Rainbow Laces Campaign
- Thread starter CBK
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Slowly but surely, yes. The job is not yet complete but casual racism is not deemed acceptable as it has been in years gone by.
Anything that puts the issue in the public eye is worth doing, although of course it's impossible to measure the effect it has. People still remember the "Rock Against Racism" campaign from the 70s. Did it change attitudes? Of course it did. In this instance, as in so many others, football is about 35 years behind the times.
Never heard of Rock against Racism.
Football is NOT 35 years behind the times. It always reflects society as it is right now. It's just made up of the general public, be they good, bad or from Wales.
I just jogged my memory thanks to google. I was more into the Carpenters back then.
Is it homophobic to sing it? Or homophobic to be offended by that chant?
Most songs sang at Brighton fans are nothing more than old and unfunny chants which have less venom than clubs sing about their rivals.
I know nothing about this campaign. However, if I assume there is no harm in it, I can't see the point in NOT taking part. It's not as if they are being asked to wear rainbow laces for every match until homophobia is stamped out, is it..?
The other day there was a the squad photoshoot. In proud position was the placeard, held by Pochettino, Say No To Racism.
So where's the difference..? Don't tell me because saying no to racism is about saying no to discrimination of foreigners or people of other colours, because that is already making a distinction of difference. If you say no to racism you ought to say no to homophobia. Or have we finally abandoned the Great Big Melting Pot World..? In effect, all it is, is another minority/ethnic/cultural people being discriminated against. And that's wrong.
However, the campaign may have an agenda that isn't acceptable. I don't know.
The other day there was a the squad photoshoot. In proud position was the placeard, held by Pochettino, Say No To Racism.
So where's the difference..? Don't tell me because saying no to racism is about saying no to discrimination of foreigners or people of other colours, because that is already making a distinction of difference. If you say no to racism you ought to say no to homophobia. Or have we finally abandoned the Great Big Melting Pot World..? In effect, all it is, is another minority/ethnic/cultural people being discriminated against. And that's wrong.
However, the campaign may have an agenda that isn't acceptable. I don't know.
Absolutely. I think that the intent of this particular largely-empty-gesture is less to educate the public than to lay the groundwork for the inevitable coming-out of a FL/PL footballer, to indicate that they wouldn't be dressing room lepers. The involvement of Paddy Power largely undermines that, though; there'll be plenty of people who aren't raging homophobes who will not be taking part in the campaign, and having a small minority of players on-board is ultimately counterproductive.
Have a read of the thread. Norwich aren't getting involved because they have an agreement with SBOBET not to work with other betting agents - as this campaign is a pretty thinly veiled PR campaign for Paddy Power, that makes sense. As ptf pointed out, we also have a partnership with SBOBET. It's likely some of the other teams are in the same boat.
The premier league/FA seem to have been caught off-guard by this a bit, maybe they're embarrassed they didn't think of it first.
Is it too naive to think that maybe Paddy Power are doing this for the right reasons? Probably. Though it is sort of sad that the biggest reason not to support a progressive campaign such as this is that you're sponsored by a rival company.
Is it too naive to think that maybe Paddy Power are doing this for the right reasons? Probably. Though it is sort of sad that the biggest reason not to support a progressive campaign such as this is that you're sponsored by a rival company.
Thanks Dan, you've saved me the bother.
Exactly what was about to write. Business before ethics. Disappointing, but understandable, I suppose.
Not really, if you think it's offensive to be called gay then you must believe there is something wrong with being gay.
This is an all-world-awful argument and you'd be wise not to think that it's a trump card.
Surely a matter of context. A description of someone as gay is not offensive, but if words are used as an insult then they are offensive. There is nothing wrong with the words 'woman' or 'black' but if used to denote inferiority then they are insulting.