Jurgen the German
Terry Dyson
Stenno? :ross:
You mean the guy that's on my cyber dingdong and jumps on all my posts? to the point that mods had a word with him? you're telling me that his post validates your point...you're funny :ross::ross:
:lol:
Stenno? :ross:
You mean the guy that's on my cyber dingdong and jumps on all my posts? to the point that mods had a word with him? you're telling me that his post validates your point...you're funny :ross::ross:
Dude, I have no time for or interest in your squabbles with other posters. I thought you would understand on your own why I asked the question I did, apparently I was wrong.
--------------------------
Since you seem honest in your question:
If you want to be pedantic it can obviously be argued that people are born asexual as toddlers have no sexual desires or preferences. As sexuality develops it seems abundantly clear that there's a strong genetic/biological component that most likely interacts with the environment any person grows up in.
The original statement you asked about "people are not born gay" is derogatory because of what is typically implied by people making that statement. It might be wrong, at some level, as it seems at the very least likely that there are environmental factors at play. So there's not a strict "born gay, grows up to be gay or born straight, grows up to be straight" dichotomy. So, if you want to be pedantic, you can say that people aren't born gay. However, there's not even a gay/straight dichotomy in the first place, sexuality varies along more of a continuum. Note that this doesn't imply a choice, and it seems likely to me at least that for some people the genetic/biological factors are very strong.
Most gay people will feel that they are "born gay" just as much as you feel "born straight". The statement you asked about has traditionally been uttered along with things like "it's a choice", It's not natural", "it's an illness" or "you can learn to be straight" etc. If you were in a minority as a straight person and there was a history of recent clear discrimination and still lasting discrimination to some degree in the society you lived and people had been using "you're not born straight" along with other terms like the one's I mentioned I think perhaps you would see why "you're not born straight" could be seen as derogatory.
That's one reason why gays shouldn't be allowed in football. Because in a game, is he going to be looking at the opponent, or is he going to be looking at his teammate and going "Ooh. He looks tasty in his kit". And I'm not homophobic, all right? Come round, look at my CDs. You'll see Queen, George Michael, Pet Shop Boys. They're all bummers.
LOL :ross:
come on, we're not in the 1950's anymore
Tbh, I do find it odd that people can be straight then either gradually or suddenly change to being gay. I always thought you either like women or men. I could see how people could possibly change to liking both, but the idea seems foreign to me that people could change from one to the other, but I guess it can happen.
It's ridiculous how this 'story' has become so big.
How many other top level footballers have come out? It's big because it's a rarity and he's someone who's played in the PL.
Who cares though?
How many other top level footballers have come out? It's big because it's a rarity and he's someone who's played in the PL.
This!
Am I right in thinking that Justin Fashanu is the only gay active top level footballer to come out (in England)? And the circumstances were complicated of course, but he ended up committing suicide.
We're not at a point where stories like these are commonplace, and until we get there of course a story like this will be high profile.
Compared to the usual managerial squabbles or high profile douchebag footballer doing something dingdongheaded to some other high profile douchebag footballer this is a story with some actual content worth paying attention to. It's a chance for football to be a force for change and a force for good in society.
"Who cares?" is normally an expression of tolerance. "Who cares about this person's skin colour/religion/gender/nationality?" etc.
But with homosexuality and the issue of people coming out, I've noticed that "Who cares?" has become the way of expressing distaste. It's not so much "Who cares?" as "I wish these people would keep their gay sh1t out of my face."
Of course, gay people being told to shut up and sit down is precisely the problem.
Interesting comparison.
I'm not old enough to remember, but did people respond with "who cares" when the first black players emerged in the top English leagues and national team?
I'm not old enough to remember, but did people respond with "who cares" when the first black players emerged in the top English leagues and national team?
"Who cares?" is normally an expression of tolerance. "Who cares about this person's skin colour/religion/gender/nationality?" etc.
But with homosexuality and the issue of people coming out, I've noticed that "Who cares?" has become the way of expressing distaste. It's not so much "Who cares?" as "I wish these people would keep their gay sh1t out of my face."
Of course, gay people being told to shut up and sit down is precisely the problem.
What about that it takes some people longer to come to terms with their sexual orientation?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.