Football Chanting Bill

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:36 am

Proposal to make any chanting or signs regarding sexuality to be made illegal. Should the same be done to ban chants about weight/ obesity, baldness and calling the ref 'blind' ? The latter is of course discrimination regarding disability.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:47 am

Have Brighton been complaining again?

Im_not_Robbie_Blake · Post by **Im_not_Robbie_Blake** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:54 am

I knew Football Chanting Bill when he was plain old Football Chanting William

PaintYorkClaretnBlue · Post by **PaintYorkClaretnBlue** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:17 am

Blackrod wrote:Proposal to make any chanting or signs regarding sexuality to be made illegal. Should the same be done to ban chants about weight/ obesity, baldness and calling the ref 'blind' ? The latter is of course discrimination regarding disability.

That sort of stuff is already covered under the public order act, I don’t see the need for a specific new bill!

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:19 am

No point passing laws that cannot be enforced, would be even worse if the club was fined and not those chanting.
Imagine what you would need to do to prosecute 10,000 spectators with chants about the refs dubious parentage, or his follocle challeneged head

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:22 am

No point passing laws that cannot be enforced, would be even worse if the club was fined and not those chanting.
Imagine what you would need to do to prosecute 10,000 spectators with chants about the refs dubious parentage, or his follicle challenged head

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:15 am

The next law to be passed in this country will be a law against criticising political correctness. We will then have gone full circle and the monster really will be eating itself.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:16 am

Mexican Football Ferderation have been fined £7,615 on account of their fans' chanting. Why is certain discrimination seen as acceptable and other discrimination not ?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:21 am

Blackrod wrote:Mexican Football Ferderation have been fined £7,615 on account of their fans' chanting. Why is certain discrimination seen as acceptable and other discrimination not ?

How are fat/bald people discriminated against (to use your examples)?

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:27 am

Here they come ....
Intolerance, narrow mindedness and unfairness of different or even minority groups of people. For example shouting obscenities about weight to players and officials could upset others with weight issues cause mental issues and loss of stigma. I shouldn't really need to spell this out to you.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:31 am

Blackrod wrote:Here they come ....
Intolerance, narrow mindedness and unfairness of different or even minority groups of people. For example shouting obscenities about weight to players and officials could upset others with weight issues cause mental issues and loss of stigma. I shouldn't really need to spell this out to you.

So how have fat/bald people been discriminated against then? Oh, and what is ‘loss of stigma’?

JohnMac · Post by **JohnMac** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:31 am

'I'm Bald
I'm Fat
But I love my Cat

Johnny Mac
Johnny Mac'

Dy1geo · Post by **Dy1geo** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:34 am

If songs are sung that make reference to certain sexual orientations are made criminal then that is by its very nature stating that that sexual orientation is different. Surely the aim of equality is to make sexual orientation equal and if people didn’t take make an issue the said chants would quickly stop.
A person who who takes prides in his/her sexual orientation must have issues with it if they feel chants against their sexual orientation needs criminalising

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:37 am

Dy1geo wrote:If songs are sung that make reference to certain sexual orientations are made criminal then that is by its very nature stating that that sexual orientation is different. Surely the aim of equality is to make sexual orientation equal and if people didn’t take make an issue the said chants would quickly stop.

Yes, that’s certainly worked a treat up until now!

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:41 am

Blackrod wrote:Here they come ....
Intolerance, narrow mindedness and unfairness of different or even minority groups of people. For example shouting obscenities about weight to players and officials could upset others with weight issues cause mental issues and loss of stigma. I shouldn't really need to spell this out to you.

You make a good point. If the chanting youre doing is sufficiently personal, as to potentially cause mental health issues, you probably shouldn't be doing it and you should probablybe pretty ashamed of crossing that line.

Homophobic chanting, like racist chanting, is simply unacceptable in this day and age. Whether there's specific legislation about it or not.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:48 am

Quite clearly football chants are warring and it is a form of tribal war and that is the sport and the sport of exhanging insults is fair play, so if I chant 'You black b******d' is not being racist per se, but attacking that player's disquiet about any issues they may have. There is no intrinsic insult to saying you white black yellow or sex this that or the other, if that is the case of the being insulted's human condition.

One is entitled to a bit of gamesmanship in attempting to put the opposition off, for example gurning behind the goal when a player takes a penalty.

This 'foootball chanting bill' is just another attempt to de-balls the Englishman and if they can get a homosexual to do it, the more kicks for those in power.

if there were viking warships nowadays, they wouldn't have a fierce monster on their sails to scare the natives but a picture of a little girl's face or a smiling baby image to cause disquiet and moral discomfort at the critical moment of battle.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:52 am

Pstotto wrote:Quite clearly football chants are warring and it is a form of tribal war and that is the sport and the sport of exhanging insults is fair play, so if I chant 'You black b******d' is not being racist per se, but attacking that player's disquiet about any issues they may have. There is no intrinsic insult to saying you white black yellow or sex this that or the other, if that is the case of the being insulted's human condition.

One is entitled to a bit of gamesmanship in attempting to put the opposition off, for example gurning behind the goal when a player takes a penalty.

This 'foootball chanting bill' is just another attempt to de-balls the Englishman and if they can get a homosexual to do it, the more kicks for those in power.

if there were viking warships nowadays, they wouldn't have a fierce monster on their sails to scare the natives but a picture of a little girl's face or a smiling baby image to cause disquiet and moral discomfort at the critical moment of battle.

Football is not a form of war. It is a sport. It hss nothing in common with Vikings who fought grisly battles over 12 hundred years ago.

Given these misapprehensions, its probably no surprise its idiotic to beyond parody.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:55 am

martin_p wrote:So how have fat/bald people been discriminated against then? Oh, and what is ‘loss of stigma’?

1. I suggest you get a dictionary.
2. It appears you have historically made mockery of certain groups of people yet when it comes to to anything sexual you get very prickly.

fatboy47 · Post by **fatboy47** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:57 am

The ability to define the homophobic chant may prove a stumbling block.

For instance...going back to the 70's ...would ""You can stick yer Blackpool Tower up yer a*se"" be seen as such in that it clearly refers to an act with homosexual connotations...

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:00 pm

Blackrod wrote:1. I suggest you get a dictionary.
2. It appears you have historically made mockery of certain groups of people yet when it comes to to anything sexual you get very prickly.

1. I know what the words mean, just not in the context you’ve used them.
2. You haven’t managed to tell me yet how fat/bald people have been discriminated against.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:14 pm

Claretspice would have sent Bruce Grobbelaar off then at the 1984 European Cup final for putting off the opposition???????

'Racist etc' chanting is gamesmanship, the 'politically correct movement' is every bit as much gamesmanship as racist chanting.

The ruling powers are involved in a divide-and-rule game of the politics of mass distraction USING 'political correctness' to pre-emptively attack all of us because we all need correction, before anyone has even done anything. it is the state tactic of the bully.

The issues of race, gender, sexuality, religion are media created to bash the populace and with the fail-safe condtion that if you don't like it then you are not against the media political battering but against those folks of that ilk that they use to batter the rest of the population with.

ALL THE DISCUSSIONS about these issues, fall into the hands of the political mandate of divide and rule.

They have deliberately brought in third world religions etc. and folk to dismay and to destroy the notion of a developed country, becasue then the illuminati whatever, would have to deal with a populace of equal parity.

if there were equal parity then the politicians could not then bang the drum of equal opportunities. Buddhism and seeking Enlightenment falls into this category, because it's never-ending in its political subjugation as a model of political rule. That is why it is now being embraced in the West, for its POLITICAL CLEVERNESS.

bumba · Post by **bumba** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:21 pm

martin_p wrote:1. I know what the words mean, just not in the context you’ve used them.
2. You haven’t managed to tell me yet how fat/bald people have been discriminated against.

'you fat ba***rd' is a common song sung at football iit not offensive like it is singing about a persons sexuality?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:29 pm

bumba wrote:'you fat ba***rd' is a common song sung at football iit not offensive like it is singing about a persons sexuality?

You don’t think being fat is an issue in an athletic sport, much the same as lack of talent?

Come back when being fat is illegal in many parts of the world and when our own churches are allowed to say that fat people cant get married there.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 1:21 pm

Is it just me or is this forum increasingly populated by cavemen?

Spiral · Post by **Spiral** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 2:09 pm

Bacchus wrote:Is it just me or is this forum increasingly populated by cavemen?

I've sometimes thought that but if you do a quick mental clock of someone's username when reading stuff you'll begin to see it's actually just seven or eight very opinionated, very prolific posters. There are certain topics you can virtually guarantee are going to be started by about one of three posters. If it's to do with sexuality/gender, for instance, it's almost certainly going to be a Blackrod post.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 2:13 pm

Blackrod wrote:Here they come ....
Intolerance, narrow mindedness and unfairness of different or even minority groups of people. For example shouting obscenities about weight to players and officials could upset others with weight issues cause mental issues and loss of stigma. I shouldn't really need to spell this out to you.

Most (not all) overweight people are overweight due to greed. It might get them to look at themselves and make a difference. 90% or so of fat people don't need to be they choose to be. No sympathy.

bumba · Post by **bumba** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 2:25 pm

martin_p wrote:You don’t think being fat is an issue in an athletic sport, much the same as lack of talent?

Come back when being fat is illegal in many parts of the world and when our own churches are allowed to say that fat people cant get married there.

How many churches are there at Turf Moor stadium?
Take it up with the churches stop bringing it in too football.
If fans sing it to a player or a set of opposing fans its banter an should be taken in good spirit's its not specifically aimed at a person who's sexuality is known is it?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 2:36 pm

bumba wrote:How many churches are there at Turf Moor stadium?
Take it up with the churches stop bringing it in too football.
If fans sing it to a player or a set of opposing fans its banter an should be taken in good spirit's its not specifically aimed at a person who's sexuality is known is it?

Jeez you’re thick!

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:27 pm

fatboy47 wrote:The ability to define the homophobic chant may prove a stumbling block.

For instance...going back to the 70's ...would ""You can stick yer Blackpool Tower up yer a*se"" be seen as such in that it clearly refers to an act with homosexual connotations...

Or a reference to Vlad the Impaler, known to his mates as Vlad the Lad.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:29 pm

Spiral wrote:I've sometimes thought that but if you do a quick mental clock of someone's username when reading stuff you'll begin to see it's actually just seven or eight very opinionated, very prolific posters. There are certain topics you can virtually guarantee are going to be started by about one of three posters. If it's to do with sexuality/gender, for instance, it's almost certainly going to be a Blackrod post.

Blackrod - now that's a name with sexual overtones (wink wink nudge nudge).

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:32 pm

I'll tell you who is thick... Claretspice. You write something about the art of gamesmanship and then he completely misses the point of the post, regarding Vikings particularly.

If his 'missing of the point' is gamesmanship then he has chosen ignorance as his master.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:37 pm

Bacchus wrote:Is it just me or is this forum increasingly populated by cavemen?

Not Cavemen, just folk who compare themselves and the way they want to behave at a football match to people from the Dark Ages, such as Vikings.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:37 pm

martin_p wrote:Jeez you’re thick!

Just an observation: why do people actually write them word 'jeez' when it is just a lazy Americanism meaning Jesus? Write Jesus or FFS or whatever.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:40 pm

Pstotto wrote:I'll tell you who is thick... Claretspice. You write something about the art of gamesmanship and then he completely misses the point of the post, regarding Vikings particularly.

If his 'missing of the point' is gamesmanship then he has chosen ignorance as his master.

Abusing people based on slurs that ceased to be socially acceptable a generation ago isn't gamesmanship, and it cannot be compared to "putting off the opposition".

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:41 pm

Bacchus wrote:Is it just me or is this forum increasingly populated by cavemen?

It's just you. A caveman, by definition, wouldn't be able to use a computer or mobile device. They were handy with a club though, so watch your back.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:41 pm

Even more of a prat you've made of yourself now, claretspice. if you go back to the sentence I wrote about Vikings it was about gamesmanship and the idea of what would now be used to cause any wavering at the critical moment of battle and yes, football is a battle.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:45 pm

claretspice wrote:Abusing people based on slurs that ceased to be socially acceptable a generation ago isn't gamesmanship, and it cannot be compared to "putting off the opposition".

Ahh brilliant. That's what I like, someone using the term 'acceptable'.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:52 pm

Pstotto wrote:Even more of a prat you've made of yourself now, claretspice. if you go back to the sentence I wrote about Vikings it was about gamesmanship and the idea of what would now be used to cause any wavering at the critical moment of battle and yes, football is a battle.

You've got a splendid sense of perspective.

Anyway, I'll leave you to this thread now.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 4:16 pm

Blackrod wrote:Proposal to make any chanting or signs regarding sexuality to be made illegal. Should the same be done to ban chants about calling the ref 'blind' ? The latter is of course discrimination regarding disability.

Hang about....referees....just factual chants!
Blind. Steamed up glasses. Minus father. Major self fulfilment habit etc

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Jun 25, 2018 4:33 pm

fatboy47 wrote:The ability to define the homophobic chant may prove a stumbling block.

For instance...going back to the 70's ...would ""You can stick yer Blackpool Tower up yer a*se"" be seen as such in that it clearly refers to an act with homosexual connotations...

I'd wager there is more anal sex goes on in this country between straight people than there is between gay people.

Spike · Post by **Spike** » Tue Jun 26, 2018 1:22 am

Bring Back Banter Bill is what the supporters clubs should be pushing for

The Knobbers unhealthy obsession with incest needs sorting