Dog sex equated to homosexuality by Rugby League

johnboy 15 December 2010 16

The Sydney Morning Herald has the intriguing news that Canberra’s most famous export Joel Monaghan is going to be protected from bestiality taunts, when he plays in the English Super League, under provisions made to protect homosexual players from homophobic abuse.

Smith acknowledges that opposition fans are eagerly awaiting their first glimpse of Monaghan. He is also aware that the Origin star will be subjected to a verbal barrage over his simulated sex act with a dog, but has backed the player and believes there is a precedent he can use to silence abusive fans.

Last June, Castleford Tigers were fined £40,000 ($64,000) after their supporters aimed homophobic abuse at Celtic Crusaders winger Gareth Thomas, who had revealed he was gay. And Smith is more than ready to demand that the league bosses do the same when Super League returns in February.

This whole episode has been a fascinating (if grimly depressing) insight into how some people tick.

Protections against homosexual villification

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
16 Responses to Dog sex equated to homosexuality by Rugby League
Filter
Order
cleo cleo 11:37 pm 15 Dec 10

And he wants the Club to sue its fans?
That idea sure worked out for Metallica…

I wonder if the dog bit Joel’s ‘bit’ what would Joel be doing now, proberly sueing the dog for assult! hee he

astrojax astrojax 9:51 pm 15 Dec 10

Pork Hunt said :

So what is the “correct” way to abuse say, a Canberra cabbie, who may or may not have been born in the sub continent, clearly got his license out of a Kellogs packet and sits in the right lane 45 km below the speed limit?

a cabbie doing under the speed limit? do don’t wanna abuse him, mate. you wanna give him some sort of medallion!

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 7:15 pm 15 Dec 10

And he wants the Club to sue its fans?
That idea sure worked out for Metallica…

Pork Hunt Pork Hunt 6:21 pm 15 Dec 10

So what is the “correct” way to abuse say, a Canberra cabbie, who may or may not have been born in the sub continent, clearly got his license out of a Kellogs packet and sits in the right lane 45 km below the speed limit?

Androyd Androyd 6:17 pm 15 Dec 10

The irony couldn’t be more apparent if it manifested itself as a giant red bus with ‘IRONY’ written on it.

Love it – a candidate for the revolving Riotact tagline at top of page ?

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 6:07 pm 15 Dec 10

Tony Smith, the former St George and Illawarra Steelers player and now Wolves coach… believes there is a precedent he can use to silence abusive fans.

Well, its a good thing he’s just a rugby coach and not on anyone’s legal defence team.
The RFL who made the 40,000 pound fine against Castleford Tigers use an internal mechanism based on the framework of the UK Equality Act 2010 and the Equal Employment Regulations.

UK Equality Act and Employment Regulations only cover sexual orientation as a protected characteristic for such instances, and their definition is

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=3698792“>Equality Act 2010
12 Sexual orientation
(1)Sexual orientation means a person’s sexual orientation towards—
(a)persons of the same sex,
(b)persons of the opposite sex, or
(c)persons of either sex.

Hence the gay guy was protected.
Joel isn’t protected as canines aren’t persons under UK Law.

In any case, would he seriously assert Joel Monaghan remains attracted to dogs for purposes of an orientation claim?

Jim Jones Jim Jones 2:00 pm 15 Dec 10

Grail said :

Jim Jones said :

I think you’ll find most people think that it’s okay to taunt people for being foolish, but taunting people because of their sexual orientation, race or gender is generally regarded as being in poor taste.

Bullying and harassment of any kind is always in poor taste, if not illegal. It doesn’t matter whether the guy “loved” a chicken or crashed his hoonmobile in a single-car accident on a straight stretch of road: harassing the guy about his actions after he’s already been punished by the law and repented his sins, makes the bullies no better than a lynch mob.

Most of us in civilised society have grown beyond the desperate need to impose our opinions upon others through verbal or physical violence.

You do realise that you’re talking about Rugby League players, right?

The irony couldn’t be more apparent if it manifested itself as a giant red bus with ‘IRONY’ written on it.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 1:57 pm 15 Dec 10

Is being called a “Big Poof” worse than being called a “Dog F*cker”?

And why are racial/sexual/gender taunts special?

Enacting stupid rules in sport like this is useless.

By and large I agree. But different codes do have regulations to try and prevent racist/homophobic, etc. vilification, because these sorts of things aren’t accepted by the wider community and bring the code into disrepute.

Extending these rules to cover someone who is being vilified because he’s a complete f#cking idiot is ridiculous, cynically motivated and deeply disrespectful.

If you really don’t think that referring to someone as a ‘poof’, ‘faggot’, ‘n&gger’, ‘black c*nt’ (or whatever other homphobic or racist term) is on the same level as Monaghan being taunted for his actions, then you’ve somehow managed to successfully not notice the entire civil rights movement of the last century and there’s not much I can do to help except suggest that you hit the history books.

troll-sniffer troll-sniffer 1:53 pm 15 Dec 10

Best thing Joel can do is take it to ’em. If he publicly flaunts his mistake and beats them at their own game it’ll blow over in a couple of minutes and that’ll be it.

Grail Grail 1:46 pm 15 Dec 10

Jim Jones said :

I think you’ll find most people think that it’s okay to taunt people for being foolish, but taunting people because of their sexual orientation, race or gender is generally regarded as being in poor taste.

Bullying and harassment of any kind is always in poor taste, if not illegal. It doesn’t matter whether the guy “loved” a chicken or crashed his hoonmobile in a single-car accident on a straight stretch of road: harassing the guy about his actions after he’s already been punished by the law and repented his sins, makes the bullies no better than a lynch mob.

Most of us in civilised society have grown beyond the desperate need to impose our opinions upon others through verbal or physical violence.

chewy14 chewy14 12:22 pm 15 Dec 10

Jim Jones said :

chewy14 said :

All taunts should be equal.

It’s either all are OK or none are.

Says who?

I think you’ll find most people think that it’s okay to taunt people for being foolish, but taunting people because of their sexual orientation, race or gender is generally regarded as being in poor taste.

All taunts are not equal.

Maybe Joel was expressing his sexual orientation.

Is being called a “Big Poof” worse than being called a “Dog F*cker”?

And why are racial/sexual/gender taunts special?

Enacting stupid rules in sport like this is useless.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 11:45 am 15 Dec 10

chewy14 said :

All taunts should be equal.

It’s either all are OK or none are.

Says who?

I think you’ll find most people think that it’s okay to taunt people for being foolish, but taunting people because of their sexual orientation, race or gender is generally regarded as being in poor taste.

All taunts are not equal.

astrojax astrojax 11:21 am 15 Dec 10

Was the dog male? Then fair enough.

i hadn’t thought of it that way; hmmmm… the dog had no recourse to say no – homosexual activities are, in the main, mutually consensual. the scrote should get whatever’s coming to him, and brit crowds can be witty and cutting – hope it gets on u-toob soon…

chewy14 chewy14 11:11 am 15 Dec 10

All taunts should be equal.

It’s either all are OK or none are.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 11:09 am 15 Dec 10

Did it move?

Holditz Holditz 10:49 am 15 Dec 10

Was the dog male? Then fair enough.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site