Why isn't there an openly gay football player in the Premiership?

Not knowing Arsenal aren't a national team isn't ignorance about football (I know very little about it) but indicates living in a cave and paying no attention to national life. He does refer elsewhere to England\Turkey playing international football. Hence I'm plumping for unusual use of words (national to signify the level below international - that is, the domestic competition) over bizarre disuse of brain.

1984 may well be ignorant about football as well, but I think here he's being a little unfairly maligned.

OK the Warrior King needs his rest. Good night everyone. Don't get at each others throats it's only a topical discussion. I haven't got anything against 1984, it would just be a good idea to distinguish between national and international teams. And also it would be useful to be a bit more aware of footballing culture before blurting out sweeping generalisations which are so far from the truth.

Why isn't there an openly gay football player in the Premiership?

I think some of the attitudes displayed on this thread demonstrate why.

If I'm not mistaken, scientists discovered a gay gene that 'predisposes' people to be homosexual, but suggests that heterosexual people can have it without becoming gay. Therefore, ultimately, you choose to be gay. Scientists ain't always right, so don't shoot the messenger!

its completely different. if all the straight people died, and the gays didn't and stayed gay, it would be the end of the human race. if it wasn't the end of the human race then clearly some people wouldn't be the gays they made themselves out to be. if all the non-dark skinned people died, humanity would still continue but everyone would be black for a bit. if all the women died, the human race would die off but it wouldn't be because of choice.

I agree with Chewy, I dont pass it off as a human condition in the same class as race.

If I'm not mistaken, scientists discovered a gay gene that 'predisposes' people to be homosexual, but suggests that heterosexual people can have it without becoming gay. Therefore, ultimately, you choose to be gay. Scientists ain't always right, so don't shoot the messenger!.

Every creature has 'dodgy' genes. Evolution normally means they die off or remain very much minorities. Without being harsh, there are more ill, disabled or homosexual people in today's community than ever simply because we have far better medical expertise and even tolerance than ever before. Don't get me wrong - this is no bad thing.

However, the human race is effectively trying to outmuscle evolution which imho there needs to be a cut off point. Look at all the superbugs spawning because we can kill off normal ones. Nature will bite back, everything goes by survival of the fittest, except humans. Its obvious something will shaft us at some point. Eg, terminal illnesses and disease are forcibly evolving faster than ever because we are helping them by cutting out the weak bits of their 'species'.

edit: no, i'm not saying homsexuality is an illness.

Look whether homosexuality is a choice or not is a different debate entirely. Sticking to the topic; -1984- is clearly not a football fan and has a set of misguided, misinformed and inaccurate opinions based on some sort of personal vendetta.

If you think that "high-brow" people have less prejudiced views then my friend you are sadly not in touch with the real world. Sections of the upper classes hold just as discriminatory, prejudicial etc views just like some sections of the working class e.g. institutional racism.

Basically you are saying that (although you didn't say it literally, that "rich people are more well behaved than poor people" which is completely off the topic.

Yes you may not be a football fan and you may not like the sport but that doesn't justify your far fetched opinion.

Also you seem to get very defensive when people make apparently "homophobic" remarks whereas you are more than happy to make misguided and ridiculous statements and sweeping generalisations about football fans. It's a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Thank you for getting the topic back on track lol.

I have no vendetta against football. I've made that clear before. All I said was that because of the make-up of football fans; not all of them, but a substantial majority, the sport is more prone to discriminatory behaviour.

It's not about rich/poor, but more educated, enlightened/less educated and etc.

I am not making sweeping statements. I have never said all football fans are chavy, fanatical, uneducated working class people, but they are more likely to be working class, less educated than the fans of sports such as tennis and etc. Of course there are loads of middle-class, educated football fans, but to go into a denial about the true demographics of football fans here in the UK and abroad is just silly.

I'm not denying that at all but you seem to have some strong opinion that if a person is more educated, it makes them a better person and less prejudicial in their views which any Tom, Dick and Harry will tell is not true at all.

Also your not aware of the corporate nature of football where tickets in hospitality areas cna go for hundreds of pounds for a single game. Hardly the price tag to appeal to members of the "working class" is it?

Education does make people less prejudicial. Not always, but in the majority of cases, education makes a person more aware and less prejudicial. Its no coincidence that the more higher one goes up the education ladder that the more likely you are to be tolerant of homosexuals. Of course, there are little or non-educated people who hold very little prejudicial views, but one cannot deny the correlation between education and tolerance/prejudices.

That is true, and it reflects that fact that football is gaining a greater range of fans, and it is appealing to the middle-class more so than ever before. I have not denied this, and I am glad that football is making in-rows with the middle-class. The more faster it shifts to the middle-class, the more likely we are to see a reduction in explicitly racist behaviour by the fans, e.g. in Spain with the fans making monkey noises, more likely to see homosexual players coming out, and less likely to witness hooligan behaviour.

I think your understanding of evolution is a tad flawed and severely simple. As for the claim that there are more homosexuals in today's society than there ever was before, this simply is an unprovable, and almost certainly false claim. The Ancient Greeks were notorious for their homosexual relations, far more liberal on these matters then we are today. True, there is greater tolerance for homosexuals today and so they are able to 'come out', but that does not mean that now there are more of them than before.

Also, I think evolution in the genetic sense is pretty much obsolete. Human ingenuity has pushed the importance of basic evolution to the sidelines. Primal urges no longer determine the path of human evolution.

that's what i said. human evolution is practically decided by humans. other evolution goes natures way or is affected by humans. in some cases, vastly accelerated.

Well I know for a fact that Manchester United player John O'Shea is openly gay so that ends this discussion