50 Leicester Fans Involved In Homophobic Chanting

[oliveandblue]

1 hour ago, Danny said:

I would go as far as saying that's the dumbest thing I've read in this topic.

In America the word "faggot" is more often than not used as a descriptor for things than it is a direct insult.  If you call someone it directly, then it is entirely unacceptable.  

Calling a video game monster a faggot is not homophobic.   I almost never use the word personally, because I think there are better words to insult with.

[Viva la FCB+]

50 minutes ago, oliveandblue said:

In America the word "faggot" is more often than not used as a descriptor for things than it is a direct insult.  If you call someone it directly, then it is entirely unacceptable.  

Calling a video game monster a faggot is not homophobic.   I almost never use the word personally, because I think there are better words to insult with.

That rationale is one of the biggest obstacles to overcome. Unfortunately America is the worst culprit for it. Its not much different then calling black people the N word in reality. You may say you dont mean it to be racist in context but the word is racist at its root much like calling them "faggots" its your society that needs to change and realize we arent cave men anymore and move passed such trivial things.

[Danny]

2 hours ago, oliveandblue said:

In America the word "faggot" is more often than not used as a descriptor for things than it is a direct insult.  If you call someone it directly, then it is entirely unacceptable.  

Calling a video game monster a faggot is not homophobic.   I almost never use the word personally, because I think there are better words to insult with.

You can't decide when a derogatory word no longer becomes offensive because you (proverbial you) "don't mean it like that". It may be common place to freely call things "faggot" but it holds the same meaning regardless of how it is used.

[Fairy In Boots]

2 hours ago, Danny said:

You can't decide when a derogatory word no longer becomes offensive because you (proverbial you) "don't mean it like that". It may be common place to freely call things "faggot" but it holds the same meaning regardless of how it is used.

So how often do you speak with people of colour and take them to task for the N word? Allowing communities to take ownership of a word strips it if it's power. Getting overly upset and easily offended has the opposite effect and empowers the word when it's occasionally used.

It's all about the context in which it's used, generally suggesting Barcelona for example rolling around like they've been shot is "some fag shit" is nowhere near as offensive as calling a specific homosexual person a "fag", it's also got a lot to do with how it's delivered. I really do find this need to have a black & white opinion on everything so fucking tiresome. 

[Inverted]

10 hours ago, oliveandblue said:

That's not necessarily derogatory.  You're not calling a person that, you're calling a thing/situation that.  That's hardly offensive.

 

[LFCMadLad]

I'm still struggling to understand how it matters 'one single bit' who a person decides to have sex with and why some people still think 'in fucking 2017' that derogatory comments are still ok, whether they are tongue in cheek or not.

Im sorry but "I have a black friend" and "my cousins are gay" doesn't excuse the shite that some have posted on here. 

Sort yourselves out ffs.  

[Fairy In Boots]

26 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

I'm still struggling to understand how it matters 'one single bit' who a person decides to have sex with and why some people still think 'in fucking 2017' that derogatory comments are still ok, whether they are tongue in cheek or not.

Im sorry but "I have a black friend" and "my cousins are gay" doesn't excuse the shite that some have posted on here. 

Sort yourselves out ffs.  

 

 

 

[Panflute]

11 hours ago, Batard said:

It's a delicate topic. England still has deep rooted racism and homophobia within its society. Chanting homophobia isn't acceptable, nor so throwing bananas at black players or shouting "fucking paki" at a British Asian player because the inference is clear, it's meant to defame and it's abundantly violent communication.

Now in the states saying "that's some faggot shit" appears to be common place, but at its heart it's still incredibly divisive and derogatory. If someone is offended by that, it doesn't make them a lesser person. We've become too focused on people being offended by everything instead of focusing on the genuinely aggressively forms of bigotry. Sure, too many whine on social media about fucking everything trivial, but gay bashing at football grounds ... that's not something we want to turn a blind eye to.

I don't see homophobia as a problem at all and any Western country that thinks it is doesn't have its priorities set straight. Perhaps 'extreme' on my end, but the obsession that Anglos have with 'oi bruv that's bigoted' is truly baffling to a point where Britain seems more like a fictional dystopia than an actual place.

[Inverted]

22 minutes ago, Panflute said:

I don't see homophobia as a problem at all and any Western country that thinks it is doesn't have its priorities set straight. Perhaps 'extreme' on my end, but the obsession that Anglos have with 'oi bruv that's bigoted' is truly baffling to a point where Britain seems more like a fictional dystopia than an actual place.

I don't think anyone would claim it's the worst issue on the agenda, but just in Glasgow for example there was a homophobic attack on somebody during the pride festival at the weekend. Something similar happened in Copenhagen too. 

Of course, people get randomly beaten up, but even in our countries, it shows that there are still a lot of people growing up surrounded by homophobia, who grow up with a burning hate for gays. 

Letting little things slip just allows these people to continue with their insulated mindsets that lead them to believe that homophobic feelings are normal or permissible. 

[Panflute]

7 minutes ago, Inverted said:

I don't think anyone would claim it's the worst issue on the agenda, but just in Glasgow for example there was a homophobic attack on somebody during the pride festival at the weekend. Something similar happened in Copenhagen too. 

Of course, people get randomly beaten up, but even in our countries, it shows that there are still a lot of people growing up surrounded by homophobia, who grow up with a burning hate for gays. 

Letting little things slip just allows these people to continue with their insulated mindsets that lead them to believe that homophobic feelings are normal or permissible. 

The fact that there's a pride festival there shows you it's a non-problem at best.

[Inverted]

Just now, Panflute said:

The fact that there's a pride festival there shows you it's a non-problem at best.

The fact that there's chemotherapy shows you cancer's a non-problem at best. 

[Panflute]

21 minutes ago, Inverted said:

The fact that there's chemotherapy shows you cancer's a non-problem at best. 

Dumb analogy. Pride parades display the victory of homosexuals in their ascent to the top of the social ladder. Chemotherapy is an unreliable treatment for a disease we do not yet have under control in any meaningful way. I can imagine this sounded like a good one-liner in your wrangled Anglo mind, but in reality it makes no sense.

[Danny]

2 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

So how often do you speak with people of colour and take them to task for the N word? Allowing communities to take ownership of a word strips it if it's power. Getting overly upset and easily offended has the opposite effect and empowers the word when it's occasionally used.

It's all about the context in which it's used, generally suggesting Barcelona for example rolling around like they've been shot is "some fag shit" is nowhere near as offensive as calling a specific homosexual person a "fag", it's also got a lot to do with how it's delivered. I really do find this need to have a black & white opinion on everything so fucking tiresome. 

So you're comparing "people of colour" (of what colour? orange, am I taking Oompa Loompas to task over their use of the n word???) who've used the word Nigga after being called niggers for god knows how long to straight people using the word fag and deciding that it's not offensive in the slightest. Good one.

And no, I don't take black people to task when they use a variation of a word that's been used to discriminate them for decades upon decades because I have no personal understanding of what it's like to be persecuted and abused because of the colour of my skin. But I can tell a straight person that it's fucking stupid to suggest they can change the meaning of a homophobic slur because they don't mean it.

[Inverted]

37 minutes ago, Panflute said:

Dumb analogy. Pride parades display the victory of homosexuals in their ascent to the top of the social ladder. Chemotherapy is an unreliable treatment for a disease we do not yet have under control in any meaningful way. I can imagine this sounded like a good one-liner in your wrangled Anglo mind, but in reality it makes no sense.

Ah yes, I don't believe that gays have somehow established themselves as our ruling class, so I have the wrangled mind.

Good convo. I'll remember to leave the facts at the door next time. 

[LFCMadLad]

2 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

 

 

 

Oh hello dinosaur  

[Batard]

13 hours ago, oliveandblue said:

That's not necessarily derogatory.  You're not calling a person that, you're calling a thing/situation that.  That's hardly offensive.

 

It depends on the person, if a gay man takes exception to it, that makes it offensive by definition

[6666]

12 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

So basically FiB made a joke that could have been interpreted as offensive but wasn't really commentworthy in my personal opinion, and now everyone is a cunt and also either a bigot or part of some TF365 social justice clique?

Just another day on the internet then.

Either you're 100% in favour of something or 100% against it. Those are the rules on the internet. 

[Panflute]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

Ah yes, I don't believe that gays have somehow established themselves as our ruling class, so I have the wrangled mind.

Good convo. I'll remember to leave the facts at the door next time. 

I didn't say ruling class; top of the social ladder. The class of people you cannot criticise in the Western hemisphere. The fact that any such criticism as pathologised as a phobia should tell you enough.

I am more familiar with the facts on the homosexual "lifestyle" than you are by the looks of it, but seeing as they won't fit your dumb prefabricated narrative, sharing them would indeed be a waste of everyone's time.

[Honey Honey]

What you mean is you don't like how you can't take your shortcuts of shoving everyone into one box, then recklessly and fecklessly firing off negative criticisms and stigma's at anyone who shares the broad and weak label on that box, regardless of whether actual criticism fits everyone there.

It's the same crap you've been doing in this thread by using the term Anglo-Saxon in its old fashioned racialist sense. It's the same crap you use when referring to Muslims, Americans, trans, capitalism and other labels you constantly use as lazy shortcuts for your "criticisms". 

It all overlaps.

 

[Panflute]

9 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

What you mean is you don't like how you can't take your shortcuts of shoving everyone into one box, then recklessly and fecklessly firing off negative criticisms and stigma's at anyone who shares the broad and weak label on that box, regardless of whether actual criticism fits everyone there.

It's the same crap you've been doing in this thread by using the term Anglo-Saxon in its old fashioned racialist sense. It's the same crap you use when referring to Muslims, Americans, trans, capitalism and other labels you constantly use as lazy shortcuts for your "criticisms". 

It all overlaps.

Fancy analysis. It's fine to accuse me of cutting corners in online arguments, but such is the nature of them. In the end your criticisms are directed at how I say things rather than what I say, and in regard to that I feel no need to waste my time on composing diatribes for people who have not proven to be capable of thinking for themselves.

[LFCMadLad]

2 minutes ago, Panflute said:

Fancy analysis. It's fine to accuse me of cutting corners in online arguments, but such is the nature of them. In the end your criticisms are directed at how I say things rather than what I say, and in regard to that I feel no need to waste my time on composing diatribes for people who have not proven to be capable of thinking for themselves.

Oh fuck off you massive twat, and take that Midlands knobhead with you. 

[Panflute]

Just now, LFCMadLad said:

Oh fuck off you massive twat, and take that Midlands knobhead with you. 

You really are a mad lad! 

[Inverted]

Evidently we bluepills just can't grasp the deep intellectual  substance behind not liking the gays. 

[LFCMadLad]

21 minutes ago, Panflute said:

You really are a mad lad! 

Anything's better than being you mate 👍🏻

You crack on with your views. 

[Fairy In Boots]

2 hours ago, LFCMadLad said:

Oh hello dinosaur  

I recall times where you've laughed at jokes about gay's in TFF days, why you suddenly have become the moral compass of the forum I don't know. Also I've not actually really said anything homophobic, in fact my argument is that gay people are strong enough to not need knights in shining armour policing the internet for them. Smiley showed his posts to be more an excuse to have a pop at me on multiple subjects, HK & now you seem to want to get involved, it's virtue signalling, it's tedious. 

3 hours ago, Danny said:

So you're comparing "people of colour" (of what colour? orange, am I taking Oompa Loompas to task over their use of the n word???) who've used the word Nigga after being called niggers for god knows how long to straight people using the word fag and deciding that it's not offensive in the slightest. Good one.

And no, I don't take black people to task when they use a variation of a word that's been used to discriminate them for decades upon decades because I have no personal understanding of what it's like to be persecuted and abused because of the colour of my skin. But I can tell a straight person that it's fucking stupid to suggest they can change the meaning of a homophobic slur because they don't mean it.

lol person of colour is the new pc term for black people you clown, it's fairly obvious I was talking about black people by the fact I've used the N word. I get that you're trying to appear that you're clowning me here but you're talking shit as normal. 

You said that people don't get to decide what words they use are derogatory, so why can black people be selective? Black people aren't necessarily offended by the N word just the context it's used in. Why do you think they use it themselves in all walks of life, likewise many gay people take ownership of "derogatory" terms and it ceases to be a word that effects them. As I said above it's all about the context with which it's used, not your perception on behalf of the person it's being used in conversation with.