Gay footballers | Czech Republic international Jakub Jankto comes out as gay

[KirkDuyt]

The ignorance in this thread is truly awesome, thank you caf. Some of it really reads like the union. I mean, at least half of it must be trolling?

I have no problem with these gays man, they are just always, you know, prone to being attention seeking drama queens, so of course they want to scream their sexuality from the rooftops. I had a gay neighbor once and he was always like Hiiiiiii! they're all very dramatic. But yeah, totally cool man. I love the gays.

 

[MrPooni]

That is my issue. It's not a homophobic view, where has he expressed any dislike towards gay people? It isn't offensive, he hasn't actually said anything bad about gay people whatsoever. Why is it that everything that isn't common opinion is immediately labelled 'offensive' and the people who express these opinions (only when asked, by the way) are immediately laughed at or are essentially told they should be ashamed of their opinion? Is that not as bad as someone supposedly being homophobic in the first place?

No mate. Are there any other painfully absurd false equivalences you need clearing up or have you had your fill for the day?

 

[The Boy]

Or maybe he just does not want to get banned from here?

Actually i think you should be congratulating @SiRed

It takes courage to come into a thread get slaughtered and then say actually I've read your points I hadn't thought about that, thanks for changing my view. A bit more of that sort of thing in general society is much needed at the moment.

 

[SalfordRed18]

Yeah, absolutely - I'd go further and say that most prejudice occurs outside of words that are overtly prejudiced, especially in the modern day and age.

It's something that people who don't suffer minority prejudice have trouble grasping - but are getting better at accepting.

In this day and age the average homophobe / racist etc know that they can't socially get away with slurs - and so a new style of prejudice has emerged where the offending party thinks nothing of keeping their own views mainly hidden (as in most cases they believe that they are the one being marginalized - by 'political correctness, and 'multi-culturalism' and 'gay agenda' etc), and it will be a more discrete and snidey form of discrimination that is experienced by the person on the other end.

Think about 'race debates' right here on Redcafe for example - no-one ever comes out and admits that they're a racist who doesn't like 'black culture', yet the chances of that being the case, statistically are very low, and then add into the equation that the conversation is often deeply unpleasant, full of insults (yet not racist ones) and there is a clear tone of hatred and racism.

The prejudice poster know that they'll be banned and / or completely ridiculed if they actually say what they feel (a fact which fairly obviously aggravates them more-so - they can't leave the topic alone, yet can't actually communicate freely within it) so the slurs are buried, and morph into a different, more complex form of prejudice.

All this, of course, lends itself wonderfully to the current climate of divisive politics.

Not so great for the people who actually live in the society though and have to deal with the new, sleek, subtle prejudice trends.

If this was Reddit you'd be given gold.

 

[Kag]

You'd also have to be as thick as a brick to chance a life view based on a couple of comments on an internet football forum. I certainly wouldn't, even if it risked a ban.

My view is in the same camp as many others: "Why the need to announce it".

Just live your life, and let others live theirs how they see fit; as long as it's legal, and not harming anybody else.

It’s the only metric I have to go off. It’s why I don’t use my account on RedCafe to foster homophobic, racist or intolerant views. What other possible conclusion would members of this forum come to if I were to do this?

Your why the need to announce it view? has been intelligently taken apart on multiple occasions throughout this thread. If you haven’t read those comments and learned something then I would suggest giving it a go. If you have read those comments and still continue to drive that narrative then you’re either a) thick as a brick or b) wilfully ignorant.

You may not like my robust stance on this. But it’s a fairly simple issue that people are complicating because they refuse to pull their own head out of their arse.

 

[MsNuno]

I don’t think anyone does give a shit, it’s not the 70s anymore.

Plus nobody these days should feel the need to “come out” it’s not some shameful secret just get one with your life no fecker cares.

So why do people get beaten up for being gay, if no fecker cares? Why are footballers afraid to be open about their sexuality if no fecker cares?
Homophobic attacks are increasing which suggest that its still a big issue.

 

[Nick7]

The "it's legal" argument, despite being factually wrong, always seems like a dog whistle argument to me. Like "be happy you're not getting arrested so you should accept homophobia". I don't know if that's just me, but that's how I always read that argument and roll my eyes.

 

[Kag]

Yeah, absolutely - I'd go further and say that most prejudice occurs outside of words that are overtly prejudiced, especially in the modern day and age.

It's something that people who don't suffer minority prejudice have trouble grasping - but are getting better at accepting.

In this day and age the average homophobe / racist etc know that they can't socially get away with slurs - and so a new style of prejudice has emerged where the offending party thinks nothing of keeping their own views mainly hidden (as in most cases they believe that they are the one being marginalized - by 'political correctness, and 'multi-culturalism' and 'gay agenda' etc), and it will be a more discrete and snidey form of discrimination that is experienced by the person on the other end.

Think about 'race debates' right here on Redcafe for example - no-one ever comes out and admits that they're a racist who doesn't like 'black culture', yet the chances of that being the case, statistically are very low, and then add into the equation that the conversation is often deeply unpleasant, full of insults (yet not racist ones) and there is a clear tone of hatred and racism.

The prejudice poster know that they'll be banned and / or completely ridiculed if they actually say what they feel (a fact which fairly obviously aggravates them more-so - they can't leave the topic alone, yet can't actually communicate freely within it) so the slurs are buried, and morph into a different, more complex form of prejudice.

All this, of course, lends itself wonderfully to the current climate of divisive politics.

Not so great for the people who actually live in the society though and have to deal with the new, sleek, subtle prejudice trends.

Yep. Spot on.

 

[Denis79]

Yeah, absolutely - I'd go further and say that most prejudice occurs outside of words that are overtly prejudiced, especially in the modern day and age.

It's something that people who don't suffer minority prejudice have trouble grasping - but are getting better at accepting.

In this day and age the average homophobe / racist etc know that they can't socially get away with slurs - and so a new style of prejudice has emerged where the offending party thinks nothing of keeping their own views mainly hidden (as in most cases they believe that they are the one being marginalized - by 'political correctness, and 'multi-culturalism' and 'gay agenda' etc), and it will be a more discrete and snidey form of discrimination that is experienced by the person on the other end.

Think about 'race debates' right here on Redcafe for example - no-one ever comes out and admits that they're a racist who doesn't like 'black culture', yet the chances of that being the case, statistically are very low, and then add into the equation that the conversation is often deeply unpleasant, full of insults (yet not racist ones) and there is a clear tone of hatred and racism.

The prejudice poster know that they'll be banned and / or completely ridiculed if they actually say what they feel (a fact which fairly obviously aggravates them more-so - they can't leave the topic alone, yet can't actually communicate freely within it) so the slurs are buried, and morph into a different, more complex form of prejudice.

All this, of course, lends itself wonderfully to the current climate of divisive politics.

Not so great for the people who actually live in the society though and have to deal with the new, sleek, subtle prejudice trends.

Good post but my personal view is that open racism has become more and more accepted, far right winds are blowing all over the "free" world and people are categorically being sorted and labelled, with smarter constructed sentances as you mention but it has become more accepted. It's going to get worse as well.

 

[Massive Spanner]

That is my issue. It's not a homophobic view, where has he expressed any dislike towards gay people? It isn't offensive, he hasn't actually said anything bad about gay people whatsoever. Why is it that everything that isn't common opinion is immediately labelled 'offensive' and the people who express these opinions (only when asked, by the way) are immediately laughed at or are essentially told they should be ashamed of their opinion? Is that not as bad as someone supposedly being homophobic in the first place?

Plenty of posters have already put it far more eloquently than I could in here, I'd suggest you read their posts. The short answer is that it is a homophobic view.

 

[The Boy]

Why do people need to announce 'IM GAY'

I didn't announce 'I'm Straight' I just got a girlfriend and people worked it out.

I think in this day and age being gay is not that big a thing as it used to people 10/20 years ago.

I don't think any footballer should come out and make a huge announcement. They should live their life and if he has a boyfriend then everyone will cotton on quite quickly that he is gay.

This is essentially what others in this thread have been saying and they have been ridiculed for it. A lot of people in our society have a bad habit of bashing whoever doesn't agree with their point of view or even a common and labelling it 'offensive'.

At best this view is thoughtless, self centred and completely unempathetic at worst perfectly fair to call it homophobic. if youve read this thread which has explained 100s of times why people should not have to keep this to themselves and still disagree, then yes absolutely homophobic

 

[Tarrou]

But it really isn't. Being gay (or queer in any other way) is still viewed by many as not normal, to varying degrees. Some people are outright hostile towards LGBTQ people, whereas many more people just quietly think being straight is the normal way and anything else is abnormal or wrong in some way. These attitudes are especially prevalent in sports. Growing up I played ice hockey, floorball and football. I still play floorball and football recreationally. Gay jokes and bad attitudes towards gay players are still, in 2019, the norm in these circles.

The only way these attitudes have any chance of changing if people have the courage to come out and say "I am a gay footballer" or "I am a gay hockey player", and to force people to confront the fact that there is nothing weird, wrong or abnormal about being gay or queer. To give a face to the issue, to make bigoted people realize that this guy I've admired and looked up to, or with whom I've played for years and am good friends with, is what I think is bad or wrong, and to hopefully examine their attitudes. It also makes it easier for more people to come out in the open and be who they are, as they are. It must be horrible having to hide your identity and listen to people treat something central to your being as a joke, as a putdown and as an insult.

The other way for these attitudes to change is that when someone does say something stupid, ignorant or bigoted, those who don't share their attitudes need to speak up and say it's not cool. To support those who do have the courage to come out and be as they are, and make it known that the world in general does not agree with gay bashers or their attitudes.

To paraphrase John Stuart Mill, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

Fantastic post

You should post a bit more than twice every five years

 

[Bestietom]

Fash's brother Justin came out years ago.

 

[Salt Bailly]

Thomas Hiltzelsperger came out after retirement if i remember correctly. Why come out though.... nothing to be gained from it other than influencing the next generation, which i am against personally.

WTF

Thomas Hitzlsperger is gay?!

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Good post but my personal view is that open racism has become more and more accepted, far right winds are blowing all over the "free" world and people are categorically being sorted and labelled, with smarter constructed sentances as you mention but it has become more accepted. It's going to get worse as well.

They're rarely THAT open though...even in those cases - they will nearly always actually argue that they 'aren't racist'.

Racist Trump supporters know, and like, that he's a racist, as with Tommy Robinson, Farage etc - but they accept (and indeed copy) the rewarded cowardice of their figurehead and will passionately argue that they aren't prejudiced.

Which is really strange when you think about it. Almost like a racism / homophobia 'closet', ironically!

Of course, not every Trump, Robinson, Farage supporter is a racist, and thus is created the grey, slippery realm where modern prejudices exist.

 

[Reddy Rederson]

What I dont understand is why a group of gay players dont come out together? Whenever we have this conversation its about that brave first one. So why not avoid it, and get a group to come out together? We know that they arent all hiding it from team mates, so there will be at least a few that know each other. So why not come out as group, supported by their team mates and clubs. That way no one person has to burden the responsibility of being "the first gay footballer" and the reality of gay people in football can move forward?

The only way we move forward with this is to push it. I remember the shocking racism in scotland aimed at Mark Walters back in the 80s for being black. Not sure if he was the first black player, but being a rangers player couldnt have made him more high profile. The same for Mo Johnston, who suffered horrific abuse for being the first high profile catholic signed by rangers in 1989. Now, no one cares. It just takes time, but you have to start somewhere. And like I said, coming out in a group will make it at least a little easier than just one man standing alone being called names by "real men" .

 

[MrPooni]

You'd also have to be as thick as a brick to change a life view based on a couple of comments on an internet football forum. I certainly wouldn't, even if it risked a ban.

My view is in the same camp as many others: "Why the need to announce it".

Just live your life, and let others live theirs how they see fit; as long as it's legal (not just referring to this subject, obviously, as I know there is a contention in some countries regarding this, which shouldn't be the case), and not harming anybody else.

Yeah man, you'd have to be a right pillock to allow a massive platform where thousands of people from around the world come to exchange their different views and experiences to impact your narrow view of wider society. Who the feck needs empathy and an outward-looking mindset? A thick bastard, that's who. Why can't everybody live out their lonely, boring, cyclical existences in a vacuum devoid of any personal growth like the rest of us? Just live your lives, you know what I mean?

 

[World Game]

"Christian Christensen, Professor of Journalism in Stockholm, argues that the accusation of whataboutism is itself a form of tu quoque fallacy, as it dismisses criticisms of one's own behavior to focus instead on the actions of another, thus creating a double standard. Those who use whataboutism are not necessarily engaging in an empty or cynical deflection of responsibility: whataboutism can be a useful tool to expose contradictions, double standards, and hypocrisy. "

The term is named because usually the counter questions are of the form "what about...". You see this tactic among politicians quite often in order to avoid and deflect criticism aimed at them. However, it is also abused by people who want to undermine arguments that point out genuine hyprocrisies when they ought to be called to attention.

Refuting a claim with "what about..." ? Yes that is a fallacy because it doesn't address the claim.
Pointing out hypocrisy with "what about..." ? That is appropriate.

Given that our conversation has become too much of a tangent to the original post of the thread, I will be happy to continue the discussion through private messaging.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Yeah man, you'd have to be a right pillock to allow a massive platform where thousands of people from around the world come to exchange their different views and experiences to impact your narrow view of wider society. Who the feck needs empathy and an outward-looking mindset? A thick bastard, that's who. Why can't everybody live out their lonely, boring, cyclical existences in a vacuum devoid of any personal growth like the rest of us? Just live your lives, you know what I mean?

This is giving me great inspiration for my tombstone.

Not that I'm dying, but still.

 

[SalfordRed18]

What I dont understand is why a group of gay players dont come out together? Whenever we have this conversation its about that brave first one. So why not avoid it, and get a group to come out together? We know that they arent all hiding it from team mates, so there will be at least a few that know each other. So why not come out as group, supported by their team mates and clubs. That way no one person has to burden the responsibility of being "the first gay footballer" and the reality of gay people in football can move forward?

The only way we move forward with this is to push it. I remember the shocking racism in scotland aimed at Mark Walters back in the 80s for being black. Not sure if he was the first black player, but being a rangers player couldnt have made him more high profile. The same for Mo Johnston, who suffered horrific abuse for being the first high profile catholic signed by rangers in 1989. Now, no one cares. It just takes time, but you have to start somewhere. And like I said, coming out in a group will make it at least a little easier than just one man standing alone being called names by "real men" .

Do they have WhatsApp group? How do we know some aren't hiding it from teammates?

 

[Denis79]

They're rarely THAT open though...even in those cases - they will nearly always actually argue that they 'aren't racist'.

Racist Trump supporters know, and like, that he's a racist, as with Tommy Robinson, Farage etc - but they accept (and indeed copy) the rewarded cowardice of their figurehead and will passionately argue that they aren't prejudiced.

Which is really strange when you think about it. Almost like a racism / homophobia 'closet', ironically!

Of course, not every Trump, Robinson, Farage supporter is a racist, and thus is created the grey, slippery realm where modern prejudices exist.

You are absolutely correct, they can call themselves whatever they want, deny however much they want, but we know and even they know what they really are. That these views and that rethoric is even acceptable shows that the tolerance for hate has grown.

I'm not that knowledgable in US politics but this problem is spreading in Europe as well.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Do they have WhatsApp group? How do we know some aren't hiding it from teammates?

They have gaydar, duh.

 

[Nick7]

"Christian Christensen, Professor of Journalism in Stockholm, argues that the accusation of whataboutism is itself a form of tu quoque fallacy, as it dismisses criticisms of one's own behavior to focus instead on the actions of another, thus creating a double standard. Those who use whataboutism are not necessarily engaging in an empty or cynical deflection of responsibility: whataboutism can be a useful tool to expose contradictions, double standards, and hypocrisy. "

The term is named because usually the counter questions are of the form "what about...". You see this tactic among politicians quite often in order to avoid and deflect criticism aimed at them. However, it is also abused by people who want to undermine arguments that point out genuine hyprocrisies when they ought to be called to attention.

Refuting a claim with "what about..." ? Yes that is a fallacy because it doesn't address the claim.
Pointing out hypocrisy with "what about..." ? That is appropriate.

Given that our conversation has become too much of a tangent to the original post of the thread, I will be happy to continue the discussion through private messaging.

There was no hypocrisy. Your posts were the definition of cynical whataboutery.

 

[3KDré]

At best this view is thoughtless, self centred and completely unempathetic at worst perfectly fair to call it homophobic. if youve read this thread which has explained 100s of times why people should not have to keep this to themselves and still disagree, then yes absolutely homophobic

The point is not to hide it. I never said that, if I did then you could call me a homophobe. Regardless of what my view is (which I haven't really shared), my point it isn't fair to belittle people for their opinion when they've all been asked to share it. That's what a forum is for right?

 

[Nick7]

The point is not to hide it. I never said that, if I did then you could call me a homophobe. Regardless of what my view is (which I haven't really shared), my point it isn't fair to belittle people for their opinion when they've all been asked to share it. That's what a forum is for right?

To not hide it, is to come out. The default most people assume is straight, therefore without coming out you would be assumed straight. The only way to avoid that, is to come out. The statement "why do they have to come out" or whatever is a prime example of what @Rhyme Animal posted on the previous page.

 

[Acrobat7]

These threads are always perfect to update my ignore list.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

You are absolutely correct, they can call themselves whatever they want, deny however much they want, but we know and even they know what they really are. That these views and that rethoric is even acceptable shows that the tolerance for hate has grown.

But the flip-side is that as more time has gone on, more and more non-prejudice people are becoming savvy to this behaviour from those perpetrating it.

I agree it's a depressing and divisive time politically, and obviously that drips down through society, but hopefully the next generation are more savvy and equipped to deal with (and disarm) it.

 

[KirkDuyt]

These threads are always perfect to update my ignore list.

Really? I find genuine pleasure in reading some of these comments. It makes me feel intelligent and morally superior. It's better than most drugs.

 

[Camilo]

So why do people get beaten up for being gay, if no fecker cares? Why are footballers afraid to be open about their sexuality if no fecker cares?
Homophobic attacks are increasing which suggest that its still a big issue.

People get beaten up for anything and everything. People are stupid. Our society is thick as shit.

But mostly I just think people are unhappy in their own lives. There's a lot of bored, unsatisfied people leaving unfulfilling lives and they lash out at anything; foreigners, people of different religions, people of different sexualities, people of different political views, people of different housing estates.. Happy people don't hate nearly so much.

I don't think it's a genuine hate of gay people plaguing the UK, it's a general hate of everything. I wouldn't blame anyone for wanting to avoid that hate, but I think the core issue is simple frustrations from lives not living up to expectations.

 

[World Game]

Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you just dumb?

Organised religion and sexuality are not the same thing.

I ask the questions in good faith. I wish to learn more about your views and why you hold them. Especially for someone like you who seems to have a strong opinion on this topic I thought you would be willing to share even more of your views and reasoning. So I question if you hold the same or similar principles in other areas of life. I don't ask much. They are just simple yes/no questions. Like "Do you think it's possible to disagree with the way someone lives without treating them differently?"

 

[Charlie Foley]

Do you think it's possible to disagree with the way someone lives without treating them differently? My questions may have seemed irrelevant but I asked them to make my point in a roundabout way. Seeing as you don't support Islam at all, would it be correct for people to call label you as an Islamophobe? You don't support Christianity at all, you are a Christophobe then? People who don't want more refugees in their countries, they are Xenophobes?

 

[Nick7]

I ask the questions in good faith. I wish to learn more about your views and why you hold them. Especially for someone like you who seems to have a strong opinion on this topic I thought you would be willing to share even more of your views and reasoning. So I question if you hold the same or similar principles in other areas of life. I don't ask much. They are just simple yes/no questions. Like "Do you think it's possible to disagree with the way someone lives without treating them differently?"

"in good faith" your posts have absolutely not been in good faith. Every single one of them is an attempted "gotcha"

 

[RobinLFC]

Really? I find genuine pleasure in reading some of these comments. It makes me feel intelligent and morally superior. It's better than most drugs.

See now you're pushing it.

 

[World Game]

There was no hypocrisy. Your posts were the definition of cynical whataboutery.

Actually our first point of discussion was based on the claim of being homophobe if you don't support homosexuality. So I question whether "not supporting" something or some people makes one an xxxphobe. The second point which arose from the first is "treating someone differently because of xxx" makes you an xxxphobe.

 

[Denis79]

But the flip-side is that as more time has gone on, more and more non-prejudice people are becoming savvy to this behaviour from those perpetrating it.

I agree it's a depressing and divisive time politically, and obviously that drips down through society, but hopefully the next generation are more savvy and equipped to deal with (and disarm) it.

I hope this is the case but children tend to embrace the views of their parents because it's how they have been brought up. I can honestly say that the future that potentionally awaits my children scares me. I've seen and lived through terrible things here in Serbia, during the war, all of it was brought by hate and greed. I hope my children never experience what hate can bring.

 

[MrPooni]

"Christian Christensen, Professor of Journalism in Stockholm, argues that the accusation of whataboutism is itself a form of tu quoque fallacy, as it dismisses criticisms of one's own behavior to focus instead on the actions of another, thus creating a double standard. Those who use whataboutism are not necessarily engaging in an empty or cynical deflection of responsibility: whataboutism can be a useful tool to expose contradictions, double standards, and hypocrisy. "

The term is named because usually the counter questions are of the form "what about...". You see this tactic among politicians quite often in order to avoid and deflect criticism aimed at them. However, it is also abused by people who want to undermine arguments that point out genuine hyprocrisies when they ought to be called to attention.

Refuting a claim with "what about..." ? Yes that is a fallacy because it doesn't address the claim.
Pointing out hypocrisy with "what about..." ? That is appropriate.

Given that our conversation has become too much of a tangent to the original post of the thread, I will be happy to continue the discussion through private messaging.

Do you actually understand what you just copy and pasted it or did you just Google "How to respond to accusations of whataboutism?" and pray for the best? Because until you point out the hypocrisy you're apparently accusing me of, I'm going to assume the latter.

 

[Charlie Foley]

Do you think it's possible to disagree with the way someone lives without treating them differently? My questions may have seemed irrelevant but I asked them to make my point in a roundabout way. Seeing as you don't support Islam at all, would it be correct for people to call label you as an Islamophobe? You don't support Christianity at all, you are a Christophobe then? People who don't want more refugees in their countries, they are Xenophobes?

Obviously not
Obviously not
Probably yes (I say probably because Xenophobe is rather derogatory and I am thinking of those Seychelles indigenous people who don’t want anyone showing up...which is fair enough in my book-I just don’t know should I call them xenophobic even though that might be exactly the word to use)

But being gay isn’t “a way you live”...it’s a part of who you are. I don’t believe anyone who phrases like that is asking “in good faith” because they aren’t. It’s just irrelevant questions, false equivalencies to try to support a point you can’t actually support.

 

[Reddy Rederson]

Do they have WhatsApp group? How do we know some aren't hiding it from teammates?

Since the heat is getting to you, Ill highlight what you skipped in my post.

What I dont understand is why a group of gay players dont come out together? Whenever we have this conversation its about that brave first one. So why not avoid it, and get a group to come out together? We know that they arent all hiding it from team mates, so there will be at least a few that know each other. So why not come out as group, supported by their team mates and clubs. That way no one person has to burden the responsibility of being "the first gay footballer" and the reality of gay people in football can move forward?

The only way we move forward with this is to push it. I remember the shocking racism in scotland aimed at Mark Walters back in the 80s for being black. Not sure if he was the first black player, but being a rangers player couldnt have made him more high profile. The same for Mo Johnston, who suffered horrific abuse for being the first high profile catholic signed by rangers in 1989. Now, no one cares. It just takes time, but you have to start somewhere. And like I said, coming out in a group will make it at least a little easier than just one man standing alone being called names by "real men" .

So a group of gay players. Not all of them, or even most of them. As for how we know some arent hiding it from team mates, its been mentioned by players in the past during interviews.

 

[World Game]

Obviously not
Obviously not
Probably yes (I say probably because Xenophobe is rather derogatory and I am thinking of those Seychelles indigenous people who don’t want anyone showing up...which is fair enough in my book-I just don’t know should I call them xenophobic even though that might be exactly the word to use)

But being gay isn’t “a way you live”...it’s a part of who you are. I don’t believe anyone who phrases like that is asking “in good faith” because they aren’t. It’s just irrelevant questions, false equivalencies to try to support a point you can’t actually support.

And your view on the first question? Do you think it's possible to disagree with the way someone lives without treating them differently?

I am sorry if I come across as anything else but asking in good faith. How should I be phrasing instead?

 

[RochaRoja]

I just came to say that I support you SIred. As I have nothing against gay people I have a lot against publicly stating your sexual orientation.
The same way I would be against a footballer going out and stating proudly he is into pissing play in sex or something even kinkier. tI is something I do not care and I do not need this info. Just feck whomever you wish and how you both(or more) like it. No need to make it public ffs.

That’s a yikes from me.