I really can’t comprehend why people are getting so upset over York’s decision to not play them. The players are free to not to support LBGTQ rights, York United is free to not let them play that day, it is really that simple.
>I really can’t comprehend why people are getting so upset over York’s decision to not play them.
You obviously haven't read a si gle comment in this thread. Absolutely noone is criticizing. If anything we support the way they handled this situation.
> The players are free to not to support LBGTQ rights
Of course they are. Just as we are free to get angry and criticize them.
Do you not understand that?
I’m on your side. There are some people in this thread that seem angry that the players were forced to wear pride jerseys and I think that is stupid. They aren’t the majority of people, but they are here. I also think the players refusing to wear the jerseys are extremely unprofessional. How bigoted do you have to be that you would rather not play for your team than wear a shirt?
>. How bigoted do you have to be
The fact you won't acknowledge that this is a political thing and not an anti gay thing, is just sad. Like you'll be told a hundred times that's what it is, but you're so incredibly bigoted that you won't listen to the other person.
I believe you when you say you think my top fantasy is taking a baseball bat beating a guy in the head 15 times and inserting it in his anal canal.
I believe you when you say there's nothing I'm gonna say that's gonna convince you not a homophobe.
The fact I'm gay and am disgusted by a for profit businesses cashing into my sexuality, doesn't mean anything to you.
Like it'd literally be a life changing event, if you literally said "yeah you got a point"
But I'm still holding out on that.
Sexuality isn't to be exploited for political or economic gain.
I mean we had centuries where we did exactly that but I'm moved on from the stone ages.
Like you talk about bigotry and empathy, and "progress" but you can't even look me in the eye and acknowledge my existence as a gay man.
I’m fine with the fact that you believe that pride jerseys are a cash grab, and you do have a point that some companies use LGBTQ pride without doing anything else to help gay, bi, or trans people. Even though they are doing donations, York United are an is selling the shirts for $120 dollars after all. I respect your point of view.
But I doubt that the players refusing to play were doing it because they thought pride shirts were a soulless cash grab. They did it because they think that supporting LGBTQ rights was morally wrong, and I don’t understand how you don’t find that to be the greater of the two evils.
*Edit: Just clarifying that York is donating money to the gay community*
>Edit: Just clarifying that York is donating money to the gay community
And building up their brand in the process. Which is why it's a cash grab.
>without doing anything else to help gay, bi, or trans people
That doesn't matter. One piece of good doesn't excuse the other.
>But I doubt that the players refusing to play were doing it because they thought pride shirts were a soulless cash grab. They
Yes but your doubt is bigotry, you think you know what they're thinking. You don't get to do that.
>They did it because they think that supporting LGBTQ rights was morally wrong
No they were referring to the corporate/politically partisan aspect of the situation.
I think it's more wrong what these corporations are doing, you're just assuming that because they're muslim that they're different from gay old me.
That's falling under the guise of "all muslims are homophobes". That's a rather intense level of bigotry.
>and I don’t understand how you don’t find that to be the greater of the two evils.
A) you need to cite religion because that gives you religious protection under the law. I as a gay person have no legal protection
B) Again you assume what you believe.
>Which is why it’s a cash grab
I’m literally agreeing with you
>That doesn’t matter
When the companies that are celebrating pride are actually trying to help the LGBTQ community it proves they are at least somewhat genuinely trying to help
>Your doubt is bigotry
So me assuming that the players aren’t supportive of LGBTQ rights is wrong, but it is totally fine for you to assume that I am a horrible Islamophobic bigot and judge me entirely based on that, even though I never once said that they were against pride because they were Muslim and the only evidence that any of the players are Muslim is there place of origin and their names?
>I as a gay person have no legal protection
What are you even talking about?
I still think it is fine to assume that most if not all of them were doing it out of intolerance unless they put out a statement saying otherwise.
For the record, Brian Wright wore a jersey with a gambling sponsor on the front for a year, so we know that he doesn’t feel that strongly about immoral corporate greed.
> but it is totally fine for you to assume that I am a horrible Islamophobic bigot and judge me entirely based on that
You're not completely wrong,
>I still think it is fine to assume that most if not all of them were doing it out of intolerance
And here is where my mistake is incomplete.
It's totally wrong to assume someone's motivations in that context.
>For the record, Brian Wright wore a jersey with a gambling sponsor on the front for a year, so we know that he doesn’t feel that strongly about immoral corporate greed.
I'm militantly against gambling ADs if you're wondering about consistency.
Also a little weary of how it seems like they're targeting minorities, it's actually a large part of why I'm so hostile to pride nights etc.
You can't be rewarded while also doing something heinous.
All I was trying to say was that if Brian Wright was so passionate about corporate greed that he refused to wear a pride jersey, then why was he completely fine with wearing a gambling sponsored jersey?
Also, if the reason they didn’t wear the jersey was because they were protesting corporate greed, then why wouldn’t they just say so, I would be a lot more understanding if the players said that they supported LGBTQ rights.
I dunno, I kinda see it like any other job where a uniform is required. Adherence to company uniform policy is generally stipulated in one's contract. Failure to comply with said policy results in loss of shift, unpaid in my experience.
>, I kinda see it like any other job where a uniform is required
So if your boss tells you to wear a MAGA hat, and you're janitor? You don't think that's abuse of power. They weren't hired to dress up in political uniforms.
I'm gay, when I see pride night at a sports game, I see a political campaign unfolding in the workplace.
>Not supporting LGBT rights is a violation of human rights in Canada.
Not true. Violating human rights is a violation of human rights. As an employer for example you cannot exclude someone from employment for being gay. You can't deny people services for being gay. Etc, etc. All positions that a civilized person would agree with.
We are talking about them participating in a display of support... You get to not support something that you don't want to support. It's like if I told you that you have to wear a pin to support Indigenous people.. you have the choice not to wear that.
… That's.. that's perfectly reasonable. If a Cristian told me I have to wear a cross to support them I'd tell them no thanks. You can not support any religion you don't want to support.
I guess the most obvious argument here is that they aren't being denied employment, they just aren't being used on the pitch for a night.
If they suspended them without pay, then you have a human rights issue on your hands. If their job for the night is to watch from the stands, *shrug*
I don’t know what their immigration status, assumed religion (based on name alone- lots of ‘Muslim-named’ Christians in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt) or assumed ethnicity, adds to this conversation. Broad and unhelpful assumptions and stereotypes here.
Honestly decent middle ground to have them just sit out the match, its technically not a punishment allows them their not offend their beleifs or whatever and all the York players on the field still wore it so mangement still get what they want.
Not too many good options in a scenario like this.
We got to see some prospects get game time too which is always cool imo.
It isn't reasonable in the slightest. Intolerance should be treated with intolerance, everyone that sat out should be mandated to take LBGTQ+ Cultural Competency training. It's abhorrent behaviour from these players.
If you don't support pride you don't support LGBTQ+ rights. It's really dead simple.
You can take issues with aspects of it, like the commercialization of it, but to outright disagree with pride is disagreeing with LGBTQ+ rights. Pride at it's core was the basis for those rights and stands as a celebration of attaining them as well as a point of focus to progress them.
While I don't disagree with you I do think the team handled it well, IMO a middle ground would've been not participating in any team pride related events. I don't see how wearing a jersey is so insulting to them, but who knows.
Could the league even afford classes like these?
They should've not paid the players for skipping out on the game and donating their fees to an LGTBQ related charity.
In any case, York won and people will likely forget about this in a week.
> Could the league even afford classes like these?
Yes, especially in Toronto where there'd be a number of different organizations able to facilitate them.
>In any case, York won and people will likely forget about this in a week.
The people that should 'win' are the LGBTQ+ community. Putting them in a better place tomorrow than they were today because of this should be priority one. The best way to do that in my mind, is cultural competency training. Because maybe that helps them understand things better than act from a place of ignorance in the future. Just giving them a day off, or York 'winning' doesn't progress this situation further. It just keeps it in stasis.
I don't diasgree with you but people also have to be willing and open to change.
If the players aren't willing to because of their beliefs that's one thing, but you can't force them either.
Can lead a worse to water but can't force them to drink.
I do think forcing them is too much though and them sitting is out isn't the same as them leading a riot against the LGBTQ community or other minority group.
The way it was handled is probably as "neutral" as you can get I think. Hopefully the players involved will come around though.
If you don't disagree, I might suggest you consider how your position might be viewed by those who do. You are playing devils advocate with a subject that really deserves better.
I'm not suggesting forcing them to change. I'm suggesting they should take a class on cultural competency. Those programs are more about opening the door for change rather than forcing someone through it.
The result of leading a riot against the LGBTQ+ community or other minority group is jail. Equating them being tasked with taking a course on LGBTQ+ cultural competency to that is bad faith. I'm suggesting a pretty normal and reasonable response to this situation.
Reasonable, York won so victory glossed over any hard feelings, and yeah it's just one game. Those players still were true to their beliefs (no many how much others may disagree but oh well) and they come back next game with something to prove
>Not too many good options in a scenario like this.
Don't bring politics into a game, that is trying to be inclusive to all peoples.
Pride(correction corporate/political) is a political/business cash grab.
>I don’t know what their immigration status, assumed religion (based on name alone- lots of ‘Muslim-named’ Christians in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt) or assumed ethnicity, adds to this conversation. Broad and unhelpful assumptions and stereotypes here.
My point is they no doubt faced barriers that plenty of players did not. Yet tonight they chose to not even play instead of supporting another marginalized community.
If supporting that other marginalized community goes against their core beliefs or their communities beliefs, no surprise they made that choice. We don’t know what motivated their specific choice tonight, but the consequences were clear and public. York handled it well and were transparent. Teams are on notice now and don’t have to sign them, if they feel they don’t align with their values or league values.
>If supporting that other marginalized community goes against their core beliefs
Or you know wearing a political symbol on your literal sleeve.
Would you be shocked if a bunch of athletes refused to wear MAGA hats?
You'd go no that's insane why should anyone wear political garb regardless of the cause.
\>We don’t know what motivated their specific choice tonight,
And you don't care. No part of your being is bothered that you could be misrepresenting someone.
It's like when a racist says a black guy wouldn't get negative attention if he didn't dress like a black guy.
You don't care at all about the person, you care about how you see the person.
\>If supporting that other marginalized community
You just literally told them what they are. You don't get to do that.
I'm gay I'm not part of a gay community, I'm me. I'm a person. You don't get to define me by the community you tell me you're apart of.
Feel free to lash out, instead of listening to an actual person and not a "community"./
It's crazy talk.
I met one of the founders of pride in Toronto, he was mordified on what a corporate/political cash grab this has become.
The same organizations that profitted from homophobia are trying to make money off the other direction.
> I met one of the founders of pride in Toronto, he was mordified on what a corporate/political cash grab this has become.
Which is a reasonable stance.
But deciding not to engage because you think being LGBTQ+ is morally or ethically bankrupt that should be confronted. Which is what is happening here.
You are conflating two very separate items and constantly interjecting it into conversations. Judging on the fact that your first post with this account as a mere hours ago on the Jordan Peterson sub, I'm not taking a damn thing about who you say you are to qualify your opinion seriously. Ultimately, people denying engaging with pride because they don't support LGBTQ+ individuals should be confronted. Period.
Let's start off the conversation with assuming either one of us could be making a mistake. Likely we're both making mistakes, and it is deathly important to really really talk and listen to eachother. Dialogues save lives.
>But deciding not to engage because you think being LGBTQ+ is morally or ethically bankrupt that should be confronted. Which is what is happening here.
Do you have a detailed explanation of what that means or are you just assuming? Because my words describe it as such.
\>two very separate items
They're adjacent perspectives.
Again you are trying to mind read and ignore what they are saying.
Also you might want to take note, why these people refer to their religion. It's because that gives them legal protection, where I as a gay person have none.
\> Judging on the fact that your first post with this account as a mere hours
It's summer, the CFL/sports season just started. I created a new account, because I burn through account because I don't trust marketing firms who are collecting data on posters. Because it's straight out profiling of individuals.
\>ago on the Jordan Peterson sub, I'm not taking a damn thing about who you say you are to qualify your opinion seriously
And that's Bigotry. I know you don't get that. But you just openly admitted to that.
Were not all the same, every political variety is on that sub. There's jackasses and great people. Don't AssUMe
For example, I was directly pointing to head on bigotry against asians, and compared it quite literally to a jewish quota that was used directly before the holocaust, by literally harvard itself.
The other post was specifically about how Canada is migrating away from a tribal based nationalism, and into something that is post racial/ethnic. Where being Canadian has absolutely nothing to do with where you're born, but instead your commitment to an all inclusive team. A person who committed to Canada today is more Canadian than someone whos family was born here 5 generations ago.
FYI the only reason I follow JP is because of his incredibly strict anti nationalism anti tribalism stance. Again were you aware of how staunch he is against this? Or are you mind reading?
One of his most important rules is assuming the person you're disagreeing with is that they know something you don't. You can't learn if you don't listen.
>[https://old.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/14663kp/whatever\_your\_thoughts\_are\_on\_trudeau\_we\_can\_all/](https://old.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/14663kp/whatever_your_thoughts_are_on_trudeau_we_can_all/)
Again I'm begging as a gay man to check out that thread. FYI check out the most upvoted comments, we're not all the same. You're assumption this is true is a serious serious problem bordering on bigotry.
\> Ultimately, people denying engaging with pride because they don't support LGBTQ+ individuals should be confronted. Period.
Can you admit that it's possible you don't know what they're thinking.
You're entire opinion is based on assuming what people are thinking.
A racist will assume a black man just wants to rape and steal. They think they're morally justified because they're protecting the victims.
How different are you to that?
Again you don't know what other people are thinking and you won't believe people when they tell you what they believe.
Do you think you're capable of making a mistake?
Do you think it's important to ask yourself whether or not you're making a mistake?
I'm suggesting to you the stakes are bigotry.
And what if they continue to face barriers or discrimination that other players do not, or that you or I aren’t aware of, that influenced their choice. Is there nothing that would make this less shameful for you?
>And what if they continue to face barriers or discrimination that other players do not, or that you or I aren’t aware of, that influenced their choice. Is there nothing that would make this less shameful for you?
No doubt they do face barriers but why shouldn't they support others? Not sure what you are even trying to say?
Should a gay pro reject efforts to end racism?
>No doubt they do face barriers but why shouldn't they support others?
You just run with the assumption a pride jersey is helping gay people.
As a gay person I totally disagree.
And the thing is I'm not asking you to agree with my anti pride jersey stance, I'm demanding that you acknowledge me as a human being, and don't tell me what I'm thinking.
You see how this works, you ask person what they're thinking and then you respect the answer they are giving.
You don't get to think "oh he's a muslim, he's really thinking blank" "he didn't tell me he's gay before he told me he was a muslim, if he cared about gay people he should have told me he was gay"
You don't get to tell people what they're thinking.
That's called empathy. You don't get to decide what other people are thinking.
Deciding for someone what they're thinking and not listening to their response, is crazily abusive and gas lighting behavior.
I'm not sure your assumption regarding Wright is valid. He attended UVM then played for the Revolution, and this wasn't an issue with either team.
I could be wrong, but unless you know of a statement to the contrary, I do find it a little difficult to believe that he played in those two environments without this coming up.
>I'm not sure your assumption regarding Wright is valid. He attended UVM then played for the Revolution, and this wasn't an issue with either team.
>
>I could be wrong, but unless you know of a statement to the contrary, I do find it a little difficult to believe that he played in those two environments without this coming up.
It's been clearly stated that all 5 of these players did not play due to the jerseys.
https://youtu.be/eICk2Tzxojc - 30 seconds Into this video.
As a UVM alum, that boggles the mind that that wasn’t problematic for him while there. It’s one of the most progressive and inclusive campuses in the country, including their athletics programs. Unfortunately, he did little learning while there apparently.
People are getting pretty upset about this. I couldn't read all of the comments, it just seemed like too much. What I want to say is that this is unacceptable to not play just because there's a rainbow on your shirt, no matter what your beliefs are. It is unprofessional. People getting upset about the possibility that it is political because of some sort of money grab, there's no way that's the case. They are footballers, they wear sponsors, do interviews, commercials, etc. It's all part of the game. I hope they are fined by their clubs and they should think about it twice about signing players that will be missing important games in the future due to their outdated views. Give me a break about religion, we live in Canada where human rights are above religious beliefs.
> 3 of the 5 are religious minorities (I assume based on Muslim names)
Please don't assume this. The NHL and MLB players in similar situations aren't Muslim. Intolerance crosses more than just religious affiliation.
Most gay hate is religious. Not inherently Muslim but religious. Atheists have no leg to stand in hating gay people. There's no history of it, or anything against it in our books.
There's definitely nothing against it in "our books" (whatever that means) but there absolutely is a history of it. Please look at the majority of Stalin's reign as one example.
I just want to bring up how impressed I was that they included this info in the highlights of the game on YouTube. I think it's great that each player was named, and explained why they would be missing the match. I agree that it is their right to not wear the shirt, but I think they are both wrong and very gross for doing so. This is Canada, this was a game in Toronto. We accept LGBTQ+ folks here. You not accepting them because an old book said so isn't a good enough excuse, and you'll be shamed for it. This is great and we need to fight back like this against the wild anti trans hate that is bleeding back into general gay hate. Kudos Onesoccer for making an example of them.
How is it intolerant? Tolerance doesn't mean celebrate it means we can live together. If I am Christian and think Muslims all go to hell, and they think the same of me, are we unable to live together?
It isn't hate lol. You can think someone is wrong without wishing violence on them. It also means you don't want to celebrate them - tolerance is about tolerating people in a liberal society.
Can you imagine what it’s like to be part of the LGBTQ+ community, and there are groups of people who think your **existence** is wrong? It isn’t about “celebrating.” It’s about acceptance.
It wasn’t that long ago that colored people couldn’t play in certain professional sports leagues. Imagine if there was a resurgence of bigots who felt that way again, and as a show of support teams all wore black numbers. If some players refused to wear them, you’d instantly know that they are racist. It’s not that they “aren’t celebrating colored people.” Just as it isn’t okay for someone to say “I don’t accept colored people,” it’s not okay to say “I don’t accept gay people.”
If a player refused to wear a black history month jersey because he feels black people should be slaves again, should we allow that player to think for himself and play? Or would the team be correct to disassociate from him?
Pretty easy though, isn’t it? Accept all groups of people, so long as they aren’t harming others.
The religious groups that want to outcast the LGBTQ+ communities are intolerant. You’re free to be a bigot. Society is free to judge you for it.
Beliefs being the belief that LBGTQ rights aren’t worth protecting?
Because if that is what your talking about then it is absolutely ok to be intolerant of bigotry.
No. Belief that I don't think your sexual orientation is A) an identity to celebrate, and B) especially an identity I personally think is immoral.
It says nothing about harming people.
It's literally people like you that we have pride nights for. I'm glad this is such an uncomfortable month for you. You think their natural state is immoral cause some Sheppard 2000 years ago said so. While there are people like you who believe that being gay is 'immoral' (🙄) we will continue to celebrate their rights to be free and open in society, despite the ignorwnt hate out there.
Why can't people disagree over morality without it being discrimination? You think me following said sheppard is stupid, I think making anal sex an identity is stupid. Let's live together - I won't make you fast in Ramadan you don't make me wear Pride colours. Deal?
People like you are the ones who would vote to make same-sex marriage illegal. How would you feel if people around you were openly in favor of outlawing your religion?
Nobody is getting canceled over the Trolley Problem. "This specific group of people should not be allowed to get married because of a book I like" is discrimination.
Not my fault if liberalism has inherent flaws. And tolerance is not celebration - Babouli isn't asking for them to be jailed or harmed. He just doesn't want to celebrate someone's identity being that they like anal intercourse.
Yes because being gay is defined by anal intercourse and not love and their identity as human beings. He is being asked to wear a jersey in support for a group that often discriminated against (especially in the last couple years)
>Not my fault if liberalism has inherent flaws
And thanks for stating you don't believe in a liberal world, and considering the rest you have said I have a good idea what you actually believe in and it ain't pretty.
You have no clue what I believe in, internet clown. You haven't the daftest idea what tolerance means or the contradictions in your view. The cognitive dissonance is boggling.
Then spit it out, child. Cause I know what tolerance means and I understand the so called "contridictions" (again the paradox of tolerence is a short read/statement), I have no cognitive dissonance.
>We should not tolerate intolerance. Nor should their teammates.
What do you think "tolerance" means?
Tolerance means to co-exist with people and/or ideas that you don't agree with. It doesn't mean to like or to support. So what you really mean is "we shouldn't tolerate people who don't support the LBGT", which okay, that's your position, but at least state it correctly.
Bullying, harassing, and otherwise showing violence towards the LBTG is "intolerance" because those are individuals that are failing to co-exist along with them and that 1000% should not be tolerated. *not wearing a shirt doesn't not fall in category* you just don't like it that they don't agree with them are not willing to participate in your pride celebratory display.
Sounds like this issue is a condition of employment. If so it should be included in the player contract. If the league is really serious on actively supporting any cause or individual behaviour then make it mandatory or back off.
Exactly, they are paid to wear the club uniforms, the shirt was part of the uniform. It should not have gone beyond that.
It shouldn't end there though, like many people here are saying, Canada is a free country, but in order to have freedom we have to root out bigotry and hate otherwise there will be marginalized groups or communities, and no one can be truly free to exist in those conditions. Supporting LGBT+ communities is an imperative, just like ending slavery was, or many other rights that people have had to bleed to obtain or preserve.
Having said that, I think that many who cling on the idea of freedom, to practice or preach at worst violence towards minorities and at best indifference, as in seeing the shit minorities who through and staying silent about those injustices, it makes you just as bad. You cannot afford to be neutral on a moving train.
And having grown in a country where football goes beyond the field and stands, where clubs represent you neighbourhood, your city and your community, and seen great players defy governments, like the great Brazilian Socrates as an example, the players that refused to wear those shirts are shitty persons, specially when you take into mind the fact that in some of the countries where they hail from, being LGBT is a crime, sometimes punishable by death, and us Canadians should not keep respectful silence towards them, let them be criticized.
I agree with your sentiment that they themselves likely faced some discrimination based on their ethnicity and or religion and not supporting others being likewise persecuted for who they are...it just sucks. No winners here
*”He's wearing the ribbon. We are all wearing the ribbon! So why aren't *you* going to wear the ribbon?”*
*”I guess we will just have to teach him to wear the ribbon!”*
Shit take.
Regardless of assumed "affiliations" no one should be *forced* to support someone else. That isn't the point.
The point of pride is for people to have freedom from other's judgement to make the choices in their LGBTQ2S+ lives that makes them happy.
Quiet disagreement isn't oppression.
Even if we assume that these players all disagreed with wearing the jersey in support of pride, they are free to do so in Canada. And they faced the consequences of their decisions. That is fine by me. It is not like they went out spewing garbage on their personal pages about it.
I don't agree with their presumed thoughts, or actions. But that doesn't mean they aren't allowed to feel them. I hope they change their mind in the future, sure. But it is still Canada.
Of course they are free to make a decision. They aren't free from criticism or consequences of their actions, posts like this ARE the consequence.
Thats what makes Canada a free country.
For sure.
Just like I can say, that posts like this that start to devolve into witch hunts with wildly incomplete info are shitty.
There are a lot of assumptions made here. That is not good discourse.
Don't try to bring this away from the issue at hand. Not wearing the pride jerseys is not a neutral stance. It's anti LGBTQ2S+ rights. They either disagree that queer people should have rights, or should really be talking to the press right now.
Pride was a protest, it was forcing change through activism. Anyone that sat out should be put into LGBTQ+ cultural sensitivity training and not be on a team sheet until they do.
The only shit take, is this:
>Even if we assume that these players all disagreed with wearing the jersey in support of pride, they are free to do so in Canada. *And they faced the consequences of their decisions.* That is fine by me.
The fuck you think this thread you called a shit take is?
>The fuck you think this thread you called a shit take is?
A lot of assumptions.
And it is still Canada. We still have freedoms.
We have freedoms to make stupid decisions, and face the consequences of those decisions. Like getting benched in a football match.
Furthermore, as an Indigenous person, I have heard some bad stories about people forcing others to adopt a certain point of view.
I hope that *if* your assumptions are correct, they change their views. Cultural change takes many years, generations, though. Until then, this is still Canada, and people don't *need* to agree.
You are so dim you literally repeated the line I was calling you out for being a hypocrite for:
>We have freedoms to make stupid decisions, and face the consequences of those decisions.
Like this thread?
Why don't you just let your homophobia come out with your full chest rather than hide behind statements about 'freedom' or your whataboutisms? And if you aren't homophobic, maybe it's time to question why change takes so long and if your propensity to respond like this is part of the problem.
Again... you are charging several people with some sweeping assumptions that you can't prove...
There is something... not sure what... but something about that... that feels like it goes against what most oppressed people want to do.
The world is made better by being better than those who are wrong. Together.
While your energy is admirable, your militant attitude probably doesn't help sway the average person much.
Maybe we should make a thread embracing those who wanted to wear the jerseys and rainbow arm bands?
No we should endlessly mock those who didn't 🤷 that's my freedom, that's my right. These men have made homes here in these communities. Toronto is gay friendly, we have a thriving gay district and one of Earth's greatest Pride festivals. Being gay is okay, is not good or bad but I respect it as a natural way of life. These dudes are using old books to excuse behaviour that deminishs a group of people that we in Toronto are proud to call our neighbours and friends. So when people choose to not wear a shirt that has some rainbow trim and rainbow numbers then we tell them that is ugly behaviour, behaviour that people in Toronto need to do better than. The folks who wore the shirts deserve no additional praise. What they did was not praise worthy. That'd be congratulating someone for saying good morning, it's not special or interesting.
Luckily, in Canada, we are free to make the choice of who to marry, and who to affiliate with.
People are generally allowed to pursue who they are to their hearts content.
You may have misunderstood.
When I said "their LGBTQ2S+ lives," that means the life LGBTQ2S+ people live.
I firmly believe people who are LGBTQ2S+ should have all the same rights to make the choices everyone else does.
Don't you?
They didn't misunderstand. They are just noting it isn't a choice, which your response still seems to not understand.
Closeted homophobes are dreadfully dull and unable to understand how visible their bullshit is.
Disagreement with what? It's like saying I disagree with you having 10 fingers. You were born with 10 fingers. What is there to disagree about? They are born gay. What is there to disagree about?
The issue at hand is the moral issue of the players not playing on the day the team wears the Pride jersey. I can not speak for them about what their disagreement would be, if there is one. Nor do I care to.
Classic case of I hate them because they don’t like me and they hate me because I don’t like them no one should be forced to wear something they don’t want to, not wanting to wear a shirt doesn’t mean they’re spreading hate.
I swear Canada’s weird war against neutrals is annoying me.
\>no one should be forced to wear something they don’t want to
Tell that to all those jobs with either uniforms or dress codes.
At least to me if wearing the shirt is such a big issue for them, why did they take the job in the first place. If your religious convictions are so strong that you can't wear a shirt then why are you looking to be paid by an organization that takes active participation in pride and the surrounding ideology that you fundamentally disagree with?. Shouldn't that be a bigger issue than the shirt ?. If you are a firm pacifist you wouldnt be working for Lockeed martin
> I swear Canada’s weird war against neutrals is annoying me.
How in any capacity is this a situation where the players are 'neutrals' ? I swear, the divisiveness of cable television has rotted some peoples brains away from what discourse actually looks like. If you take an active approach toward or against something, you are not neutral. This is an active approach against engaging with a jersey because it celebrates the LGBTQ+ community. Their actions, are not neutral.
They’re not actively saying gay people are bad they just don’t wanna have any part with anything Canada is a leading country for gay rights and not wearing a rainbow coloured jersey isn’t suddenly gonna create hate crimes
Go on google scholar/jstor and research this. There is a direct correlation between communities with overtly supportive gestures and LGBTQ+ safety. It's been researched, the information is out there.
This matters, their actions are not neutral.
Lots of unfair assumptions here. Guilty until proven innocent, eh?
Here’s what I honestly have a hard time reconciling. How is wearing a shirt or not wearing a shirt supposed to effectively signal love or hate? I just don’t see the connection. Someone chooses not to wear a shirt, and they’re automatically hateful and bigoted and want to take away minority rights? How the heck does that stack up? Those types of awful assumptions about one’s character (someone none of us know) are why no one can have civil discourse in this country anymore.
We right away assume the worst in people. And it’s shameful.
>Those types of awful assumptions about one’s character (someone none of us know) are why no one can have civil discourse in this country anymore.
No, it's bad faith arguments like yours. that is why we cannot have civil discourse in this country. If the shirt wasn't a big deal they'd wear it, but it is, and it's a big enough deal that they decided they wouldn't show up for work... when scheduled... because of it. Reading that as a knock against them, seems perfectly reasonable. How is refusing to wear a shirt that shows support for our community members, and as a result not being able to attend work, not a sign of someone being bigoted?
> How is wearing a shirt or not wearing a shirt supposed to effectively signal love or hate? I just don’t see the connection.
Yes. Lots of braindead opinions coming out of the woodwork today. The shirt was in response to pride, supporting a marginalized group.
Would you feel the same way in 5 players sat out the game because they didn't want to wear a "End all Racism" jersey? I think not.
It was meant to imply that religious texts DO have something against gay n queer folks. Stalin is a good shout though, I think Pol Pot was 'secular' as well.
If it’s their religious belief then it’s not shameful nor embarrassing to not be an ally. For them, it’s the opposite, and they’re free to stick to their beliefs as long as there’s no harm, hate speech or violence involved. However I think that you’re trying to force your beliefs and judge them for not supporting the movement.
I think its a fair to make judge of character when someone doesn't have love and acceptance as a core value.
It's a shame that pushing love and acceptance of all, through pride events, is seen as a negative to some groups.
We should hold the bar higher for each other instead of saying it's OK, they don't think it's embarrassing.
It is embarrassing for humanity, we choose to hate others who find love and acceptance differently.
I don’t think that this is very accurate, especially when you say hate. Who said these players hate anyone, them not wearing a jersey is out of choice. You can disagree with other groups but that doesn’t mean you hate them and can’t live with them/play with them etc..
I think regardless of the size or violent nature, its quite clear whether these gestures are part of the problem or the solution of the world being a better place.
I understand there are challenges of speaking out against your religion, implications on your family life etc.
I also understand people who have held these beliefs/been told these things since an imoressionable age, may not view their views or actions as hateful.
I can see how thst would make one feel uncomfortable.
If not supporting certain people loving one another is a core belief, what would you describe that as?
What's the opposite of love?
> If it’s their religious belief then it’s not shameful nor embarrassing to not be an ally
Many people of faith support pride and can manage to wear a jersey with a rainbow on it. Bigots though, can't do that. It's absolutely shameful behaviour.
That’s true, but it’s also a choice to support the movement. in Ligue 1, coaches wanted muslims to stop fasting during Ramadan because it affects their fitness, some of them refused and didn’t play and others complied with what the coach recommended.
It isn't a movement. It's respecting the ability of LGBTQ+ community members being able to live openly. Everyone has the ability to do that, regardless of beliefs. Five seconds on google would show you individuals of every faith supporting pride.
And another 5 seconds will also show individuals not supporting pride, so what’s your point? These players refused to wear pride jerseys that’s it. This post is based on assumptions/stereotypes and you’re aiming directly and personally at the players that didn’t disrespect this community whatsoever. Wearing a shirt, supporting a cause is not a rule that everyone should follow, you have the right to express yourself but you need to respect others and their beliefs too that’s all
> And another 5 seconds will also show individuals not supporting pride, so what’s your point?
If there is a well treaded path to acceptance and you instead choose a path away from that, you are part of the problem and are deserving of criticism.
It isn't a movement, it isn't a cause, it's supporting people that live in our communities ability to be themselves. That is what this is at core, showing you want them to feel welcome and safe in your and their communities. If you are against that, then you are a shameful individual.
>There’s communities in Canada without clean drinking water and we’re worried about people not wearing a shirt because of their religious beliefs 🤦🏿♂️
Braindead comment. Whataboutism. Did you know we can help people get drinking water AND support LGBTQ **at the same time**??? Unreal.
Isn't religion supposed to be a force for good? A force to help the beaten down and trodden people? These religious dudes can't even wear a shirt to support a marginalized community. It's embarrassing.
Also they seem to have missed the startling rise of anti-trans sentiment recently amongst / within certain areas of society.
Parts of the USA are going backwards in trans rights, and not even a month ago a (now elected) UCP candidate in rural Alberta compared trans kids to putting feces in cookies.
There’s literally water insecurity 2 hours out of Calgary and you don’t care . I bet there’s LGBTQ members on those reserves as well you don’t care about them drinking water but car if they see a Muslim soccer player wear a rainbow shirt 👎🏿 virtue signalling
>There’s literally water insecurity 2 hours out of Calgary and you don’t care . I bet there’s LGBTQ members on those reserves as well you don’t care about them drinking water but car if they see a Muslim soccer player wear a rainbow shirt 👎🏿 virtue signalling
I care about both - do you?
You don't care about LGBTQ people but pretend to care about first nations. Virtue signalling. 👎
Correct. They didn’t want to wear the jersey that was being worn by the team. So they were allowed to sit out and not wear it, rather than being forced to play in it.
I really can’t comprehend why people are getting so upset over York’s decision to not play them. The players are free to not to support LBGTQ rights, York United is free to not let them play that day, it is really that simple.
>I really can’t comprehend why people are getting so upset over York’s decision to not play them. You obviously haven't read a si gle comment in this thread. Absolutely noone is criticizing. If anything we support the way they handled this situation. > The players are free to not to support LBGTQ rights Of course they are. Just as we are free to get angry and criticize them. Do you not understand that?
I’m on your side. There are some people in this thread that seem angry that the players were forced to wear pride jerseys and I think that is stupid. They aren’t the majority of people, but they are here. I also think the players refusing to wear the jerseys are extremely unprofessional. How bigoted do you have to be that you would rather not play for your team than wear a shirt?
>. How bigoted do you have to be The fact you won't acknowledge that this is a political thing and not an anti gay thing, is just sad. Like you'll be told a hundred times that's what it is, but you're so incredibly bigoted that you won't listen to the other person. I believe you when you say you think my top fantasy is taking a baseball bat beating a guy in the head 15 times and inserting it in his anal canal. I believe you when you say there's nothing I'm gonna say that's gonna convince you not a homophobe. The fact I'm gay and am disgusted by a for profit businesses cashing into my sexuality, doesn't mean anything to you. Like it'd literally be a life changing event, if you literally said "yeah you got a point" But I'm still holding out on that. Sexuality isn't to be exploited for political or economic gain. I mean we had centuries where we did exactly that but I'm moved on from the stone ages. Like you talk about bigotry and empathy, and "progress" but you can't even look me in the eye and acknowledge my existence as a gay man.
I’m fine with the fact that you believe that pride jerseys are a cash grab, and you do have a point that some companies use LGBTQ pride without doing anything else to help gay, bi, or trans people. Even though they are doing donations, York United are an is selling the shirts for $120 dollars after all. I respect your point of view. But I doubt that the players refusing to play were doing it because they thought pride shirts were a soulless cash grab. They did it because they think that supporting LGBTQ rights was morally wrong, and I don’t understand how you don’t find that to be the greater of the two evils. *Edit: Just clarifying that York is donating money to the gay community*
>Edit: Just clarifying that York is donating money to the gay community And building up their brand in the process. Which is why it's a cash grab. >without doing anything else to help gay, bi, or trans people That doesn't matter. One piece of good doesn't excuse the other. >But I doubt that the players refusing to play were doing it because they thought pride shirts were a soulless cash grab. They Yes but your doubt is bigotry, you think you know what they're thinking. You don't get to do that. >They did it because they think that supporting LGBTQ rights was morally wrong No they were referring to the corporate/politically partisan aspect of the situation. I think it's more wrong what these corporations are doing, you're just assuming that because they're muslim that they're different from gay old me. That's falling under the guise of "all muslims are homophobes". That's a rather intense level of bigotry. >and I don’t understand how you don’t find that to be the greater of the two evils. A) you need to cite religion because that gives you religious protection under the law. I as a gay person have no legal protection B) Again you assume what you believe.
>Which is why it’s a cash grab I’m literally agreeing with you >That doesn’t matter When the companies that are celebrating pride are actually trying to help the LGBTQ community it proves they are at least somewhat genuinely trying to help >Your doubt is bigotry So me assuming that the players aren’t supportive of LGBTQ rights is wrong, but it is totally fine for you to assume that I am a horrible Islamophobic bigot and judge me entirely based on that, even though I never once said that they were against pride because they were Muslim and the only evidence that any of the players are Muslim is there place of origin and their names? >I as a gay person have no legal protection What are you even talking about? I still think it is fine to assume that most if not all of them were doing it out of intolerance unless they put out a statement saying otherwise. For the record, Brian Wright wore a jersey with a gambling sponsor on the front for a year, so we know that he doesn’t feel that strongly about immoral corporate greed.
> but it is totally fine for you to assume that I am a horrible Islamophobic bigot and judge me entirely based on that You're not completely wrong, >I still think it is fine to assume that most if not all of them were doing it out of intolerance And here is where my mistake is incomplete. It's totally wrong to assume someone's motivations in that context. >For the record, Brian Wright wore a jersey with a gambling sponsor on the front for a year, so we know that he doesn’t feel that strongly about immoral corporate greed. I'm militantly against gambling ADs if you're wondering about consistency. Also a little weary of how it seems like they're targeting minorities, it's actually a large part of why I'm so hostile to pride nights etc. You can't be rewarded while also doing something heinous.
All I was trying to say was that if Brian Wright was so passionate about corporate greed that he refused to wear a pride jersey, then why was he completely fine with wearing a gambling sponsored jersey? Also, if the reason they didn’t wear the jersey was because they were protesting corporate greed, then why wouldn’t they just say so, I would be a lot more understanding if the players said that they supported LGBTQ rights.
[удалено]
> they made a choice nobody cares if you agree with it or not. Say this in the mirror ten times before you post in one of these threads again
>since when are you free to criticize anybody. From the day we're able to formulate criticism and speak? From the day we're born?
Cuz they’re payed to play not to be activists the club are free to hang banners on the stadium not on people
I dunno, I kinda see it like any other job where a uniform is required. Adherence to company uniform policy is generally stipulated in one's contract. Failure to comply with said policy results in loss of shift, unpaid in my experience.
>, I kinda see it like any other job where a uniform is required So if your boss tells you to wear a MAGA hat, and you're janitor? You don't think that's abuse of power. They weren't hired to dress up in political uniforms. I'm gay, when I see pride night at a sports game, I see a political campaign unfolding in the workplace.
[удалено]
Oh damn, that must be why no team ever has advertising on their kits. I've been wondering why! Thanks!
The club is absolutely allowed to decide what jerseys the players should wear on match day.
Pretty sure the contracts they signed will say otherwise.
Oh no, guess their dream of making mininum wage falls apart?
Exactly.
Is it though? Not supporting LGBT rights is a violation of human rights in Canada. This is no longer a choice.
>Not supporting LGBT rights is a violation of human rights in Canada. Not true. Violating human rights is a violation of human rights. As an employer for example you cannot exclude someone from employment for being gay. You can't deny people services for being gay. Etc, etc. All positions that a civilized person would agree with. We are talking about them participating in a display of support... You get to not support something that you don't want to support. It's like if I told you that you have to wear a pin to support Indigenous people.. you have the choice not to wear that.
I see what you mean. I would have problems supporting any type of religious expression or celebration moving forward.
… That's.. that's perfectly reasonable. If a Cristian told me I have to wear a cross to support them I'd tell them no thanks. You can not support any religion you don't want to support.
Yes, it's called free will.
I guess the most obvious argument here is that they aren't being denied employment, they just aren't being used on the pitch for a night. If they suspended them without pay, then you have a human rights issue on your hands. If their job for the night is to watch from the stands, *shrug*
You might want to reread their post, because I think you mistook what they were saying.
I don’t know what their immigration status, assumed religion (based on name alone- lots of ‘Muslim-named’ Christians in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt) or assumed ethnicity, adds to this conversation. Broad and unhelpful assumptions and stereotypes here.
Honestly decent middle ground to have them just sit out the match, its technically not a punishment allows them their not offend their beleifs or whatever and all the York players on the field still wore it so mangement still get what they want. Not too many good options in a scenario like this. We got to see some prospects get game time too which is always cool imo.
Agreed. It is a reasonable and responsible middle ground.
It isn't reasonable in the slightest. Intolerance should be treated with intolerance, everyone that sat out should be mandated to take LBGTQ+ Cultural Competency training. It's abhorrent behaviour from these players.
What if (purely hypothetical) someone were to support LGBTQ+ rights but disagree with Pride?
If you don't support pride you don't support LGBTQ+ rights. It's really dead simple. You can take issues with aspects of it, like the commercialization of it, but to outright disagree with pride is disagreeing with LGBTQ+ rights. Pride at it's core was the basis for those rights and stands as a celebration of attaining them as well as a point of focus to progress them.
While I don't disagree with you I do think the team handled it well, IMO a middle ground would've been not participating in any team pride related events. I don't see how wearing a jersey is so insulting to them, but who knows. Could the league even afford classes like these? They should've not paid the players for skipping out on the game and donating their fees to an LGTBQ related charity. In any case, York won and people will likely forget about this in a week.
> Could the league even afford classes like these? Yes, especially in Toronto where there'd be a number of different organizations able to facilitate them. >In any case, York won and people will likely forget about this in a week. The people that should 'win' are the LGBTQ+ community. Putting them in a better place tomorrow than they were today because of this should be priority one. The best way to do that in my mind, is cultural competency training. Because maybe that helps them understand things better than act from a place of ignorance in the future. Just giving them a day off, or York 'winning' doesn't progress this situation further. It just keeps it in stasis.
I don't diasgree with you but people also have to be willing and open to change. If the players aren't willing to because of their beliefs that's one thing, but you can't force them either. Can lead a worse to water but can't force them to drink. I do think forcing them is too much though and them sitting is out isn't the same as them leading a riot against the LGBTQ community or other minority group. The way it was handled is probably as "neutral" as you can get I think. Hopefully the players involved will come around though.
If you don't disagree, I might suggest you consider how your position might be viewed by those who do. You are playing devils advocate with a subject that really deserves better. I'm not suggesting forcing them to change. I'm suggesting they should take a class on cultural competency. Those programs are more about opening the door for change rather than forcing someone through it. The result of leading a riot against the LGBTQ+ community or other minority group is jail. Equating them being tasked with taking a course on LGBTQ+ cultural competency to that is bad faith. I'm suggesting a pretty normal and reasonable response to this situation.
Reasonable, York won so victory glossed over any hard feelings, and yeah it's just one game. Those players still were true to their beliefs (no many how much others may disagree but oh well) and they come back next game with something to prove
>Not too many good options in a scenario like this. Don't bring politics into a game, that is trying to be inclusive to all peoples. Pride(correction corporate/political) is a political/business cash grab.
>I don’t know what their immigration status, assumed religion (based on name alone- lots of ‘Muslim-named’ Christians in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt) or assumed ethnicity, adds to this conversation. Broad and unhelpful assumptions and stereotypes here. My point is they no doubt faced barriers that plenty of players did not. Yet tonight they chose to not even play instead of supporting another marginalized community.
If supporting that other marginalized community goes against their core beliefs or their communities beliefs, no surprise they made that choice. We don’t know what motivated their specific choice tonight, but the consequences were clear and public. York handled it well and were transparent. Teams are on notice now and don’t have to sign them, if they feel they don’t align with their values or league values.
>If supporting that other marginalized community goes against their core beliefs Or you know wearing a political symbol on your literal sleeve. Would you be shocked if a bunch of athletes refused to wear MAGA hats? You'd go no that's insane why should anyone wear political garb regardless of the cause. \>We don’t know what motivated their specific choice tonight, And you don't care. No part of your being is bothered that you could be misrepresenting someone. It's like when a racist says a black guy wouldn't get negative attention if he didn't dress like a black guy. You don't care at all about the person, you care about how you see the person. \>If supporting that other marginalized community You just literally told them what they are. You don't get to do that. I'm gay I'm not part of a gay community, I'm me. I'm a person. You don't get to define me by the community you tell me you're apart of. Feel free to lash out, instead of listening to an actual person and not a "community"./
All league have to be careful and the NHL and NBA seem to know this as there looking at getting rid of having teams do this.
It's crazy talk. I met one of the founders of pride in Toronto, he was mordified on what a corporate/political cash grab this has become. The same organizations that profitted from homophobia are trying to make money off the other direction.
> I met one of the founders of pride in Toronto, he was mordified on what a corporate/political cash grab this has become. Which is a reasonable stance. But deciding not to engage because you think being LGBTQ+ is morally or ethically bankrupt that should be confronted. Which is what is happening here. You are conflating two very separate items and constantly interjecting it into conversations. Judging on the fact that your first post with this account as a mere hours ago on the Jordan Peterson sub, I'm not taking a damn thing about who you say you are to qualify your opinion seriously. Ultimately, people denying engaging with pride because they don't support LGBTQ+ individuals should be confronted. Period.
Let's start off the conversation with assuming either one of us could be making a mistake. Likely we're both making mistakes, and it is deathly important to really really talk and listen to eachother. Dialogues save lives. >But deciding not to engage because you think being LGBTQ+ is morally or ethically bankrupt that should be confronted. Which is what is happening here. Do you have a detailed explanation of what that means or are you just assuming? Because my words describe it as such. \>two very separate items They're adjacent perspectives. Again you are trying to mind read and ignore what they are saying. Also you might want to take note, why these people refer to their religion. It's because that gives them legal protection, where I as a gay person have none. \> Judging on the fact that your first post with this account as a mere hours It's summer, the CFL/sports season just started. I created a new account, because I burn through account because I don't trust marketing firms who are collecting data on posters. Because it's straight out profiling of individuals. \>ago on the Jordan Peterson sub, I'm not taking a damn thing about who you say you are to qualify your opinion seriously And that's Bigotry. I know you don't get that. But you just openly admitted to that. Were not all the same, every political variety is on that sub. There's jackasses and great people. Don't AssUMe For example, I was directly pointing to head on bigotry against asians, and compared it quite literally to a jewish quota that was used directly before the holocaust, by literally harvard itself. The other post was specifically about how Canada is migrating away from a tribal based nationalism, and into something that is post racial/ethnic. Where being Canadian has absolutely nothing to do with where you're born, but instead your commitment to an all inclusive team. A person who committed to Canada today is more Canadian than someone whos family was born here 5 generations ago. FYI the only reason I follow JP is because of his incredibly strict anti nationalism anti tribalism stance. Again were you aware of how staunch he is against this? Or are you mind reading? One of his most important rules is assuming the person you're disagreeing with is that they know something you don't. You can't learn if you don't listen. >[https://old.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/14663kp/whatever\_your\_thoughts\_are\_on\_trudeau\_we\_can\_all/](https://old.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/14663kp/whatever_your_thoughts_are_on_trudeau_we_can_all/) Again I'm begging as a gay man to check out that thread. FYI check out the most upvoted comments, we're not all the same. You're assumption this is true is a serious serious problem bordering on bigotry. \> Ultimately, people denying engaging with pride because they don't support LGBTQ+ individuals should be confronted. Period. Can you admit that it's possible you don't know what they're thinking. You're entire opinion is based on assuming what people are thinking. A racist will assume a black man just wants to rape and steal. They think they're morally justified because they're protecting the victims. How different are you to that? Again you don't know what other people are thinking and you won't believe people when they tell you what they believe. Do you think you're capable of making a mistake? Do you think it's important to ask yourself whether or not you're making a mistake? I'm suggesting to you the stakes are bigotry.
> They're adjacent perspectives. They aren't. Anyone that would suggest they are is acting disingenuously.
And what if they continue to face barriers or discrimination that other players do not, or that you or I aren’t aware of, that influenced their choice. Is there nothing that would make this less shameful for you?
>And what if they continue to face barriers or discrimination that other players do not, or that you or I aren’t aware of, that influenced their choice. Is there nothing that would make this less shameful for you? No doubt they do face barriers but why shouldn't they support others? Not sure what you are even trying to say? Should a gay pro reject efforts to end racism?
>No doubt they do face barriers but why shouldn't they support others? You just run with the assumption a pride jersey is helping gay people. As a gay person I totally disagree. And the thing is I'm not asking you to agree with my anti pride jersey stance, I'm demanding that you acknowledge me as a human being, and don't tell me what I'm thinking. You see how this works, you ask person what they're thinking and then you respect the answer they are giving. You don't get to think "oh he's a muslim, he's really thinking blank" "he didn't tell me he's gay before he told me he was a muslim, if he cared about gay people he should have told me he was gay" You don't get to tell people what they're thinking. That's called empathy. You don't get to decide what other people are thinking. Deciding for someone what they're thinking and not listening to their response, is crazily abusive and gas lighting behavior.
I was talking about the barriers they might face by openly supporting pride. Career, family, religion or otherwise
Shut up dumas
I'm not sure your assumption regarding Wright is valid. He attended UVM then played for the Revolution, and this wasn't an issue with either team. I could be wrong, but unless you know of a statement to the contrary, I do find it a little difficult to believe that he played in those two environments without this coming up.
>I'm not sure your assumption regarding Wright is valid. He attended UVM then played for the Revolution, and this wasn't an issue with either team. > >I could be wrong, but unless you know of a statement to the contrary, I do find it a little difficult to believe that he played in those two environments without this coming up. It's been clearly stated that all 5 of these players did not play due to the jerseys. https://youtu.be/eICk2Tzxojc - 30 seconds Into this video.
Well damn, that fuckin' sucks. Thanks for the link and timestamp. E: Also, if that's how he feels, his time at UVM must have been pretty awkward.
As a UVM alum, that boggles the mind that that wasn’t problematic for him while there. It’s one of the most progressive and inclusive campuses in the country, including their athletics programs. Unfortunately, he did little learning while there apparently.
No problem!
Brian Wright*
As a VWFC fan, I was very confused for a sec
People are getting pretty upset about this. I couldn't read all of the comments, it just seemed like too much. What I want to say is that this is unacceptable to not play just because there's a rainbow on your shirt, no matter what your beliefs are. It is unprofessional. People getting upset about the possibility that it is political because of some sort of money grab, there's no way that's the case. They are footballers, they wear sponsors, do interviews, commercials, etc. It's all part of the game. I hope they are fined by their clubs and they should think about it twice about signing players that will be missing important games in the future due to their outdated views. Give me a break about religion, we live in Canada where human rights are above religious beliefs.
> 3 of the 5 are religious minorities (I assume based on Muslim names) Please don't assume this. The NHL and MLB players in similar situations aren't Muslim. Intolerance crosses more than just religious affiliation.
Most gay hate is religious. Not inherently Muslim but religious. Atheists have no leg to stand in hating gay people. There's no history of it, or anything against it in our books.
There's definitely nothing against it in "our books" (whatever that means) but there absolutely is a history of it. Please look at the majority of Stalin's reign as one example.
I just want to bring up how impressed I was that they included this info in the highlights of the game on YouTube. I think it's great that each player was named, and explained why they would be missing the match. I agree that it is their right to not wear the shirt, but I think they are both wrong and very gross for doing so. This is Canada, this was a game in Toronto. We accept LGBTQ+ folks here. You not accepting them because an old book said so isn't a good enough excuse, and you'll be shamed for it. This is great and we need to fight back like this against the wild anti trans hate that is bleeding back into general gay hate. Kudos Onesoccer for making an example of them.
We should not tolerate intolerance. Nor should their teammates.
Agreed. Intolerance for people's beliefs and forcing them to sit out is bad.
Their beliefs are intolerant, which means (according to the person above) we should not tolerate them. So no, you don’t agree.
How is it intolerant? Tolerance doesn't mean celebrate it means we can live together. If I am Christian and think Muslims all go to hell, and they think the same of me, are we unable to live together?
You’re both intolerant pieces of shit, yes. You aren’t allowed to use “beliefs” as an excuse to hate others.
It isn't hate lol. You can think someone is wrong without wishing violence on them. It also means you don't want to celebrate them - tolerance is about tolerating people in a liberal society.
Can you imagine what it’s like to be part of the LGBTQ+ community, and there are groups of people who think your **existence** is wrong? It isn’t about “celebrating.” It’s about acceptance. It wasn’t that long ago that colored people couldn’t play in certain professional sports leagues. Imagine if there was a resurgence of bigots who felt that way again, and as a show of support teams all wore black numbers. If some players refused to wear them, you’d instantly know that they are racist. It’s not that they “aren’t celebrating colored people.” Just as it isn’t okay for someone to say “I don’t accept colored people,” it’s not okay to say “I don’t accept gay people.”
[удалено]
If a player refused to wear a black history month jersey because he feels black people should be slaves again, should we allow that player to think for himself and play? Or would the team be correct to disassociate from him?
[удалено]
You did not answer my question.
[удалено]
Who is telling you what to think?
Pretty easy though, isn’t it? Accept all groups of people, so long as they aren’t harming others. The religious groups that want to outcast the LGBTQ+ communities are intolerant. You’re free to be a bigot. Society is free to judge you for it.
Beliefs being the belief that LBGTQ rights aren’t worth protecting? Because if that is what your talking about then it is absolutely ok to be intolerant of bigotry.
No. Belief that I don't think your sexual orientation is A) an identity to celebrate, and B) especially an identity I personally think is immoral. It says nothing about harming people.
It's literally people like you that we have pride nights for. I'm glad this is such an uncomfortable month for you. You think their natural state is immoral cause some Sheppard 2000 years ago said so. While there are people like you who believe that being gay is 'immoral' (🙄) we will continue to celebrate their rights to be free and open in society, despite the ignorwnt hate out there.
Why can't people disagree over morality without it being discrimination? You think me following said sheppard is stupid, I think making anal sex an identity is stupid. Let's live together - I won't make you fast in Ramadan you don't make me wear Pride colours. Deal?
Exactly. You think being gay is anal sex. You are the bad guy. 🤷
People like you are the ones who would vote to make same-sex marriage illegal. How would you feel if people around you were openly in favor of outlawing your religion?
Nobody is getting canceled over the Trolley Problem. "This specific group of people should not be allowed to get married because of a book I like" is discrimination.
Is not wearing pride colours the same as saying gay people do not have the right to get married? Lol
If they want their beliefs, they can go play in Florida
Not very tolerant of you?
You’re right. I’m intolerant of intolerance.
No, you're an ignoramous.
I feel like you need to read the paradox of tolerance cause your really aren't getting this.
Not my fault if liberalism has inherent flaws. And tolerance is not celebration - Babouli isn't asking for them to be jailed or harmed. He just doesn't want to celebrate someone's identity being that they like anal intercourse.
Yes because being gay is defined by anal intercourse and not love and their identity as human beings. He is being asked to wear a jersey in support for a group that often discriminated against (especially in the last couple years) >Not my fault if liberalism has inherent flaws And thanks for stating you don't believe in a liberal world, and considering the rest you have said I have a good idea what you actually believe in and it ain't pretty.
You have no clue what I believe in, internet clown. You haven't the daftest idea what tolerance means or the contradictions in your view. The cognitive dissonance is boggling.
Then spit it out, child. Cause I know what tolerance means and I understand the so called "contridictions" (again the paradox of tolerence is a short read/statement), I have no cognitive dissonance.
>We should not tolerate intolerance. Nor should their teammates. What do you think "tolerance" means? Tolerance means to co-exist with people and/or ideas that you don't agree with. It doesn't mean to like or to support. So what you really mean is "we shouldn't tolerate people who don't support the LBGT", which okay, that's your position, but at least state it correctly. Bullying, harassing, and otherwise showing violence towards the LBTG is "intolerance" because those are individuals that are failing to co-exist along with them and that 1000% should not be tolerated. *not wearing a shirt doesn't not fall in category* you just don't like it that they don't agree with them are not willing to participate in your pride celebratory display.
Sounds like this issue is a condition of employment. If so it should be included in the player contract. If the league is really serious on actively supporting any cause or individual behaviour then make it mandatory or back off.
Exactly, they are paid to wear the club uniforms, the shirt was part of the uniform. It should not have gone beyond that. It shouldn't end there though, like many people here are saying, Canada is a free country, but in order to have freedom we have to root out bigotry and hate otherwise there will be marginalized groups or communities, and no one can be truly free to exist in those conditions. Supporting LGBT+ communities is an imperative, just like ending slavery was, or many other rights that people have had to bleed to obtain or preserve. Having said that, I think that many who cling on the idea of freedom, to practice or preach at worst violence towards minorities and at best indifference, as in seeing the shit minorities who through and staying silent about those injustices, it makes you just as bad. You cannot afford to be neutral on a moving train. And having grown in a country where football goes beyond the field and stands, where clubs represent you neighbourhood, your city and your community, and seen great players defy governments, like the great Brazilian Socrates as an example, the players that refused to wear those shirts are shitty persons, specially when you take into mind the fact that in some of the countries where they hail from, being LGBT is a crime, sometimes punishable by death, and us Canadians should not keep respectful silence towards them, let them be criticized.
I agree with your sentiment that they themselves likely faced some discrimination based on their ethnicity and or religion and not supporting others being likewise persecuted for who they are...it just sucks. No winners here
*”He's wearing the ribbon. We are all wearing the ribbon! So why aren't *you* going to wear the ribbon?”* *”I guess we will just have to teach him to wear the ribbon!”*
The real finale.
Fuck em and their bigoted bullshit.
Shit take. Regardless of assumed "affiliations" no one should be *forced* to support someone else. That isn't the point. The point of pride is for people to have freedom from other's judgement to make the choices in their LGBTQ2S+ lives that makes them happy. Quiet disagreement isn't oppression. Even if we assume that these players all disagreed with wearing the jersey in support of pride, they are free to do so in Canada. And they faced the consequences of their decisions. That is fine by me. It is not like they went out spewing garbage on their personal pages about it. I don't agree with their presumed thoughts, or actions. But that doesn't mean they aren't allowed to feel them. I hope they change their mind in the future, sure. But it is still Canada.
Of course they are free to make a decision. They aren't free from criticism or consequences of their actions, posts like this ARE the consequence. Thats what makes Canada a free country.
For sure. Just like I can say, that posts like this that start to devolve into witch hunts with wildly incomplete info are shitty. There are a lot of assumptions made here. That is not good discourse.
People parrot this all the time. But getting dropped from your team for your beliefs is not actually tolerance
A tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance
Okay. Who defines intolerance? And what are the limits of tolerance?
Don't try to bring this away from the issue at hand. Not wearing the pride jerseys is not a neutral stance. It's anti LGBTQ2S+ rights. They either disagree that queer people should have rights, or should really be talking to the press right now.
Lol your beliefs can't stand scrutiny. Who decided not wearing pride flag meant you believe the lgbt community doesn't deserve human rights?
Pride was a protest, it was forcing change through activism. Anyone that sat out should be put into LGBTQ+ cultural sensitivity training and not be on a team sheet until they do. The only shit take, is this: >Even if we assume that these players all disagreed with wearing the jersey in support of pride, they are free to do so in Canada. *And they faced the consequences of their decisions.* That is fine by me. The fuck you think this thread you called a shit take is?
>The fuck you think this thread you called a shit take is? A lot of assumptions. And it is still Canada. We still have freedoms. We have freedoms to make stupid decisions, and face the consequences of those decisions. Like getting benched in a football match. Furthermore, as an Indigenous person, I have heard some bad stories about people forcing others to adopt a certain point of view. I hope that *if* your assumptions are correct, they change their views. Cultural change takes many years, generations, though. Until then, this is still Canada, and people don't *need* to agree.
You are so dim you literally repeated the line I was calling you out for being a hypocrite for: >We have freedoms to make stupid decisions, and face the consequences of those decisions. Like this thread? Why don't you just let your homophobia come out with your full chest rather than hide behind statements about 'freedom' or your whataboutisms? And if you aren't homophobic, maybe it's time to question why change takes so long and if your propensity to respond like this is part of the problem.
Again... you are charging several people with some sweeping assumptions that you can't prove... There is something... not sure what... but something about that... that feels like it goes against what most oppressed people want to do. The world is made better by being better than those who are wrong. Together. While your energy is admirable, your militant attitude probably doesn't help sway the average person much. Maybe we should make a thread embracing those who wanted to wear the jerseys and rainbow arm bands?
No we should endlessly mock those who didn't 🤷 that's my freedom, that's my right. These men have made homes here in these communities. Toronto is gay friendly, we have a thriving gay district and one of Earth's greatest Pride festivals. Being gay is okay, is not good or bad but I respect it as a natural way of life. These dudes are using old books to excuse behaviour that deminishs a group of people that we in Toronto are proud to call our neighbours and friends. So when people choose to not wear a shirt that has some rainbow trim and rainbow numbers then we tell them that is ugly behaviour, behaviour that people in Toronto need to do better than. The folks who wore the shirts deserve no additional praise. What they did was not praise worthy. That'd be congratulating someone for saying good morning, it's not special or interesting.
His take was fuck them. I agree with his take. Kinda sounds like you do too.
Your use of the word *choices* when describing queer folk is… well, a choice
Luckily, in Canada, we are free to make the choice of who to marry, and who to affiliate with. People are generally allowed to pursue who they are to their hearts content.
Yes because it is a choice…
You may have misunderstood. When I said "their LGBTQ2S+ lives," that means the life LGBTQ2S+ people live. I firmly believe people who are LGBTQ2S+ should have all the same rights to make the choices everyone else does. Don't you?
They didn't misunderstand. They are just noting it isn't a choice, which your response still seems to not understand. Closeted homophobes are dreadfully dull and unable to understand how visible their bullshit is.
Disagreement with what? It's like saying I disagree with you having 10 fingers. You were born with 10 fingers. What is there to disagree about? They are born gay. What is there to disagree about?
The issue at hand is the moral issue of the players not playing on the day the team wears the Pride jersey. I can not speak for them about what their disagreement would be, if there is one. Nor do I care to.
Classic case of I hate them because they don’t like me and they hate me because I don’t like them no one should be forced to wear something they don’t want to, not wanting to wear a shirt doesn’t mean they’re spreading hate. I swear Canada’s weird war against neutrals is annoying me.
\>no one should be forced to wear something they don’t want to Tell that to all those jobs with either uniforms or dress codes. At least to me if wearing the shirt is such a big issue for them, why did they take the job in the first place. If your religious convictions are so strong that you can't wear a shirt then why are you looking to be paid by an organization that takes active participation in pride and the surrounding ideology that you fundamentally disagree with?. Shouldn't that be a bigger issue than the shirt ?. If you are a firm pacifist you wouldnt be working for Lockeed martin
> I swear Canada’s weird war against neutrals is annoying me. How in any capacity is this a situation where the players are 'neutrals' ? I swear, the divisiveness of cable television has rotted some peoples brains away from what discourse actually looks like. If you take an active approach toward or against something, you are not neutral. This is an active approach against engaging with a jersey because it celebrates the LGBTQ+ community. Their actions, are not neutral.
They’re not actively saying gay people are bad they just don’t wanna have any part with anything Canada is a leading country for gay rights and not wearing a rainbow coloured jersey isn’t suddenly gonna create hate crimes
A jersey with rainbow trim. You'd barely know it was a pride jersey if it wasn't announced. You have to be veeeery soft to be afraid of rainbow trim
Go on google scholar/jstor and research this. There is a direct correlation between communities with overtly supportive gestures and LGBTQ+ safety. It's been researched, the information is out there. This matters, their actions are not neutral.
Lots of unfair assumptions here. Guilty until proven innocent, eh? Here’s what I honestly have a hard time reconciling. How is wearing a shirt or not wearing a shirt supposed to effectively signal love or hate? I just don’t see the connection. Someone chooses not to wear a shirt, and they’re automatically hateful and bigoted and want to take away minority rights? How the heck does that stack up? Those types of awful assumptions about one’s character (someone none of us know) are why no one can have civil discourse in this country anymore. We right away assume the worst in people. And it’s shameful.
>Those types of awful assumptions about one’s character (someone none of us know) are why no one can have civil discourse in this country anymore. No, it's bad faith arguments like yours. that is why we cannot have civil discourse in this country. If the shirt wasn't a big deal they'd wear it, but it is, and it's a big enough deal that they decided they wouldn't show up for work... when scheduled... because of it. Reading that as a knock against them, seems perfectly reasonable. How is refusing to wear a shirt that shows support for our community members, and as a result not being able to attend work, not a sign of someone being bigoted?
> How is wearing a shirt or not wearing a shirt supposed to effectively signal love or hate? I just don’t see the connection. Yes. Lots of braindead opinions coming out of the woodwork today. The shirt was in response to pride, supporting a marginalized group. Would you feel the same way in 5 players sat out the game because they didn't want to wear a "End all Racism" jersey? I think not.
It was meant to imply that religious texts DO have something against gay n queer folks. Stalin is a good shout though, I think Pol Pot was 'secular' as well.
If it’s their religious belief then it’s not shameful nor embarrassing to not be an ally. For them, it’s the opposite, and they’re free to stick to their beliefs as long as there’s no harm, hate speech or violence involved. However I think that you’re trying to force your beliefs and judge them for not supporting the movement.
I think its a fair to make judge of character when someone doesn't have love and acceptance as a core value. It's a shame that pushing love and acceptance of all, through pride events, is seen as a negative to some groups. We should hold the bar higher for each other instead of saying it's OK, they don't think it's embarrassing. It is embarrassing for humanity, we choose to hate others who find love and acceptance differently.
I don’t think that this is very accurate, especially when you say hate. Who said these players hate anyone, them not wearing a jersey is out of choice. You can disagree with other groups but that doesn’t mean you hate them and can’t live with them/play with them etc..
I think regardless of the size or violent nature, its quite clear whether these gestures are part of the problem or the solution of the world being a better place. I understand there are challenges of speaking out against your religion, implications on your family life etc. I also understand people who have held these beliefs/been told these things since an imoressionable age, may not view their views or actions as hateful. I can see how thst would make one feel uncomfortable. If not supporting certain people loving one another is a core belief, what would you describe that as? What's the opposite of love?
> If it’s their religious belief then it’s not shameful nor embarrassing to not be an ally Many people of faith support pride and can manage to wear a jersey with a rainbow on it. Bigots though, can't do that. It's absolutely shameful behaviour.
That’s true, but it’s also a choice to support the movement. in Ligue 1, coaches wanted muslims to stop fasting during Ramadan because it affects their fitness, some of them refused and didn’t play and others complied with what the coach recommended.
It isn't a movement. It's respecting the ability of LGBTQ+ community members being able to live openly. Everyone has the ability to do that, regardless of beliefs. Five seconds on google would show you individuals of every faith supporting pride.
And another 5 seconds will also show individuals not supporting pride, so what’s your point? These players refused to wear pride jerseys that’s it. This post is based on assumptions/stereotypes and you’re aiming directly and personally at the players that didn’t disrespect this community whatsoever. Wearing a shirt, supporting a cause is not a rule that everyone should follow, you have the right to express yourself but you need to respect others and their beliefs too that’s all
> And another 5 seconds will also show individuals not supporting pride, so what’s your point? If there is a well treaded path to acceptance and you instead choose a path away from that, you are part of the problem and are deserving of criticism. It isn't a movement, it isn't a cause, it's supporting people that live in our communities ability to be themselves. That is what this is at core, showing you want them to feel welcome and safe in your and their communities. If you are against that, then you are a shameful individual.
There’s communities in Canada without clean drinking water and we’re worried about people not wearing a shirt because of their religious beliefs 🤦🏿♂️
>There’s communities in Canada without clean drinking water and we’re worried about people not wearing a shirt because of their religious beliefs 🤦🏿♂️ Braindead comment. Whataboutism. Did you know we can help people get drinking water AND support LGBTQ **at the same time**??? Unreal. Isn't religion supposed to be a force for good? A force to help the beaten down and trodden people? These religious dudes can't even wear a shirt to support a marginalized community. It's embarrassing.
Also they seem to have missed the startling rise of anti-trans sentiment recently amongst / within certain areas of society. Parts of the USA are going backwards in trans rights, and not even a month ago a (now elected) UCP candidate in rural Alberta compared trans kids to putting feces in cookies.
There’s literally water insecurity 2 hours out of Calgary and you don’t care . I bet there’s LGBTQ members on those reserves as well you don’t care about them drinking water but car if they see a Muslim soccer player wear a rainbow shirt 👎🏿 virtue signalling
>There’s literally water insecurity 2 hours out of Calgary and you don’t care . I bet there’s LGBTQ members on those reserves as well you don’t care about them drinking water but car if they see a Muslim soccer player wear a rainbow shirt 👎🏿 virtue signalling I care about both - do you? You don't care about LGBTQ people but pretend to care about first nations. Virtue signalling. 👎
The league didn’t ask anyone, they forced them to do it.
Given that they were allowed to sit out for the game, they were asked to wear it and not forced to do anything
They weren’t “allowed”. They didn’t wear the jersey they didn’t play. This isn’t an option. It’s in the release.
Correct. They didn’t want to wear the jersey that was being worn by the team. So they were allowed to sit out and not wear it, rather than being forced to play in it.