It’s all performative bollocks but they aren’t being worn as a personal statement, they are being worn as a representative of the club. And if 19 wear it and one doesn’t, that makes an unfortunate statement about the club in question. If it had been Yates that didn’t want to wear it, I’d hope the club would inform him that someone else was captaining the side this week.
Basically a bloke went to Turkey for reasons that are not clear, bought a new mate back with him, they went to visit that tree everyone went apeshit about, they built a banging tree top village and then combined to stop Alan Rickman raping that bird who was in Scarface. A fat bloke got shitfaced to celebrate and I beleive they all lived happily ever after.
I periodically get texts and phone calls about a PIP review. I have occasionally answered and once even returned the message they left to tell them I think they have a transposed phone number or similar. They are generally very surprised/grateful for my efforts, but the process seems to continue.
Changing the captaincy for a week makes it a thing and is equally performative. Maybe it’s the better path, but it’s hard to say. I think his not wearing one says nothing at all about his club, fwiw. It just says that he personally holds a belief that most do not, and he’s not going to lie about it for the sake of peace and quiet.
Anyone should be free not to wear a pride armband, a poppy, a crucifix, or whatever the fuck else they don’t want to wear when that thing is expressing a belief or position that they do not share or hold. If that is where it starts and ends for someone citing their religion as a reason for something, surely everyone can just shrug and move on. People are entitled to the rights and protections given under the law, and if god has a beef with them then he’s welcome to run for office, but beyond that we’re into the realms of social pressure.. which it’s necessary to allow people to resist. Policing shared gestures is always bollocks.
Which does raise the question, is there a need for football to wear rainbow laces and armbands at all as a collective anymore? It seems to make more sense to say wear them when you like if you like, but it's a personal choice.
What you have to bear in mind is that the 'ship isn't football any more. It's a global entertainment that misrepresents to your face, what it actually is, in order to extract value from you. So the foot soldiers are held to the values of the market place, and expected to conform to it's behaviours, while the ownership model persues an entirely different agenda. In the case of more than none, that is petrochemical states that oppress and criminalise the very people that they insist the people on the ground wave a flag for.
We are living in a fog of post-truth hypocrisy. It's not a question of reality, it's more about doing as you are told by your owners. Personal freedom is off the agenda.
I think my point is that individuals are compelled to conform to the project. Or consequences. Of course we retain the illusion of freedom, but freedom isn't really that if its accompanied by coercion, or worse. Don't get me wrong, I think preferring a doctrine based on no facts, to demonise and oppress groups of people, in the name of freedom, is pretty ugly and hypocritical. But here we are. If the question is freedom, it's not trumpable (in terms of cards, not fascist opressors). The whole thing is a mess.
In other news, shitty have got Santa parading round in sky blue. Coca cola execs will be spinning in their crack houses.