So, the other thread was rather annoying to me, as it basically consisted of a large number of straight people saying how homophobia wasn't a problem.

The statement 'I have the right not to be offended by homophobic abuse' coming out of the mouth of a straight person is meaningless. Of course you have the right to not be offended - why would you be? Just as a white person wouldn't be offended by the use of the N word towards them, just as men are not offended by misogyny, so straight people are not hurt by homophobia.

Sexism, Racism, Homophobia, Transphobia & Ableism are all vile. They seek to take a characteristic of one person and use that against them, to isolate them from everyone else by flagging up one part of them that is seen as 'unnatural', 'wrong' or somehow to be valued less. This only works because society is built on a set of unquestioned assumptions about how people are, and how they behave.

It's for that reason we can's just ignore it. 'Can't we all just get along and not care' is a way of excusing the priveliged position some people find themselves in. If we don't talk about sexuality, people will consistently assume that I'm straight. My sexual identity becomes something I have to hide or conserve because nobody questions the assumptions held by the vast majority of society.

I understand that for many people this seems like a fuss over nothing, and that Zak's use of 'F****t' wasn't a problem. Please take some time to appreciate how well off you are, that abuse like that isn't directed at you, explicitly and implicitly, on a daily basis. That your sexuality is considered the norm in society, that no-one will abuse you in the street simply for holding your partners hand.

The video below is about race & gender, but the point it makes is equally applicable to the problem of straight privelige and heteronormativity we see in society today.

[urlhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgaOK74HqiA[/url

[uPrivilege is invisible to those who have it. [/u

OK.

Oh great, another thread.

Good job on posting this. Though i would slightly dispute the idea that white people aren't 'offended' by racism and men aren't 'offended' by misogyny. I am a white man and get offended by both when i hear them. I assume you mean more 'are not personally impacted by...'

But all this 'played like a girl' / 'don't be a woman about it' stuff that is said in sports and a lot on here on the other thread is just as bad as it is implying that it is unacceptable to display such qualities.

The job i do, 86% of its members are female and if i said on here what the job was, i suspect a decent sample would say things like 'get a proper job', or 'that's not a man's job' or those sorts of things.

It is essentially insecure members of a 'ruling majority' (whether that be white vs ethnic minorities, hetero vs homosexual, able bodied vs not) feeling threatened in some way about their own deficiencies so then try and belittle those in a smaller group to make them feel better about themselves.

Well said.

good post, agree with a lot of it.

Well said.

Brilliant post. Well said.

How do you the people on their were straight? Did everyone announce their sexuality when posting?

Who actually said homophobia isn't a problem? No one I can recall, a big difference between one RL incident and the whole world wide issue of homophobia?

Or does not thinking one particular incident is as big an issue as others have made out make me or others homophobic? Before you answer that I'll note that on the various threads on this subject just one poster have announced himself as bisexual. He admitted that whilst he would be offended if someone called him a faggot, the Hardaker incident didn't bother him at all. Does this make this openly bisexual man a homophobe?



I certainly didn't say "I have the right to not be offended by homophobic abuse." I did however say "I have the right to feel however I want about the situation."

Big difference to the way your trying to present myself and others who aren't up in arms about the incident as ignorant homophobes. Trying to label as such based on what's been written on these threads without knowing anything else about me or who I know in my personal life......what does that make you? Ignorance does seem an appropriate word indeed.



I agree, they are vile. That's why I'm offended and disgusted by many incidents of homophobia and the other others listed above. But because I don't think a RL player calling another RL player a faggot in the heat of the moment is worthy of such IMO OTT reactions does this make me a bad person? If it does then so is the bisexual man I mentioned above surely.



You started your post off by assuming everyone was straight? "Privileged position".....I don't consider myself being straight as a privilege, nor someone being gay as not being "privileged" so I find that comment ridiculous.



I admit Hardaker using that word was a problem, I think most have. It's the varying levels that seem to be the issue. For some it's a massive problem, others a minor problem. And that's not because we are "homophobic" or just don't care. That you point out, a gay man can be abused in the street for holding his partners hand (some countries jailed). Some people are against gay marriage and allowing gay couple to adopt. Gay people may be overlooked for jobs/promotions due to their sexuality. Gay people may be physical attacked because of their sexuality. All the above I hate and find to be the real ones to worry about, the ones that stop them living their lives with the freedom everyone is entitled to.....a RL player calling another a fag I view in the grand schemes of things to be not that big a deal.

of course you don't. You have never known anything but that privilege. You have never been a Gay man subjected to homophobic abuse, you have never been a gay child working things out whilst their peers use Gay to describe anything and everything a bit rubbish, you have never sat there whilst other casually used those words as if they were no big deal to dismiss you and probably the people you love. Yet you feel able to dismiss concerns as no big deal, reactions as OTT, to question whether children asked how they felt actually felt that way or if they were just trying to make a splash.

That is your privilege.

But it's not, is it?

When Zak chose to use the F word, what he decided was that he could substitute 'gay' for 'bad'. That, in a nutshell, is the essence of homophobia that needs to be countered.

Words matter - they are the means through which interact with other people, that we understand our society and at the end of the day, ourselves. The turning of being other than heterosexual into something people should be upset about is incredibly damaging, both to the non-straight people who have to live in that society, and to the kids who haven't yet realised their own sexuality.

That's why the use of any homophobic term (and yes, it's homophobic even if Zak himself isn't a homophobe) needs to be stamped out. I understand that 'it was in the heat of the moment' and that, all things considered Zak didn't mean it and regrets the choice of words.

I also don't think that's an excuse. It should [unever[/u be acceptable to abuse people on grounds of their sexuality, even if it's become a habit and even in stressful situations.

Consider, for instance, that someone called Bailey the N word during a match. Even if he apologised, said he knew it was wrong and convinced us he wasn't a racist, we wouldn't think it was ok, or that he shouldn't be punished for it.

We also (and I think this goes for other teams fans too) would completely forgive Bailey for beating the living daylights out of him.

So it doesn't matter what the situation was, the fact he used those words is enough. And though Zak using that word is less bad than many problems LGBTQ people face globally, [uthat is also not an excuse for the RFL, and the entire Rugby League family, not to act.[/u

I'm a Leeds Rhinos fan. I think Zak Hardaker isn't a homophobe, he's someone who made a mistake and now regrets it. I think him being banned would be bad for Leeds' chances of doing well this season, meaning I'm likely to spend money watching us get beat.

But I think the RFL should throw the book at him.

i agree with everything you put before. But i would question again whether 'punishment' is the best option. I would much rather see some positive engagement and education.

'Punishment' sometimes draws battle lines which are best avoided.