CCFC Supports Rainbow Laces - Why? (1 Viewer)

[Liquid Gold]

I don’t know what the answer is, but I know putting some colourful laces on my boots isn’t it.

We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.

That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.

I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.

 

---

[Bennettbarnet]

Why is challenging a bigoted viewpoint virtue signalling? It’s yet another USA import to discourage challenging bigotry.

As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[mr_monkey]

In the main, people aren't challenging with any degree of articulation, they are whinging cos he hurt their feelings.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Or he has attacked and dimissed their way of life (as he has done to numerous posters and their families)

 

[stay_up_skyblues]

We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.

That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.

I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.

Yep. I mean it’s literally in front of people’s noses and they are actively participating in the debate… this is one of the exact reasons for the campaign. It’s not complicated is it?!

 

[djr8369]

Just thinking how insane it is that people are still reluctant to live their lives how they wish because of the hang ups from religion and it’s social engineering.

 

[stay_up_skyblues]

As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

People have given personal accounts and other scientific evidence to disprove his views. How is that not debate and education with credibility?

 

[clint van damme]

As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

What? People have given a whole array of reasons why they consider him to be wrong. Both anecdotal and in one case linking a study.

Not really sure what else you can do on a football forum.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

In the main, people aren't challenging with any degree of articulation, they are whinging cos he hurt their feelings.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

As above, I haven’t personally attacked or insulted him once. Just called out the offensive posts for what they are as you suggested he hadn’t made any.

And yes referring to your other post, we do carry sub conscious prejudice in ways even more entrenched than the ones you listed. But that is much more difficult and nuanced to deal with than the quite conscious beliefs the OP has expressed in detail. It’s worth at least trying to get him to reflect on his views.

 

[Skybluefaz]

But my point is that we all carry prejudices. It is a human survival instinct. It is the reason we don't walk the streets at night by a group of youths, why we cross the road if someone heading our way doesn't look right and why we were on high alert to anyone of Arabian looking descent when flying on a plane right after 9/11. It is nonsense prejudice.

We are all a product of our environment and obviously the posters environment was very different to yours and many others. It doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean he gets a free pass. But it does mean you need to understand why he is of that opinion and then try and change it with debate and evidence. And if he doesn't, don't worry about it. That's his right to live in ignorance.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

I actually agree with what you say here but I'm not sure how you think a gay person using lived experience to express an opinion on the contrary to that of the the OP is not valid evidence. Shmmeee has also offered up actual evidence.

 

[Bennettbarnet]

It's not politicaly insensitive it's down right fully factually inaccurate and of course it's offensive, he is saying that I can't raise a child as well as a male/female relationship which is the pure definition of offensive

In your instance, I can understand that offence will be caused as it is personal to you.

For everyone else, his opinion should be treated with the contempt it deserves and either engage to educate him or move on.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[djr8369]

We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.

That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.

I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.

Just look how white and male dominated football attendance is. Surely people look around and realise it doesn’t reflect their communities or workplaces? Football has massive problem in this regard and has a moral, ethical and financial need to change.

But my point is that we all carry prejudices. It is a human survival instinct. It is the reason we don't walk the streets at night by a group of youths, why we cross the road if someone heading our way doesn't look right and why we were on high alert to anyone of Arabian looking descent when flying on a plane right after 9/11. It is nonsense prejudice.

We are all a product of our environment and obviously the posters environment was very different to yours and many others. It doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean he gets a free pass. But it does mean you need to understand why he is of that opinion and then try and change it with debate and evidence. And if he doesn't, don't worry about it. That's his right to live in ignorance.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Those prejudices are the result of a perceived sense of danger. Largely unwarranted but somewhat understandable, and crossing the street to avoid some youths or not travel by air doesn’t really impact anyone else.
What reason does anyone have to be fearful of gay people openly living their lives?

 

[Sick Boy]

As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

That’s more of a reflection on you.

 

[Bennettbarnet]

It's not virtue signalling, it's calling out something offensive as offensive.

No its not! To call something out as offensive it has to be offensive to you as a perceived insult, otherwise it is virtue signalling. You can't be offended on behalf of someone.

You can feel a sense of injustice, a sense of protection over the aggrieved and a million other emotions. But do not be so disingenuous and patronising to believe that you understand what the offended party is feeling. Any claims that you do are virtue signalling.


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Sick Boy]

In your instance, I can understand that offence will be caused as it is personal to you.

For everyone else, his opinion should be treated with the contempt it deserves and either engage to educate him or move on.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Personally I’d find racism against non-white people offensive.

 

[Bennettbarnet]

If you don’t challenge prejudice, which he accepts this is, attitudes can’t be changed. If you do, you’re only doing it to score virtue points.

Though since he asked, dealing with prejudiced opinions is part of my day job.

I have never said don't challenge, in fact that is what I have been advocating for. What I have said is let's not turn this into a witch hunt because opinions don't allaign and instead try to educate him.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

No its not! To call something out as offensive it has to be offensive to you as a perceived insult, otherwise it is virtue signalling. You can't be offended on behalf of someone.

You can feel a sense of injustice, a sense of protection over the aggrieved and a million other emotions. But do not be so disingenuous and patronising to believe that you understand what the offended party is feeling. Any claims that you do are virtue signalling.


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Interesting. So nobody is allowed to challenge anything unless they are the victim.

If somebody is sexist, racist or homophobic in my classroom I should just let it happen because I’m a white straight man. Got it.

 

[shmmeee]

No, I am not. If a Flat Earth believer was on here you wouldn't be offended by them. Its that his opinion is politically sensitive and therefor you are offended and have a need to tell everyone just how offended you are. Its the very definition of virtue signalling.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Im not offended firstly. Well no more than I am with any other blatant disregard for scientific evidence.

Secondly you clearly don’t understand what virtue signalling is. It’s not being offended. It’s signalling morally good opinions to make yourself look like a good person. No one here is doing that.

Your problem is you can’t accept that your views are both scientifically illiterate and in the minority.

 

[shmmeee]

As above, people are not challenging with any degree of credibility, just outraged by how offended they are.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Havr you even read the thread? We’ve got logical arguments, scientific research, personal experience.The full gamut of evidence, nothing to do with outrage. Outrage is just your personal buzzword for people not agreeing with you.

 

[Bennettbarnet]

People have given personal accounts and other scientific evidence to disprove his views. How is that not debate and education with credibility?

I should correct my original post to "some" people are not challenging. My issue are with those who are jumping on the bandwagon of outrage without offering any substance to the debate.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Bennettbarnet]

As above, I haven’t personally attacked or insulted him once. Just called out the offensive posts for what they are as you suggested he hadn’t made any.

And yes referring to your other post, we do carry sub conscious prejudice in ways even more entrenched than the ones you listed. But that is much more difficult and nuanced to deal with than the quite conscious beliefs the OP has expressed in detail. It’s worth at least trying to get him to reflect on his views.

I couldn't agree more.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I couldn't agree more.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

In which case direct your frustrations at virtue signalling or aimless ranting elsewhere!

 

[djr8369]

Havr you even read the thread? We’ve got logical arguments, scientific research, personal experience.The full gamut of evidence, nothing to do with outrage. Outrage is just your personal buzzword for people not agreeing with you.

Why is it never “outrage” or “virtue signalling” when someone is giving a conservative or religious opinion? Curious.

 

[Bennettbarnet]

I actually agree with what you say here but I'm not sure how you think a gay person using lived experience to express an opinion on the contrary to that of the the OP is not valid evidence. Shmmeee has also offered up actual evidence.

It is valid evidence, of course it is. It just brings me to the end of my post where I say "And if he doesn't, don't worry about it. That's his right to live in ignorance" lifes too short to worry about the things you can't change.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Bennettbarnet]

That’s more of a reflection on you.

How so?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Bennettbarnet]

Interesting. So nobody is allowed to challenge anything unless they are the victim.

If somebody is sexist, racist or homophobic in my classroom I should just let it happen because I’m a white straight man. Got it.

You have an interesting way of reading only the parts that serve your agenda in my posts dont you.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You have an interesting way of reading only the parts that serve your agenda in my posts dont you.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Haha. You said that being offended on behalf of someone else is virtue signalling. Applied to a real world scenario it clearly isn’t, at least not always.

No agenda here my friend.

 

[Bennettbarnet]

In which case direct your frustrations at virtue signalling or aimless ranting elsewhere!

Have I offended you?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Have I offended you?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

No. Though you have given a bit of a weird take.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

No its not! To call something out as offensive it has to be offensive to you as a perceived insult, otherwise it is virtue signalling. You can't be offended on behalf of someone.

This is absolute nonsense.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Why is it never “outrage” or “virtue signalling” when someone is giving a conservative or religious opinion? Curious.

And how come that people are allowed their opinions, but a view that something is offensive is not allowed?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

And how come that people are allowed their opinions, but a view that something is offensive is not allowed?

Dare I say it is taking offence on behalf of the offender…

 

[Sick Boy]

Using the term virtue signalling unless you’re an American alt right member is a bit weird.

 

[Reppz]

We’ll it has already caused a conversation on here that has allowed a couple of posters to be able to express their sexuality freely where they might not have before and shown that the vast majority of people support their rights.

That should be enough in itself but it may also mean that lurkers or even people not associated with the forum at all can see football is no longer a homophobic environment and feel comfortable trying out a game or two.

I’d say it’s doing a pretty good job.

The campaign has been going on for what, maybe a decade now, and in that time 1 professional player in a dead Australian league has come out as gay.

Yeah the campaign is working wonders.

 

[djr8369]

And how come that people are allowed their opinions, but a view that something is offensive is not allowed?

Everyone is allowed their opinion mate but that only extends to one level. An opinion disagreeing with the first opinion is virtue signalling.

Same with “free speech”. People must have the right to free speech but don’t go disagreeing with them as that is subduing the first person free speech and essentially “cancelling” them.

Got it?

 

[djr8369]

The campaign has been going on for what, maybe a decade now, and in that time 1 professional player in a dead Australian league has come out as gay.

Yeah the campaign is working wonders.

So you’re saying we need to step it up, maybe make it more visible?