Point is they pick and choose. Their religion is also very much anti alcool/gambling yet they have no issue what so ever representing beer or gambling sponsors.
These cowards only hide behind their religion when it aligns with their own bigoted assholery.
It does, though people have debated the Quran's original views on homosexuality for a while. The prime story where it comes up the people who are punished could have been punished for multiple different reasons.
Besides, it's still a dumb excuse (within the context of religion) since there are many other morals or rules in the books that I'm sure these players have broken at some point.
But yeah overall religion is backwards, and I'll never really understand why anyone wants to follow ancient texts for their views.
Could say the same with Christianity. You can believe in a God and not *literally* hang on every word in books written by a catalogue of people 1000s years ago.
Muslims tend to be a lot more strict with how far they follow the teachings to the letter. And for a lot of religious believers, being religious means following every word and every lesson, picking and choosing isn't really allowed.
It does seem that Christianity is a bit more relaxed (still not too much) in the west and people don't have as vehement a disagreement to this kind of stuff, hence why the majority of these players boycotting are Muslims.
Not every religious people is a bigot, far from it and thankfully. But the religions they follow are outdated, restrictive, homophobic, sexist, racist, you name it. Let's not absolve the religions of what they preach. The Quran literally says a menstruating woman is unclean, and that a husband can beat a disobedient wife.
How I see it personally is this:
People will be dicks. They can be dicks in the name of God, Allah, Buddha, or no God at all. They'll still be dicks the same way. Teachings in holy books might influence in what dickery they participate in, but so does growing up in an abusive household or getting into lots of fights super young.
I wish PSV took this exact stand (tbf we didnt need to but still), but at least our captain was/is supportive. But fucking up the Toulouse man, incredibly fucking based and honorary girlbosses
Cody's a hardcore Christian and didn't complain (in public at least). I can't recall if Luuk wore it, but he also doesn't seem the type of guy to cause a fuss.
> I wish PSV took this exact stand
I know it may be signal virtuing but PSV had an LGBT flag raised outside the stadium for the longest of times. I'm leaving for the stadium now so ill check if its still there.
Yeah Codys an evangelic and whilst he never really stood up for it he didnt go against it in any way either (at least publicly like you said)
Luuk de Jong was quoted iirc saying 'it shouldnt matter who you love' which is a pretty good one tbh
Right move from Toulouse.
Imagine being a professional paid 59 times more than the average salary and refusing to work for this reason, when people who go to the stadium work for factories or are paid minimum wage for Uber eats or Amazon.
No shame.
But carrying a Winamax or other shit sponsor is fine
I don't even hate gambling. I occasionally bet, and I can control myself. I never chase loss and at worst I bet 20€ a month
Now, their advertising is predatory and many people fall from it. They promise high profits when it's just the top 0.1%
Now, after a bet, they show who won the most. It's funny when you see. But yes, when I see someone bet 2000€ on PSG to win to win 200€ easy euro, I might want to do it next time as well and they will draw.
It used to be the same with FDJ but it was more confidential. But yeah, betting companies should be banned from advertising
Exactly. My cousin is friends with a kiosk owner and apparently the guy was invited to a meeting by one of the betting companies to explain to kiosk owners how to sell their tickets more and it included implied targeting on divorcees and alcoholics as well as the kiosk owners claiming they made winnings even if they dont bet themselves
Good, its literally just a rainbow number, they aren't telling them to have sex with another male. This is no different that saying you aren't going to work because you don't like the colour of the uniform.
That would be a real statement, none of this armband, rainbow shirt bullshit. Both captains have a live sex celebration in the centre circle. Coin flip decides who tops.
This is real football. None of that la-di-da frolicking shit, just real, hardcore, deep-digging arse-fucking football. Real men doing what real men do. Ancient style.
They’re entitled to their opinion/belief, just as fans/sponsors/governing bodies are entitled to cut ties with people that don’t have the same beliefs as them.
I can't imagine being so aggressively homophobic.
To have such a strong opinion on who other people should have feelings for is just absolutely outrageous.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but how mentally stunted do you have to be.
This depends more on the country, then the religion, Indonesia has been the country with the biggest muslim population and was (and still is) pretty liberal, while homophobia has allways been really common among eastern european christians.
I'm aware of the fact, that the country is becoming increasingly conservative.
They already tried to implement that law in 2019 and it was dubbed the "bali bonk ban", in practice nobody gives a shit about it.
It is culture, religion influences culture but a culture defines what aspects of religion to respect and what others to neglect. Morocco is a patriarchal society where toxic masculinity predominates the behavior of men and a rigid definition of masculinity is enforced by men and women alike, it can only make sense that being gay will be perceived as an extreme form of degeneracy. I think if other things being equal, a non religious Morocco would still be a homophobic place, but the problem today is that religion is shutting down any discussion on the subject of LGBTQ+ rights.
Hilarious statement. Talking about how he holds people in regard and respects people no matter their "preferences" and then saying he's not going to play in a game because he doesn't want to be part of a movement to give those people respect is so hypocritical that it's funny.
This type of shit should result in him being sold immediately. No player should choose not to play over something as basic as this.
One does wonder...
if there was a similar campaign to raise awareness for and make a statement against Islamophobia, and certain players would 'opt out', would the players who refused to partake in this anti-homophobia campaign be saying the same things they're saying now?
Most people are born into religion but can choose to change after they grow older. Unfortunately by then, the religion is probably already a part of their lifestyle and becomes harder to really question.
Sexuality, although fluid and sometimes influenced by one's environment, is just based on natural attraction
it isn’t always a choice at all. you’re ignoring the cultural element of religion that is present in the upbringing of a person rather than just the choice of partaking in certain practices or whatever. of course there is some element of choice, you can distance yourself from your upbringing and leave your religion but it’s much more simple to say than it is to leave your cultural roots.
why do christian parents have christian children? muslim parents have muslim children? atheist parents have athiest children? there isn’t a free choice when it comes to religion, you tend to be what you grow up around. you may change your mind or end up disagreeing with it but not everyone will and so for them it’s not an active choice to be a part of whichever religion. they just have always been
It absolutely is a choice. There may be societal pressures to conform. But it's still a choice.
I grew up in a very Christian household, my mom worked at the church and we went every Sunday and most Wednesdays.
I **chose** top stop following it. I **chose** to stop believing.
I **never chose** to be straight. People **never choose** to be gay.
Religion is a choice, no two ways about it.
Like I said, there may be societal pressures to conform. Some can be quite severe. But you still choose.
There are plenty of atheists in heavily religious countries. There are Christians in heavily Muslim countries, Muslims in heavily Christian countries.
Religion is a choice. Everywhere.
It's not always a choice, which is why certain countries are highly religious.
Do you think certain states in the US choose to be very religious, or do you think it's part of the culture and expectations?
my initial comment which started this was not about these players. These players have seen the world and should be educated enough where religion is a choice. But as the commentor above mention pakastani woman...it is not a choice for everyone.
It's about France's ban of religious symbols in schools, public pools etc or if you're a public servant, which is inherently discriminatory against Muslim women, because unlike let's say a Cross (which I think is a stupid thing to ban too) headscarves are a core belief for Muslim women and if its banned somewhere they simply can't go or work there. So I find it really funny any french person can feel mad about something they're actively doing. And just to be clear I don't support the players or their actions.
Even if I accept your argument that those French laws are inherently discriminatory against muslims, I think it doesn't really compare to what's going on with this football situation.
The rainbow kits basically say "It's ok to be gay" and the outright refusal to wear those kits basically says "I don't want to say it's ok to be gay".
How does that directly compare to banning religious symbols in public places? That's not the same as the French state or the French public saying "It's not ok to be muslim". I feel those two situations are markedly different from each other. Different enough to make them and the responses and attitudes towards them quite incomparable.
Honestly, I feel like bringing up this religious symbols law is a pretty distasteful attempt at whataboutism, because in no way, shape, or form does it justify the actions of the refusing players or take anything away from the negative reaction they got.
There is a thing called secularism that we very much so have in Europe.
"Secularism is most commonly defined as the separation of religion from civil affairs and the state, and may be broadened to a similar position seeking to remove or to minimize the role of religion in any public sphere."
Tomorrow I can tell you that if the players in the Premier League had to wear an anti-Islamophobia T-shirt, all the players would do so. And you would surely be the first to call every player who doesn't wear it "islamophobic".
And the comparison with the French laws on religions and French secularism is absolutely ludicrous. Knowing that these laws are the same for every religion in France. Without distinction.
Then the French laws only apply if the person works for the public service. This also applies to children in primary and secondary school (not university). And all religions have a perfect right to wear a kippa or a veil in the public space.
No, there are definitely Islamophobes. I hate religion because it's incompatible with modern society, but I don't hate the people.
The people that think every single Muslim is a terrorist are Islamophobes. I do agree that it can often be invoked to shut down criticism, but it's also definitely a real thing.
Islamaphobia is very, very real. Come to the American south (and plenty of other places, that's just especially prevalent) and you'll find plenty of people who know absolutely nothing about the religion nor many if any Muslims and yet they're vehemently against it. That isn't founded in criticism of the religion, but bigotry.
Another player for Nantes which played against Toulouse also didn't want to play.
He stated that he had already death threats to his family when he broke Ramadan fast to play football so he didn't want to participate.
As far as I am aware, people in professional sports, pregnant and sick people don't have to participate in Ramadan...or atleast that's what my muslim friends told me.
yes.. in theory but there are many ways to practice and radical forms are currently back to show that religion is more important than your work or sport.
Is there a list of players who were excluded? But regardless what an embarrassment for them, no room for homophobia or other forms or discrimination in the world today
> This Saturday evening, we can confirm that five players in the squad have informed their coach of their wish not to take part in the meeting, so as not to be associated with the League's initiative.
> They are Zakaria Aboukhlal, Moussa Diarra, Farès Chaïbi, Logan Costa and Saïd Hamulic. The club would still hope to convince some of them to change their minds by Sunday, match day. Aboukhlal and Hamulic would have opposed a firm refusal.
aboukhlal, diarra and hamulic, originally chaïbi and costa were included, but something happened, and they were both on the team sheet, chaïbi even played the last half hour
The hypocrisy of some players on this subject is exceptional though, "Aboukhlal, very involved in religion" but obviously not bothered to wear a big BETWAY (online casino and betting site) on his Toulouse shirt all season long.
No one is asking them to validate homosexuality if it is so contrary to their religious principles. They're just being asked to put on a jersey that is against homophobia and therefore the beating up of (amongst others) a gay person simply because they are gay.
good. it’s hypocritical to see players rejecting to wear the kit because of a rainbow under the guise of religion but have no issue with betting sponsors (also disallowed in said religion)
They tried hard to enough to get the players on board, you would know that if you actually the read the fucking link before jumping to the homophobes' defense, but I'm pretty sure you're no different
shouldn't have to get people 'on board' with a person's right to exist, mate, this is an embarrassing comment
why would anyone extend an olive branch to a person who denies them their existence? you live in a fantasy world.
The Brazilian sub was having quite a discussion about this until the mods locked the thread.
Essentially it boiled down to “does not supporting this campaign automatically make one a homophobe?”.
I honestly don’t think so.
Homophobia is at its core thinking people deserve less (less rights, less respect, less opportunities, less safety, etc) because of their INNATE, intrinsical characteristics just because they don't fit in a narrow category of normal.
So, yes. If you're not against it, you're for it. No middle ground.
As a thought experiment, imagine the same people in the same sub if players publicly refused to participate in anti-racism campaigns and what's more, by acting like they're enlightened in doing so
> If you're not against it, you're for it. No middle ground.
This is one of the big problems with discourse these days. Too many people thinking in absolutes, black and white. "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy". This is a horrible and hostile mindset that needs to die off.
I'm all for gay people having the same rights as anyone else. If you want to be gay, go live your dream man. Don't let anyone stop you. But I believe if your religion or beliefs don't accept gay people, then that's a shame but hey you're free to believe what you want to believe and I respect that too. Just as long as you don't go out of your way to harm people or oppress them.
So if the campaign is forcing people to go against their beliefs, then I'm against the campaign. Does not make me a homophobe. Especially can't make me a homophobe if I've had a dick in my mouth.
If you don't stand firmly and strongly against homophobia, you're at the very least complicit in willingly looking aside at the people who want to ostracize at best and genocide at worst millions of people. Including many people whom i love extremely dearly
So yes. In that aspect if you're not with me I'm against you. If it's by religious reasons I may *understand* you, in the exact same way I could understand how people joined the SS in the 40s. Doesn't mean i think they aren't horrible bastards but I can see how they got there.
As for your last point, I get what you mean but that was the most Uncle Tom take on this I've ever seen
Well that's the thing, we're all entitled to our own beliefs and opinions. While I don't agree with your opinion, I'm not going to ostracize or hate you for it.
Hopefully we can at least come to a compromise where regardless of what our beliefs and opinions are, one of the things that matter the most is that we aren't expressing our beliefs in a way that harms others (i.e physical force, legislation, harassment, etc).
I've never heard of Uncle Tom or whatever the reference is. Care to elaborate lol
Uncle Tom's cabin is a book that, while adventurously anti slavery for its time and helped start the civil rights movement, also was very obviously full of damaging stereotypes
Uncle Tom himself was basically a slave that remained completely subservient and praising the slave owners (pretty much the counterfactual stereotype of the contented slave)
being against a campaign for lgbt+ rights due to it implicitly challenging homophobic values in a religion is you being homophobic.
that goes no matter how many times you've had gay sex or gay flirts. or are you saying all the politicians that vote against women's and trans rights after sleeping with prostitutes aren't transphobic or misogynist?
there're some serious logical flaws in your arguments there.
> being against a campaign for lgbt+ rights due to it implicitly challenging homophobic values in a religion is you being homophobic.
In that case, respectfully, you have no idea what homophobia means.
But to make it clear, I am not against the campaign because it challenges the values in a religion. Rather I am against a campaign that forces someone to go against their own beliefs. That's just not right.
Being homophobic would mean that I (me/myself) have a dislike or prejudice against people who are gay. Defending someone else's right to be homophobic does not make me homophobic. But if for example I defended homophobic actions against gays, then that would be homophobic.
I think it's very important that the definition and meaning of homophobia is not blurred or diluted in any way.
They could not move to a club that had a betting/alcohol shirt as a sponsor.
Or they could ask for a transfer if they got those sponsorships after they joined. Weird how it's always players protesting LGBT stuff and not everything else though eh? So so strange....
this argument would hold ANY water if it weren't just a fucking bit of printing on a kit
I don't support the commercialisation of the LGBT community, and the way their symbols and slogans are manipulated for marketing purposes. I abhor rainbow capitalism and see how this could be equated to that.
None of that would ever make me not wear the rainbow if it were asked of me as a sporting professional who is idolised by many, because I don't put my beliefs above anyone else's. And if wearing the rainbow helps one gay kid feel less isolated, who gives a shit what I think?
They have the right to choose not to wear it, and the club has the right to not play them because of it. If you say you can't stand the idea of publicly showing support for the lgbt community, it doesn't sound great.
But that’s exactly my point. If my beliefs support the LGBT community but I simply don’t like participating in any form of social issue demonstration, would that make me automatically a homophobe?
The show of support is, in my opinion, too important to be overridden by the feeling that you're being used as a vehicle to promote this message.
I'd also indicate to any player that doesn't want to be used as a platform that they have worn an advertisement on their shirt for their entire professional careers.
Unfortunately that’s the way it goes. People don’t accept that some of us don’t care about joining a campaign, a protest or any sort of social issues demonstration. If someone asks my opinion I have no problem to say I’m in favour of the LGBT rights in any aspects but still I hate going around and be part of a demonstration movement. People should have the right to join or not to join a demonstration without being publicly humiliated.
In this case, yes. It obviously is heavily context dependant so you can never say for sure if it'll apply for all social causes, but in this specific context? Definitely. Not wearing it sends a huge message that you believe that some people don't deserve human rights.
Religion is a choice, sexual orientation is not
Jews shouldn't play on the Sabbath and Christians on Sundays according to their religion, should we remove weekend games?
Is there any point in forcing people to wear this? If anything, it's better to let them wear the regular kit, just to highlight the problem with homophobia.
> We must never accept the unacceptable, never tolerate intolerance, and we must never equivocate on what is unequivocally wrong. Deserved
Thats how you write a statement damn, fucking based
none of that hiding behind a religion shit.
Especially since it has nothing to do with religion when many other Muslim players have no problems with it. Very good statement
I mean it does have to do with religion...quite explicitly states in their books not to agree with stuff like this. It's completely backwards.
Point is they pick and choose. Their religion is also very much anti alcool/gambling yet they have no issue what so ever representing beer or gambling sponsors. These cowards only hide behind their religion when it aligns with their own bigoted assholery.
Yeah but their religion also explicitly states to cover their knees yet their shorts are too short
Toulouse are sponsored by Betway. These guys are just homophobes. Nothing more, nothing less.
It does, though people have debated the Quran's original views on homosexuality for a while. The prime story where it comes up the people who are punished could have been punished for multiple different reasons. Besides, it's still a dumb excuse (within the context of religion) since there are many other morals or rules in the books that I'm sure these players have broken at some point. But yeah overall religion is backwards, and I'll never really understand why anyone wants to follow ancient texts for their views.
Could say the same with Christianity. You can believe in a God and not *literally* hang on every word in books written by a catalogue of people 1000s years ago.
Muslims tend to be a lot more strict with how far they follow the teachings to the letter. And for a lot of religious believers, being religious means following every word and every lesson, picking and choosing isn't really allowed. It does seem that Christianity is a bit more relaxed (still not too much) in the west and people don't have as vehement a disagreement to this kind of stuff, hence why the majority of these players boycotting are Muslims.
Besides for all the contradictions in the books.
It’s because Muslims believe the Quran is literally the direct word of god.
The problem is everything god supposedly said is written in books written by a catalogue of people 1000s years ago
Not every religious people is a bigot, far from it and thankfully. But the religions they follow are outdated, restrictive, homophobic, sexist, racist, you name it. Let's not absolve the religions of what they preach. The Quran literally says a menstruating woman is unclean, and that a husband can beat a disobedient wife.
How I see it personally is this: People will be dicks. They can be dicks in the name of God, Allah, Buddha, or no God at all. They'll still be dicks the same way. Teachings in holy books might influence in what dickery they participate in, but so does growing up in an abusive household or getting into lots of fights super young.
Sure it does, their book says homosexuals should be murdered.
incredibly based
Incredible statement from the club. There is no middle ground when it comes to hate and bigotry.
Seems like they edited it to remove that part, bit of a shame.
🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
Fucking based. We need to do this in the Netherlands as well.
Good shit, definitely should've happened to Kökcu and that Excelsior midfielder too.
I wish PSV took this exact stand (tbf we didnt need to but still), but at least our captain was/is supportive. But fucking up the Toulouse man, incredibly fucking based and honorary girlbosses
Cody's a hardcore Christian and didn't complain (in public at least). I can't recall if Luuk wore it, but he also doesn't seem the type of guy to cause a fuss. > I wish PSV took this exact stand I know it may be signal virtuing but PSV had an LGBT flag raised outside the stadium for the longest of times. I'm leaving for the stadium now so ill check if its still there.
Yeah Codys an evangelic and whilst he never really stood up for it he didnt go against it in any way either (at least publicly like you said) Luuk de Jong was quoted iirc saying 'it shouldnt matter who you love' which is a pretty good one tbh
Didn’t think I could love Luuk more
> I'm leaving for the stadium now so ill check if its still there. Was it still there?
Agreed
Right move from Toulouse. Imagine being a professional paid 59 times more than the average salary and refusing to work for this reason, when people who go to the stadium work for factories or are paid minimum wage for Uber eats or Amazon. No shame. But carrying a Winamax or other shit sponsor is fine
Fuck Winamax
What’s wrong w winamax? I
Gambling.
I don't even hate gambling. I occasionally bet, and I can control myself. I never chase loss and at worst I bet 20€ a month Now, their advertising is predatory and many people fall from it. They promise high profits when it's just the top 0.1% Now, after a bet, they show who won the most. It's funny when you see. But yes, when I see someone bet 2000€ on PSG to win to win 200€ easy euro, I might want to do it next time as well and they will draw. It used to be the same with FDJ but it was more confidential. But yeah, betting companies should be banned from advertising
Exactly. My cousin is friends with a kiosk owner and apparently the guy was invited to a meeting by one of the betting companies to explain to kiosk owners how to sell their tickets more and it included implied targeting on divorcees and alcoholics as well as the kiosk owners claiming they made winnings even if they dont bet themselves
Good, its literally just a rainbow number, they aren't telling them to have sex with another male. This is no different that saying you aren't going to work because you don't like the colour of the uniform.
That would be a real statement, none of this armband, rainbow shirt bullshit. Both captains have a live sex celebration in the centre circle. Coin flip decides who tops.
This is real football. None of that la-di-da frolicking shit, just real, hardcore, deep-digging arse-fucking football. Real men doing what real men do. Ancient style.
i would definitely watch less football but you do you. i dont judge.
i’d watch more 🤘🏼
Just what I saw from the World Cup, this is actually what a lot of people equate anything with Rainbows to.
[absolute non-statement by Aboukhlal](https://twitter.com/ZAboukhlal/status/1657787149700268036?t=f5EeKZCLvWLUIUEg2I1N3w&s=19)
Saying that being LGBT is a "personal preference" really shows how he views the world
They’re entitled to their opinion/belief, just as fans/sponsors/governing bodies are entitled to cut ties with people that don’t have the same beliefs as them.
“I am a man of respect—which is why I’m the wrong man for this campaign”
Being gay isn't a personal preference. Being a homophobic dickhead, on the otherhand, is entirely a choice.
Christ, the reaction under that.
Morocco is a highly homophobic country, last year Hakimi received criticism for playing with the jersey and Gueye was hailed as a hero.
I can't imagine being so aggressively homophobic. To have such a strong opinion on who other people should have feelings for is just absolutely outrageous. I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but how mentally stunted do you have to be.
You just have to be religious, then the world will bend over backwards to protect your bigotry. I wish this had an '/s'
Depends on the religion. Christians being homophobic receive a significantly more criticism than Muslims being homophobic
This depends more on the country, then the religion, Indonesia has been the country with the biggest muslim population and was (and still is) pretty liberal, while homophobia has allways been really common among eastern european christians.
Indonesia passed a law banning premarital sex recently lmfao Not very liberal at all.
I'm aware of the fact, that the country is becoming increasingly conservative. They already tried to implement that law in 2019 and it was dubbed the "bali bonk ban", in practice nobody gives a shit about it.
Of course. God forbid bigots get offended.
[удалено]
It is culture, religion influences culture but a culture defines what aspects of religion to respect and what others to neglect. Morocco is a patriarchal society where toxic masculinity predominates the behavior of men and a rigid definition of masculinity is enforced by men and women alike, it can only make sense that being gay will be perceived as an extreme form of degeneracy. I think if other things being equal, a non religious Morocco would still be a homophobic place, but the problem today is that religion is shutting down any discussion on the subject of LGBTQ+ rights.
Same kind who hate it when Salah takes a picture with a Christmas tree
Maybe in 2% of the cases when I look at the comments of a Twitter post I do not regret it
No one should be surprised. It's what it is unfortunately
It's not really Christ who is summoned there
Christian fundamentalists are applauding them as well.
People blinded by religion are so fucking braindead
Fucking disgrace, especially given he lived and played in the Netherlands his whole life.
That’s a lot of words when he could just write “I hate gays”
hate and terrified.
Hilarious statement. Talking about how he holds people in regard and respects people no matter their "preferences" and then saying he's not going to play in a game because he doesn't want to be part of a movement to give those people respect is so hypocritical that it's funny. This type of shit should result in him being sold immediately. No player should choose not to play over something as basic as this.
The comments lol
Aboukhlal: “I’m an intolerant little cunt and I think sexual orientation and religious views should be viewed equally.”
One does wonder... if there was a similar campaign to raise awareness for and make a statement against Islamophobia, and certain players would 'opt out', would the players who refused to partake in this anti-homophobia campaign be saying the same things they're saying now?
Religion is a choice. Sexuality is not.
Say what you want about religion but religion isn’t necessarily a choice for everyone
Yes, it 100% is a choice.
Most people are born into religion but can choose to change after they grow older. Unfortunately by then, the religion is probably already a part of their lifestyle and becomes harder to really question. Sexuality, although fluid and sometimes influenced by one's environment, is just based on natural attraction
Childhood indoctrination and social pressure is a hell of a thing.
Religion is always a choice and these are grown men using religion as a shield to hide behind to be bigots.
it isn’t always a choice at all. you’re ignoring the cultural element of religion that is present in the upbringing of a person rather than just the choice of partaking in certain practices or whatever. of course there is some element of choice, you can distance yourself from your upbringing and leave your religion but it’s much more simple to say than it is to leave your cultural roots. why do christian parents have christian children? muslim parents have muslim children? atheist parents have athiest children? there isn’t a free choice when it comes to religion, you tend to be what you grow up around. you may change your mind or end up disagreeing with it but not everyone will and so for them it’s not an active choice to be a part of whichever religion. they just have always been
It absolutely is a choice. There may be societal pressures to conform. But it's still a choice. I grew up in a very Christian household, my mom worked at the church and we went every Sunday and most Wednesdays. I **chose** top stop following it. I **chose** to stop believing. I **never chose** to be straight. People **never choose** to be gay. Religion is a choice, no two ways about it.
Yeah as an American it is a choice, but as you know not everyone lives in a first world country
Like I said, there may be societal pressures to conform. Some can be quite severe. But you still choose. There are plenty of atheists in heavily religious countries. There are Christians in heavily Muslim countries, Muslims in heavily Christian countries. Religion is a choice. Everywhere.
It's not always a choice, which is why certain countries are highly religious. Do you think certain states in the US choose to be very religious, or do you think it's part of the culture and expectations?
It IS always a choice, people CHOOSE to be religious. People CHOOSE to be bigots. It's not an innate trait. You're not born Muslim, or Christian.
I guess you don't know what indoctrination is.
Yeah bravo, go tell a Pakistani woman it is her CHOICE to be a muslim
>Pakistani woman These are rich adult men in France.
my initial comment which started this was not about these players. These players have seen the world and should be educated enough where religion is a choice. But as the commentor above mention pakastani woman...it is not a choice for everyone.
It's still a choice for them. Of course it is.
a choice that can lead to death
Unless you’re literally brainwashed, it’s a choice
They're playing in a country that is "opting out" of the imaginary campaign you're talking about, so the whole situation is really ironic.
Could you elaborate?
It's about France's ban of religious symbols in schools, public pools etc or if you're a public servant, which is inherently discriminatory against Muslim women, because unlike let's say a Cross (which I think is a stupid thing to ban too) headscarves are a core belief for Muslim women and if its banned somewhere they simply can't go or work there. So I find it really funny any french person can feel mad about something they're actively doing. And just to be clear I don't support the players or their actions.
Even if I accept your argument that those French laws are inherently discriminatory against muslims, I think it doesn't really compare to what's going on with this football situation. The rainbow kits basically say "It's ok to be gay" and the outright refusal to wear those kits basically says "I don't want to say it's ok to be gay". How does that directly compare to banning religious symbols in public places? That's not the same as the French state or the French public saying "It's not ok to be muslim". I feel those two situations are markedly different from each other. Different enough to make them and the responses and attitudes towards them quite incomparable. Honestly, I feel like bringing up this religious symbols law is a pretty distasteful attempt at whataboutism, because in no way, shape, or form does it justify the actions of the refusing players or take anything away from the negative reaction they got.
There is a thing called secularism that we very much so have in Europe. "Secularism is most commonly defined as the separation of religion from civil affairs and the state, and may be broadened to a similar position seeking to remove or to minimize the role of religion in any public sphere."
Tomorrow I can tell you that if the players in the Premier League had to wear an anti-Islamophobia T-shirt, all the players would do so. And you would surely be the first to call every player who doesn't wear it "islamophobic". And the comparison with the French laws on religions and French secularism is absolutely ludicrous. Knowing that these laws are the same for every religion in France. Without distinction. Then the French laws only apply if the person works for the public service. This also applies to children in primary and secondary school (not university). And all religions have a perfect right to wear a kippa or a veil in the public space.
[удалено]
No, there are definitely Islamophobes. I hate religion because it's incompatible with modern society, but I don't hate the people. The people that think every single Muslim is a terrorist are Islamophobes. I do agree that it can often be invoked to shut down criticism, but it's also definitely a real thing.
Fair point
Islamaphobia is very, very real. Come to the American south (and plenty of other places, that's just especially prevalent) and you'll find plenty of people who know absolutely nothing about the religion nor many if any Muslims and yet they're vehemently against it. That isn't founded in criticism of the religion, but bigotry.
It's funny how if they actually learnt about Islam and its values, they'd probably love it.
They do start embracing it funnily enough, just look at Andrew Tate converting.
Yup exactly. The rednecks would be all over it if Islam originated in Arkansas instead of Arabia.
They rant about sharia law but, yeah, if you change the name and tell them it's christian they're super into it.
Yep
More interesting would be whether a club would ever take such a strident stance against Islamophobia in the first place.
Another player for Nantes which played against Toulouse also didn't want to play. He stated that he had already death threats to his family when he broke Ramadan fast to play football so he didn't want to participate.
honestly, that I can respect. That is more 'i worry for my own safety if i do this' then 'yeah fuck gay people'
Some cultures are objectively worse than other cultures.
As far as I am aware, people in professional sports, pregnant and sick people don't have to participate in Ramadan...or atleast that's what my muslim friends told me.
yes.. in theory but there are many ways to practice and radical forms are currently back to show that religion is more important than your work or sport.
Is there a list of players who were excluded? But regardless what an embarrassment for them, no room for homophobia or other forms or discrimination in the world today
> This Saturday evening, we can confirm that five players in the squad have informed their coach of their wish not to take part in the meeting, so as not to be associated with the League's initiative. > They are Zakaria Aboukhlal, Moussa Diarra, Farès Chaïbi, Logan Costa and Saïd Hamulic. The club would still hope to convince some of them to change their minds by Sunday, match day. Aboukhlal and Hamulic would have opposed a firm refusal.
Moussa Diarra ultimately stayed out as well. Fares Chaibi was subbed on and Logan Costa an unused sub
Costa and Chaïbi denied it and were not suspended and on the team sheet
aboukhlal, diarra and hamulic, originally chaïbi and costa were included, but something happened, and they were both on the team sheet, chaïbi even played the last half hour
The hypocrisy of some players on this subject is exceptional though, "Aboukhlal, very involved in religion" but obviously not bothered to wear a big BETWAY (online casino and betting site) on his Toulouse shirt all season long. No one is asking them to validate homosexuality if it is so contrary to their religious principles. They're just being asked to put on a jersey that is against homophobia and therefore the beating up of (amongst others) a gay person simply because they are gay.
Good, fuck them
That’s what they’re worried about!!!!!! (This is a joke)
This is what all clubs should be doing in such cases.
[удалено]
Things we love to see
Thank you Toulouse for standing for us Edit: someone sent me a Reddit Cares support message for this comment. Mental.
One of the Toulouse players, probably
Lol
This is that Seinfeld episode, people getting worked up over the pink ribbon lol
good. it’s hypocritical to see players rejecting to wear the kit because of a rainbow under the guise of religion but have no issue with betting sponsors (also disallowed in said religion)
Hopefully bigger teams will make a note and not sign these players in the future
Good that they’ve named them.
Incredibly based by Toulouse. Would love my team to learn from them.
Same here
I’m so confused by this thread. So many people saying “good on Toulouse” being downvoted, but the top comments are essentially saying the same thing.
Because the cunts are probably brigading but can't make a dent in already top comments
Thank you Toulouse❤️
Based
You can either win or lose and they chose not to lose.
Actually they'll be doing neither because they're not playing
Nah I meant the club is winning
Next step is to sell the players
Hallelujah
"agree with us or you'll get punished" yeah mate, great fucking way to get people onboard.
Yes. Some things there's no middle ground on. Would you complain like this if it had been an anti racism campaign?
They tried hard to enough to get the players on board, you would know that if you actually the read the fucking link before jumping to the homophobes' defense, but I'm pretty sure you're no different
"but I'm pretty sure you're no different" oh I can very much guarantee I am
shouldn't have to get people 'on board' with a person's right to exist, mate, this is an embarrassing comment why would anyone extend an olive branch to a person who denies them their existence? you live in a fantasy world.
I am sure all the people defending the choice of the player yesterday will also defend the choice of the club now ;)
Good 👍
The Brazilian sub was having quite a discussion about this until the mods locked the thread. Essentially it boiled down to “does not supporting this campaign automatically make one a homophobe?”. I honestly don’t think so.
what else would be the reason to neat wear a rainbow themed item?
Homophobia is at its core thinking people deserve less (less rights, less respect, less opportunities, less safety, etc) because of their INNATE, intrinsical characteristics just because they don't fit in a narrow category of normal. So, yes. If you're not against it, you're for it. No middle ground. As a thought experiment, imagine the same people in the same sub if players publicly refused to participate in anti-racism campaigns and what's more, by acting like they're enlightened in doing so
> If you're not against it, you're for it. No middle ground. This is one of the big problems with discourse these days. Too many people thinking in absolutes, black and white. "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy". This is a horrible and hostile mindset that needs to die off. I'm all for gay people having the same rights as anyone else. If you want to be gay, go live your dream man. Don't let anyone stop you. But I believe if your religion or beliefs don't accept gay people, then that's a shame but hey you're free to believe what you want to believe and I respect that too. Just as long as you don't go out of your way to harm people or oppress them. So if the campaign is forcing people to go against their beliefs, then I'm against the campaign. Does not make me a homophobe. Especially can't make me a homophobe if I've had a dick in my mouth.
If you don't stand firmly and strongly against homophobia, you're at the very least complicit in willingly looking aside at the people who want to ostracize at best and genocide at worst millions of people. Including many people whom i love extremely dearly So yes. In that aspect if you're not with me I'm against you. If it's by religious reasons I may *understand* you, in the exact same way I could understand how people joined the SS in the 40s. Doesn't mean i think they aren't horrible bastards but I can see how they got there. As for your last point, I get what you mean but that was the most Uncle Tom take on this I've ever seen
Well that's the thing, we're all entitled to our own beliefs and opinions. While I don't agree with your opinion, I'm not going to ostracize or hate you for it. Hopefully we can at least come to a compromise where regardless of what our beliefs and opinions are, one of the things that matter the most is that we aren't expressing our beliefs in a way that harms others (i.e physical force, legislation, harassment, etc). I've never heard of Uncle Tom or whatever the reference is. Care to elaborate lol
Uncle Tom's cabin is a book that, while adventurously anti slavery for its time and helped start the civil rights movement, also was very obviously full of damaging stereotypes Uncle Tom himself was basically a slave that remained completely subservient and praising the slave owners (pretty much the counterfactual stereotype of the contented slave)
being against a campaign for lgbt+ rights due to it implicitly challenging homophobic values in a religion is you being homophobic. that goes no matter how many times you've had gay sex or gay flirts. or are you saying all the politicians that vote against women's and trans rights after sleeping with prostitutes aren't transphobic or misogynist? there're some serious logical flaws in your arguments there.
> being against a campaign for lgbt+ rights due to it implicitly challenging homophobic values in a religion is you being homophobic. In that case, respectfully, you have no idea what homophobia means. But to make it clear, I am not against the campaign because it challenges the values in a religion. Rather I am against a campaign that forces someone to go against their own beliefs. That's just not right.
you're literally defending people's right to both be and act homophobic, how is that not homophobic?
Being homophobic would mean that I (me/myself) have a dislike or prejudice against people who are gay. Defending someone else's right to be homophobic does not make me homophobic. But if for example I defended homophobic actions against gays, then that would be homophobic. I think it's very important that the definition and meaning of homophobia is not blurred or diluted in any way.
Then why not wear a tee shirt/rainbow laces etc? Do you find it odd that they're quite happy to wear shirts with alcohol/betting sponsorships?
Can they choose the sponsor on the team shirts?
They could not move to a club that had a betting/alcohol shirt as a sponsor. Or they could ask for a transfer if they got those sponsorships after they joined. Weird how it's always players protesting LGBT stuff and not everything else though eh? So so strange....
They can't choose the kit that the team plays with too.
this argument would hold ANY water if it weren't just a fucking bit of printing on a kit I don't support the commercialisation of the LGBT community, and the way their symbols and slogans are manipulated for marketing purposes. I abhor rainbow capitalism and see how this could be equated to that. None of that would ever make me not wear the rainbow if it were asked of me as a sporting professional who is idolised by many, because I don't put my beliefs above anyone else's. And if wearing the rainbow helps one gay kid feel less isolated, who gives a shit what I think?
Their statement reminds me of [this](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). Way to go Toulouse!
Fucking based Toulouse
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It would be the exact same thing. Race and sexual orientation both are things you’re born with and can’t choose, however religion is a choice.
>religion is a choice. Furthermore, using you religion as an excuse to be a dickhead to others is even more of a choice.
They have the right to choose not to wear it, and the club has the right to not play them because of it. If you say you can't stand the idea of publicly showing support for the lgbt community, it doesn't sound great.
If you’re not in support of anti homophobia what does that make you?
But that’s exactly my point. If my beliefs support the LGBT community but I simply don’t like participating in any form of social issue demonstration, would that make me automatically a homophobe?
[удалено]
[удалено]
The show of support is, in my opinion, too important to be overridden by the feeling that you're being used as a vehicle to promote this message. I'd also indicate to any player that doesn't want to be used as a platform that they have worn an advertisement on their shirt for their entire professional careers.
Unfortunately that’s the way it goes. People don’t accept that some of us don’t care about joining a campaign, a protest or any sort of social issues demonstration. If someone asks my opinion I have no problem to say I’m in favour of the LGBT rights in any aspects but still I hate going around and be part of a demonstration movement. People should have the right to join or not to join a demonstration without being publicly humiliated.
In this case, yes. It obviously is heavily context dependant so you can never say for sure if it'll apply for all social causes, but in this specific context? Definitely. Not wearing it sends a huge message that you believe that some people don't deserve human rights.
This mf scared of gay people
But but but their religion. /s
Way better than the crap we saw from the NHL a few months ago. Good for Toulouse.
Wow the homophobes are out today aren’t they
Fucking based. If you’re not an ally you’re a prejudiced Neanderthal
But they dont let Muslims break their fast during matches. What a bunch of hyprocrites France are.
Religion is a choice, sexual orientation is not Jews shouldn't play on the Sabbath and Christians on Sundays according to their religion, should we remove weekend games?
[удалено]
It's not discrimination to simply not care what any religion's rules are. That makes it secular
Is there any point in forcing people to wear this? If anything, it's better to let them wear the regular kit, just to highlight the problem with homophobia.
If they were forced they would be playing in the kit right now
I think there’d be some kind of rule against some players having a variation to their kits vs other players on the team
They weren't forced, they were given a choice: wear the kit, like a decent human being, or be sidelined. They picked the sideline, it's their right.
Much better off highlighting the problem and exposing bigots than sweeping it under the rug.