Ipswich captain Morsy not wearing rainbow armband

[Positive_Canary 27]

3 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

If he’s said that then please show me the quote. Otherwise stop putting words in his mouth to try and prove a point 

He doesn't need to say it. As someone else has said, actions speak much louder than words as an influencer and particularly as captain of their club. 

[The Raptor 1,218]

10 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Delia Smith Sucks

Ipswich Town Sucks

Ed sheeran sucks

Reality TV sucks

[Fen Canary 848]

7 minutes ago, Positive_Canary said:

He doesn't need to say it. As someone else has said, actions speak much louder than words as an influencer and particularly as captain of their club. 

That’s what I thought. You’ve no idea the reasoning behind his decision so you’ve simply invented a reason to be outraged. No doubt you’ve already denounced and attacked him on Twitter to show what a nice person you are 

[Fen Canary 848]

10 minutes ago, The Raptor said:

Ed sheeran sucks

Reality TV sucks

My Hoover doesn’t unfortunately 

[NeymarSmith 130]

51 minutes ago, nu_matik said:

 

Lets hope he gets booked tonight anyway, and doesnt play on the weekend. Otbc

Edited December 11, 2023 by NeymarSmith
I cant be asked to argue this

[Canaries north 151]

3 hours ago, Positive_Canary said:

He doesn't need to say it. As someone else has said, actions speak much louder than words as an influencer and particularly as captain of their club. 

It seems mad to me that people put footballers up as influeners in this modern world. I'm not going to get involved in the rights and wrongs of putting on the armband or not. Just that if someone wanted advice on political,  moral or social issues, why would anyone choose a footballer to listen to. The man is a sportman not a social arbiter. Teach kids to look up to their sporting heroes for their ability in sport and not their political and social choices. The same with musicians. I went to a gig the other day and the support act spent more time talking politics than playing. 

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

4 hours ago, Positive_Canary said:

He doesn't need to say it. As someone else has said, actions speak much louder than words as an influencer and particularly as captain of their club. 

He is a Moslem, so it is against his faith to do the rainbow stuff. Unless you think he should go against his beliefs?

[Newtopia 518]

6 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

Surely these things should be a personal choice? If they're forced into it it both goes against what it stands for and defeats the purpose.

Nothing to see here. 

True, he should be free to do and say as thinks, but shouldn’t be captain if inclusion is the message the club want to project.  As captain you have to led, and toe the party line.  Behind closed door discuss openly.

[Fen Canary 848]

21 minutes ago, Newtopia said:

True, he should be free to do and say as thinks, but shouldn’t be captain if inclusion is the message the club want to project.  As captain you have to led, and toe the party line.  Behind closed door discuss openly.

What if the majority at the club doesn’t want to wear the rainbow stuff, should he still be forced to?

What if the argument is nothing to do with gay rights, but instead on the trans debate? Perhaps he’s showing solidarity with the clubs women's side who feel that the implementation of trans groups policies who fly that flag would be detrimental to the women’s game?

[Positive_Canary 27]

3 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

What if the majority at the club doesn’t want to wear the rainbow stuff, should he still be forced to?

What if the argument is nothing to do with gay rights, but instead on the trans debate? Perhaps he’s showing solidarity with the clubs women's side who feel that the implementation of trans groups policies who fly that flag would be detrimental to the women’s game?

You seem determined to find an excuse for him to refuse to wear the modern, accepted emblem of inclusion. To be honest, his disciplinary record suggests that he doesn't put too much thought into anything. 

[Fen Canary 848]

Just now, Positive_Canary said:

You seem determined to find an excuse for him to refuse to wear the modern, accepted emblem of inclusion. To be honest, his disciplinary record suggests that he doesn't put too much thought into anything. 

And you seem determined to portray his actions as entirely homophobic, despite him making no comment at all on his reasons for wearing a plain armband. Perhaps he just wants to play football and not be involved in any politics around his position as captain.

Also who says the rainbow flag is an accepted emblem of inclusion? Accepted by who? There are many feminists (Rosie Duffield for instance) who would likely disagree with you

[Positive_Canary 27]

24 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

And you seem determined to portray his actions as entirely homophobic, despite him making no comment at all on his reasons for wearing a plain armband. Perhaps he just wants to play football and not be involved in any politics around his position as captain.

Also who says the rainbow flag is an accepted emblem of inclusion? Accepted by who? There are many feminists (Rosie Duffield for instance) who would likely disagree with you

I guess people will form their own judgements. It will inevitably give licence for some people to continue to exclude though. Of that there can be no argument. 

[Fen Canary 848]

7 minutes ago, Positive_Canary said:

I guess people will form their own judgements. It will inevitably give licence for some people to continue to exclude though. Of that there can be no argument. 

Excluded from what? What rights do I have that a gay man doesn’t? 

[mccanary 84]

5 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Excluded from what? What rights do I have that a gay man doesn’t? 

This......all day long. Not only gay but female, black and trans. How much equality is equal?? 

[Positive_Canary 27]

6 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Excluded from what? What rights do I have that a gay man doesn’t? 

I think your response highlights just how much work there is still to do on the subject of inclusion and acceptance. My own view is that by remaining silent on his refusal (and it can only be regarded in that way) to wear an emblem of support for LGBTIA+ he passively endorses the opposite. 

[Fen Canary 848]

9 minutes ago, Positive_Canary said:

I think your response highlights just how much work there is still to do on the subject of inclusion and acceptance. My own view is that by remaining silent on his refusal (and it can only be regarded in that way) to wear an emblem of support for LGBTIA+ he passively endorses the opposite. 

The acronym has changed since the beginning of the conversation. You’ll be getting cancelled for swapping the Q to an IA. Even noisy Twitter types can’t get it right apparently 

[Positive_Canary 27]

2 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

The acronym has changed since the beginning of the conversation. You’ll be getting cancelled for swapping the Q to an IA. Even noisy Twitter types can’t get it right apparently 

Without the sentiment, nothing about the campaign means anything I'm afraid and people will continue to be singled out for who and what they are. Maybe some things should be bigger than football and perspective you be encouraged. The actions of individuals who are seen as role models are incredibly important and influential when it comes to creating a more tolerant society. Footballers can choose to make things better or worse. It is very simple. 

[Naturalcynic 641]

1 hour ago, Positive_Canary said:

You seem determined to find an excuse for him to refuse to wear the modern, accepted emblem of inclusion. To be honest, his disciplinary record suggests that he doesn't put too much thought into anything. 

You seem determined to force people to sign up to political causes that sound nice and caring but in reality include areas that are extremely contentious, such as mandating that men wanting to be women really are women despite having xy chromosomes and external genitalia and encouraging the indoctrination of young impressionable children to believe that they’re the wrong gender.  It’s the same as footballers being forced to take a knee, ostensibly as a way of demonstrating support for inclusivity whereas we all know that initially it was used to show solidarity with BLM which was and is a far-left political movement.  Politics should be kept out of football.

[Ken Hairy 3,774]

5 hours ago, Newtopia said:

True, he should be free to do and say as thinks, but shouldn’t be captain if inclusion is the message the club want to project.  As captain you have to led, and toe the party line.  Behind closed door discuss openly.

Maybe the club aren't bothered?

[Positive_Canary 27]

4 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Maybe the club aren't bothered?

That would be the logical conclusion to draw, yes. 

[AJ 1,224]

12 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

Didn't Zimmermann refuse to take the knee?

Was it his injured knee? 😬

[canarybubbles 1,924]

You can't keep politics out of football, just as you can't keep it out of any important aspect of human society.

People who talk about keeping politics out of football tend to mean keep-the-politics-that-I-disagree-with out of football. Almost always it's BLM and trans rights they get worked up about, while they generally keep quiet about football clubs being bought by countries where people are tortured to death. Because that's not politics, is it?

[Fen Canary 848]

34 minutes ago, Positive_Canary said:

Without the sentiment, nothing about the campaign means anything I'm afraid and people will continue to be singled out for who and what they are. Maybe some things should be bigger than football and perspective you be encouraged. The actions of individuals who are seen as role models are incredibly important and influential when it comes to creating a more tolerant society. Footballers can choose to make things better or worse. It is very simple. 

No, what’s very simple is you’re criticising a footballer for not blindly following the latest empty performative gesture. Despite not knowing his reasons for not doing what you believe he should you’ve chosen to attack him anyway. You’re so sure of your own superiority that you fail to see that others may have different opinions on contentious issues such as trans rights (which have somehow latched themselves onto the gay rights movement)

[Positive_Canary 27]

1 minute ago, Fen Canary said:

No, what’s very simple is you’re criticising a footballer for not blindly following the latest empty performative gesture. Despite not knowing his reasons for not doing what you believe he should you’ve chosen to attack him anyway. You’re so sure of your own superiority that you fail to see that others may have different opinions on contentious issues such as trans rights (which have somehow latched themselves onto the gay rights movement)

Ironic that you seem to be hiding behind small anomalies, when the general thrust of the campaign is generally accepted as 'inclusion'. It all feels too convenient for people to find a reason to support bigotry over kindness and acceptance. 

[Fen Canary 848]

5 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

You can't keep politics out of football, just as you can't keep it out of any important aspect of human society.

People who talk about keeping politics out of football tend to mean keep-the-politics-that-I-disagree-with out of football. Almost always it's BLM and trans rights they get worked up about, while they generally keep quiet about football clubs being bought by countries where people are tortured to death. Because that's not politics, is it?

In politics you’re allowed to disagree, that’s a fundamental point of it. However according to some on here a player should be ostracised for having an opinion that they deem incorrect. If you want to let politics into football then let’s ask players if they believe biological males should be allowed to compete in the women’s league for instance, as that is a policy the rainbow flag now stands for after all

[Fen Canary 848]

1 minute ago, Positive_Canary said:

Ironic that you seem to be hiding behind small anomalies, when the general thrust of the campaign is generally accepted as 'inclusion'. It all feels too convenient for people to find a reason to support bigotry over kindness and acceptance. 

But not every aspect of the rainbow flag does support inclusion. Look at the abuse dished out to JK Rowling by many “trans allies” for instance, many of whom place that flag on their online bios. Is the treatment of women such as Kathleen Stock or Rosie Duffield by various groups for whom that flag is an emblem to be deemed inclusive?

[Positive_Canary 27]

Just now, Fen Canary said:

But not every aspect of the rainbow flag does support inclusion. Look at the abuse dished out to JK Rowling by many “trans allies” for instance, many of whom place that flag on their online bios. Is the treatment of women such as Kathleen Stock or Rosie Duffield by various groups for whom that flag is an emblem to be deemed inclusive?

It's clear that you have an agenda here. My point is that someone who wants to benefit from the mainstream of our society as a very well paid sportsman, does not want to actively play his part in promoting inclusion for the historically excluded within that same society. If he played for us I wouldn't want him anywhere near the captain's armband. 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,752]

6 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

He is a Moslem, so it is against his faith to do the rainbow stuff. Unless you think he should go against his beliefs?

And yet the bible says man should not sleep with another man for it is an abomination.

 

And yet you see vicars flying the LGBT flag at churches and even the Pope is saying Catholics can be gay.

 

Interesting, no?

Edited December 12, 2023 by cambridgeshire canary

[Fen Canary 848]

You’re the one that started the thread criticising the man, so clearly you’re the one with the agenda. Also he’s paid for his skills as a footballer, that’s it. He’s taken nothing from the mainstream of society (whatever that means), he’s not asked to be a role model or ambassador for any group (unlike Henderson who made a big song and dance about being anti discrimination then hypocritically moved to Saudi Arabia) so therefore in my eyes doesn’t deserve to be criticised for not wearing an armband featuring the emblem that has become very contentious due to its association with groups such as Stonewall.

Also if he was a Norwich player I’d have no issue with him being captain provided he was the best man for the job. A players political or religious beliefs mean nothing to me 

[canarybubbles 1,924]

28 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

In politics you’re allowed to disagree, that’s a fundamental point of it. However according to some on here a player should be ostracised for having an opinion that they deem incorrect. If you want to let politics into football then let’s ask players if they believe biological males should be allowed to compete in the women’s league for instance, as that is a policy the rainbow flag now stands for after all

To make my opinion clear, I think players should have the right not to take the knee or wear a rainbow armband if they feel so strongly against it. I wouldn't want to go back to a world where it was almost compulsory to stand up during God Save The King. As long as it's not hate speech (which I know is difficult to define exactly), people should be free to say or not say what they wish.

I also agree that these gestures can quickly become empty and merely performative. They can also make people feel good about themselves, but probably don't change the world much. They can become an alternative to action.

All that being said, someone's refusal to take the knee or wear the armband is also a clear political gesture, and they can't pretend that it isn't. They are sending a message, just as much as the person wearing a rainbow armband is sending a message.

As someone who would happily wear a rainbow armband, I think you should also recognise that there is a lot of discussion within the movements that you seem to think are totally monolithic.

 

Edited December 12, 2023 by canarybubbles