ochlol:
:vert:
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
ochlol::vert:
Want sissoko to start. And Very confident about the game. Two halfs like we did there at our home and they wont have a chance. 3-1 for us.
Chelsea to win 3-1. Spursy.
Thoughts on the "Chelsea <removed>s, were coming for you" chant?
On first thoughts it seems like a fairly juvenile play on words and relatively harmless, but I remember the Proud Lilywhites group getting quite upset about it, calling it homophobic. Does it stigmatise prostitution? without question. But is it actually homophobic? Personally I don't think so.
On first thoughts it seems like a fairly juvenile play on words and relatively harmless, but I remember the Proud Lilywhites group getting quite upset about it, calling it homophobic. Does it stigmatise prostitution? without question. But is it actually homophobic? Personally I don't think so.
Not homophobic, they should quit being such sensitive twats
Been thinking about this one, too.
Surely a '<removed>' is a very specific thing and alludes primarily to their finances.
I didn't interpret it as a slur against the gay community - but the Proud Lilywhites are entitled to be offended by whatever they wish.
Agreed although just because you are offended doesn't mean anything, I could be offended by a whole range of things, that's life.
The chant if it does stigmatise would be against the escorting community I guess, doesn't seem an anti gay chant to me. While <removed>s are often thought of for men they can be also for women particularly rich older women, it's just a male prostitute at the end of the day.
Sorry, to clarify I did mean they're welcome to be offended - though not to censor other fans through outrage!
It actually makes me laugh - if your reaction when hearing '<removed>' is to associate it with the entire gay community then surely that's more homophobic in itself.
:eriksenlol:
Couldn't give a flying fuck what it symbolises, how non PC it is or who it offends, all I know is they hate being called it and that's every reason to continue to do so. Any reasoning or normal behaviour goes out the window when these are involved.
Male prostitutes might get offended....anyone else, gay or otherwise have nowt to do with it
Rubbish it's plain homophobic and we all know it is. Labeling them <removed>s is an offensive way of calling them gay. we can't pontificate on their anti semitism if we tolerate our own homophobia. we shouldn't sing it simple.
I sure hope so. Son on the bench in case we need a goal in the last half hour.
I think we ought to put out the most rested and physical team we can. I don't think many teams look forward to facing the likes of Dier, Dembele, Wanyama, Sissoko, Rose, etc. in any kind of physical game. I honestly don't think Chelsea like a physical game, their players just can't hack it. They're pampered lightweight pussy boys. Plus they could get a points reduction as punishment if they lose control of their players anyway.
Unlike most teams we can bring both physicality and ability and that's a winning combination in games like these. Let's fuck them up and take all three points.
All <removed>s arent gay.....its about them being prostitutes in the west end
They've been called it for decades, its not like we just came up with it
Surely we can come up with something better anyway, ffs!
You serious? I always treated the term as essentially selling yourself but maybe that's just me.
Ah... the master of disguise. Have you ever got fucked up the arse for being a fucking wise guy?
My guess is many times.