless series of foster homes.

 

Excellent. You and I have our differences. But one thing that we have in common is that we try and bring personal experience and honesty to the table. Others have done the same thing on this thread - Necrobutcher and StAlbansRoad at least. To my mind, that always brings a bit more to the discussion.

Your point about the printers was interesting. I'd earlier thought that I might introduce Saatchi and Saatchi into the argument. If they had been asked, should they have been required to act on behalf of the Labour party as well as Thatcher? They are an advertising agency looking for business after all. But of course not.

As regards the SNP. OK - I'll give it a rest. But it was a thread with that title started by Meister!

 

Yep. Many actions have an ulterior motive as admitted. Create a scene with a bunch of tunnel vision lefties. Throw in a catalyst on a quiet day here ...

Edit: No, my 'example' wasn't intended to illustrate a more general point or stereotype anybody. It was simply a story relating to a specific incident. That was all.

 

You became the most important person on this thread StAlbansRoad as soon as you outed yourself (if that's the right word) when I pressed you on whether you'd actually had to rescue a gay person from attack. You said you had (twice in Brighton), were the victim of another insulting incident in London, told us what bars you like to hang out in (and those you don't) and gave us an insight into what it's like being on the inside of this particular minority looking out in a number of ways. Thank you for all of that.

One interesting common theme that's developed is that all of you, Necrobutcher and I would prefer not to hang out in camp gay bars. You also said that you'd have found the antics funny if you did. And that was one of my problems. I did find it funny! But I was unable to laugh out loud at the antics because I didn't know how that would have been received and still don't. Would I have been laughing at them or with them? Probably a bit of both to be honest. Would they have recognised the distinction? Who knows. Naively I'd thought I could go into that situation and be a fly-on-the-wall observer. Observation is what I do (field ornithologist). But in that situation of course I couldn't. It immediately got way too close for comfort for me and I couldn't handle it apart from vacating the scene.

To be clear though. If I was to go for a drink with you and your partner in Watford at a regular bar I'd have no problem. Six of your gay mates could turn up and I still wouldn't have a problem at all. If one was camp I guess he'd be a bit of a novelty for all of us. If two were well I guess they could talk amongst themselves. If three were I'd start to think - hang on a minute. If four were I'd be off. That's it really.

As far as I can see, everyone on this thread is supportive of your quest for equality and understands your need to fight your corner vociferously. There is absolutely no hatred whatsoever. Sometimes I'm a bit slow on the empathy front so I now extend my sympathy to you regarding the completely unacceptable attacks you have suffered in the same way that Jumbo did earlier.

Yes, it is somehow sinister that there are no openly gay footballers. There was one once - Justin Fashanu who eventually killed himself. There's also a Welsh rugby player who fairly recently outed himself. I forget his name. Big, burly red-haired bloke (googled him now - Gareth Thomas). There are also hardly any moslem footballers. Squibba explained this to me once. Something along the lines of them not being generally very interested I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong please Squibba.

The only issue I have with you is this. Yet again you've referred to my post that used a phrase you didn't like. You don't seem to be able to leave it alone. Yet you've also described how a sexual contact with a woman actually made you throw up. And ZZT in his #139, a post you were very complimentary of, used the phrase 'turns my stomach'. So where's the consistency here? And, as Necrobutcher said @#80 - tolerance is a two-way street.

Yet again I apologise for an accidental dislike. It's a habit of mine. You'll probably get used to it.

 

Bloody hell you two. Get a room.

 

hahaha, sorry UEA ...leaving room back to footie/Eurovision...

 

Great result in Eire on a number of fronts:

- the first time this change has ever been made in any nation by asking the people in a referendum

- 62% v 38% - quite conclusive

- a terrific victory for rational, inclusive, modern humanity over bigoted, backward organised religion

It's hard to see N.I. being able to resist the wind of change for much longer either given this resounding result from their next-door-neighbours.

 

Highly bloody amusing I'm sure UEA. Ha! But the real moral of the story is this:

It's quite possible to start from two fairly polarised positions and, with perseverance and a real willingness to listen properly to what others are saying, to come to a concensus at the end of the process. If you refuse to listen to any nuance, but instead only hear what you want to hear and stick blindly to a line which isn't justified as an argument progresses, then you will get nowhere. For the first process to be successful 'it takes two to tango'.

The first, and obviously better way of proceeding, is more often the female way. The second is more often the male way and involves fighting and a testosterone fuelled need to be seen to 'win'. Those are of course generalisations but valid as such.

Because I value the 'female way', I argued on another thread recently that we should change the way our parliament is selected to ensure 50% female representation. The way this thread has developed is one of the principal reasons why.

 

The only other bone I have to pick with you StAlbansRd is this:

Why do you keep saying sorry to people all the time? What have you got to apologise about? Nothing I've noticed!

My mum does this all the time too. She's the kindest, most inclusive person you can imagine (although she's got a few 'generational prejudices' lurking in the background too). I guess it's a kind of default position.

I tell her off about it anyway though. She's 92 b.t.w.

 

Sorry, I'll try to say sorry less......darn it!....

(i'm 29 , grrr!)

 

You can say sorry again for breaking your word and posting on this thread AGAIN!

 

Just a couple of things.

First, I haven't said or implied that gay "parents" cannot bring up children. So why should you think that? If I may say so, I think that is a typical misreading or overreaction, the sort that I was talking about when I am thinking about the gay movement throwing some accusations about.

Second, why is the lack of "openly gay footballers" disgraceful? Why do you expect a footballer to talk about his sexuality in public? Again, the gay movement should not be making an issue of that. If you want equality, why do you think that being gay is some sort of "badge of honour" that should be announced publicly, or do you expect players to come out and declare that they are straight as well? We aren't bothered who a player cosies up to at night, so why should the gay movement be trying to push it "in our face"?

So, instead of trying to blame the footballing world, or society, for an injustice, and instead of pressurising gay footballers to announce their sexual preferences to the world, why don't they put themselves into the mind of the footballer in question, and their teammates with whom they share changing rooms, showers, baths, etc. It is a potentially embarrassing situation, similar I would think, to having women in the male changing rooms (from the males point if view). Having spent a lot of time in Germany where many facilities are just shared anyway, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest, but I am sure many would be bothered.

 

Eire vote is hugely encouraging, not just for gay people, but for democracy.

I'm sick of politicians having to pander to a bigoted, old fashioned set of values in order to appear upright and traditional. This shows that decency and tolerance can win out. I hope it's a contagious phenomenon which spreads across the Irish sea.

 

*tiptoes into room, hopefully unnoticed as promised wouldn't come back in*

Youre correct about point A, i think you were talking about gay marriage to be fair and not gay parenting, so sorry (**** done it again), if i implicated your views on that, pointed out my views on gay parenting and wasn't intended to be an attack on yours, though your right it did look like it in the post. On second point, i agree that also it does require a footballer/manager to take the step to come out in the first place but surely you can see in the macho world of football it is a very difficult step to take in reality (look back at Justin Fashanu) it does need someone big to come out, and they should. It's not a 'badge of honour' or in your face I would say it would provide a great role model for young gay men and women wanting to play the sport (got a lot of gay friends who hate footie because they think it is so macho/homophobic). Not going there about the changing rooms though, the assumption that just because your one bloke is gay and another is straight, you need separate changing rooms is pretty ridiculous. Liked bits of it though and said it was refreshingly honest, picked out points i didnt like i guess.

Missed earlier post: Eire vote was great Kelso/wfcmoog ! Turnout was high too, so opponents haven't got a leg to stand on!

*dashes back out of room, hopfeully unnoticed*

 

I agree with you about some of the pushiness in general as indicated earlier in the thread. But I also understand that minorities will tend to have to be pushy to achieve their goal of equality. The gay community have done that and have mostly now achieved what they sought in equality of opportunity and tolerance I would hope although not entirely completely yet. But as StAlbansRoad has indicated, they're still certainly subject to sporadic, targetted violence which is totally unacceptable.

The only time I've been in a minority was when I first moved to Scotland and there was more anti-English rhetoric and resentment about especially regarding sporting events. OK - I'm still in that minority but there's far less bad feeling about now. But I'm 6ft, rugby centre build and don't take any sh.t from anybody. So it was easy for me to deal with. I suspect you are much the same. Those who are not so lucky to be able to be that self-confident are bound to seek the comfort of a self-confident group of fellow travellers.

The main point about openly gay footballers I think is that there are none. Doing a quick ballpark calculation - 92 PL and FL clubs, 25 players in each squad and a conservative 5% gay people in the wider community gives a figure of 115 gay footballers. So the issue isn't that all 115 should be required to 'out' themselves. It's that none, not even the feisty ones who must exist, have. That can only be down in part at least to the prejudice they think they would be subjected to were they to do so.

Until you 'out' yourself you can't tell your full story. StAlbansRoad couldn't on here until he did and then he was able to give us a full insight. I bet it comes as a blessed relief not having to live a double life anymore, half of which must, by definition, remain secret. Of course there are 'changing room issues' for gay footballers and their team mates. But if they're 'undeclared' they'll have to creep around secretly with their chosen partner and not hang out in places they might enjoy as well because, as a recognisable face in a public place, they'd get 'outed' by someone else soon enough anyway. Sounds like a pretty harsh double existence to me.

I dreamt of women in the changing rooms when I was younger. Hearing this news from Germany I intend to take out a gym membership for six months then emigrate there immediately afterwards.

 

I'm sure many of the would be 115 play rugger or cricket instead ... they are altogether more gay sports. (edit: and add athletics to that)

And that's judging no one ... but I will add that I'm not one that believes people have gay in their genes.

 

One thing you've gotta understand SAR is that there may very well be 'changing room issues' for the majority of the heterosexual males in the changing room. This comes under the same category as the post of mine you didn't like, ZZT's similar phrase and your revulsion when kissing a woman. The point is that the majority in the changing room would be naked in a room with a minority whose attentions (even if they were simply in the mind of the beholder) they would find repulsive. You wouldn't have the same problem. You may find it ridiculous but it's not for you to decide. That's for us heterosexuals to decide. Personally, I'd have far less of a problem with a mixed changing room. The reasoning behind that should be obvious.

It's OK. I know you're listening at the door and looking through the keyhole. Get back in this room at your leisure!

 

Haha cheers,

Yeah but the fact is that gay and str8 footballers are already getting changed together and as far as I'm aware it's not causing any concern. I don't think being out will change that to be honest, For example everyone knows Im gay at my gym no problem with gay and straight men changing together there, would it REALLY be any different? Crazy idea to have separate changing rooms. Seems like a retrograde step to equality to me. No need.

 

Some fair points. Maybe. But I'd suggest that a gym changing room is a rather different place than a football team changing room, the emphasis being on team. So these mixed straight/gay football changing rooms you're talking about. Outed gays or secret ones? That's quite important! This is absolutely not an equality issue or retrograde. It's a practical issue surrounding protecting everybody's sensibilities. It may be a generational one to some extent too though. If so, fine by me. The world moves on. But yet again you use the terms crazy and 'no need' and yet again I'll remind you - that's not for you to decide. That's for the majority to decide and you ain't the majority! This is an example of the pushyness that annoys!

 

Let's play change the changing room. The changing room is now occupied by a majority of gay males including you. There are no heterosexual males. But there are a couple of heterosexual females who will probably fancy a number of the gay males even if they don't declare that interest and you know it. How do you feel about this changing room?

 

What?

Why would anyone care?

 

Quite obviously a number of people do! Let's see what the man says. Why do you think there are no, declared, gay professional footballers?

 

If Troy just came out now and said he's gay I wouldn't give one little sh*t.

But best believe it'll be the first thing opposition fans brig up.

 

Me neither. But that's our view. It doesn't answer the question of why he'd be unique if he did that.

 

It would be really gay.

 

Tbf Squibba, you've probably nailed the real reason why no gay footballers choose to 'out' themselves right there. Because they'd get dog's abuse from the terraces and suspect (probably correctly) that very little would be done to stop it.

 

But what's the point? They don't have to come out there's no need.

That's what bothers me, it's cool to be gay but it doesn't have to be in everyone's face or agreed upon by everyone.

There's many gay footballers amongst us and they're probably perfectly happy as they are.

 

I agree and sexuality is someone's own business and someone doesn't have to out themselves if they don't want to and I'd never force anyone to, but all I can say from my own experience if you are out and you aren't hiding your sexuality, you are a hell of a lot happier. It's not anything to do with being in your face. Also, it's just the whole role model thing I guess for encouraging more openly gay men entering the sport. To have NO openly gay men in the League, you've got to admit something just doesn't add up there.