I'm copying this from the Guardian, because I couldn't put it any better. Couldn't really have shot ourselves in the foot any better. Norwich City were the first club to come out and say they would not be sporting Stonewall's rainbow laces this weekend in support of removing homophobia from football. Stephen Fry, board member and ardent supporter of the campaign is sure to be pleased. But what is the club's noble reason for turning down the request? Apparently 'Norwich have discussed the matter with Stonewall, explaining that the organisation's partnership with Paddy Power conflicts with their own relationship with SBOBET and use of the promotional material would set a precedent other good causes would attempt to follow.' So their bookie of choice conflicts with Stonewall's? An insurmountable problem. What an awful signifier of the state of the modern game when puny commercial interests can get in the way of an undeniably good cause. And this at a club with an openly gay board member and where Justin Fashanu began his career.
Having read this yesterday, I see no problem whatsoever with City's decision! http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/spor...their_opt_out_of_stonewall_campaign_1_2732430
sorry china, but the clubs decision is absolutely the correct one. when you read up about it you may very well change your mind as the whole campaign is a shambles and distasteful and norwich are quite right to ignore it. of course, the sentiments behind the campaign are absolutely great but it's not been done the right way. this is a quote by an anti-homophobia group: "It is incongruous to run a campaign aiming to change football culture whilst using language which reinforces the very stereotypes and caricatures that, in the long term, ensure that homophobia persists" sums it up perfectly for me (a full statement from football v homophobia is also below) http://www.footballvhomophobia.com/...atement-regarding-the-rainbow-laces-campaign/
Storm in a teacup personally I can't see the problem, indeed why should anyone be forced to take part in this. No-one should be discriminated against for their sexual preference, race etc. etc. BUT why should anyone be TOLD that they MUST take part in this ? We live in a democracy (allegedly), not a dictatorship it should be up to the individual to decide and if he decides not to participate he should not be ostracised for it either IMO, education is one thing brainwashing is another. Live and let live but be allowed to think for yourself.
It's a bit similar to the objections to Newcastle being sponsored by 'Rip-off.com" as 3 of their players are muslim but were effectively forced to comply with the megabuck sponsorship contract.
I stand corrected - thanks for the link, a much better viewpoint and I'm sure Mr Fry agrees. Thanks Supers.
As a gay man, I have a horse in this race, but I am totally confused about the entire issue. On one level, football is not the place to try to engineer social change, and people (quite rightly in my opinion) will be deeply suspicious of the great and good telling the oiks how they should feel about issues of sexuality. On another level, though, I recognise that nothing will change unless change is positively advocated. Basically I just wish it didn't matter (and it shouldn't) but the reality is that it does.
