Don't kid yourselves there aren't Charlton fans who find some of the sexism on here far more offensive than "support Brighton", but it's their choice whether to use the site or not and that's what freedom of expression is all about.
CharltonLife is not the same thing as the club's official social media account
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I assume as their official title is PROUD valiants they will be posting photos of their members[faces!] so they can be individually congratulated as they arrive at the first home game. Or will they actually form a secret society within the ground with signals to each other so as they can recognise each other but not be recognised. Whilst the chap who was banned was rather unsophisticated in making his point he did have some merit in his arguement in that there is no a]christian addicks group b]single lonely heterosexual valiants group c].....oh I think you get the idea.
Nothing to stop you forming any of the above. If someone wants to form a LGBT group then good for them, go for it.
Don't kid yourselves there aren't Charlton fans who find some of the sexism on here far more offensive than "support Brighton", but it's their choice whether to use the site or not and that's what freedom of expression is all about.
CharltonLife is not the same thing as the club's official social media account
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I assume the guy was using his own Twitter account, not the club's. CAFC wouldn't be responsible for his views if he'd put them in a letter, so I don't see that they are if he addresses them to the club on Twitter.
I can only respond to what I've seen, but let's compare it to Charlton fans singing about incest among opposition supporters. That's pretty vile by most people's standards and the club has expressed a view on it in the past, but it still goes on, nobody's been arrested or banned to my knowledge, and it takes place within the grounds and therefore within the remit of the club(s), which Twitter isn't. Some people also think it's funny, much like the Brighton chanting.
I don't condone any of it, but if the club is going to take action against offensive behaviour by supporters that might be a better place to start than highlighting the nonsense put forward by one individual in an arena entirely outside its control.
I think the guy is a twit for want of a better word and personally have no issue with anyone. We are all humans after all. BUT...
"Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression."
Many people have died for this right! And LGBT would not be so public or supported without this basic right.
Don't kid yourselves there aren't Charlton fans who find some of the sexism on here far more offensive than "support Brighton", but it's their choice whether to use the site or not and that's what freedom of expression is all about.
CharltonLife is not the same thing as the club's official social media account
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I assume the guy was using his own Twitter account, not the club's. CAFC wouldn't be responsible for his views if he'd put them in a letter, so I don't see that they are if he addresses them to the club on Twitter.
I can only respond to what I've seen, but let's compare it to Charlton fans singing about incest among opposition supporters. That's pretty vile by most people's standards and the club has expressed a view on it in the past, but it still goes on, nobody's been arrested or banned to my knowledge, and it takes place within the grounds and therefore within the remit of the club(s), which Twitter isn't. Some people also think it's funny, much like the Brighton chanting.
I don't condone any of it, but if the club is going to take action against offensive behaviour by supporters that might be a better place to start than highlighting the nonsense put forward by one individual in an arena entirely outside its control.
The Addams family song is not comparable to what he was saying.
And your argument now seems to be that the club was right, but should have also banned other people.
To reiterate, because incredibly a lot of people, particularly Airman who needs a lesson on what freedom of speech is, seem to be still missing the point, the bloke was banned because he referred to another fan publicly as a 'faggot' and offered him out on Twitter. He went from expressing his miserably outdated opinion to actively abusing individuals with homophobic slurs. He crossed the line into aggressive illegal abuse and whatever point he was trying to make at the start was long gone. There's no freedom of speech issue here, he completely lost his head. People can debate all they want about how they don't understand why the LGBT group is necessary but it's not going to change the fact the bloke was banned for his abusive threats and slurs
I think the guy is a twit for want of a better word and personally have no issue with anyone. We are all humans after all. BUT...
"Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression."
Many people have died for this right! And LGBT would not be so public or supported without this basic right.
Just my opinion.
It's his right to voice his opinion and it's our right to call him out as a bigot
I assume as their official title is PROUD valiants they will be posting photos of their members[faces!] so they can be individually congratulated as they arrive at the first home game. Or will they actually form a secret society within the ground with signals to each other so as they can recognise each other but not be recognised. Whilst the chap who was banned was rather unsophisticated in making his point he did have some merit in his arguement in that there is no a]christian addicks group b]single lonely heterosexual valiants group c].....oh I think you get the idea.
Go for it, single heterosexuals have really had to go through hard times in modern society I'm sure loads of people will sign up to get their problems across.
Don't kid yourselves there aren't Charlton fans who find some of the sexism on here far more offensive than "support Brighton", but it's their choice whether to use the site or not and that's what freedom of expression is all about.
CharltonLife is not the same thing as the club's official social media account
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I assume the guy was using his own Twitter account, not the club's. CAFC wouldn't be responsible for his views if he'd put them in a letter, so I don't see that they are if he addresses them to the club on Twitter.
I can only respond to what I've seen, but let's compare it to Charlton fans singing about incest among opposition supporters. That's pretty vile by most people's standards and the club has expressed a view on it in the past, but it still goes on, nobody's been arrested or banned to my knowledge, and it takes place within the grounds and therefore within the remit of the club(s), which Twitter isn't. Some people also think it's funny, much like the Brighton chanting.
I don't condone any of it, but if the club is going to take action against offensive behaviour by supporters that might be a better place to start than highlighting the nonsense put forward by one individual in an arena entirely outside its control.
I see what you're getting at but it's just highly unrealistic that they are going to try and ban 2-300 hundred fans everytime a song like that gets sung. Plus it wouldn't be very good for their image amongst the football community.
This incident however gives them a positive reflection in the community by being able to deal with the matter openly via social media.
I guess the point I am making is that it is much easier to deal with these incidents than to deal with things you mention inside the stadium.
This is becoming the silly season, Does anyone know of a Transgender person who goes to CAFC ? Other than Kelly Malone at Millwall, i doubt it.
what about Transvestites ? mainly straight men who put the girly clothes on once a week to get in touch with their feminine side. Should they have a letter ?
Unless I am getting confused with how you mean your contexts and apologise if I am , Quite a few people who are ''Transgender'' likely go to Charlton and are likely season ticket holders, I know through a few close friend who is with somebody that is trans and both are Charlton supporters, and its not something you would know or notice on the spot that is obvious, especially with the hormone treatment that both FtM and MtF can get now days,
Secondly you know there is a huge diffrence between ''Transvestite'' and somebody who is actually ''Transgender'' they mean two completly diffrent things
I assume as their official title is PROUD valiants they will be posting photos of their members[faces!] so they can be individually congratulated as they arrive at the first home game. Or will they actually form a secret society within the ground with signals to each other so as they can recognise each other but not be recognised. Whilst the chap who was banned was rather unsophisticated in making his point he did have some merit in his arguement in that there is no a]christian addicks group b]single lonely heterosexual valiants group c].....oh I think you get the idea.
Go for it, single heterosexuals have really had to go through hard times in modern society I'm sure loads of people will sign up to get their problems across.
Why do some twats assume that because somebody is gay, they are overly camp or would make some secret codesign of some sort, some people like you really don't make sence, you could look at the hardest tallest most masculine guy in the north upper, he could still be not straight unless you personly know him and his life style,
Dont judge a book by its cover, I know some REALLY CAMP guys who are as straight as anything
Don't kid yourselves there aren't Charlton fans who find some of the sexism on here far more offensive than "support Brighton", but it's their choice whether to use the site or not and that's what freedom of expression is all about.
CharltonLife is not the same thing as the club's official social media account
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I assume the guy was using his own Twitter account, not the club's. CAFC wouldn't be responsible for his views if he'd put them in a letter, so I don't see that they are if he addresses them to the club on Twitter.
I can only respond to what I've seen, but let's compare it to Charlton fans singing about incest among opposition supporters. That's pretty vile by most people's standards and the club has expressed a view on it in the past, but it still goes on, nobody's been arrested or banned to my knowledge, and it takes place within the grounds and therefore within the remit of the club(s), which Twitter isn't. Some people also think it's funny, much like the Brighton chanting.
I don't condone any of it, but if the club is going to take action against offensive behaviour by supporters that might be a better place to start than highlighting the nonsense put forward by one individual in an arena entirely outside its control.
I see what you're getting at but it's just highly unrealistic that they are going to try and ban 2-300 hundred fans everytime a song like that gets sung. Plus it wouldn't be very good for their image amongst the football community. This incident however gives them a positive reflection in the community by being able to deal with the matter openly via social media.
I guess the point I am making is that it is much easier to deal with these incidents than to deal with things you mention inside the stadium.
That's exactly why it looks like posturing, though. You imply the club's motivation is how it looks rather than the substance of the issue.
Banning someone who already wants to withdraw their support is like a couple arguing who broke off the relationship first.
Garrymanilow refers to some things I haven't seen, which would change my view, but it does seem to me that the irony is the original comments exactly make the case for the group to exist and for the club to support it.
I firmly believe that the way you push back racism and discrimination generally is through the law and that over time this is what changes attitudes.
I just think the club could spend a lot of time chasing offensive comments about any number of things on the internet, but what it should actually be doing is creating a welcoming environment for all supporters at the ground.
It's awkward and not always operationally prudent to deal with what several hundred people sing, especially at the time, but it would certainly be tackled if it was racist so it isn't impossible.
More to the point there were lots of people singing "takes it up the arse" at a Birmingham fan at St Andrew, which is obviously homophobic. I'd be interested to see the reaction if the club started sanctioning them. And if it doesn't, in future.
To reiterate, because incredibly a lot of people, particularly Airman who needs a lesson on what freedom of speech is, seem to be still missing the point, the bloke was banned because he referred to another fan publicly as a 'faggot' and offered him out on Twitter. He went from expressing his miserably outdated opinion to actively abusing individuals with homophobic slurs. He crossed the line into aggressive illegal abuse and whatever point he was trying to make at the start was long gone. There's no freedom of speech issue here, he completely lost his head. People can debate all they want about how they don't understand why the LGBT group is necessary but it's not going to change the fact the bloke was banned for his abusive threats and slurs
...And if they didn't ban him and he then turned up at a game and abused or even assaulted someone because he thought they were LGBT, the club would be far more embarrassed than they are by banning him. In a no-win situation, they made the sensible choice for all concerned.
I think the whole freedom of speech thing gets overused, and there have been a lot of cases where Twitter uses have been punished for posting offensive views. Having announced that this group were part of the club, it is asking a bit much of the club to expect it to sit on its collective hands when an individual starts threatening the members on twitter-even a sad individual like this guy. Airmans view about sexism on here is vaguely correct but is basically saying because one person does'nt get punished, everyone else can do what they like. There is some offensive stuff chanted at our games, which reflects badly on us (we can see you holding hands? - ffs) but this guy was threatening.
Don't kid yourselves there aren't Charlton fans who find some of the sexism on here far more offensive than "support Brighton", but it's their choice whether to use the site or not and that's what freedom of expression is all about.
CharltonLife is not the same thing as the club's official social media account
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I assume the guy was using his own Twitter account, not the club's. CAFC wouldn't be responsible for his views if he'd put them in a letter, so I don't see that they are if he addresses them to the club on Twitter.
I can only respond to what I've seen, but let's compare it to Charlton fans singing about incest among opposition supporters. That's pretty vile by most people's standards and the club has expressed a view on it in the past, but it still goes on, nobody's been arrested or banned to my knowledge, and it takes place within the grounds and therefore within the remit of the club(s), which Twitter isn't. Some people also think it's funny, much like the Brighton chanting.
I don't condone any of it, but if the club is going to take action against offensive behaviour by supporters that might be a better place to start than highlighting the nonsense put forward by one individual in an arena entirely outside its control.
I see what you're getting at but it's just highly unrealistic that they are going to try and ban 2-300 hundred fans everytime a song like that gets sung. Plus it wouldn't be very good for their image amongst the football community. This incident however gives them a positive reflection in the community by being able to deal with the matter openly via social media.
I guess the point I am making is that it is much easier to deal with these incidents than to deal with things you mention inside the stadium.
That's exactly why it looks like posturing, though. You imply the club's motivation is how it looks rather than the substance of the issue.
Banning someone who already wants to withdraw their support is like a couple arguing who broke off the relationship first.
Garrymanilow refers to some things I haven't seen, which would change my view, but it does seem to me that the irony is the original comments exactly make the case for the group to exist and for the club to support it.
So have you changed your views because it seems as if you were overly critical of club but are now back tracking having first jumped in with both feet without hearing the whole story.
There is no freedom of speech issue either. The idiot can still use twitter, facebook, write to his local paper, march, demonstrate, etc etc on any topic he chooses under the law the same and you and I. All that happened was that he was blocked from replying to the CAFC official twitter and that was not because his views were unpalatable but because he was abusive and making threats of physical violence.
this bloke was not only homophobic on Twitter he actually sent a email to the club, and also said he would meet the group at a game and see what happened then (that to me is a threat)
the bloke was banned because he referred to another fan publicly as a 'faggot' and offered him out on Twitter. He went from expressing his miserably outdated opinion to actively abusing individuals with homophobic slurs. He crossed the line into aggressive illegal abuse and whatever point he was trying to make at the start was long gone.
Looking at his Twitter account, I don't think this guy is very Christian at all.
I honestly didn't think homophobia was a problem at the club, is there really anyone who goes every week who is against them going? That said I also cannot see the point of the group and what it achieves.
For those like me who are not on Facebook or Twitter it's all a bit detached and a bit other, like not having sky television, at times like this I feel glad I'm free of the grip of those three things.
I do always genuinely wonder what the response would be if someone wanted to create a say 'English, White and Proud' Charlton supporters group??
Would it be accepted in the way this group rightly is by the majority of people or would there be a negative OTT response to what is a legitimate reason on the face of it for creating a group? And before someone says 'Well go and create one if thats what you want" - well thats not the point at all really. I'm just interested in how certain people get offended at certain things and can be quite hypocrytical on these matters? And I beleive the police attention for one would be all over the aforementioned group.
I do always genuinely wonder what the response would be if someone wanted to create a say 'English, White and Proud' Charlton supporters group??
Would it be accepted in the way this group rightly is by the majority of people or would there be a negative OTT response to what is a legitimate reason on the face of it for creating a group? And before someone says 'Well go and create one if thats what you want" - well thats not the point at all really. I'm just interested in how certain people get offended at certain things and can be quite hypocrytical on these matters? And I beleive the police attention for one would be all over the aforementioned group.
I do always genuinely wonder what the response would be if someone wanted to create a say 'English, White and Proud' Charlton supporters group??
Would it be accepted in the way this group rightly is by the majority of people or would there be a negative OTT response to what is a legitimate reason on the face of it for creating a group? And before someone says 'Well go and create one if thats what you want" - well thats not the point at all really. I'm just interested in how certain people get offended at certain things and can be quite hypocrytical on these matters? And I beleive the police attention for one would be all over the aforementioned group.
If they said anyone can join even if they aren't white or English (like the LGBT group have) no uproar at all.
Comments
"Go and support Brighton" (in the context) is weird. "Disgusting" is offensive.
I can only respond to what I've seen, but let's compare it to Charlton fans singing about incest among opposition supporters. That's pretty vile by most people's standards and the club has expressed a view on it in the past, but it still goes on, nobody's been arrested or banned to my knowledge, and it takes place within the grounds and therefore within the remit of the club(s), which Twitter isn't. Some people also think it's funny, much like the Brighton chanting.
I don't condone any of it, but if the club is going to take action against offensive behaviour by supporters that might be a better place to start than highlighting the nonsense put forward by one individual in an arena entirely outside its control.
"Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression."
Many people have died for this right! And LGBT would not be so public or supported without this basic right.
Just my opinion.
And your argument now seems to be that the club was right, but should have also banned other people.
This incident however gives them a positive reflection in the community by being able to deal with the matter openly via social media.
I guess the point I am making is that it is much easier to deal with these incidents than to deal with things you mention inside the stadium.
LGBT people can now marry in the UK,
people coming out as trans has gone up %20 over the last five years,
Someone is gay/bi/trans and is going to a football game, Jesus its the end of the world ....
We arnt in 1954 anymore, its really nothing special if someone isn't straight, poor Andrew
Secondly you know there is a huge diffrence between ''Transvestite'' and somebody who is actually ''Transgender'' they mean two completly diffrent things
Dont judge a book by its cover, I know some REALLY CAMP guys who are as straight as anything
Banning someone who already wants to withdraw their support is like a couple arguing who broke off the relationship first.
Garrymanilow refers to some things I haven't seen, which would change my view, but it does seem to me that the irony is the original comments exactly make the case for the group to exist and for the club to support it.
I firmly believe that the way you push back racism and discrimination generally is through the law and that over time this is what changes attitudes.
I just think the club could spend a lot of time chasing offensive comments about any number of things on the internet, but what it should actually be doing is creating a welcoming environment for all supporters at the ground.
It's awkward and not always operationally prudent to deal with what several hundred people sing, especially at the time, but it would certainly be tackled if it was racist so it isn't impossible.
More to the point there were lots of people singing "takes it up the arse" at a Birmingham fan at St Andrew, which is obviously homophobic. I'd be interested to see the reaction if the club started sanctioning them. And if it doesn't, in future.
Airmans view about sexism on here is vaguely correct but is basically saying because one person does'nt get punished, everyone else can do what they like. There is some offensive stuff chanted at our games, which reflects badly on us (we can see you holding hands? - ffs) but this guy was threatening.
"Tinpot"
There is no freedom of speech issue either. The idiot can still use twitter, facebook, write to his local paper, march, demonstrate, etc etc on any topic he chooses under the law the same and you and I. All that happened was that he was blocked from replying to the CAFC official twitter and that was not because his views were unpalatable but because he was abusive and making threats of physical violence.
Would it be accepted in the way this group rightly is by the majority of people or would there be a negative OTT response to what is a legitimate reason on the face of it for creating a group? And before someone says 'Well go and create one if thats what you want" - well thats not the point at all really. I'm just interested in how certain people get offended at certain things and can be quite hypocrytical on these matters? And I beleive the police attention for one would be all over the aforementioned group.