1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

England Players Ditch "OneLove" Armband, Supporters' Association Criticizes Qatar

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by Debater Slayer, Nov 23, 2022.

  1. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    222,846
    Ratings:
    +87,530
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I see a couple different kinds of hostility.
    A) Hostile protest, eg, abusive insults,
    threats, arson, assault.
    B) Mere reaction to civil criticism.

    Type B is acceptable (IMO).
    Of course, one should always consider
    expressing criticism in a manner most
    likely to be productive.
    I see this specifically as your "perspective",
    not an argument you've made.
    Qatar is a country seeking more presence
    in the western world. I see this feedback as
    effective pressure for them to change.
    Do armbands & kneeling actually violate Qatar's laws?
    (This would point to it being the wrong venue for such
    an event in the 1st place.) If so, the boundaries of such
    laws against expression are worth pushing against.
    Some protests were in concert.
    Others weren't, eg, kneeling.
    I never thought your words would affect them.
    "Abuse" simply addresses unfair (IMO) criticism.
    I don't know what effect the protests would have.
    But Qatar is seeking international exposure &
    approval, so protests by people from other countries
    might have a positive effect.
    We aren't inspired to weigh in on every injustice in
    our own & every other country. If this is hypocrisy,
    then we're all hypocritical, & perhaps should remain
    silent on all issues, eh. Nah.
    People will protest when the spirit moves them.
    This is good.
     
    #61 Revoltingest, Nov 24, 2022
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Koldo

    Koldo Incredible Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    13,004
    Ratings:
    +2,623
    We are discussing whether any alternative would have been better. Aren't we? In two senses of the term, either because it could bring about more positive changes or because it would bring about equal changes with a less antagonizing message.

    Since there is no evidence that your alternatives would bring about more positive changes, and since bigots are always going to be selective about what antagonizes them (even when there is no intention to antagonize them themselves per se)... I see no merit in your alternatives, as in I see no bigger benefit in them.
     
    #62 Koldo, Nov 24, 2022
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2022
  3. Debater Slayer

    Debater Slayer Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    25,346
    Ratings:
    +27,242
    I think the alternatives I listed are better in the sense that they are less likely to draw as much widespread hostility and outrage. The actors I mentioned are two examples of this, although I recognize that both of us lack rigorous studies or other similarly systematic evidence to cite in this discussion.

    I think we're looking at this from very different angles, though. Your argument seems to suggest that provoking the outrage resulting from bigotry doesn't matter, and I think it also doesn't sufficiently address the multitude of socioeconomic and political factors that give rise to bigotry and enable it in the first place.

    As far as I can see, looking at societies and cultures in a more comprehensive way based on material conditions (including education, upbringing, etc.) and basing one's approach to influencing cultural changes on that makes it much easier to address bigotry than merely pointing out that someone is bigoted and saying that it doesn't matter to anger them by wearing an armband without addressing any of the numerous other factors.

    If you look at almost any society that used to be severely homophobic but now has legal and social acceptance of LGBT people, you will see a lot of factors at play such as religious reform, better education, improved living conditions, democracy, and secularization of the law, among others. You won't see protests from outsiders inspiring changes on their own that, in all societies we know of so far, have taken decades or sometimes centuries and many specific material conditions to allow them to happen.
     
  4. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    66,423
    Ratings:
    +25,043
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    I certainly hope any countries handing out armbands follow through and accept LGBTQ Qataris (or nationals of any country where they'll face death or persecution) as refugees.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Koldo

    Koldo Incredible Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    13,004
    Ratings:
    +2,623
    What you are defending here is not that we should not provoke the bigots (since wearing that armband or taking a knee is not provacation per se), but rather that we should not do anything the bigots find provocative.

    Ideally we wouldn't want any radical reaction. The problem is that we have no control over what exactly is going to offend them. Let's take this a step further: Imagine that the mere fact of saying that homosexuals shouldn't be sent to jail ends up provoking a backlash from the bigots, and you can be certain it will, even if among a small group.

    Should we then not talk about that? Should we then remain silent until they eventually change their minds even though we acknowledge that this won't happen by itself given that their culture and religion is leading them towards more bigotry?

    I don't know about protests, but...

    1)Do you know what was a significant driving force behind the abolition of slavery in Brazil? The UK. The UK went to the point where it took up the role of intercepting slave ships, hundreds of them. There is a lot of international pressure.

    2) The degree of globalization we have nowadays is unprecedented. Expect outside pressure being far more impactful than it used to be.
     
  6. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    66,423
    Ratings:
    +25,043
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Is the homophobic society necessarily the only intended audience, though?

    Personally, I think a lot of the messaging is directed at the West, not at Qatar: "remember Qatar's treatment of LGBTQ people when you're considering tourism/trade/cooperation/whatever."
     
  7. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    14,622
    Ratings:
    +13,842
    Religion:
    none
    You are missing the point that it wasn't something started for the World Cup aimed at changing the Middle East. It it part of a continued series of actions primarily aimed at promoting inclusivity in European football, where it has been quite successful.

    Supporters across English football are by now used to seeing their club's stadium decked out in rainbows for two weeks every year as part of the Rainbow Laces campaign.

    Set up in 2013 by LGBT+ rights charity Stonewall, Rainbow Laces seeks to show the community that sport is for them. A traditionally hostile arena for minorities, the work of Rainbow Laces has been part of a wider move towards the acceptance and inclusion of LGBT+ people in football.

    The Qatar World Cup has forced the campaign to move from its traditional spot in the calendar, with Premier League and EFL clubs choosing the next fortnight to throw their support behind Rainbow Laces. Stonewall have been the driving force behind it, with director of programmes Liz Ward delighted at the progress that has been made so far.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/premier-league-rainbow-laces-stonewall-28270341

    The campaign is awesome and raising awareness seems to have had an impact. Sky Sports says, “Over the last five years, the proportion of sport fans who think homophobic remarks in sport are acceptable has almost halved — from 25% in 2017 to 14% in 2022. This follows five years of dedicated campaigning by Stonewall and sporting bodies such as the Premier League, FA, Premiership Rugby and leading sponsors who are part of TeamPride.”

    EPL teams to wear rainbow laces, but we still need openly gay player - Outsports

    Manuel Neuer and the German Football Association (DFB) were investigated over the goalkeeper's decision to wear a rainbow captain's armband at Euro 2020.


    Uefa prohibits political statements from players and teams, hence why an investigation may now be launched. A report from NTV has claimed the DFB could be fined for Neuer's armband, which he also wore in a pre-tournament warmup fixture against Latvia.

    It is currently Pride Month, and Munich's Allianz Arena is set to light up in rainbow colours for Germany's final group game against Hungary later this week.

    Neuer has worn the armband in both of Germany's games at the tournament as a show of support of the LGBTQ+ community.


    Manuel Neuer's rainbow armband approved by UEFA as 'good cause' | SportsJOE.ie

    The captains of the national teams of Belgium, Denmark, Germany, England, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Wales, Sweden and Swiss will wear the OneLove armband in their upcoming games. OneLove initially started as a campaign by the Dutch Football Association which emphasizes on the fact that all football fans have one thing in common: their love for football. With this message the creators want to express their support for unification of all people and at the same time they want to speak out against all forms of discrimination.

    Holland captain Virgil van Dijk: “This is an important message which suits the game of football: on the field everybody is equal and this should be the case in every place in society. With the OneLove band we express this message. On behalf of the Dutch team I have been wearing this band for quite a while now. It is good to see that other countries are joining this initiative.”

    Sweden and Norway will join the initiative only during the UEFA Nations League matches since they didn’t qualify fort he FIFA World Cup. Due to alternate plans to mark the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, England will not wear the armband in September but adopt OneLove at the FIFA World Cup. The captains of the seven other countries will wear the OneLove armband in their upcoming games for the UEFA Nations League and the FIFA World Cup in Qatar.

    Ten countries embrace the Dutch OneLove campaign | KNVB






     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Yerda

    Yerda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    9,894
    Ratings:
    +2,817
    Religion:
    Nothing in particular
    Well, aye, that would definitely be good.

    Would you say that in the case the countries aren't welcoming refugess the players shouldn't wear an armband, or a rainbow on their shirt, or whatever?

    I guess that the best thing would be to seek the opinions of LGBT communities. If the Qatari LGBT population is pleading for foriegn footballers to leave the armband off then I'm happy to agree with you.
     
Loading...