True. It isn't, fundamentally. It's just common sense and decency. But it becomes one when someone tries to prevent people from being treated decently and without prejudice.
LGBT issues in Football
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
You only have to Google 'football prostitute chant' and see there have also been chants towards players who have been caught with female prostitutes...
This, I actually agree with. At the time, there most likely would've been derogatory chants... but you can be sure as hell that anything like that today would be sung by only a few backwards individuals, and everyone else would come down on them like a ton of bricks, thankfully.
Of course it does. Like pretty much everything else these days. People looking for homophobia, sexism, racism in places where it doesn't exist. Things that were fine just 5 years ago, suddenly having a different meaning placed on them. I felt the same about the Lukaku chant... that was pathetic too. No mention of the guys' skin colour whatsoever, and yet people automatically assumed it had a racist meaning (which makes me question, who really are the racist ones?) Could it not simply have just been because the guy was a tank? I somehow don't seem to remember 'big dick' chants for players like Defoe, Wright-Phillips etc
I wonder why. 
Typical kind of response... almost surprised you didn't call me a "snowflake". You guys seem to love turning that one back around on us, even though it was invented for you.
You know what I meant... I couldn't care less about the responses I get... it won't change my opinion. I obviously DO care about people trying to control what other people say/think/do, and trying to get them punished when they won't comply. That's called fascism. Having different opinions is great, it'd be boring if we all thought the same, just don't try and force those views on others... that's where my problem lies.
Snowflake was invented for me? Well, that's an honour, but what am I supposedly offended about here?Typical kind of response... almost surprised you didn't call me a "snowflake". You guys seem to love turning that one back around on us, even though it was invented for you.
You know what I meant... I couldn't care less about the responses I get... it won't change my opinion. I obviously DO care about people trying to control what other people say/think/do, and trying to get them punished when they won't comply. That's called fascism. Having different opinions is great, it'd be boring if we all thought the same, just don't try and force those views on others... that's where my problem lies.
I just poked at a line in your post, and you've gone straight back on the ultra-defensive, at a post that didn't even challenge your view.
We’ve got a live one here.You only have to Google 'football prostitute chant' and see there have also been chants towards players who have been caught with female prostitutes...
This, I actually agree with. At the time, there most likely would've been derogatory chants... but you can be sure as hell that anything like that today would be sung by only a few backwards individuals, and everyone else would come down on them like a ton of bricks, thankfully.
Of course it does. Like pretty much everything else these days. People looking for homophobia, sexism, racism in places where it doesn't exist. Things that were fine just 5 years ago, suddenly having a different meaning placed on them. I felt the same about the Lukaku chant... that was pathetic too. No mention of the guys' skin colour whatsoever, and yet people automatically assumed it had a racist meaning (which makes me question, who really are the racist ones?) Could it not simply have just been because the guy was a tank? I somehow don't seem to remember 'big dick' chants for players like Defoe, Wright-Phillips etc
I did always wonder what the rent boy thing was about in specific reference to Chelsea. Like if it was about them being plastics City would be getting called that too.
whatever the origin of the chant it's definitely intended by fans today as a homophobic slur, and it has been ever since I became aware of it probably a couple of decades ago nowI'm sure I'll be warned, or probably banned (not that it'll make any difference to my opinion), for daring to go against the grain on what is clearly a very woke forum... but the song is NOT homophobic... it is clear to anyone with a brain (i.e. someone who can think for themselves and not just follow the media/Twitter on whatever they have decided the latest topic of "outrage" is) that the target of the joke is male prostitutes... not gay men themselves. If the Chelsea hooligan had been caught lying in bed with a man who was simply his partner, then that wouldn't be funny, and any mocking of that would be downright homophobic, sure... but it is do with the "prostitute" aspect of it. I don't get why this is so difficult for many of you to understand. Of course, in 2023, I don't expect anyone who already has the opposite view to me on this to change. However, I accept that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and if people choose to look at it a different way and therefore be offended by it, that is their right, but it doesn't mean that everyone that is offended has the right to try and force everyone to abide by their views, and try to get people banned from a stadium for singing a harmless song. Why must we always pander to these people? Being offended, doesn't always mean, you're RIGHT.
I'm sure I'll get the usual responses that I see on here such as "Wow... I have no words", whenever somebody in the minority DARES to state their alternate views (shock! horror!) but hey, I honestly couldn't care less.
The CPS say it's homophobic, the clubs say it's homophobic, gay pressure groups say it's homophobic and the official LGBT Man United supporters club say it's homophobic and have asked for it to stop.
@reuben290 genuine question, what makes you so certain that it isn't when so many gay people say it is?
Feel free to call me a Chelsea gigolo by the way if you want to take the homosexual aspect away and not have everyone think you're a bigot.
@reuben290 genuine question, what makes you so certain that it isn't when so many gay people say it is?
Feel free to call me a Chelsea gigolo by the way if you want to take the homosexual aspect away and not have everyone think you're a bigot.
Christ I am dying here.I can see your point that prostitution is certainly part of what's being mocked here. But homosexuality is undoubtedly also being mocked to at least an equal degree. I've been criticized recently on this forum for holding views that I imagine you also hold (concern re: levels of social control and their apparent acceptability today, for example)...but there's no reasonable way to argue that mocking homosexuality is not a significant component of the rentboy chant.I'm sure I'll be warned, or probably banned (not that it'll make any difference to my opinion), for daring to go against the grain on what is clearly a very woke forum... but the song is NOT homophobic... it is clear to anyone with a brain (i.e. someone who can think for themselves and not just follow the media/Twitter on whatever they have decided the latest topic of "outrage" is) that the target of the joke is male prostitutes... not gay men themselves. If the Chelsea hooligan had been caught lying in bed with a man who was simply his partner, then that wouldn't be funny, and any mocking of that would be downright homophobic, sure... but it is do with the "prostitute" aspect of it. I don't get why this is so difficult for many of you to understand. Of course, in 2023, I don't expect anyone who already has the opposite view to me on this to change. However, I accept that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and if people choose to look at it a different way and therefore be offended by it, that is their right, but it doesn't mean that everyone that is offended has the right to try and force everyone to abide by their views, and try to get people banned from a stadium for singing a harmless song. Why must we always pander to these people? Being offended, doesn't always mean, you're RIGHT.
I'm sure I'll get the usual responses that I see on here such as "Wow... I have no words", whenever somebody in the minority DARES to state their alternate views (shock! horror!
Hilarious that anyone thinks homophobia can be divorced from a ‘rent boy’ chant.
You make a lot of valid points, ultimately folks should not need to be told by government and the FA to act decently it should be a simple case self discipline and taking personal responsibility. Opposing and contrasting views on all issues are great to see here, so long as we can all stay civil.You only have to Google 'football prostitute chant' and see there have also been chants towards players who have been caught with female prostitutes...
This, I actually agree with. At the time, there most likely would've been derogatory chants... but you can be sure as hell that anything like that today would be sung by only a few backwards individuals, and everyone else would come down on them like a ton of bricks, thankfully.
Of course it does. Like pretty much everything else these days. People looking for homophobia, sexism, racism in places where it doesn't exist. Things that were fine just 5 years ago, suddenly having a different meaning placed on them. I felt the same about the Lukaku chant... that was pathetic too. No mention of the guys' skin colour whatsoever, and yet people automatically assumed it had a racist meaning (which makes me question, who really are the racist ones?) Could it not simply have just been because the guy was a tank? I somehow don't seem to remember 'big dick' chants for players like Defoe, Wright-Phillips etc
Gigolo always sounded complimentary
@reuben290 Might have to think again when you next want to sing it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64241443
FA can now charge clubs over homophobic chant usually aimed at Chelsea players and fans
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64241443
FA can now charge clubs over homophobic chant usually aimed at Chelsea players and fans
I'm in the camp that doesn't really feel it's homophobic but it's important to remember that if a good few other people find it so, then it might as well be. I'm no worse of for not singing it or writing it tbh. There's plenty of other funny things to say about Chelsea.
I think its down to gay folk to decide if its homophobic or not and they clearly say it is, I mean that should be the end of the matter. They are the people who suffer homophobia so I imagine they know was is and isn't better than us straight folk. It clearly is and needs to be stamped out.
Exactly where I am at as well.
When LGBT groups are telling you that it is homophobic and it is offensive maybe you should listen to them.I'm sure I'll be warned, or probably banned (not that it'll make any difference to my opinion), for daring to go against the grain on what is clearly a very woke forum... but the song is NOT homophobic... it is clear to anyone with a brain (i.e. someone who can think for themselves and not just follow the media/Twitter on whatever they have decided the latest topic of "outrage" is) that the target of the joke is male prostitutes... not gay men themselves. If the Chelsea hooligan had been caught lying in bed with a man who was simply his partner, then that wouldn't be funny, and any mocking of that would be downright homophobic, sure... but it is do with the "prostitute" aspect of it. I don't get why this is so difficult for many of you to understand. Of course, in 2023, I don't expect anyone who already has the opposite view to me on this to change. However, I accept that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and if people choose to look at it a different way and therefore be offended by it, that is their right, but it doesn't mean that everyone that is offended has the right to try and force everyone to abide by their views, and try to get people banned from a stadium for singing a harmless song. Why must we always pander to these people? Being offended, doesn't always mean, you're RIGHT.
I'm sure I'll get the usual responses that I see on here such as "Wow... I have no words", whenever somebody in the minority DARES to state their alternate views (shock! horror!
Good news.
Yeah that stuff needed to be eradicated. It happens with every fanbase but it's unacceptable, especially in 2022.
Indeed you have!Christ I am dying here.
These are the exact types of comments I was expecting... although I've been pleasantly surprised to find that most people seem to be willing to discuss the topic at hand... even if they disagree with me! 
Nope, completely disagree with this in fact... these types of Twitter groups (I'm not talking about LGBT people in general before anyone starts) usually deliberately LOOK for things to get outraged by... or refuse to believe that anything can have a different meaning to the one they have interpreted it as. I genuinely believe sometimes they get some kind of kick out of it. For some reason, Twitter has become a cesspit for extremism, and I'm very much including right-wing extremism in that. i avoid Twitter like the plague and always have... that goes for most social media in fact but Twitter is the worst no doubt.
Let me put it another way, if you were having a heated online argument with a black guy, over something COMPLETELY unrelated to skin colour/racism etc etc... and he called you a racist for disagreeing with him, you would say that guy is clearly someone using the race card... right? But using your logic, would that be right? After all, that guy is black, he should know what racism is.
I'll repeat what I said in an above post... people have the right to be offended if they want to be, but it doesn't make them RIGHT.
You're making absolutely no sense. I never mentioned Twitter, CPS disagrees with you and your point about the fictitious black guy is irrelevant and idiotic.Indeed you have!
Nope, completely disagree with this in fact... these types of Twitter groups (I'm not talking about LGBT people in general before anyone starts) usually deliberately LOOK for things to get outraged by... or refuse to believe that anything can have a different meaning to the one they have interpreted it as. I genuinely believe sometimes they get some kind of kick out of it. For some reason, Twitter has become a cesspit for extremism, and I'm very much including right-wing extremism in that. i avoid Twitter like the plague and always have... that goes for most social media in fact but Twitter is the worst no doubt.
Let me put it another way, if you were having a heated online argument with a black guy, over something COMPLETELY unrelated to skin colour/racism etc etc... and he called you a racist for disagreeing with him, you would say that guy is clearly someone using the race card... right? But using your logic, would that be right? After all, that guy is black, he should know what racism is.
I'll repeat what I said in an above post... people have the right to be offended if they want to be, but it doesn't make them RIGHT.
Quit while you're ahead is my advice.Indeed you have!
Nope, completely disagree with this in fact... these types of Twitter groups (I'm not talking about LGBT people in general before anyone starts) usually deliberately LOOK for things to get outraged by... or refuse to believe that anything can have a different meaning to the one they have interpreted it as. I genuinely believe sometimes they get some kind of kick out of it. For some reason, Twitter has become a cesspit for extremism, and I'm very much including right-wing extremism in that. i avoid Twitter like the plague and always have... that goes for most social media in fact but Twitter is the worst no doubt.
Let me put it another way, if you were having a heated online argument with a black guy, over something COMPLETELY unrelated to skin colour/racism etc etc... and he called you a racist for disagreeing with him, you would say that guy is clearly someone using the race card... right? But using your logic, would that be right? After all, that guy is black, he should know what racism is.
I'll repeat what I said in an above post... people have the right to be offended if they want to be, but it doesn't make them RIGHT.
I wonder what they'd make of the Elton John and Posh Spice chants these days!
You actually believe the ‘rent boy’ chant is not homophobic?Indeed you have!
Nope, completely disagree with this in fact... these types of Twitter groups (I'm not talking about LGBT people in general before anyone starts) usually deliberately LOOK for things to get outraged by... or refuse to believe that anything can have a different meaning to the one they have interpreted it as. I genuinely believe sometimes they get some kind of kick out of it. For some reason, Twitter has become a cesspit for extremism, and I'm very much including right-wing extremism in that. i avoid Twitter like the plague and always have... that goes for most social media in fact but Twitter is the worst no doubt.
Let me put it another way, if you were having a heated online argument with a black guy, over something COMPLETELY unrelated to skin colour/racism etc etc... and he called you a racist for disagreeing with him, you would say that guy is clearly someone using the race card... right? But using your logic, would that be right? After all, that guy is black, he should know what racism is.
I'll repeat what I said in an above post... people have the right to be offended if they want to be, but it doesn't make them RIGHT.
Not sure I’d define them as ahead.
I’m sure you would like that. And by the way, that’s not advice. That’s you bunging your fingers in your ears going La-la-la because you can’t handle an alternate opinion that doesn’t fit the narrative. But I’ve always stood by my opinions and always will… that’s not to say I can’t ever change my opinions, I have many times but I do that when I want to, not other people.
Worth reading it's apparent origin https://www.quora.com/Why-are-Chelsea-fans-sometimes-called-as-Rentboys
So homophobic & plastic. Interesting.
Knowing the 80's it was probably more to do with the prostitute angle, the male bit would have been a bonus
I remember Shilton and the Cor-tina - that went on for years but that was some bird he'd been caught with
No way it’s the prostitution first, the real ‘zinger’ is the homosexuality. No way around that in my eyes.
How is it though? I don’t want to drag this thread off-topic at all, but there have been plenty of instances where people have actually used the colour of their skin, their sexual orientation etc to try and deflect from something… by accusing that person of prejudice in some way. Everyone knows that this does happen from time to time… the point I’m trying to make is, just because a certain group says something is offensive… doesn’t mean what theyre saying is correct. What if other gay people were to come on here, and say they don’t find the chant offensive? Then what? Who do you listen to?
And wrong. The chant was around in the mid 1960s. I know because I had to ask a grown up what a rent boy was.
Fair enough, I wasn't around then, I remember it in the 80's but we just sang stuff and probably didn't think about how/what it was
In those days, young male prostitutes were to be found in numbers on the Kings Road. There was a really good gay pub up at the Sloane Square end of the street where the rich guys on the make would go to pick up a boy. It was called the Queens Head, much to the amusement of the clientele. I'm straight but knew a lot of gay mates from the theatre and went out with them now and again.
You are completely ignoring the actual negative stereotypes/tropes that are associated with the language in question.Indeed you have!
Nope, completely disagree with this in fact... these types of Twitter groups (I'm not talking about LGBT people in general before anyone starts) usually deliberately LOOK for things to get outraged by... or refuse to believe that anything can have a different meaning to the one they have interpreted it as. I genuinely believe sometimes they get some kind of kick out of it. For some reason, Twitter has become a cesspit for extremism, and I'm very much including right-wing extremism in that. i avoid Twitter like the plague and always have... that goes for most social media in fact but Twitter is the worst no doubt.
Let me put it another way, if you were having a heated online argument with a black guy, over something COMPLETELY unrelated to skin colour/racism etc etc... and he called you a racist for disagreeing with him, you would say that guy is clearly someone using the race card... right? But using your logic, would that be right? After all, that guy is black, he should know what racism is.
I'll repeat what I said in an above post... people have the right to be offended if they want to be, but it doesn't make them RIGHT.
Your argument is quite childish to be honest and boils down to "just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right". Care to actually address actually why it's being used as an insult in the first place?
I imagine you have the same sort of view on Lukaku's and Amad's chant being shut down.
I think what's quite depressing about your responses is you're not even looking for a discussion, you've made up you're mind where you stand and we're the wokerati trying to bring about Orwellian speech control in football grounds.
And here's be thinking I'd meet posh birds down Sloane Square!
You would. I pulled some really cracking birds in the Queens, mostly theatre types or those that liked theatre type.The really posh ones could be found in the Australian or the Admiral Codrington.
I'm kinda past that now, my wife would kill me for a start and it's a bit far to go anyways!
Oh for sure. I'm talking ancient history here. 1973 - 77.