The Prejudices in Professional Football

Moscow, the capital city of Russia and the likely final of the 2018 Football World Cup. Rewind back to the present day and the influential city is at the end of negative media attention after the events of Tuesday night: A Champions League game between CSKA Moscow and Manchester City.

Manchester City player Yaya Toure claimed to the referee, Ovidiu Hategan, he had been receiving racial abuse from some Moscow fans, an allegation the Russian club strongly deny. CSKA, to make matters worse, have accused Toure he 'dreamt' the monkey noises. Toure has said if black players keep receiving the same treatment in Russia all African countries should boycott the 2018 World Cup - a threat his international teammates (Ivory Coast) have agreed to do.

1,700 miles away from Moscow back in England, I think we are combating racism successfully. I have never heard racist chanting at any football match I have attended. Credit has to go to the F.A and effective campaigns such as 'Lets Kick Racism Out of Football'.

T-Shirts footballers wear before games to support the campaign. Picture courtesy of kickitout.org

 

With racism being as good as under control why have the F.A not tried to eradicate other prejudices such as homophobia or sexism? These two bias seem to be second class compared to racism.

I am sure there will be people raising their eyebrows reading that statement but I am merely questioning why the F.A feel the need to oppose one prejudice yet think it's okay to ignore others?

Homophobia was in the spotlight a few weeks ago when troublemaker Joey Barton, of all people, wanted to make a stance against homophobia in football by wearing rainbow laces on his boots. Barton encouraged other professional footballers to do this, to be fair, a lot of footballers did. Despite all the media attention not one professional footballer has come out as gay or bi-sexual, cricketers and rugby players have come out as gay in the past year, is football behind other sports when it comes to discrimination?

In 2009 England player Sol Campbell was subject to homophobic chants by a minority of Portsmouth fans in a Premier League game, the player isn't even gay! Sol Campbell is black and fans choose to chant homophobic abuse at the player - does this mean racism has been tackled so fans choose to discriminate in other ways?

Sexism; another taboo that the F.A has choose not to impede on. In a sport which is widely dominated by men how can football not be sexist?

Referees and linespersons get a lot of abuse from fans no matter if they get a decision right or wrong. Sian Massey one of the top linespersons in the English Football League has undoubtedly received a lot of sexist comments throughout her time running the line in football games. Yet statistically she has got one of the best success rates (correct offside decisions) in England.

Sian Massey one of the best linespersons in the country - yet she has received criticism for being a female. Picture courtesy of guardian.com

When a high profile pundit like Andy Gray humiliates a lineswoman with bigoted comments the public reacts; some would be outraged others find it funny and mimic the jokes Andy Gray mentioned. Sky (the channel Andy Gray worked for whilst making the comments) quickly reacted and sacked Gray for ill-mannered comments. The ex-Luton Town manager Mike Newell criticised another female official saying: "This is not park football. What are women doing here?"  Yet the F.A only reacted by fining Newell, we have found out throughout racism punishments that fining individuals and teams doesn't stop it. There remains no big campaigns to stop sexism in football.

The sooner the F.A bring in other campaigns to stop all discrimination in football the better for everyone involved in the beautiful game. Sepp Blatter has come out and said there will be points deductions for any club that are racist. How about point deductions for any club that are homophobic or sexist as well? The sooner that happens the sooner football can catch up with the real world in which everyone is treated as equal whether they be black, white, female, male, gay or straight.

El Salvador: Where it is Illegal to Have a Miscarriage

Abortion laws have been the topic of conversation for years with strict Catholic countries banning the procedure. Latin America, some states in U.S.A and even in Ireland it is illegal to have an abortion (in Ireland and U.S.A it is legal in incredibly rare cases).

Take the case of a 13 year old Irish girl, who can't be named for legal reasons, she got pregnant after being raped by a paedophile. Under inhumane Irish law she was not consented an abortion. After much debate the girl was taken to Britain, where our laws are more in touch with the modern world, and had she had the abortion.

I understand fully that abortion and miscarriage are not the same thing, in the middle of Latin America, lies a tiny country: El Salvador (the smallest of all central American countries). Women in this poor, strictly catholic country are being imprisoned for having miscarriages.

The slums some pregnant women can find themselves living in, no wonder there is so many miscarriages with this standard of living. Picture courtesy if Internationalparnters.org
 

A women, Cristina Quintanilla, was seven months pregnant when she had her miscarriage, the BBC report. She passed out after having a terrible pain and bleeding in her womb, she was taken to hospital. When she regained consciousness at hospital she was interrogated by police then handcuffed to her hospital bed. She was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment for the death of her unborn child. The prosecution in court labelled Quintanilla a child murderer claiming she could have done more to save her child, yet she had passed out before the miscarriage through the incapable pain.

This is not the only occurrence more women are being imprisoned some for 15 years for manslaughter, others, 50 years for murder of their unborn children. And what's more the church in El Salvador are supporting these sentences. El Salvador's churches are well known to be right wing and conservative - no concern over the poor - even though most of El Salvadorians survive on less than one pound a day.

In some poor parts of the world nearly 25% of women can suffer from a miscarriage. In El Salvador experts are unsure what the rate is but it is estimated to be extremely high. Yet not all women who suffer the pain of a miscarriage are arrested - it is only the poor. Surely the poor need more support when suffering a miscarriage, than a rich citizen. Most poor women are on their own (no husband/boyfriend) to support them so when going through a miscarriage where do they get emotional support from? It's certainly not a prison. Most poor women are more likely to go through a miscarriage than a rich women as well through diet and their standard of living yet once again like most things in the world; it's the poor who suffer.

Special cases in El Salvador are also over looked by this abortion/miscarriage law, such as the Beatriz case earlier this year. She was told in her pregnancy her baby was an awfully deformed foetus, she applied for an abortion. While the supreme court deliberated for months on whether she can have an abortion Beatriz gave birth; hours after giving birth the baby died.

People protesting on the 'Beatriz case'. Picture courtesy of realitycheck.org

Now I have never been involved in trying for a baby with someone but if somebody has a miscarriage I can imagine it is one of the worst feelings one can have. Losing something that has been so precious to you can hurt. It's a mother instincts to looks after her baby even if it is unborn - to then be under arrest hours later for it's murder I can't even think of a word to describe how one would feel!

With a strict and quite frankly absurd law this has had other implications on El Salvador. In recent years the most common cause of death in young women is suicide half of them were pregnant, that, I am sure is no coincidence.

Protests and campaigns are underway in El Salvador to abolish this law which was updated in 1998 but there is still a long way to go. It is mostly poor people who are protesting but the effect it is having is questionable.

The Ignorance of the Daily Mail

The Daily Mail is the second most read newspapers in the country and I continue to ask myself; how? The paper, which at one time supported the British Union of Fascists, published an article earlier this month claiming Ed Miliband's father hated Britain - an accusation the Labour leader denies.

The Daily Mail has stood by the article and has refused to apologise to Mr Miliband, (although they admitted an 'error of judgement' over a picture published in relation to the article). Mr Miliband's father - Ralph - was known to have supported the Marxist ideology, quite radical admittedly but not a reason to hate Britain. Ralph Miliband fled to Britain during the Second World War because he was a Jew. He served in the British Royal Navy; which once again seems odd to have hated Britain.

The Daily Mail have defended the article saying it is relevant and important - although just because your father is a Marxist doesn't mean you are. Ed Miliband said he was appalled by the article and even got the support of David Cameron (something you don't see everyday).


Protests outside Daily Mail offices after the article was published. Picture courtesy of Guardian.com

The Daily Mail not only ignored Ed Miliband's request to apologise they then published another article claiming he was evil! Ed Miliband, nicknamed 'Red Ed' for his socialist ideas, is trying to stick up for his father and The Daily Mail are almost like a bully teasing him, which has backfired - emotion that the Labour leader has shown grabs voters attention.

The Daily Mail is well know for it's prejudice headlines trying to scare the public with incorrect or twisted facts. The paper, founded by Lord Rothermere, was a big supporter of Oswald Moseley, leader of the BUF, a man who had the same philosophy as Adolf Hitler! And the Daily Mail has the cheek to say Ralph Miliband was evil!

The article has lead to a lot of public support for Ed Miliband; according to a YouGov poll 72% of people support Mr Miliband over the tabloid daily. Although only a tiny amount of people have complained to the Press Complaints Commission (the newspaper regulator) more people complained about the Sun's article about Roy Hodgson's speech impediment. Miliband has said he has had over 10,000 e-mails and messages of support from the public.



The PCC received more complaints for this headline then they did for the article written last week by the Daily Mail. Picture courtesy of  digitalspy.co.uk

The Daily Mail have really shot themselves in the foot with an article like this. They, like all newspapers, are asking for the newspapers not to be regulated to harshly by politicians then they publish an article that offends the next potential Prime Minister of the country.

After a quiet few days the Daily Mail has now come out against the BBC stating the article they published was bias towards Mr Miliband. This is once again incredibly cheeky saying the BBC are being bias when The Daily Mail writes a piece criticising a politicians father in the manner they did.

The Conservative's withdrawl of Benefits

David Cameron announced this week that he plans to cut benefits for young people aged between 18-24, but is this really a good idea?



David Cameron announced his plans at his party conference last week.

I totally agree with him that there are far too many people in this country living off their £50 a week dole money and blasting it all on cheap alcohol or any other harmful substances they can get their hands on, instead of using it for essentials. But once again a political party are regarding all young people as the same; not all of us take a trip into the city centre once a week walk into the job centre and claim our £50 without any sense of shame.

Myself; I work and I am proud to say that when I am talking to the older generation. Not because I am in a well paid job or I do something extraordinary but older people listen to politicians and newspapers who stereotype young people in the most negative of manners! We are not all brain dead slobs who sit at home all day watching Jeremy Kyle whilst smoking our 5th joint of cannabis.

Not all young adults are troublemakers for the economy.

So if, and lets face it after putting some British families on the bread line it's a big if, David Cameron and his Conservative Party get another term and he does bring in this unreasonable proposal then what will unemployed young people do? If I was in their shoes firstly I'd press the panic button and apply for any job going - is that healthy? We all want to do a job we love but can any of us say we do a job we loathe? If we all did I'm sure a few more sick days would be taken. We already have enough depressed young people about, if they did jobs they despised then that number would take a steep rise. This in turn putting more pressure on what is already a fragile NHS.

If this proposal comes in then most young people, who are actively seeking work but can't find any, would be panicking. The people who Mr Cameron is aiming the proposal at are not panicking, they'll just turn to something else other than indirectly robbing off people - they will directly rob off people. If this proposal does turn into legislation then petty crime like muggings and snatching old ladies handbags will increase quite dramatically. Young people who are addicted to drugs will try every sly move to get money apart from the honest way: to actually work!

So what is the alternative substitute I can hear you screaming at me. So I propose this: All people that are claiming job seekers allowance (not just young people) should have to do volunteer work. Get people who are sitting on their bum all day doing nothing to work to earn their £50 a week. Many charitable organisations over the country are vying for volunteers. It gets people used to working and it might JUST MIGHT get people who are used to doing nothing to be proud of what they are doing; something good and are earning their money rather than just getting their money!

David Cameron needs to slightly re-think his proposal. There are too many people who think it is ok to live on benefits for their whole lives when they are more than capable of working. But to cut young people's benefits completely is incredibly harsh. This not only puts a strain on the young unemployed person but also the family of the young unemployed person as they then have to support another body. People are already feeling the financial pinch of with wages not increasing with inflation, quite rich when some MPs are claiming 3p expenses on taxpayers money.