girlie jones (girliejones) wrote,
girlie jones

Ahh football, you are ever increasingly becoming outdated

I was going to post about the environment today but then, amongst all the news headings about footballers getting done for cocaine possession and violence both on and off the field and what not, one idiot man stood out from amongst the other idiot men of his clan and said this:

The AFL is not ready for openly homosexual players - Jason Akermanis (I don't much care which club he belongs to)

And amongst all the crap and prejudice and misinformation that accompaned his "opinion piece" were two key snippets for me:

"In an athletic environment the rules are different from the cultural rules for men."

Until football players in this country understand, fully understand, comprehend and get that this IS NOT TRUE and furthermore, the laws of the land apply ON AND OFF the field, we will never lift the behaviour of footballers into what I like to refer to as "appropriate and acceptable". The rules are not different for them. They cannot actively marginalise, aggrevate or ignore. They cannot take drugs, sell drugs, violate women or use violence to get their way. Except, like they can and do in this country. And I for one am sick and tired of the countless news articles and court appearances of this scum who somehow get a free pass cause they can jump real high and catch a ball. Whoop di doo.

"Locker room nudity and homoerotic activities are normal inside footy clubs."

This one I don't actually know what to respond with. A) Does he understand what "homoerotic activities" mean and B) is this like all those song lyrics - "totally not gay" as in, I participate in homoerotic activities but that doesn't make me gay?

It all comes back to this though, doesn't it. Homophobic straight (or supposedly straight) men are terrified that if they stand nude in the same place as a gay man, something "horrible" will happen to them - what? they'll be forced/coerced to have sex? We call that rape, and actually, straight men can be rapists too.

Maybe its that homosexuality is catchy? Maybe they are scared of catching Teh Gay?

Or perhaps homophobes fear that they will in some way have unwanted sexual advances made towards them? Or be touched in a way that they do not like? Or be forced to watch a man look at them and get aroused. You know what? As a woman, fully clothed, walking down the street, at work in my job, in a bar, at the shops and all over the damn place, in daylight and at nighttime THAT HAPPENS TO ME ALL THE TIME!

Really though, it's a call to preserve the nude locker space - a space in which men apparently *need* to be able to wander around nude, presumably either to air their bits or to reinforce some kind of pecking order based on the size of their pecker (sorry, I had to go there). But they want to be able to control the context of the gaze upon them - that is, in no way should they be seen as a sexual object, in that context.

And really, he's not arguing that there are no gay men in the AFL, so really ... what he objects to is the declaration of same. The declaration that perhaps some of the homoerotic activities in the locker room could be for realz.

Tags: current affairs

  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded