Antiseptic, I answered the question that you claim nobody's addressed. Your response, as usual, is to attempt to insult me.

It's not me that's "squirming" here.

Yeah Proxy,

I have to confess, I have had sex in a Boeing, and also in the girls toilets more than once. I have also had anal sex and been promiscuous. And I'm not gay, so do you think I'm un-natural? Natural is as natural does, and I'm not Robinson Crusoe.

'Thus Annie Proulx can write a romantic love story about the 20 year love affair between two homosexual cowboys and women can automatically relate to and empathise with homosexuals.
More realistic to show the cruising of public toilets for anonymous sex with strangers.'

Both happen Proxy. People can be in love (even gay people) and people have casual sex. Gay or straight. In public and in private. There is a seedy heterosexual underworld and swingers clubs and bondage and I'll even take you down to Salon Kitty's one day if you don't believe me.

So, can you accept you have a 1-dimensional view of homosexuals, and that the activities you despise are also widespread amongst heterosexuals?

I mean, if you were constantly on about the promiscuity and public sex and anal sex of anyone I can understand, but you only seem to be worried when it's homosexuals involved.

Houellebecq:"What 'gay culture' is football being asked to take on."

It is being asked to accept within its own culture the presence of openly homosexual men, when the culture is overtly and I believe essentially heterosexual. You claim this is "mainstreaming" football, but there are already precedents for groups reserving their own right to continue practises that might be considered discriminatory in other circumstances and their right to do so being upheld.

As I said, it's a simple case of "we don't do that here", not "you musn't do that at all".

Houellebecq:"As long as you're not gay of course, as football shouldn't be forced to assimilate your culture."

Participating as a spectator is hardly forcing anyone to assimilate anything.

Pelican:"Aboriginal football players aren't suggesting that all football players embrace their culture"

No, they're both polite enough and smart enough to try to fit in without causing a fuss. On the whole, Aboriginal players who've tried to play the race card don't last long at the top level.

Severin:"why do you fear so much?"

"Fear"? What on earth would I be araid of? Why are you so afraid o anybody who intelligently expresses a view at odds with your prejudices?

CJMorgan, your argument was that because openly homosexual men exist in the broader society, then football must accept them as part of their own culture, willy-nilly. That's rubbish I'm afraid "old chap". It's an "appeal to popularity" and is a pretty basic fallacy that is often heard on the more salacious current affairs program.

Antiseptic: << CJMorgan, your argument was that because openly homosexual men exist in the broader society, then football must accept them as part of their own culture, willy-nilly. >>

Please don't misrepresent me, old chap. That wasn't my argument at all. This was my argument:

<< [footballers and their culture] exist in Australian society, in which discrimination against people on the basis of sexual orientation has quite rightly been made unacceptable, if not always illegal. >>

That's not an "appeal to popularity", it's recognising that a football culture that demands that gays either live a lie or not play football is discriminatory on the basis of sexuality, and therefore inconsistent with the laws and standards of the society in which it exists.

Your homophobic agenda isn't assisted by either insults or dishonesty.

CJMorgan:"That's not an "appeal to popularity"

'fraid it is "old chap". http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html

I quote:"The Appeal to Popularity has the following form:

1. Most people approve of X (have favorable emotions towards X).
2. Therefore X is true.

The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is substituted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim. "

Glad to have cleared that up for you.

Antiseptic, you're not stupid, so I have to conclude that you're being obtuse.

To discriminate against people because of their sexuality in Australia is generally unlawful. You are proposing exactly that.

Your attempt to deploy erroneously the 'appeal to popularity' fallacy is another specious argument that indicates the intellectual and ethical paucity of your position. If anything, yours is the 'appeal to popularity', by implying that because most footballers are supposedly homophobic, then it's OK to discriminate against the minority of footballers who are gay.

Glad to have cleared that up for you.