Marc Guehi

[St. Maximin]

2 hours ago, Conjo said:

 

I get that, and said as much in my previous post.  

 

The question was more specifically to Segun when he wrote "One can acknowledge they exist without wearing the group's paraphernalia at their place of employment. Refusal to do so does not make them hateful or evil, no matter how much certain people will protest." as I was curious if he had the same opinion if the refusal was racially motivated.

Ah fair, sorry I misread that . Tbh I think this is one of the reasons why I'm not particularly keen on people being strongly encouraged to take part in such gestures. The discussions can easily become political and someone's refusal can be easily misinterpreted or misreported, especially when they may actually share the same views as many other players over the matter.

[Elliottman]

5 hours ago, andyc35i said:

Someone with beliefs like that isn’t a person I want representing our team. I get there’s a religious element he’s getting at, but you just don’t make a statement like that as it’s irrelevant to the campaign and not about a ‘belief’ - it’s a human right to live the way you want to and not have fear for your sexuality

 

 

 

So he has to be forced to wear an armband supporting something he doesn’t believe but he’s not allowed to share his own beliefs in return?

 

Massively hypocritical no? 

[BGRM]

2 minutes ago, Nowhere Man said:

Exactly.. I’m gonna stick to watching kittens and how to make a bazooka outa baked beans cans..

I'd love to know how you make these from bean cans......

 

[wormy]

So.. Reckon £25m will do it now, guys? 

[Hanshithispantz]

16 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

 

Science frequently changes it's standpoint based on new discoveries or experiments, but can only be disproven by better science, not by opinion.

 

Do better science and get back to me.

This is just gatekeeping by use of semantics though. Science is 'debated' just like everything else, sectioning it off into it's own little academic bubble doesn't change that.

 

Edit: Not sure how the Marc Guehi thread has come to this 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 18:09 by Hanshithispantz

[KennyUtd]

3 minutes ago, wormy said:

So.. Reckon £25m will do it now, guys? 

They'll pay us. 

[Sibierski]

Some amount of pages for a player that’s not played a single minute for us.

[mouldy_uk]

Just now, Sibierski said:

Some amount of pages for a player that’s not played a single minute for us.

Though he has scored for us 

[Chris_R]

3 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

This is just gatekeeping by use of semantics though. Science is 'debated' just like everything else, sectioning it off into it's own little academic bubble doesn't change that.

 

Edit: Not sure how the Marc Guehi thread has come to this 

 

 

 

That's like saying neuroscience or car mechanics or plumbing or electrics is open for debate by the general public - it isn't

 

Every professional discipline is 'gatekept' by the study, work, and understanding of the experts and we have to accept that. Doesn't matter if you like it or not. 

 

I don't tell my plumber I disagree with how he's going to do the work unless I've got a fucking good reason, certainly not that I just don't believe in pipes. He's the expert. 

[St. Maximin]

2 hours ago, Memphis said:

To refuse to wear a rainbow armband can only be interpreted as choosing to tell gay players and people at large that you do not think they should be included in sport. The message intended by the proliferation of the armbands is that gay people are to be included and discrimination against them is not to be tolerated. If you want to twist that message into something that then doesn't conform with your religious beliefs, you are intentionally obscuring the truth in order to allow your homophobia to persist.

 

Gambling is considered sinful by Guehi's church. Yet he endorses a bookmaker called NET88 with his shirt - a very shady operator without a UK presence and that has courted controversy in the past - and manages not to write 'I love Jesus' on it every game. Odd that he would find one "sin" too sinful to be seen as endorsing, but the other he seems to be fine with. It's almost as if there's more than a religious element to his statement.

 

And that's the point. Gay people exist. Gay athletes exist. They have been forced to compete in a world that harasses and bullies them at every turn. Players like Guehi would love to ignore that gay people exist. Would love to turn their backs and pretend that homophobia/bullying aren't a life-threatening problem for gay athletes. And allowing them to shame-facedly claim some religious exemption helps to normalize treating gay athletes and gay people differently. 

 

It's not enough to be non-homophobic. If you are a person with empathy, you've got to help fight against this kind of "soft" bigotry.

I think this involves assumptions and shows a lot of things here can be interpreted differently by different people - both the meaning of an armband (or another gesture, such as wearing a poppy or 'taking the knee') and the intentions and views of someone who refuses to participate (or does so in a different manner in this case).

 

I don't really see how his refusal to wear a rainbow armband can 'only' be interpreted that way in the slightest, unless you want to think the worst of people. It's been mentioned before he is Christian and his parents are highly involved in church etc. So clearly it might be a rather conflicting issue for him (hence the fact he has multiple, possibly conflicting messages). Maybe he, like many other religious people, rightly or wrongly, interprets the rainbow as a political symbol associated with a lot of anti-religious views (which tbh, it often is). Maybe some others simply interpret it is a show of support against discrimination and abuse towards homosexuals in football. Whatever the 'correct' interpretation is, there's pretty understandable reasons not everyone sees these things in the same way and no reason to think he actively encourages discrimination. To me it's not much different to James McLean not wearing the poppy for personal reasons - he has every right to hold those views, but clearly it comes from his own interpretation of it.

 

The view that players like Guehi would love to 'ignore that gay people exist' and 'turn their backs and pretend that homophobia/bullying aren't a life-threatening problem for gay athletes' is pretty baseless here. The fact he hasn't spoken about it says a lot - clearly people are making up their own ideas of what he thinks. As I said before, from experience I think I'm pretty qualified to comment here (unlike other things I definitely have commented on!) due to my upbringing - I don't know a single Christian who would do the above, yet for all we know they have exactly the same views as Guehi and just haven't been pressurised to wear a rainbow. In fact I'm pretty sure they would be some of the first people I know to show actual support for someone abused because of their sexuality, which goes far beyond simply wearing a rainbow flag. But they might also have some Biblical views about morality, so homophobic scumbags I guess.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 18:20 by St. Maximin

[80]

I was gonna turn up and make some quip about James McClean but it looks like we've moved past that by now. 

 

Personally, I've never been so excited to sign Mark Guehi 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 18:21 by 80

[Nowhere Man]

10 minutes ago, BGRM said:

I'd love to know how you make these from bean cans......

 

😬 nah it’s a weapon of least destruction.. sorry for the digression haha..

[JigsawGoesToPieces]

Im guessing he wont be visiting the pink triangle if he signs for us then?

[Memphis]

14 minutes ago, St. Maximin said:

I think this involves assumptions and shows a lot of things here can be interpreted differently by different people - both the meaning of an armband (or another gesture, such as wearing a poppy or 'taking the knee') and the intentions and views of someone who refuses to participate (or does so in a different manner in this case).

 

I don't really see how his refusal to wear a rainbow armband can 'only' be interpreted that way in the slightest, unless you want to think the worst of people. It's been mentioned before he is Christian and his parents are highly involved in church etc. So clearly it might be a rather conflicting issue for him (hence the fact he has multiple, possibly conflicting messages). Maybe he, like many other religious people, rightly or wrongly, interprets the rainbow as a political symbol associated with a lot of anti-religious views (which tbh, it often is). Maybe some others simply interpret it is a show of support against discrimination and abuse towards homosexuals in football. Whatever the 'correct' interpretation is, there's pretty understandable reasons not everyone sees these things in the same way and no reason to think he actively encourages discrimination. To me it's not much different to James McLean not wearing the poppy for personal reasons - he has every right to hold those views, but clearly it comes from his own interpretation of it.

 

The view that players like Guehi would love to 'ignore that gay people exist' and 'turn their backs and pretend that homophobia/bullying aren't a life-threatening problem for gay athletes' is pretty baseless here. The fact he hasn't spoken about it says a lot - clearly people are making up their own ideas of what he thinks. As I said before, from experience I think I'm pretty qualified to comment here (unlike other things I definitely have commented on!) due to my upbringing - I don't know a single Christian who would do the above, yet for all we know they have exactly the same views as Guehi and just haven't been pressurised to wear a rainbow. In fact I'm pretty sure they would be some of the first people I know to show actual support for someone abused because of their sexuality, which goes far beyond simply wearing a rainbow flag. But they might also have some Biblical views about morality, so homophobic scumbags I guess.

 

 

 

 

Here's the thing. All of your discussion is proving my point - the original meaning of the armband is being twisted for people's religious purposes. There's really not much room for interpretation seeing as how the message was clearly outlined from the start of the campaign.

 

This is the message that the armband was designed to convey, straight from the people who started it: Wearing it shows that your club is a safe place where everyone can be themselves and that you actively support LGBTQ+ inclusion. 

 

It's not an endorsement of homosexuality. It's not a value judgement on lifestyles different than the societal norm. It's simply a way to outwardly say, "Hey, if you're gay, we're fine with you playing alongside us. We're fine with being your teammate." That's all.

 

And if people can't do that, it says a lot about them.

[Hanshithispantz]

24 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

That's like saying neuroscience or car mechanics or plumbing or electrics is open for debate by the general public - it isn't

 

Every professional discipline is 'gatekept' by the study, work, and understanding of the experts and we have to accept that. Doesn't matter if you like it or not. 

 

I don't tell my plumber I disagree with how he's going to do the work unless I've got a fucking good reason, certainly not that I just don't believe in pipes. He's the expert. 

Someone doesn't require a PhD to understand a scientific study, or to contribute to science, just as a they don't need to be a plumber to fix their toilet.

 

That's not what I was saying though, using the academic term for a word on an internet forum is obviously gatekeeping 

 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 18:41 by Hanshithispantz

[Ellis H]

Both players are captain again tonight. Should be interesting.

[Chris_R]

5 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

Someone doesn't require a PhD to understand a scientific study

 

True to an extent, I can understand a study without re-doing the maths. I read a lot of science that I appreciate the outcome of but haven't walked their path to get there so don't fully, truly understand it but I can cosmetically understand it when the concepts are explained to me.. 

 

But to dispute it, you do need to become pretty close to (or even greater than) the equal of the person who wrote it and it course that can be done by a lay person in any field. You do need to re-do their maths, find errors in their methodology, have your own work challenging the outcome  peer reviewed by the community and come out intact. You can't just go "nah, I don't think it works like that" - at least not with an ounce of credibility. Of course that can be your starting point for investigation, but you've got to put in the hard yards to validate that opinion and you should do so with an open mind, that if your own work vindicates the original and you can find no error in your own work, you adopt that original outcome as your default standpoint too.

 

Anyway, enough from me.

[RodneyCisse]

Both with dodgy bands on/off tonight then?

[Lush Vlad]

49 minutes ago, wormy said:

So.. Reckon £25m will do it now, guys? 

Get the owners to discuss their views on gays with him. He’ll sign there and then. 

[MagMal]

The world would be a lot better place if we had more closet religious people and less closet gay people.

[HawK]

My opinion is that putting any messaging of any kind out there will just create divisions regardless of the intention. My view is that supporting football clubs should be about bringing a community together, not highlighting differences. Isn't supporting a club about leaving your differences at the door and getting on with the people around you, sharing in a common interest? Personally, I don't want supporting a football club to be mixed with religion or politics, or any other external issues. There are other methods, times and places for that sort of thing. I don't want to go the cinema and sit through political or societal messaging before the film starts.

 

FWIW I don't think whether someone wears an armband or makes a gesture is going to stop whichever bigoted person from behaving the way they were going to behave anyway.

[DiddyLevine]

1 hour ago, mouldy_uk said:

Fun fact, the odds of us winning something is statistically identical to there being a God 

The chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one

but still they come ...

[Lush Vlad]

1 hour ago, Eveready said:

Why is the guy who did wear the armband under more fire than the guy who didn't wear it at all?

I’m actually half interested in this TBH. More so than the actual main discussion.  
 

Perhaps because Guehi is an England international and higher profile? As surely if you take issue with what Guehi has done. Then refusing to wear it is ‘worse’ in this instance?

 

It would be nice to know why one might face an FA charge and the other is seemingly fine to say ‘sod off, I’m not wearing it.’ 
 

I don’t actually care, either way. But if no explanation is given. Then it won’t be long until the EDL/Tommy Robinson types will be saying that it’s anti-Christian and the media don’t dare speak out against Islam. I’m sure they’ve already arrived at that conclusion, TBH. 

[Tiresias]

11 minutes ago, HawK said:

My opinion is that putting any messaging of any kind out there will just create divisions regardless of the intention. My view is that supporting football clubs should be about bringing a community together, not highlighting differences. Isn't supporting a club about leaving your differences at the door and getting on with the people around you, sharing in a common interest? Personally, I don't want supporting a football club to be mixed with religion or politics, or any other external issues. There are other methods, times and places for that sort of thing. I don't want to go the cinema and sit through political or societal messaging before the film starts.

 

FWIW I don't think whether someone wears an armband or makes a gesture is going to stop whichever bigoted person from behaving the way they were going to behave anyway.

 

No message is a message. I didn't grow up as a football fan due to family not being into sport apart from wimbledon once a year. As a gay fan it's hard to put into words what walking into the stadium for the first time somewhat nervously and seeing a rainbow flag being waved meant. 

 

Now I am also slightly critical of companies etc sticking rainbow flags everywhere just to look like they're good guys and join a party once a year at pride for no good reason, but it being there is important. While there is some ambiguity on things whether it is out of spite, cluelessness etc I don't care for massive pile ons, I am not under the illusion that all football players are nice people I'd want to spend time with but also could be some degree of cluelessness. As said before, genuine outreach. All political stuff out of the match? Does that include the anti-racism stuff? Not saying anything is saying a lot tbh. 

[HawK]

1 minute ago, Tiresias said:

 

No message is a message. I didn't grow up as a football fan due to family not being into sport apart from wimbledon once a year. As a gay fan it's hard to put into words what walking into the stadium for the first time somewhat nervously and seeing a rainbow flag being waved meant. 

 

Now I am also slightly critical of companies etc sticking rainbow flags everywhere just to look like they're good guys and join a party once a year at pride for no good reason, but it being there is important. While there is some ambiguity on things whether it is out of spite, cluelessness etc I don't care for massive pile ons, I am not under the illusion that all football players are nice people I'd want to spend time with but also could be some degree of cluelessness. As said before, genuine outreach. All political stuff out of the match? Does that include the anti-racism stuff? Not saying anything is saying a lot tbh. 

 

I don't think I'll win many friends saying this, but I do think it also includes no racism messaging either. I think it's a societal issue, but one we should definitely punish, vilify and not tolerate along with any kind of hate speech and there should be appropriate bans and action taken to enforce it. I'm just not sure personally how well received the messaging will be by the people we're effectively wanting to educate or change for the better. I'm not sure it's going to have the effect people with the best of intentions think it will. Intolerance is the enemy in my view. One club, one family.