I hate AFL. I don't watch it, I'm not interested.
One of the reasons I hate AFL is because it celebrates people like Jason Akermanis. His article in today's Herald Sun made me want to smash my computer.
How is it that this person, and people like him (I'm looking at you Sam Newman) have a public voice where they can spout their archaic, homophobic, misogynistic bullshit and the public lap it up like the archaic, homophobic, misogynistic lemmings that they are?
People like Jason Akermanis shouldn't have a public voice - because their opinions can't be backed up with anything even slightly tangible. Here is a supposedly heterosexual man spouting some half-cocked idea about how he thinks gay people should lead their lives. He's not gay, he's not a psychologist, he's not a sociology major, he's not an expert in sexual health or in suicide prevention - he's a footballer, and that is all. He has no place to publicly comment on the issue of homosexuality in sport. He has no place commenting on anything other than football - the actual game - not whatever does or doesn't happen in the locker room.
Everyone has a right to their own opinion and everyone's opinions are more frequently heard thanks to new media. But Jason Akermanis' opinion is broadcast on commercial radio and printed in commercial newspapers. This gives him 'voice of God' status - meaning that to some people, his opinions are seen as fact. It also means that in the public sphere, other people who think his opinions are fantastic can stand up, pump their fist in the air and say "Yeah! I'm a homophobic asshole too and I say NO gays in sport!" - and they can feel that they are completely justified in saying this, because JASON AKERMANIS thinks so.
I've been trying to write this for a while now, but due to the fact that I am furious, disappointed and ... furious ... it is very difficult to be as articulate as I'd like to be.
Jason Akermanis is a scared little man. Scared that a gay teammate might glance at him in the shower and he might feel a twinge in his nether regions - which would obviously make him gay. Scared that a group of people he has spent his life assuming were beneath him might actually stand up for themselves against him and people like him and prove that they collectively have more talent, intellect, guts and masculinity than he has in his little finger (or any other *little* appendage he might be compensating for).
I know that not all AFL players are idiots. This article by Adam Gooodes in The Age is excellent. Unlike Akermanis, Goodes actually can talk about Indigenous players because he actually has some experience being one.
I don't care how much Akermanis tries to defend his comments with "I don't hate the gays, some of my best friends are gay" type comments - he is a stupid little man with idiotic opinions that he should keep to himself.
Here is the Western Bulldog's official response and I particularly like the photo advocate.com have chosen for their story.
The AFL Footy Show is, as I type, very formally backing away from Akermanis' comments - although Sam Newman's lisping pronunciation of 'homosexual' makes it quite clear what position he takes (- missionary, one would assume).
I want to hear informed, educated opinion from people who know what they're talking about - unfortunately the voices that we hear in Australian mainstream, commercial media are more often than not uneducated, uninformed, bigoted and downright idiotic.
I'm off to watch Christopher Hitchens on Lateline. Thank Dog for Tony Jones.
Fantastic post.
ReplyDeleteYou are right - AFL players get far too much opinion time/space, and unfortunately their opinions can be influential, no matter how good or bad.
On what ground does Akermanis have the right to comment on this issue? As you say, he is not gay, not a psychologist nor in the health industry. He's merely a footballer with an inflated sense of self importance and intelligence.
I blogged about the Aker opinion piece too: http://carlyfindlay.blogspot.com/2010/05/homophobia-in-football.html
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Aker's angered many today.
Cheers Carly, I love that we both commenced our rants with the fact that we don't like football - how very "un-Australian" of us! *tongue firmly in cheek*
ReplyDeleteIt's reassuring to see so many people angry about it - it makes my eulogy for society seem less urgent.
Careful, a lot of people today have let fury get in the way of actually looking at it in some kind of balanced way. Jack Marx was one of them, damaging his good points with mudslinging and a rather liberal interpretation of the words in order to be considered biting and witty, and based on the comments, it seems to have worked on all those but the 'homophobes'. I use that word because it's very easy to group all dissenting opinion into that category, and to be sure many of those comments were ill-informed or indeed ignorant. But as I'm sure you well know nothing is black and white, and there is much more grey matter than it would appear at first.
ReplyDeleteGiven that I am neither gay nor a footballer, I suppose I am in even less of a position to make a comment but considering everyone else has and this is, after all, a blog, I will allow myself this moment. What if he had said 'Everyone is accepting so come out if you want'? Not only would he be wrong but nobody would in fact believe him.
Yes, he's a dickhead, and no, he should not be telling anyone how to live their lives. But as someone who hates football, you're probably less likely to know that Jason Akermanis is not seen as a 'voice of God' - a good deal of people thought he was a loud-mouthed moron long before he had the chance to have his opinions ghostwritten. He's controversial and that sells so he gets in the Herald Sun, are you surprised?
But I digress. By pointing out the way things unfortunately are (not just in Australian football but in, for example, American basketball if you take a glance at John Amaechi's Wikipedia page for Tim Hardaway's reaction), Akermanis is not condoning the attitudes of others. But he is saying why it is difficult. And it is. Amaechi, Daniel Kowalski and Greg Louganis, for example, came out after they had retired. Is it right that they felt like they had to wait? Of course not. But are you going to tell someone to be the first footballer to come out while playing? Of course you're not... It's their choice and players have enough trouble trying to get a game without the inevitable media circus surrounding them. Eventually, though, it will have to happen, and whoever this first footballer is will surely feel more comfortable with people having discussed it already and therefore having some knowledge of the reception he will get. So the issue has to get out there, however controversially it is to begin with.
Not to suggest Akermanis is a saint in any way. But some good may come of it.
As you point out, so many people are angry. He's gotten quite a bit of backlash from this and as a result it's hardly going to make someone feel more comfortable about homophobic views. Nor can I imagine a gay footballer thinking 'Well I was going to come out, but not now that Aker's told me not to'. So I would suggest that raising the issue, whatever side he has come down on, has got people talking about it rather than sweeping it under the rug. And to me that's a good thing - if you find the number of people angry 'reassuring' then obviously you underestimated the level of acceptance. A public declaration by so many that they do indeed accept people's rights to their individual lifestyles is definitely a good thing.
Furthermore, I would also suggest that you don't fall into the trap of assuming that more footballers are racist, sexist, homophobic etc just because of the percentage that do make the headlines. Someone like Adam Goodes, who you mentioned, is one of the good ones but there are plenty of others - they just don't have the name values. Picking a name out at random, I have no idea whether Tayte Pears is a dickhead or not but I don't think it's fair to assume he's guilty until proven innocent of such.
As far as the ones who are, well you'll find there are dickheads, not just in sport, and indeed not just in Australia or in Western society. And dickheads like to voice their opinion. I try to avoid such noise.
I think it's dangerous to say that you have to 'be one' to talk about an issue. Yes...Adam Goodes is indigenous and he is in a good position to discuss indigenous issues in the AFL...but I also think that people respect the opinions of someone like Kevin Sheedy, who has been an advocate for the rights of indigenous footballers since well before it was cool. I would argue that Akermanis IS qualified to talk about the culture of football clubs, and the nature of them. Football clubs have been his workplace for the last thirteen or fourteen years! I also agree that he is NOT qualified to talk about coming out, and the pressure involved in that...and other issues relating to homosexuality.
ReplyDeleteThis is not as much about football as it is the Herald-Sun. The little paper enjoys printing stories like this...stories that reflect the insipid views of those people John Howard referred to as "Middle Australia". A lot of your "Middle Australians" read this sort of article and feel warm and fuzzy because it accurately reflects their view of society and how society should be.
Whatever I think of what Akermanis said...if you read between the lines and ignore the obvious homophobia in parts...he's right. Mainstream Australian society still has a problem with homosexuals, and a greater problem with homosexuals as role models. It's a sad reflection on the culture at most football clubs that they'd rather have a rapist in their team than a homosexual!
He's also wrong in a lot of ways.
1. It would NOT be 'international news' if an AFL player was gay. Trust me. Nobody in South Korea is gonna give a fuck.
2. AFL is not 'unlike any other workplace' because workers shower together. I know plenty of workplaces where people shower together (mining, heavy industry, EVERY other team sport).
3. No...you shouldn't need to 'sit down and have a talk' with your gay team mate and 'try to understand his life'. His life is just like yours. He just has sex with men. Get over it...and stroll on.
4. What do you mean when you say "homoerotic activities are normal inside footy clubs"? That's a curious statement.
444 comments on the HS website for this article. Mission accomplished for the gutter media.
Evan, I actually know an awful lot about football - having grown up in country Victoria and being related to some grade A Bogan stock it's hard to avoid, try as I might. I know Akermanis is seen as somewhat of a 'class clown' but as Burndog points out, his views reflect that of middle Australia and therefore validate their and his ignorance.
ReplyDeleteHe might not be condoning the actions of others but he has basically started a conversation with "shut up".
Marx's response was, one would assume, not supposed to be anything BUT mudslinging - and a giant f#ck you to Akermanis besides.
I don't think all footballers are racist, sexist, homophobic - but the ones who have a public voice in the "gutter media" more often than not are or have been historically.
I wonder what good will come of the reiteration of homosexuality being a negative thing? When public figures 'come out' it's front page news - the terms in the public discourse are 'brave' and 'courageous'. As Johnny Galecki said just the other day on The View, he doesn't comment about rumours that he's gay because that would suggest that it is something that needs to be defended.
The argument of whether Akermanis should have said 'Everyone is accepting so come out if you want'? is mute, because he shouldn't have said anything - which is my point. What might have been helpful, had he or anyone else actually intended to assist those struggling with their sexuality in sport would have been to say something along the lines of "there are plenty of gay players in AFL, it doesn't matter what your sexual preference is, as long as you can play the game".
Now, Burndog! are you absolutely sure South Korea doesn't care about Australia's gays?! *insert sarcasm here*
I should point out that I don't think you have to BE something to talk about it - I just think that you should know a bit about it and be able to say something intelligent. You're right re Kevin Sheedy; he and Michael Long's work with mentoring and raising awareness of Indigenous issues has been amazing and I do indeed think he is qualified to speak about it because he is well informed on the topic.
I would suggest that the only actual research Akermanis has done into the issue of homosexuality in sport has been to re-watch 'Ready Willing and Anal 3: Chicks With Dicks Gone Wild!' (thanks Catherine Deveny for that gem of a title).
You're so right re the audience of the Herald Sun, Akermanis might be seen as a general laughing stock but when he comes out with something like this, they just lap it up - at my day job (filled with mostly uneducated slobs) the HS is devoured in the tea room while The Age sits mostly untouched - and of course there is much "he IS right though", and "the gays should stay quiet for their own good" - as if a middle-class, hetero, white, obese male with a penchant for Barely 18 magazine and a wife with more hairy moles on her face than capillaries knows what's good for "them".
More generally, I don't think a formal education makes you particularly smart - but I do think knowledge is power and that those speaking in the media as official commentators have a duty to be informed and to know a bit about that which they speak.
There may well be a need for a discussion re homosexuality in sport, but Jason Akermanis didn't need to start it. The old "well at least people are talking about it" argument is bollocks.
I agree.
ReplyDeleteSometimes the problem with describing things the way they 'are' is that it actually perpetuates and reinforces the present situation rather than opening a discussion and debate about change and how this may occur. As an AFL player, Akermanis is definitely in a position to describe the current situation of the league and give his opinion about how a gay player may be received and treated. However, the problem with his article is that he ends the discussion with his closing statement "but if they are thinking of telling the world, my advice would be forget it". Earlier on in the piece he writes "It's not the job of the minority to make the environment safer. Not now, anyway".
So, my question then is, if not now, when exactly would it be a good time? And if it's not the job of the minority, then whose job is it? Perhaps, maybe, someone in Akermanis' position—as a well known player who writes regularly for a newspapee—could have opened the discussion further, rather than closing it by warning players that it isn't a good time.
Evan, I think that you may have missed the point of Mully's post. There was an extensive and comprehensive report conducted by two universities studying homophobic attitudes in sporting activities. Their voices, experts, have been silenced by the controversy that surrounds Akermanis' article.
I agree with Burndog that it says more about the Herald Sun and in fact the wider media than football. It's not like football, or even sport, is unique. The arts for example is just as bad. Take Ricky Martin, who didn't come out at the height of his fame, that would have damaged his record sales!
ReplyDeleteAnd so I guess if you hate football for glorifying morons, there are a lot of other things you probably need to hate. The whole nature of celebrity has been reduced to dubious claims to fame and society laps it up, but spending too much time worrying about that will only get you bitter and not change a thing.
You are right though in that Akermanis didn't need to be the one starting the discussion. But who is the right person to start it? Presumably someone like Gareth Thomas, who is still playing, could be well qualified but we don't have a figure like that in Australian sport. Does that make it better for Akermanis to say something? No, but it might at least help to explain why it hasn't happened so far and why it ended up that he was the person to speak out. Nobody else would.
I'm not saying (and nor did I say) Akermanis should have said 'everybody is accepting and come out' or indeed anything. I'm absolutely not on his side here. I'm coming down ever-so-delightfully in no-man's land.
And by the way, in this land I therefore say to both of you that comments that most football clubs would "rather have a rapist in their team than a homosexual" (or the similar comment that Aker would prefer to shower next to a rapist that you retweeted) are helping nobody, as they are equally unfounded and small-minded and quite frankly "bollocks".
---
I just spotted Gabrielle's post. I don't believe it has reinforced that it's OK, in fact the backlash against Akermanis has shows that there are indeed a lot of people who don't think the way it is is fine. Staying silent and allowing it to fester is doing just as much, if not more, to reinforce the current state, that certainly isn't going to open a discussion and debate. And of course, as I said, it would have been nicer if it were someone a little more intelligent and informed, but it's not as simple as "shut up Aker you homophobe'.
I was responding to a post entitled "Why I hate Australian Rules" which had nothing to do with a university report. And given that I have never disputed her sentiments on the mainstream media (because I agree), I chose to instead comment upon the parts that I didn't agree with, namely (and yes I'm paraphrasing) AFL sucks, Jack Marx's post was awesome and shut up Aker you homophobe.
Just to clarify, my opening two paragraphs should not be interpreted as 'don't worry about prejudicial comments' - the two sentiments 'football isn't the problem' and 'if you worry about morons in the media it probably won't change anything' should be taken as separate.
ReplyDeleteWow, Evan, thanks for clarifying your views with your posts – it has certainly cleared things up…
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have, again, missed the subtleties of Mulley’s post and the subsequent discussion. You say that you’re writing from ‘no-man’s land’, perhaps, you should decide on a position and precisely where your opinion is from before commenting on someone’s post.
From the length of you responses and discussion maybe you should start your own blog.
Hey everyone, interesting discussion, good points by all. Particularly enjoyed Evan's paraphrasing of my initial post - hilarious.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this piece today by Gerard Whateley in ABC's The Drum http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/21/2906126.htm?site=thedrum .
Thanks all for stopping by.
OK Gabrielle, educate me on the subtleties.
ReplyDeleteAnd do not confuse my colloquialism of 'no man's land' to mean I have no position. I have stated my position from the start, I have accepted opposing viewpoints as well - did I not write in my initial post that there were many grey areas?
And I have my reasons for not starting a blog.
Whateley's piece was excellent by the way, thanks. Far, far superior to Jack Marx. (Although a more accurate headline would have been Akermanis: with the benefit of maturity, tact and other symptoms of a functioning brain)