The AFL Player Spectator Current AFL Threat Level

Millionaires with a Year Ten Education

Saturday, July 01, 2006

Gay Fan Site Cops Footballer Hate

The omnipresent AFL shop steward, Brendan Gale, has instructed his winged monkeys to send a nastygram to a footy fan site, ordering them to shut down their gallery. What sort of a business turns on its customers like that? Only one staffed by a bunch of arrogant, hate-filled and moronic spoilt brats.

The AFL Players' Association head Brendan Gale has been harassing the fan site Gay Footy since April, regarding its use of photographs of AFL players in undress or near-undress.

Bizarrely, Gale defended the gallery:

"The site is quite an informative site actually, with chat and a various array of features," Mr Gale told ABC radio today.

"One of the features is a gay footy picture gallery, and there were hundreds of footballers in various states, a lot of typical training shots, some with tops off.

"These are images that have probably already been on the public record and in no way were they offensive or inappropriate." (SMH, 29/6/2006)

Then what's the problem, Brendan? Rather than just "coming out" and saying what they really think, they dug up a legal-eagle prepared to bat for their team:
[L]egal services consultant Bernie Shinners said the photos were "of significant concern" to players. "Photographs that show a player in a socially embarrassing position such as in the showers and in various states of undress are defamatory . . ." he said. (The Age, 28/6/2006)

What a load of tosh. Even corporate law firm Minter Ellison (who make buckets of cash out of running defamation cases - hello if you're reading!) poo-pooed the notion:
Minter Ellison lawyer Cindy Christian said Australian courts did not recognise a right to privacy, and the issue of players being defamed by the website was "very questionable". (Ibid.)

The website in question made it clear that the fansite wasn't implying the featured players were gay with a disclaimer stating "Inclusion in this site does not imply sexual preference."

The AFL Players' Association has been at pains to state it's nothing to do with being a gay website at all; no, it's just players' privacy they're trying to protect. Brendan even went out on a limb stating that:

The association would have "absolutely" taken the same action against a straight-themed website, he said. (Ibid.)

Really? So I suppose fansites were women post pictures of semi-nude footballers and go "wow, he's hot", "yeah, I'd love to lick his abs" etc would get sent threatening legal letters too? Sites like this one and this one. Sites were the participants have names like Kim and Lisa and Lizzy and Emily and Jessy. The existence of such female-oriented sites demonstrably invalidates Brendan's claim of being even-handed.

Here's what I reckon is actually going on.

Step 1. Slightly dim footballers turn up to commercial photo shoots and allow candid shots to promote themselves as sex objects. Presumably, turning on the chicks with a few beefcake shots will help their post-footy career, earn them money somehow ... or have more, err, immediate benefits.

Case in point: The Candyman Brodie Holland, famed for being a multimedia-tart with oiled-up, pouting specials like this:

Broad Appeal: Brodie Holland Flaunts His Money-Maker

Step 2. Said footballers stumble onto the internet (or, more likely, a clueful friend points it out to them) and they realise that it's not just women "enjoying themselves" with these images. Uh oh!

Step 3. Gay panic sets in. They feel under threat and worry that their more blokey mates - already suspicious of their facials, group bondings and the extensive grooming of your modern metrosexual - might deem them actively homosexual unless they stridently act to remove the images.

Step 4. They get their union to "do something". Lawyers are brought in, nasty legal threats made. Double-standard results (since the footballers are quite happy for women to ogle the photos). Publicity machine kicks in to minimise damage. Largely docile and gay-hostile footballing-public secretly (or publicly) agree with hypocrisy, making PR flaks' job very easy.

To add fuel to the fire, the legal geniuses at the AFL Players' Association also asked for a photograph of a fully-clothed Western Bulldogs player holding his daughter on the field to be taken down.

Is this really gay porn?
Source:Western Bulldogs gallery

What are they saying? That gay people seeking photos of big hunky young men are necessarily also pedophiles who will derive sexual enjoyment from seeing clothed little girls? There's some very sinister reasoning going on here.

It's no secret that the AFL is a deeply-homophobic environment, where bigotry and infantile attitudes are ingrained. There are currently over 500 professional footballers. Many thousands have gone through its ranks in the past few decades. None have discussed their homosexuality. Of course, it could be that there weren't any. Or - much more plausible - the ones that are there have been frightened or pressured into staying silent.

How will the league move forward when blatant gay-hating double-standards like this go unchallenged? Where is the outrage and condemnation? The players need to get wise and accept that their appeal spans all flavours of human sexuality, or they should stop shamelessly promoting it to make a buck.

You can't have your (beef)cake and eat it, boys. Just grow up and get over yourselves.

Citations: SMH, 29/6/2006; The Age, 28/6/2006; or publicly

Word Count: 907

Labels: , ,



    <    >
  • Those women-friendly footy fan sites are absolutely frightening.

    Someone took time and "care" to put that claptrap together. What's even worse, other women found the sites and worse yet, found them worth "contributing" to.

    Woot woot woodle? woodle?



    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:35 am, July 08, 2006  

  • <    >
  • Yes, to add insult to injury Channel 7 have been spruiking a segment for tonight (Monday, July 10th) where they get some horny older women (divorcees?), load them up with bubbly and get them to rate the hunkiness and sexual allure of various footballers.

    This isn't even in Today Tonight - this is part of the friggin' 6 o'clock news.

    I weep for my country.

    By Blogger Greg, at 4:12 pm, July 10, 2006  

  • <    >
  • How can we expect these footballers to treat women with a modicum of respect if women themselves do not take a stand against misogynst and criminal behaviour? It is time that women take a stand by boycotting AFL games and other AFL sponsored initiatives in order to send a message that criminal behaviour is unnacceptable. Sadly, most women today seem to either not care or have been brainwashed by the media in believing that a true and real man is one who partakes in the rough and tumble pursuit of an oval shaped ball.

    By Anonymous Ben Wallace, at 12:23 pm, July 16, 2006  

  • <    >
  • I think we need to be careful to distinguish between the vast majority of womanhood, and the small (but loud) gaggle who pursue footballers as the closest thing we have to rootable celebrities.

    Unfortunately, these women have the most contact with footballers, which colours their view of women in general. A young dumb footballer thinks all women are like the ones trying to blow him in the toilets. Next thing you know, he's urinating on a normal woman at a bar and claims it's all a big misunderstanding!

    By Blogger Greg, at 12:59 pm, July 19, 2006  

  • <    >
  • I just want to say brilliant website. I just came across it, you really need to get this site around!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:42 pm, July 21, 2006  

  • <    >
  • Hey there,

    Gee, thanks! I agree with you totally; on both counts :-)

    But there's somethings you can do to help get the word around:

    * Subscribe We have RSS feeds for the posts and for the comments, as well as email subscription.

    * Promote Why not send a link around to some of your friends who might approve? But not at work. You never know when your boss is going to be a humourless footy-worshipping meathead.

    * Participate Make sure you visit when the next scandal hits the media (give it a few days for the dust to settle). Write some comments. Send in some tips-offs. We love scurrilous gossip and ill-founded allegations.

    Thanks again, and please: tell your friends!

    By Blogger Greg, at 12:07 am, July 22, 2006  

  • <    >
  • If anyone's looking for evidence the AFL is choc-a-block full of hate-filled, homophobic morons, have a squizz at this little episode involving Nick Riewoldt:

    The St Kilda superstar provoked outrage after making a comment vilifying gays on radio.

    In a word-association game during the Triple M program The Gospel, Riewoldt was asked to respond to the word "homosexual".

    He said: "Die."

    The forward apologised and tried to get the comment edited out of the program, which he co-hosts with Jason Dunstall, Nathan Brown and Peter Everitt. (Sunday Herald-Sun, 16/7/2006)

    What a disgraceful, "revolt-ing" little man. Clearly, he's got his own cross to bear when it comes to deeper psychological issues around sexuality.

    But he should have more self-respect than to bare his soul and inner turmoil so openly ...

    Nick, mate, get some counselling and come to terms with it. Don't spew your own hate and confusion all over the airwaves.

    By Blogger Greg, at 4:02 pm, July 26, 2006  

  • <    >
  • Where you in the studio? Do you know what the other side of the story was? Here is what I have heard:
    1) Must understand Nick get ribbed about his looks and that he maybe gay
    2) The show is Taped and the audio is played on MMM and the video+Audio on Foxtel.
    3) They were doing word associations and Nathan Brown being a bit of a smart ass said to Nick, "homosexual"
    4) (NB here is where the context is missed) Nick pointed to Brown and said Die. I.E. piss off and give it a rest
    5) HE straight away understood that this would be taken out of context and asked it to be edited out
    6) Foxtel did take it out, MMM didn't.

    So I think you need to take a grain of salt what you hear and read in the media as it is often taken out of context and often edited. Don't believe me? Have a look at the following:


    By Anonymous Phillip Molly Malone, at 2:54 pm, July 27, 2006  

  • <    >
  • Sure, Molly. And when Sideshow Bob tatooed "Die Bart, Die" on his chest, it really said (in German) "The Bart, the", as he carefully explained to the Parole Board.

    Damn, I'd hoped the youtube link would be actual footage of what went on in the studio ... sadly you've just (predictably) bent over backwards to put the best possible spin on a disgraceful episode.

    By Blogger Greg, at 3:46 pm, July 27, 2006  

  • <    >
  • Greg, that comment WAS taken out of context, and you need to get over yourself. Nick isn't homophobic, and the comment was directed at Nathan Brown who was again insinuating that Nick is gay, as he does often.

    On-topic, I think the AFLPA and any players who complained have massivel overreacted.


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:50 pm, August 06, 2006  

  • <    >
  • Quite ironic that fully grown men that prance around in tight shorts, jump all over each other in pursuit of a bag of air and take dainty backward steps after taking a mark can be homophobic. Riewoldt had good role models when he first came to St.Kilda, the Milne/Montagna tag-team! The AFL is a collection of the most homophobic and misogynist group of inidividuals that our society has to offer. Even Rugby League for all of its off field problems have had men that have come out of the closet with little if no homophobia attached, despite the fact that it is a much tougher sport.

    By Anonymous Ben Wallace, at 9:54 pm, August 06, 2006  

  • <    >
  • We're being asked to believe that Nick Riewoldt's "die" remark was directed at a fellow chat-show host, not homosexuals. As I indicated above, I have serious doubts about that.

    But even if it were true, what's the big deal in having someone suggest you're gay? Would he have had the same reaction if someone suggested he was Argentinian, a regular participant at Star Trek conventions or a practising vegeterian? (All of which, as with being gay, don't apply to Nick.) It must be that being called "gay" is an insult in AFL-land.

    And if he's so sick of the constant innuendo, why does he appear on a chat-show with those dickheads? Surely, with his hundreds of grand a year, he doesn't need the money.

    No, the whole line doesn't gel. The sorry incident points to a long-term, sustained gay-hating culture in the AFL.

    I support Ben's remarks about the poor comparison with our northern neighbours; juvenile sniggering about Hopoate and what happens in the scrum just further highlights the schoolyard attitudes down here.

    By Blogger Greg, at 1:24 pm, August 08, 2006  

  • <    >
  • the princesses need to toughen up or just come out.

    By Anonymous Jason, at 5:20 pm, July 19, 2014  

  • <    >
  • By Blogger Obat Sipilis, at 1:53 am, February 08, 2016  

Post a Comment    Comments: 

<< Home