Reader comments · Stonewall dismisses criticism of Paddy Power rainbow laces campaign · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Stonewall dismisses criticism of Paddy Power rainbow laces campaign

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Of course paddy power’s history of trans phobia isn’t an issue at all. Good old S’onewall, riding roughshod over trans people’s interests all the time…

    1. Didn’t Paddy Power have an advert on Pink News recently?

    2. I second what Gabrielle said, and also would the Joey Barton publicly supporting this campaign against homophobia the same Joey Barton who recently tried to put down another football player by letting flow a stream of transphobic abuse over the internet at him?

  2. You’ll all notice that Stonewall neglected to mention criticism of the name of the campaign, or the impression it gives of us all being laughed at, with their approval.

    It’s also interesting to see them completely ignore the criticism of them creating this association with PP specifically, when they SHOULD have done this independently and involved all the existing sponsors of all the clubs.

    Stonewall has failed, miserably. They don’t understand sponsorship agreements, they didn’t think about this campaign, and they allowed a good idea to be hijacked by one company for their own marketing ambitions.

    Shame on you Stonewall, shame on you.

  3. Godric Godricson 20 Sep 2013, 4:38pm

    Does Stonewall still exist?

    1. It shouldn’t, that’s for sure.

  4. Stonewall handled this incompetently. Is anyone really surprised? At this point I think their only donors are their corporate sponsors. How the board let Mr Summerskill stay in post after the marriage debacle I will never understand.

    But this is mostly the FA’s fault. If they had actually done something about this issue instead of letting it fester then it wouldn’t have been left to a bookmaker and the world’s most inept activists. At least Stonewall, albeit in a highly ill-judged way, have drawn some attention to this issue.

  5. Follow the money.

    How much money did Stonewall get from Paddy Power?

    How much will it spend on shoelaces?

    Why does Stonewall not have a policy on tackling institutional homophobia within the FA.

    Stonewall is an utterly useless organisation.

    Its opposition to marriage equality until caught is evidence that Stonewall has absolutely no interest in equality for LGBT people.

    1. Oh I see the morons at Stonewall claim not to have taken any moneyvfrom PP.

      If so, then why is PP needed as a partner in this worthless campaign

  6. Gary Powell 20 Sep 2013, 5:12pm

    The unthinking support for this sham campaign is yet another example of far too many LGBT people colluding with being treated like second-class citizens, led by an organisation that has lost the plot.

    Just imagine a major race equality organisation teaming up with a company that committed the racist equivalent of publishing an advert where a trans woman was referred to as a “dog”.

    And imagine this same major race equality organisation endorsing a putatively anti-racist slogan coined by this company that contained a clear innuendo ridiculing people of colour for a popularly-mocked racial stereotype.

    And now ask yourself how Stonewall can possibly be serving the LGBT community with the choice it has made to back the blatantly homophobic and obviously self-serving Paddy Power “campaign”.

  7. Gary Powell 20 Sep 2013, 5:25pm

    Here is the message of this campaign:

    “It is fine to make snide “backs to the wall lads” jokes about gay people: to reduce the wealth of their experience as human beings to being merely a sexual act worthy of ridicule.”

    “How do I know? Because this is exactly what Stonewall endorsed when it endorsed the “Right Behind Gay Footballers” slogan from Paddy Power.”

    “And if Stonewall say it’s ok to make that joke, indeed in what is meant to be a serious campaign, then it must be ok.”

    It reminds me of when I was arguing for equal marriage, and antagonists quoted back to me Stonewall’s early opposition to it.

    Our main LGBT campaigning organisation should not be becoming an impediment to progress.

  8. Plenty of clubs and prominent individuals are supporting this initiative. And the issue of gay professional footballers is being given the promotion which it needs. That’s great. Go for it! The critics can have their moans now and join the bandwagon later on if that’s what they want.

    1. Gary Powell 20 Sep 2013, 5:42pm

      No matter how successful this campaign (fortuitously) is in changing attitudes, it is one that lacks integrity. The ends do not automatically justify the means. No self-respecting LGBT person should endorse a homophobic campaign slogan that mocks us and reduces us to a sexual act. That is why Football v Homophobia withdrew its support from the campaign. We are not circus clowns who have to submit ourselves to humiliation in order to gain public acceptance.

      All Paddy Power needed to do was to change the slogan. They refused to do so, even at the expense of FvH withdrawing support. Why was it so important for them to keep a slogan that mocked us? The publicity of controversy, perhaps?

  9. It’s a difficult one. Stonewall couldn’t have mounted this alone. They needed the cash. If Paddy Power was there to provide it. I think the objections are MUCH more about the ‘contractual exclusivities’ imposed by the Premier League’s main sponsors and the precedent which the club’s fear this may set …..

  10. From the people who brought you “Civil Partnership are enough” comes “Backs to the wall, lads”. You couldn’t make it up!

  11. This campaign goes from hot mess to hot mess – and it’s not like it started well; really “rainbow laces” let footballers make a gesture about homophobia that is so subtle that they’d have to actually tell people about it for it to be noticed. What’s the point?

    More strongly penalised homophobia, homophobia being taken more seriously by the FA and higher bodies, refusing to work with homophobes – that would show an actual dedication

  12. They never backed marriage equality, until everyone complained and said stonewall should be shut down.

    Now they are making a hash of homophobia in football. Ridiculous. Something needs to change at stonewall, or they need to stop pretending that they represent anyone but their staff’s wages.

    WTF have a (transphobic) betting company got to do with LGBT rights?

    1. Gary Powell 20 Sep 2013, 7:49pm

      I want the Stonewall back that we used to know. The one that championed gay and lesbian rights without compromise, and that put the needs of the gay community first.

      The one that made sound judgments, instead of trying to spin its way out of bad ones.

      The one that regarded itself as a means to an end, rather than apparently an end in itself.

      1. Strongfemme 21 Sep 2013, 10:19pm

        I want Stonewall to champion rights for the Transgender Community? Then and only then would I renew my subscription.

        1. Gary Powell 22 Sep 2013, 12:50am

          Yes, that would be a very good development.

  13. Sky News report about the Stonewall / PaddyPower campaign:-

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.