Britain's Gay Footballers

[torahboy]

It is thought that no matter where you are in Britain you are never more than twelve foot away from a homosexual. If you work in the bar and restaurant sectors you can halve that distance. If you're in the Royal Navy it's down to inches, and if you went on the old Shed at Chelsea, well, hello ducky!

[Peflecan]

Being gay isn't illegal, so why is it so taboo in football?, I know I'd rather have a squad full of gay men at the football club, than a manager like Harry Redknapp illegally syphoning off money to fuel his own greed.

 

Yet the "lads" laud 'arry the "futbawl maigaaa" and give dogs abuse to any footballer alleged to be gay.

 

Read some sickening stuff on football message boards over the years about footballers like Luke Young and Jon O'Shea that were rumoured to be gay.

 

Football as a whole, needs to get with the times, as some aspects of it (such as tolerance of gay footballers) are mired in the dark ages, along with racism being acceptable.

[Major Tom]

 

Unfortunately, these days there's a lot more personal stuff being hurled at players, and any glimps in to their private life is almost always used as ammo, regardless of the PC connotations etc.

 

 

Yeah, like defaming a guy by casually - and with no basis - referring to him as a paedophile.

 

People like you are part of the problem, Tom. Smart enough to know better but ignorant enough not to make that count.

[Duff Man]

Tom R in hypocritcial nonsense shocker.

[xerxes]

I like the modern man attitude of 'If footballer's came out it would be fine etc' er no, it wouldn't they'd get fucking dog's abuse week in week out.

Yet television personalities, musicians, politicians, cricketers and rugby players

do not.

 

In the seventies, abusing black players was commonplace, now it is unacceptable.

 

If it were a high profile player, the spotlight on abuse would be so intense that it may deal with it once and for all.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

Each to their own, as long as they don't make it compulsory. Plus why would heterosexuals hate homosexuals, it means there are more heterosexuals to go around.

[Tom R]

Yeah, like defaming a guy by casually - and with no basis - referring to him as a paedophile.

 

People like you are part of the problem, Tom. Smart enough to know better but ignorant enough not to make that count.

 

Hang on, he's the one who broke the law by bumming boys. Not me!

Fuck me for stating facts!

 

So he was gay? So fucking what. I couldn't care less about that, as I've stated above. It has no relevance to me or to society as a whole if someone is gay or not gay. Who cares, seriously?

 

I'm sorry, but I struggle to idolise anyone who has sex with underage kids. Being a big brave openly gay man in the horrible homophobic world of football doesn't change that. That has no relevance at all.

 

Sue me.

Edited January 31, 2012 by Tom R

[Tom R]

Tom R in hypocritcial nonsense shocker.

 

Er, what the fuck is "hypocritical" about anything I've said?

 

Being gay - fine

Bumming underage kids - definitely not fine

 

All sounds quite reasonable and clear cut to me!!

 

Yeah, you're gonna have to explain yourself here, cos at the moment you just look a thick prick, gegging in to a debate you weren't even involved in.

Edited January 31, 2012 by Tom R

[Markmywords]

Tom R in hypocritcial nonsense shocker.

 

I think he's making some sense here actually mate.

 

The point he made earlier about (some) gays announcing it to the world that they're gay pisses me off no end.

 

Ok, well done, so you're gay, good for you.

[Newport]

You're not a kid if you are 17 and an adult who sleeps with a 17 year old is certainly not a paedo, something which in several countries is legal. It's fucking ridiculous to say something like that.

 

A paedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children, which generally means they are under 13 years of age. Actually you can be classified a paedo from the age of 16.

[Tom R]

Jesus, ok, so he's not by the legal definition a "pedophile".

 

But he still fucked an underage boy. Call it what you like and defend it all you like, it doesn't make it any less fucking wrong.

[Lee909]

According to wiki, the lad was 17 and the legal age of consent in Maryland was 16.

[Newport]

Jesus, ok, so he's not by the legal definition a "pedophile".

 

But he still fucked an underage boy.

 

He didn't. The age of consent in Maryland is 16. What he was accused of was sexual assault on a 17 year old. Whether it was true or not we'll probably never know.

[Duff Man]

"Clearly I approve of sex with minors"

 

Jesus Christ. Idiot

[Duff Man]

You're about as wrong as you can get here, Tomarse. Well done.

[Tom R]

He didn't. The age of consent in Maryland is 16. What he was accused of was sexual assault on a 17 year old. Whether it was true or not we'll probably never know.

 

IS 16.

 

WAS 18.

[Duff Man]

Right, so because it happened in 1998 rather than 2003 he's a pedophile?

[Tom R]

There's a whole lot of defending sex with a minor going on here.

 

Not sure how comfortable you should all be with that.

[Tom R]

Right, so because it happened in 1998 rather than 2003 he's a pedophile?

 

Learn to read.

 

I've already taken back the "pedophile" comment in its legal definition sense.

 

But he still fucked an underage boy. Deal with it and move on with your life. Defend it if that's what you're about, but it happened.

[Tom R]

You're about as wrong as you can get here, Tomarse. Well done.

 

I'm actually 100% correct in everything I've said.

 

You're the one trying to say that because he fucked a boy when it was completely illegal, it's perfectly ok.

 

You're clearly "wrong" in more than one sense of the word.

[Duff Man]

Yeah, I'm defending sex with minors. That's exactly what I'm doing.

[Il Fenomeno]

There's a whole lot of defending sex with a minor going on here.

 

Not sure how comfortable you should all be with that.

 

Michael Jackson anyone??

[Tom R]

Yeah, I'm defending sex with minors. That's exactly what I'm doing.

 

You're not really doing anything other than dropping in stupid remarks with no basis, such as me talking "hypocritical nonsense", which you still haven't explained.

[Major Tom]

I'm actually 100% correct in everything I've said.

 

 

Actually, you're not, Tom. You're only serving to derail a decent discussion. But, as I said, people like you are very much part of the problem.

[Tom R]

Michael Jackson anyone??

 

When did Michael Jackson admit to bumming an underage boy, therefore making it a nailed on fact that it happened?

 

Must have missed that.

 

Michael Jackson's bumming or not bumming of minors is always up for debate (personally I believe that he didn't. And that's very different to defending him if he did btw, just in case you're that stupid). Fashanu's bumming or not bumming of minors isn't.

Edited January 31, 2012 by Tom R