Where is the implication?

Am I the only mod on here?

You really need to be able to distinguish between being called a gay icon and something homophobic. It's says more about your closed mind than anything else.

Sorry Andy, you seem to be the most active mod, given I've seen no others.

The point is this

Leeds Rhinos' prop forward Ryan Bailey is not a gay icon. That's a fact. So the claim that he is, is not a claim about the real world, describing a situation this exists.

It is a normative claim, in the sense that 'that Ryan Bailey, he's a gay icon' has a silent 'nudge nudge wink wink' after it, from which the reader is meant to draw their own conclusion.

As such, it's an attempt to imply that, were Ryan Bailey a gay icon, that would be bad, or that he is, in some way, associated with homosexuality, and that that'd bad, or contradictory to him being a tough as nails SoB on the pitch.

As such, that's something I find personally offensive.

And I hope that when I say 'personally offensive', people are as able to read the subtext, as they were for the Bailey remark.

How do you know?

There is no Mod but Andy. And Andy is His prophet.

You dont have to be Gay, to be a gay icon you know.

The rest of your conclusions probably say more about you than the OP

Understand your concern. Fortunately there are few unpleasant or unnecessary references on these boards to homosexuality and this board in particular has a good record I think on these issues.

I did once however have a real issue with many posters on a certain team's board after the coach of its team made a very ill-advised comparison between the treatment by fans of one of his players who had committed an offence of a sexual nature and the treatment by supporters of Gareth Thomas. The coach called on the RFL to punish fans who made offensive chants about his player in the same way as those abusing Gareth Thomas had been punished. This attempt to equate or at least compare the two was very disturbing - the abuse aimed at the former was just offensive and the abuse aimed at Thomas was much more than this, it was a hate crime.

I'm not going to name the board because the people involved are tedious to say the least, but it was a deeply unpleasant incident, with homophobic remarks being made by posters and ignored by moderators who were clearly unable to see the distinction between offensive remarks about someone who has done something wrong and offensive remarks about someone who has nothing to be ashamed of.

By the way, I myself would read "gay icon" in the context of someone like Bailey as a compliment in that it is presumably his physique and uncompromising playing style that makes him an icon. He's clearly no Kylie Minogue!

Just to put this bizarre thread drift to bed.

Kylie
David Beckham
Steven Gerrard
James Anderson

All gay icons, all raving hetrosexuals

I'll be glad when this weekend's over.

Imagine if it's the build up to a Wire final next week.

I'm going to turn the internet off.

The Northampton Board is going to become extremely popular.

That's a shoe-in.

Stevie G and Jimmy Anderson gay icons? Fascinating.

Don't worry. They won't get past Saints.

I've never seen a feature in GT, Attitude or any other forum that might discuss such issues. While I accept that it's possible I might be looking in the wrong place, It doesn't seem plausible that there is a secret Ryan Bailey gay fan club.



I'm going to assume that the OP doesn't simply insert words into their sentences at random, and that when they write something they intend to convey a meaning. If the first (descriptive) meaning (i.e. that RB is a gay icon) is not true (it isn't), then a meaning must be secondary-that is to say, that the reader should draw a subliminal meaning from the use of an association.

Given that saying 'Ryan Bailey is an Icon' would seem to be positively loaded, the inserting of the word 'gay' as a modifier can be for the sole purpose of replacing positive association with negative.



Yep, which is why I objected to the OP. Also it doesn't have to be specific association in that way, but a general use of the word 'gay' to mean 'bad', or in some way negative or inferior.

I don't mean to make specific behavioural claims about who can and can't be a gay icon, or any normative deductions we should make from that. I simply hope to point out that words are important, and if used carelessly can be insulting, offensive, or hurtful.

However, thanks for the many positive responses, I'm sure it was unintentional or done without thinking.

James