NRL Rules Out Pride Round For 2023

[sam4731]

11 hours ago, hw88 said:

Why do the bigots win again? Why should the LGBTQ community get a special round for themselves? It sets them apart and is the very opposite of inclusive. And why should RL promote inclusivity? I thought everyone was welcome to play and/or watch already without having to trumpet the fact from the roof tops.

No you're right, let's just ignore the fact that as a major sport (I know, hold the giggles), that has a reach to millions of people, especially in Australia, we shouldn't use that platform to promote positive social change. 

Also the point isn't setting some groups apart from others, it's about putting to the fore, different aspects of society that we want to celebrate.

Maybe anyone that has this opinion wants to abandon any community outreach programmes, stop Sir Kev's amazing fundraising efforts for MND or even stop LDRL matches happening at Magic Weekend for example.

After all Rugby League is just about the 80 minutes between the two whistles, right?

[Barley Mow]

5 hours ago, George Watt said:

Should have added that a float called NRL Pride in League was one of around 200 paraded in the recent massive Sydney Gay Mardi Gras which was watched by scores of thousands at the event and millions round the world.

So why not a Pride round?

Maybe things like this float can be the compromise that @Oxford was calling for.

It allows NRL to make a public demonstration to tell LGBT people that they are welcome/a valued part of the game while only requiring those who are happy to express pride in that lifestyle to take part.

It avoids players who do not feel able to share that pride (while still being tolerant or even welcoming) from being compelled into a public show of pride through rainbow shirts, etc.

[hw88]

37 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

No you're right, let's just ignore the fact that as a major sport (I know, hold the giggles), that has a reach to millions of people, especially in Australia, we shouldn't use that platform to promote positive social change. 

Also the point isn't setting some groups apart from others, it's about putting to the fore, different aspects of society that we want to celebrate.

Maybe anyone that has this opinion wants to abandon any community outreach programmes, stop Sir Kev's amazing fundraising efforts for MND or even stop LDRL matches happening at Magic Weekend for example.

After all Rugby League is just about the 80 minutes between the two whistles, right?

I know I'm right!

Don't you see that 'putting people to the fore' is setting them apart, making them different in some way. I'll wager the vast majority of gays just want to get on with life, while most of the straight people are sick and tired of having gay pride rammed down their throats (no pun intended).

Celebrating different aspects of society - maybe we could have a Conservatives for RL Day? Or is that a step too far?

[The Rocket]

6 hours ago, George Watt said:

Should have added that a float called NRL Pride in League was one of around 200 paraded in the recent massive Sydney Gay Mardi Gras which was watched by scores of thousands at the event and millions round the world.

So why not a Pride round?

George you`ve got your years mixed up, the NRL didn`t have a float in this year`s Mardi Gras because they weren`t given an invite after the Manly Pride Round Jersey fiasco, or whatever it was called.

My first instincts were ` xxxx `em` because I felt like the whole NRL were being  targeted (you might say cancelled) by the Mardi Gras organisers because of what had happened at Manly. Almost as if they were looking for an excuse to target someone to make a statement. The more rational side of me acknowledges that this was a black eye for the game.

At a game at Parramatta last year an obviously gay couple were seated near us, I witnessed what was fairly obvious low hostility towards them yet on the other hand I saw people being openly friendly and welcoming. The former definitely wasn`t nice, the latter was quite touching. At the end of the day if a Pride or Inclusivity Round `educates` the former about live and let live then it`s not a bad thing.

Edited March 15, 2023 by The Rocket

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, Barry Badrinath said:

Absolute cowards

I'm not sure who you mean Barry.

But if people are starting to be wary it wouldn't exactly be a shock when taking into account recent surges in attitude and the support it recieves from the nonsense brigade.

6 hours ago, George Watt said:

Should have added that a float called NRL Pride in League was one of around 200 paraded in the recent massive Sydney Gay Mardi Gras which was watched by scores of thousands at the event and millions round the world.

So why not a Pride round?

I do favour a pride round though I would rather every day was inclusion day.

To me it's a bit like sending flowers on Mothers' day and then forgetting where your Mam lives for 362 days.

The maths is correct by the way.

[Oxford]

16 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

The more rational side of me acknowledges that this was a black eye for the game.

When discussing stuff around where your passions lie rationality tends to be rationed so thinly it might as well not be there.

For a change the discussion was reasonable even when posters who can't see the wood for the timber posted.

These ideas of being cancelled and it's a free country are myths wrapped in rubbish and only used to either dominate or close down a debate you don't like.

It's not that either the discussion or your views are not stopped because of discomfort felt by some. That happens from the top to the bottom of any social media forum. You only have to look at the locked threads on here to realise that but that's not being cancelled and neither was the pride reaction to the NRL debacle and you're spot on that was a real mess and made worse by the handling. The LGBT communities can't be blamed for this kind of mess and it would be completely understandable if they felt the NRL had chosen where it stands.

 

[DoubleD]

19 hours ago, sam4731 said:

The bigots win again unfortunately. Well done everyone who has opposed anything promoting inclusively, you've got your wish. Don't give me all of this "let's have an inclusivity round" nonsense too, might as well advocate a "All lives matter" round while you're at it.

It does the opposite of what it intends to do though, it polarises groups and then you get other groups feeling left out and marginalised. It becomes counter productive. 

There aren't enough rounds to focus on all subject groups, just off the top of my head you'd have........

• women in league round
• trans round
• non-binary round
• black lives matter round
• indiginous round 
• heritage round
• physical disability round
• mental health round
• armed forces round
• key workers round
• volunteers round
• refugee round
• christian round
• muslim round
• hindu round
• buddhist round
• I feel left out round
• I identify as a goat round
• can we stop this pointless posturing and focus on the rugby round

Actually focusing on inclusivity and putting active measures to promote that across all subject groups, rather than meaningless soundbites, is far more productive

Edited March 15, 2023 by DoubleD

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

It does the opposite of what it intends to do though, it polarises groups and then you get other groups feeling left out. It becomes counter productive. 

There aren't enough rounds to focus on all subject groups, just off the top of my head you'd have........

• women in league round
• trans round
• non-binary round
• black lives matter round
• indiginous round 
• heritage round
• mental health round
• armed forces round
• key workers round
• volunteers round
• refugee round
• christian round
• muslim round
• hindu round
• buddhist round
• I feel left out round
• can we stop this pointless posturing and focus on the rugby round

Actually focusing on inclusivity and putting active measures to promote that across all subject groups, rather than meaningless soundbites, is far more productive

I do tend to agree somewhat.

The club should focus on being a club for every one of its supporters and potential fans.

That said, I think this decision was made only because of how bad the Manly situation was handled last year. By contrast, Idrissa Gueye (how ironic a name) and a couple of others have never played in PSG's rainbow round kits (the irony of Qatar owned PSG shouldn't be lost). Though its never been formally stated, and fans have put 2 and 2 together, they simply were stated to be unavailable/injured during that round. Unfortunately for Manly it became a very public political battle.

I think the rainbow laces campaign is good as it means individual players can take a view. Those that do want to be a part of it publicise it, those that don't, won't. Taking a knee is now a similar thing for me. The option to engage or not should be available for anyone involved. 

[gingerjon]

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I do tend to agree somewhat.

The club should focus on being a club for every one of its supporters and potential fans.

That said, I think this decision was made only because of how bad the Manly situation was handled last year. By contrast, Idrissa Gueye (how ironic a name) and a couple of others have never played in PSG's rainbow round kits (the irony of Qatar owned PSG shouldn't be lost). Though its never been formally stated, and fans have put 2 and 2 together, they simply were stated to be unavailable/injured during that round. Unfortunately for Manly it became a very public political battle.

I think the rainbow laces campaign is good as it means individual players can take a view. Those that do want to be a part of it publicise it, those that don't, won't. Taking a knee is now a similar thing for me. The option to engage or not should be available for anyone involved. 

Rainbow laces is a good example.

[George Watt]

3 hours ago, The Rocket said:

George you`ve got your years mixed up, the NRL didn`t have a float in this year`s Mardi Gras because they weren`t given an invite after the Manly Pride Round Jersey fiasco, or whatever it was called.

My first instincts were ` xxxx `em` because I felt like the whole NRL were being  targeted (you might say cancelled) by the Mardi Gras organisers because of what had happened at Manly. Almost as if they were looking for an excuse to target someone to make a statement. The more rational side of me acknowledges that this was a black eye for the game.

At a game at Parramatta last year an obviously gay couple were seated near us, I witnessed what was fairly obvious low hostility towards them yet on the other hand I saw people being openly friendly and welcoming. The former definitely wasn`t nice, the latter was quite touching. At the end of the day if a Pride or Inclusivity Round `educates` the former about live and let live then it`s not a bad thing.

Mea culpa Rocket. Up to this year the NRL had participated in 7 of the last 8 years of the Mardi Gras.

My wife and I have a few gay friends and they are great people.

[unapologetic pedant]

4 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

It allows NRL to make a public demonstration to tell LGBT people that they are welcome/a valued part of the game while only requiring those who are happy to express pride in that lifestyle to take part.

Just from cursory observation, I would say that the percentage of lesbians in women's RL is significantly higher than in the rest of the population.

That happened naturally. No ostentatious attempts to make people feel welcome. Everyone just knows that they are. And no scope for narcissists to pursue their own interests by taking it upon themselves to do the welcoming.

Clearly, the problem is with men in general rather than men in RL specifically. Not convinced that Pride rounds can address that. 

[RL Tragic]

5 hours ago, Barry Badrinath said:

Absolute cowards

Who’s Barry Badrinath

[The Masked Poster]

On 15/03/2023 at 13:21, unapologetic pedant said:

Just from cursory observation, I would say that the percentage of lesbians in women's RL is significantly higher than in the rest of the population.

That happened naturally. No ostentatious attempts to make people feel welcome. Everyone just knows that they are. And no scope for narcissists to pursue their own interests by taking it upon themselves to do the welcoming.

Clearly, the problem is with men in general rather than men in RL specifically. Not convinced that Pride rounds can address that. 

I  

Edited March 17, 2023 by The Masked Poster

[StandOffHalf]

On 14/03/2023 at 13:36, Spidey said:

When it comes to an Indigenous round, are players free not to promote it?

I don't know. I think it's a false comparison in any case.

[StandOffHalf]

On 14/03/2023 at 14:43, lucky 7 said:

Time to end these gimmick themed rounds and just get on with playing games, and that's what they are gimmicks

I don't know. I quite like Heritage Round and Women in League Round. Having unifying, non-controversial themes to rounds can be interesting and shine a light on aspects of the game.

Controversial or divisive themes aren't suitable IMO.

[StandOffHalf]

22 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

I don't think there was a NRL pride round last year - wasn't it just Manly deciding that they wanted to have a 'pride jersey'?

The only other thing I'd add is that, as I understand it, to those who object it isn't necessarily a person being attracted to someone of the same gender that is controversial, but that their employers require them to publicly display pride in a way of life that they don't personally have pride in. As you say, to most objectors it isn't their or anyone else's business.

 

Quite. There's a world of difference between acceptance and promotion.

[Spidey]

17 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

I don't know. I think it's a false comparison in any case.

Why is it a false comparison?

[StandOffHalf]

7 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

Maybe things like this float can be the compromise that @Oxford was calling for.

It allows NRL to make a public demonstration to tell LGBT people that they are welcome/a valued part of the game while only requiring those who are happy to express pride in that lifestyle to take part.

It avoids players who do not feel able to share that pride (while still being tolerant or even welcoming) from being compelled into a public show of pride through rainbow shirts, etc.

Wonderful suggestion. I think this would be wholly appropriate and inclusive.

[StandOffHalf]

17 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Why is it a false comparison?

Because race and sexuality are different. Being opposed to Aboriginals playing RL isn't a topic of division. Nobody is going to sit out a game because some black guys are playing. We have them in RL and they light up the sport.

To me, it's a lazy comparison.

Edited March 15, 2023 by StandOffHalf

[Spidey]

9 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Because race and sexuality are different. Being opposed to Aboriginals playing RL isn't a topic of division. We have them in RL and they light up the sport.

And Gay people don’t?

Both causes are raising awareness of prejudice against groups of people that shouldn’t exist in the 21st century

[StandOffHalf]

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

And Gay people don’t?

Both causes are raising awareness of prejudice against groups of people that shouldn’t exist in the 21st century

Sure. I just see them as different cases and I found your comparison lazy.

Nobody is going to sit out a game because there are black players. Also, I don't think any player would sit out a game involving a gay player.

It is the active promotion that elicits objection, not the involvement of those from particular groups.

[emesssea]

19 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Because race and sexuality are different. Being opposed to Aboriginals playing RL isn't a topic of division. Nobody is going to sit out a game because some black guys are playing. We have them in RL and they light up the sport.

To me, it's a lazy comparison.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say there was a time when people were opposed to aboriginals playing RL and it was a topic of division, and people did sit out rather than play alongside or against them. It was only over time and through various civil rights movements that that stigma went away and those whole held onto it were considered backwards and ostracized.

[StandOffHalf]

I think a Muslim Inclusion Round would run into the same sort of problem as a Pride Round.

There would be Fundamentalist Christians - and perhaps atheists - who wouldn't want to be actively associated in promoting something that went against their personal values/beliefs.

RL is for all. I ardently believe that. Controversial and divisive topics should be dealt with off-field by those players who have a finger in the various pies.

Edited March 15, 2023 by StandOffHalf

[StandOffHalf]

1 minute ago, emesssea said:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say there was a time when people were opposed to aboriginals playing RL and it was a topic of division, and people did sit out rather than play alongside or against them. It was only over time and through various civil rights movements that that stigma went away and those whole held onto it were considered backwards and ostracized.

Quite. RL is for all. I celebrate that.

[Spidey]

20 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Sure. I just see them as different cases and I found your comparison lazy.

Nobody is going to sit out a game because there are black players. Also, I don't think any player would sit out a game involving a gay player.

It is the active promotion that elicits objection, not the involvement of those from particular groups.

It’s a valid comparison. But you seem to be suggesting that we pander to prejudice, not challenge it. Now that’s a bit lazy don’t you think?