The Gay Footballer

[i8hibsh]

53 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

I’m not sure these two lassies would agree with you:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-london-48555889

 

 

Assaults happen 24/7 for infinite reasons.

 

Scum be scum.

Edited July 10, 2019 by i8hibsh

[i8hibsh]

47 minutes ago, Morph said:

All of them are a choice apart from homosexuality. 

 

 

Of course, but all define the person.

[Tynieman]

There's a surprise, I8 arguing against something purely to get attention.

 

It's a sad reflection of you that you've been trolling for so long, all for a bit of attention.

 

You're boring. I thought you didn't care about Hearts so why don't you find a new Hobbie?  Why would you post on here if you no longer were interested in the club. Lonely?

[Spellczech]

7 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

It’s exactly how it works, when do the big statements stop, how can it ever be normal when we don’t act normally. Homophobia is very much on the decline, it will survive in the brains of morons who use any differences as a weapon, black, Muslim, catholic, gay. It’s as normal as it’s ever gonna be imo but the grand statements continue - what forever? 

This is where I am with this. Bullies will always go for a perceived weakness. Blithely labelling such acts as a "phobia" is wrong. It is simply bullying someone for being different and will always happen. Humans are still animals and animals have pecking orders. The more base and less humane a human is then the more like an animal s/he behaves. Civilisation is where people choose to live together in a society controlled by behavioural rules. Modern British society accepts homosexuality - it is written into the law. People who don't accept it need to be punished under that law, whether it is a blunt tool or not. There is no point in saying "ah but Africa, Asia and the Middle East ..." - that is their society and it is for them to adapt and advance their civilisation. Cultural imperialism is not for us to do, just as we ought not be foisting the imperfect system of democracy upon the Middle East just because our leaders believe it is better than despotism and rule by Kings (which we retain for tourism purposes - bit hypocritical?)

 

Life for gays in the UK is as good as it is likely to get. If anything there is a possibility of things going backwards as other minorities jump on board and we get extra letters on the LBGT...acronym and right-meaning but questionable decisions are taken like pushing children towards gender realignment. A factionalism within the LGBT community is also a risk as extremists seek more influence...Just as is happening in politics at the moment.

 

My interest in LGBT issues is limited to seeing how my niece develops with 2 mothers. My sister and her partner seem to be doing a good job but I do have reservations about the "Frankenbaby" element of my sister choosing donor sperm from a half Japanese (because she likes "the look"), highly intelligent Danish male who has committed to meet her just once at some point in her life to explain his reasons for doing what he did. On the flipside some kids never meet their father, even though they are conceived "naturally"...

 

Footballers heralding their homosexuality has no interest for me. I am not that into football and footballers' private lives that it matters one iota...

 

 

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

Of course, but all define the person.

Sexuality doesn't matter a jot to you, yet you think it defines them as a person. 

[i8hibsh]

3 minutes ago, Tynieman said:

There's a surprise, I8 arguing against something purely to get attention.

 

It's a sad reflection of you that you've been trolling for so long, all for a bit of attention.

 

You're boring. I thought you didn't care about Hearts so why don't you find a new Hobbie?  Why would you post on here if you no longer were interested in the club. Lonely?

 

 

Seeking attention as opposed to someone calling a press conference to tell everyone they are gay?

 

Who gives a ****?

[i8hibsh]

1 minute ago, Normthebarman said:

Sexuality doesn't matter a jot to you, yet you think it defines them as a person. 

 

Well they seem to always want to label themselves.  I reckon the labels people give themselves is quite defining.

[kevmacd]

2 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

This is where I am with this. Bullies will always go for a perceived weakness. Blithely labelling such acts as a "phobia" is wrong. It is simply bullying someone for being different and will always happen. Humans are still animals and animals have pecking orders. The more base and less humane a human is then the more like an animal s/he behaves. Civilisation is where people choose to live together in a society controlled by behavioural rules. Modern British society accepts homosexuality - it is written into the law. People who don't accept it need to be punished under that law, whether it is a blunt tool or not. There is no point in saying "ah but Africa, Asia and the Middle East ..." - that is their society and it is for them to adapt and advance their civilisation. Cultural imperialism is not for us to do, just as we ought not be foisting the imperfect system of democracy upon the Middle East just because our leaders believe it is better than despotism and rule by Kings (which we retain for tourism purposes - bit hypocritical?)

 

Life for gays in the UK is as good as it is likely to get. If anything there is a possibility of things going backwards as other minorities jump on board and we get extra letters on the LBGT...acronym and right-meaning but questionable decisions are taken like pushing children towards gender realignment. A factionalism within the LGBT community is also a risk as extremists seek more influence...Just as is happening in politics at the moment.

 

My interest in LGBT issues is limited to seeing how my niece develops with 2 mothers. My sister and her partner seem to be doing a good job but I do have reservations about the "Frankenbaby" element of my sister choosing donor sperm from a half Japanese (because she likes "the look"), highly intelligent Danish male who has committed to meet her just once at some point in her life to explain his reasons for doing what he did. On the flipside some kids never meet their father, even though they are conceived "naturally"...

 

Footballers heralding their homosexuality has no interest for me. I am not that into football and footballers' private lives that it matters one iota...

 

 

Good post, apart from the bit in bold. We can’t, as a society, simply accept that this is as good as it will get. In 10 years time, when we’ve had LGBT+ Ballon D’or winners and nobody actually gives a shit and ‘LGBT+’ is never used or needed to describe anyone or anything, it will possibly be as good as it can get.

[Spellczech]

6 minutes ago, kevmacd said:

Good post, apart from the bit in bold. We can’t, as a society, simply accept that this is as good as it will get. In 10 years time, when we’ve had LGBT+ Ballon D’or winners and nobody actually gives a shit and ‘LGBT+’ is never used or needed to describe anyone or anything, it will possibly be as good as it can get.

Who is doing the defining as "LGBT+"? It is usually the Meghan Rapinoes themselves...Whilst they see themselves as trailblazers, they are not normalising anything. Instead they are factionalising, by drawing attention to the very differences that they say should not matter...

 

The ideal of all people embracing every difference in everyone is a mere Utopian pipe dream. People need to be realistic about what can be achieved.  I used to work somewhere where a man who dressed as a woman wanted to use the female toilets...That was not pushing down boundaries, that was pushing buttons. (men found it merely funny, some women were not up for it at all - is that not counter to the view that women are more accepting, and men are more likely to be unreconstructed troglodytes when it comes to LBGT issues?)

Edited July 10, 2019 by Spellczech

[Locky]

While I agree with many that it shouldn't have to come to this, you can't help but think he has no choice to come out.

 

You can only imagine how much of a media circus there would be if a player was openly seen with another man, without ever declaring he was in fact gay. Least this way, the media get their bit of entertainment off the bat, and get it out the way.

 

The sad reality in all of this is, whether a gay footballer comes out or no, the only people who are going to really make such a song and dance, are the media. Be it positive press or not.

[FWJ]

23 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

Seeking attention as opposed to someone calling a press conference to tell everyone they are gay?

 

Who gives a ****?

Clearly you do because you’re always all over threads like this like a rash.

[Randy Marsh]

2 hours ago, i8hibsh said:

 

But most folk choose the UK.

 

I think a lot of people choosing to come to the UK rather than elsewhere is down to language barriers.  Folk trying to seek assylum tend to speak a decent level of English rather than any other languages.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Randy Marsh

[kevmacd]

6 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Who is doing the defining as "LGBT+"? It is usually the Meghan Rapinoes themselves...Whilst they see themselves as trailblazers, they are not normalising anything. Instead they are factionalising, by drawing attention to the very differences that they say should not matter...

 

The ideal of all people embracing every difference in everyone is a mere Utopian pipe dream. People need to be realistic about what can be achieved. 

Yeah, totally agree. That’s how it is at the moment. Society cannot stand still though and needs to constantly improve upon itself until the phrase is no longer needed - whether it’s being used to identify, persecute or defend.

 

’As good as it gets’ is not acceptable.  I think your sister would agree.

[Dallas Green]

1 hour ago, i8hibsh said:

 

Attitudes to everything in life stink. For example you are more at risk of attack in the UK if you are a Brexit supporting, non hating trump, pro Isreal, Tory Thatcherite than a homosexual.

 

Got any facts to back that up?

 

Also, all the things you list are a choice. Being gay isn't.

[Spellczech]

1 minute ago, kevmacd said:

Yeah, totally agree. That’s how it is at the moment. Society cannot stand still though and needs to constantly improve upon itself until the phrase is no longer needed - whether it’s being used to identify, persecute or defend.

 

’As good as it gets’ is not acceptable.  I think your sister would agree.

For sure, but are you assuming that because she is gay, she is better informed or her opinion more valid than mine?

 

The laws are in place to protect individuals from discrimination. It's a done deal. Anything more would be positive action, which I think is very damaging to a society as it seeks to right wrongs with more wrongs - example being the lad a few months back who was knocked back from being a policeman for being too white and straight.

[John Findlay]

Excuse my ignorance. What rights don't the LGBT have thst I do as a hetrosexual male.  I'm not upto date with the latest Scottish and UK law overall?

Human rights. Are we saying that certain groups human rights come before others? 

A footballer might be homosexual. Honestly so what.

It didn't stop a female gay footballer being voted best player at the tournament and winning the golden boot at the recent women's world cup.

There is no big deal over this.

[kevmacd]

23 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

For sure, but are you assuming that because she is gay, she is better informed or her opinion more valid than mine?

 

The laws are in place to protect individuals from discrimination. It's a done deal. Anything more would be positive action, which I think is very damaging to a society as it seeks to right wrongs with more wrongs - example being the lad a few months back who was knocked back from being a policeman for being too white and straight.

I’m assuming that, as a member of ‘the community’, she would be extremely unlikely to agree that this is as good as it gets.

[Spellczech]

9 minutes ago, kevmacd said:

I’m assuming that, as a member of ‘the community’, she would be extremely unlikely to agree that this is as good as it gets.

So how does that trump my opinion that all people, including "the community", you, me and even the extreme liberals who tend to get more offended on behalf of other people than the people who are actually offended against, need to be realistic about what can actually be achieved?

 

Ideals of complete non-discrimination where nobody is ever hurt by words or actions are a pipe dream, and thus an irrelevance. It is the same for domestic violence. We cannot stop people hitting their partner or kids, we just need to punish them when they do. That is why we have the law...and the law states that they have all the rights not to be discriminated against. It is a done deal.

 

If male footballers want to be openly gay in their workplace then the ball is in their court - the protections are all there. If that is what they want, then just get on and do it. The gay women footballers already have... Writing annonymous stuff on social media to herald it - that is no test of the waters, or the reception he will get. Life ain't that simple. Doing it quetly and without fanfare is likely to get a better response than doing it in a universal "look at me" way. Do the opinions of strangers including you and me, ever matter?

[Finlay James]

4 hours ago, Mr Elwood P said:

 

What laws specifically are you referring to?

 

I think he probably means protected characteristics rather than laws?

[Mr Elwood P]

11 minutes ago, Finlay James said:

 

I think he probably means protected characteristics rather than laws?

 

Protected how though? Think he’s just slavering pish as per !

[Shrekeo]

4 hours ago, Dallas Green said:

 

You are clueless.

 

My brother in law is gay, when he came out he started to get harassed, bullied and beaten up. 

 

It doesn't matter that there are laws against it, there are utter dregs in our society who will abuse people because they are gay. 

 

Making it more visible and acceptable in our society by people who are gay coming out in higher roles / prominent  roles and not corporations who change things for a month of the year helps.

 

Only a moron would try and link the braveness of fighting cancer to being gay.

 

Great post and bang on the cash!

[Shrekeo]

3 hours ago, i8hibsh said:

 

Attitudes to everything in life stink. For example you are more at risk of attack in the UK if you are a Brexit supporting, non hating trump, pro Isreal, Tory Thatcherite than a homosexual.

 

Peak I8.

 

 

[Shrekeo]

I would be fascinated to hear of anytime I8 has personally been prejudiced, bullied or discriminated against for being either straight, white, or male?

 

Not something he read in the Daily Mail or or on Twitter, but anytime this has personally happened to him.

 

It would give wonderful context and ammunition to his argument. 

[4marsbars]

2 hours ago, John Findlay said:

Excuse my ignorance. What rights don't the LGBT have thst I do as a hetrosexual male.  

 

People have a right to equal treatment. If everyone was treated equally, I think there would be more gay footballers.

 

My question is, how do you explain the extreme lack of 'out' gay professional male footballers?

 

As I see it (and these are just my opinions):

 

EITHER

There are lots of gay professional footballers, but they are unable to, or choose not to, talk about their home life (there are probably a few in that category, but my guess, and it is a guess, is that it is very few).

 

OR

Gay men are not good at football (I cannot accept this).

 

OR

Gay men who are good enough to be professional footballers do not choose that career (which seems the most likely explanation to me). In your terms, they have every 'right' to become professional footballers but something stops them. What do you think that something is? 

[i8hibsh]

31 minutes ago, Shrekeo said:

I would be fascinated to hear of anytime I8 has personally been prejudiced, bullied or discriminated against for being either straight, white, or male?

 

Not something he read in the Daily Mail or or on Twitter, but anytime this has personally happened to him.

 

It would give wonderful context and ammunition to his argument. 

 

 

The LGBTQ community discriminates against me by the very exclusive definition.

 

And as a p.s I do not read the daily mail and I do not use Twitter.

 

 

[XB52]

1 minute ago, 4marsbars said:

 

People have a right to equal treatment. If everyone was treated equally, I think there would be more gay footballers.

 

My question is, how do you explain the extreme lack of 'out' gay professional male footballers?

 

As I see it (and these are just my opinions):

 

EITHER

There are lots of gay professional footballers, but they are unable to, or choose not to, talk about their home life (there are probably a few in that category, but my guess, and it is a guess, is that it is very few).

 

OR

Gay men are not good at football (I cannot accept this).

 

OR

Gay men who are good enough to be professional footballers do not choose that career (which seems the most likely explanation to me). In your terms, they have every 'right' to become professional footballers but something stops them. What do you think that something is? 

Don't want to appear in anyway with i8 but the average gay guy is far more likely to be interested in the arts than sport. I know this is a generalisation but it is true. If course there will be a lot more gay footballers than this one english championship player but I am certain the percentage is way lower than in the general population. If this guy coming out publicly can help other gay men to feel more accepted in football  then that is surely a good thing. I just can't see any reason for people to get all Daily Mail on the subject

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

22 minutes ago, 4marsbars said:

 

People have a right to equal treatment. If everyone was treated equally, I think there would be more gay footballers.

 

My question is, how do you explain the extreme lack of 'out' gay professional male footballers?

 

As I see it (and these are just my opinions):

 

EITHER

There are lots of gay professional footballers, but they are unable to, or choose not to, talk about their home life (there are probably a few in that category, but my guess, and it is a guess, is that it is very few).

 

OR

Gay men are not good at football (I cannot accept this).

 

OR

Gay men who are good enough to be professional footballers do not choose that career (which seems the most likely explanation to me). In your terms, they have every 'right' to become professional footballers but something stops them. What do you think that something is? 

Well, given the prevalence of lesbians in woman's football, there may actually be a little truth in this.

[Dallas Green]

17 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

The LGBTQ community discriminates against me by the very exclusive definition.

 

And as a p.s I do not read the daily mail and I do not use Twitter.

 

 

 

There is a + at the end of LGBTQ for a reason.

 

I'm not surprised you aren't aware of its presence or what it means though. 

 

However, I'll explain a small part that falls under the +

 

Straight Allies. People who believe that LGBTQ+ should have the same rights as everyone else.

 

Cisgender. Which is a term given for people who identify as the gender they were born. Example - willie yer a boy, ***** yer a girl

 

So it isn't an exclusive definition, its actually inclusive.

 

Most straight people would fall under straight allies and cisgender as most would want equal rights for LGBTQ+ people.

 

If a person thinks someone who is gay doesnt deserves the same rights as someone who is straight, then that person is a ***** of the highest order.

 

Also, if you genuinely think that the LGBTQ+ community discriminates against you because you are straight then I actually feel sorry for you. You need help.

[Zico]

4 hours ago, Tazio said:

I think your definition of minority is extremely skewed. 

I8 thought the main stand windae cleaning bill would be in the hundreds of thousands a year so I don’t think maths is his strong point. 

[i8hibsh]

13 minutes ago, Dallas Green said:

 

There is a + at the end of LGBTQ for a reason.

 

I'm not surprised you aren't aware of its presence or what it means though. 

 

However, I'll explain a small part that falls under the +

 

Straight Allies. People who believe that LGBTQ+ should have the same rights as everyone else.

 

Cisgender. Which is a term given for people who identify as the gender they were born. Example - willie yer a boy, ***** yer a girl

 

So it isn't an exclusive definition, its actually inclusive.

 

Most straight people would fall under straight allies and cisgender as most would want equal rights for LGBTQ+ people.

 

If a person thinks someone who is gay doesnt deserves the same rights as someone who is straight, then that person is a ***** of the highest order.

 

Also, if you genuinely think that the LGBTQ+ community discriminates against you because you are straight then I actually feel sorry for you. You need help.

 

 

LGBTQ+ is not open to include me in any way shape or form.

 

Hope this clears this up.

 

 

[Serge Pizzorno]

In all honesty I think the account it’s a troll and not to be taken serious. 

 

If true however well done to the lad and hopefully if there is others out there who are hiding in fear, they now have the confidence to come out. 

[Dallas Green]

2 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

LGBTQ+ is not open to include me in any way shape or form.

 

Hope this clears this up.

 

 

Explain to me why it isn't?

[4marsbars]

41 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Don't want to appear in anyway with i8 but the average gay guy is far more likely to be interested in the arts than sport. I know this is a generalisation but it is true. If course there will be a lot more gay footballers than this one english championship player but I am certain the percentage is way lower than in the general population. If this guy coming out publicly can help other gay men to feel more accepted in football  then that is surely a good thing. I just can't see any reason for people to get all Daily Mail on the subject

 

The arts and sport - not really an either/or. Most people I know are into both. Measured by how I spend my time, although straight, I'm quite a bit more interested in the arts than sport. But I'm interested enough in sport to play football once a week (even at my age) and have a Hearts season ticket. 

 

[i8hibsh]

Just now, Dallas Green said:

Explain to me why it isn't?

 

 

I am straight.  Unless you are saying LGBTQ+ is 100% of the population?

[weaz1981]

5 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

I am straight.  Unless you are saying LGBTQ+ is 100% of the population?

He said it's everyone who isn't a homophobe...

[Dallas Green]

Just now, i8hibsh said:

 

 

I am straight.  Unless you are saying LGBTQ+ is 100% of the population?

 

LGBTQ+ includes straight allies. So either you don't believe that they should have the same rights or you do believe they deserve the same rights but YOU dont want to be included in the community which means you arent being discriminated against by LGBTQ+. You are deciding to exclude yourself (which is perfectly fine)

 

LGBTQ+ isn't 100% of the population because some people are against equal right or don't want to be part of the community. 

 

LGBTQ+ does not discriminate or exclude anyone from their community however.

[i8hibsh]

3 minutes ago, weaz1981 said:

He said it's everyone who isn't a homophobe...

 

 

But they support Islam.

[i8hibsh]

3 minutes ago, Dallas Green said:

 

LGBTQ+ includes straight allies. So either you don't believe that they should have the same rights or you do believe they deserve the same rights but YOU dont want to be included in the community which means you arent being discriminated against by LGBTQ+. You are deciding to exclude yourself (which is perfectly fine)

 

LGBTQ+ isn't 100% of the population because some people are against equal right or don't want to be part of the community. 

 

LGBTQ+ does not discriminate or exclude anyone from their community however.

 

 

What about straight people who simply do not give a flying **** about what they do in their private life but simply does not buy into the whole rainbow flag 'thing'.

[i8hibsh]

2 minutes ago, sassenach said:

I'd never heard of cisgender - every day's a school day.

I'm not really sure why there's a need for a specific word, though.

 

 

Just another label for those who don't want to be defined.

[Shrekeo]

1 hour ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

The LGBTQ community discriminates against me by the very exclusive definition.

 

And as a p.s I do not read the daily mail and I do not use Twitter.

 

 

 

So you personally have never actually been prejudiced, bullied or discriminated against for being straight, white or male, yet you believe yourself to be persecuted? 

 

 

[Ibrahim Tall]

1 hour ago, 4marsbars said:

Gay men who are good enough to be professional footballers do not choose that career (which seems the most likely explanation to me). In your terms, they have every 'right' to become professional footballers but something stops them. What do you think that something is? 

 

Tbh I’m not sure how that could be considered the ‘most likely scenario’ of the three?

 

Becoming a professional sportsman isn’t as simple as a choice, you either have the ability or you don’t. Perhaps for one reason or another you may apply yourself more and train harder but to assume there’s apparently thousands of potential professional-level gay footballers out there  just not ‘playing’ through choice is fanciful at best and if it existed would be pretty obvious.

[i8hibsh]

2 minutes ago, Shrekeo said:

 

So you personally have never actually been prejudiced, bullied or discriminated against for being straight, white or male, yet you believe yourself to be persecuted? 

 

 

 

 

I don't believe myself to be persecuted.  I don't give the slightest **** about being allowed entry into LGBTQ+.

 

I, like most people in LGBTQ+ in this country have a pretty non oppressed life.

[Dallas Green]

Just now, i8hibsh said:

 

 

What about straight people who simply do not give a flying **** about what they do in their private life but simply does not buy into the whole rainbow flag 'thing'.

 

That's fine if that is what you choose to feel. Do not see how that means LGBTQ+ discriminates against you though.

 

Just now, sassenach said:

I'd never heard of cisgender - every day's a school day.

I'm not really sure why there's a need for a specific word, though.

 

I think it came about to stop people using the term "normal" when describing people who were recognised as the gender they were born as, so transgender people didn't feel like there "weren't normal" I could be wrong though.

 

5 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

Just another label for those who don't want to be defined.

 

Read above.

 

1 minute ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

I don't believe myself to be persecuted.  I don't give the slightest **** about being allowed entry into LGBTQ+.

 

I, like most people in LGBTQ+ in this country have a pretty non oppressed life.

 

 You said yourself you are discriminated against. It also isn't a club you gain entry to.

 

Also, until 2014 gay people couldn't get married in Scotland. That is oppressive. 

[i8hibsh]

2 minutes ago, Dallas Green said:

 

That's fine if that is what you choose to feel. Do not see how that means LGBTQ+ discriminates against you though.

 

 

I think it came about to stop people using the term "normal" when describing people who were recognised as the gender they were born as, so transgender people didn't feel like there "weren't normal" I could be wrong though.

 

 

Read above.

 

 

 You said yourself you are discriminated against. It also isn't a club you gain entry to.

 

Also, until 2014 gay people couldn't get married in Scotland. That is oppressive. 

 

 

Marriage is oppressive full stop

[4marsbars]

13 minutes ago, Ibrahim Tall said:

 

Tbh I’m not sure how that could be considered the ‘most likely scenario’ of the three?

 

Becoming a professional sportsman isn’t as simple as a choice, you either have the ability or you don’t. Perhaps for one reason or another you may apply yourself more and train harder but to assume there’s apparently thousands of potential professional-level gay footballers out there  just not ‘playing’ through choice is fanciful at best and if it existed would be pretty obvious.

 

To be clear, I wrote 'choose' but a better word might be 'pursue'.

 

What do you think is the more likely explanation for the apparent lack of gay professional footballers?

 

 

[The Internet]

Surprised at how this thread has turned out. 

[JimKongUno]

6 minutes ago, 4marsbars said:

 

To be clear, I wrote 'choose' but a better word might be 'pursue'.

 

What do you think is the more likely explanation for the apparent lack of gay professional footballers?

 

 

 

Not trying to be funny , there were a couple of gay lads in my class at school and they preferred gymnastics and bally dancing to football .

[jambopilms]

One for the shed ?

[Norm]

20 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

Marriage is oppressive full stop

It is when your married to my missus.... 

[Ibrahim Tall]

9 minutes ago, 4marsbars said:

 

To be clear, I wrote 'choose' but a better word might be 'pursue'.

 

What do you think is the more likely explanation for the apparent lack of gay professional footballers?

 

 

 

“1 in 10” men are apparently gay, 1 in 3 people on earth are Chinese or Indian. Why are they so few Chinese and Indian professional footballers?

 

Theres of course a strong possibility that a  number of players are “in the closest” but from my own experience at both school and work gay men on average are less interested in football than ‘straight’ men and those that were tended to be pretty useless at football. Women being the opposite.

 

In exactly the same way that kids who were brilliant at  e.g. maths and physics at school and top of the class tended to also be less interested in football.