orchardsaint

i know the acadamy is doing well, but i didn't recognise the small fella next to MP.

you need to be more specific. i am not sure if i can get offended on turks behalf, until i actually know what you are saying!

that wasn't even at a football match. if you show the whole picture, it was at a radio 1 roadshow, quite near the gents toilets in a big park on the outskirts of manchester.

brings back memories. my first boots and i was every one of those players! and wright, jordan, case, wallace etc, etc, etc

agree with this

wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong. you seem to have read the thread, but not taken the pertinent points out of it. we clearly do want to hear about it. it's just that we couldn't give a monkeys @rseh0le about it. there is defintitely an issue with gays in, or not in, football. anyone can be offended by anything, or nothing, and even if they aren't offended by it, they may, or may not, know someone who would probably be outraged by something or nothing, but still need to tell everyone to be offended on behalf of someone. we are all mindless cavemen/raging nazis/ homophobic thugs, who have no idea how to handle other, different, peoples feelings, and need to be re-educated. but, most importantly JN9, rainbow laces will solve everything! (please see my ebay selling list, as i have just stocked up on a batch of 50,000 sets of rainbow laces, bought off a mr p. power.) I think that just about sums this thread up.

There HAS to be a problem, because as we know, if there aren't any openly gay bookmakers then knowing one in fifty people are gay, at least three of the leading ones are, and probably need help to tell everyone so they can do their jobs better!

Wanting to encourage more bookmakers to come out as gay?

but there isn't

not comparing gay men who do their business above board with kiddie fiddlers, just pointing out how different cultures view different things as ok. if you want to live in a truly liberal world, then you can NEVER speak out about anyone. be it gay/racist/paedophilia/necrophilia/beastiality/religion or anything. you do however, seem to find certain things offensive, of which i am glad, but you can't decide what other people find offensive or don't. heck, some people find michael mcintyre funny. if you are airing your private views in public, why are you shocked that some people disagree? and why wouldn't anyone want to air their private views? why isn't there a support for nazis day? or internet posters in the minority? or fly a beige flag for anyone who lives with their parents after the age of 40? or any other thing? making an issue (and a very big one mind) out of one that doesn't need to be raised. some people make themselves targets when sometimes, there really isn't a need. (and i don't mean gays)

perhaps he is, but heeds the backing of his fellow forumers to help him out. or he could just be getting morally outraged on someone eles behalf for no reason other to say stuff.

but you did when they were made? have times changed or have you? comedy is funny to different people, or we would all be laughing to dave gorman dvds. some people find laughing at gays/blacks/gingers/fatties/women funny. so what? the difference is not intent to offend, see frankie boyle still funny, but when it is directed PERSONALLY at someone. as you say, laughing at daily mail readers is ok?

i am not racist. you probably didn't know this, but malcolm x is a famous ginger. fact. google it. that is why i fully support all black people, we are brothers.

that seems to be an issue. whereby all "straight white males" have to be classed as homophobic with bums to the wall type gags, all gay men must think they will get beaten up for trying it on with said team members. fact

it is a cartoon intended for a bit of fun. does it really need a message? does the simpsons carry a strong message? or tom and jerry?

does your boyfriend know you're here? is that really INTENDED to offend? really? isn't it not banter? anyway, why is it ok for the minority population to call each other "offensive" names? i know black people who call each other ni***r, gay men who call each other queens and ginger friends who call each other pasty day walkers. if it is ok for them to do it why not everyone else? yet again, offence for the sake of it.

this is what it comes down to. there may or may not be gay footballers. some of them may or may not play for the saints. there is a campaign to make gay footballers speak out and pronounce themselves as gay. WHY? why does there need to be gay footballers. as has been said, it is only an issue when someone makes it an issue. no one is saying all gays should not play football, but why force the issue. does anyone believe that there are any players out there who could play better if they told the world they were gay? would they get a better contract? who cares about the first gay footballer anyway? that has been done, and i can't even think of the americans name who came out earlier. is that their problem, no one really cares? will they just slip into obscurity after all the fuss has died down?

why? why can't fat people fight without being ridiculed? that is a very strange stance you have on tolerance. don't laugh because they are fat, laugh because fatties fight.

I didn't say "gay rose tinted glasses". And you still don't get it. Just because 1 in 10 are blah blah blah or whatever, doesn't mean there HAS to be gay footballers. Why does there HAVE to be a gay anything? Why can't there just be footballers and no one need to pigeon hole everyone? Too much time wasted on why there aren't gay (whatever's) anyway. No one cares there aren't enough ginger footballers!

You still aren't reading it without your rose tinted gay glasses. I am saying that you cannot say because of statistics it means there are gay footballer. And I am saying that because no one says they aren't gay, it may mean they aren't gay. I don't need it to be a bastion of staightness as was said, I just don't understand why gayness has to be an issue? Who cares? Do gay people really need to have a gay footballer to be proud of? Why force an issue that MAY not be there?

Clearly you either didn't read it or just didn't like the argument so got back on your high horse. I didn't say gay men aren't interested in football, and am not saying that there are no gay footballers, just that because no one says they are gay doesn't mean someone is. An the proportion of people in a test cannot be blown up to say there must be gay men in football, because one in fifty men are. There are probably many things in this country that 1 in 50 people are, but you don't find in football. That is called averaging it out, more in one section than another.

No it is not ludicrous. 1 in 20 voted conservative in the last election but not one person in the over three thousand workforce I worked at did. I'm only saying just because no one says they are means that some of them are hiding it. One other thing, gay bisexual or other. Surely the other is straight? If so, that buggers up the statistics a little bit doesn't it?

Navratolova and billie jean king

Why does everyone assume there are any gay footballer? Just because some people are gay doesn't mean there HAS to be gay footballers. I am not stating this as a fact but there might not be. There aren't that many Indian professional footballers in England ( I can't think of one) so does that make us racist? It might be that gay men aren't very good at football, don't like football or just don't want to play. Just because no one says they are gay, everyone is now being told they are still hiding it.

This. Who really gives a f*##. Also, no one has come out in defence of us gingers, and until that happens I will not support any gay/coloured/religious differently sectioned members of the world. You support your club and your players, and slag off the other teams players. If by this sledging you could put off said players, then ok. That doesn't make you homophobic/racist/bigoted or anything.