Those who have some white hair in the head, like us, will remember the legendary theme song of the legendary transmission those that the football sung by the legendary Enzo Jannacci. Much less are the ones who know that that abbreviation was the football -themed reduction of a 1977 song in which Jannacci spoke of politics and society with verses such as “those who vote for white card so as not to dirty, oh year / those who have never dealt with politics, oh year / those who vomit, oh year, no, no, ne, yeh /
Those who keep to the king “.

Here, we like to think that if it were alive today, in addition to phrases like “those who vote on the right because they are afraid of thieves” or “those who, those who cannot believe it even now that the earth is round, Oh Yeh”, the great Jannacci would also write a phrase on those who believe that being against homophobia is a question of democracy and freedom of choice. How to be favorable to divorce or abortion, let’s say.

And if they already make little sense, those who, not wanting to divorce or interrupt a pregnancy, think that it is right to impose their (religious) opinion by law, it becomes totally illogical to claim as a right, as a choice, whether to beat and kill those who have a different sexual orientation from their own.

Yes, because this is what they ask for those who, when a boy risks his life in order not to make a colorful scale, or when millionaire footballers cover a rainbow symbol of the fight against homophobia on their shirts as happened in France these days (and as happens for years now), go around for social and bars to say that it is a matter of freedom of choice: the right to use violence against LGBTQ people.

Ekdal: “Gay footballers are afraid of retaliation inside and off the pitch”

Is violence against women’s question? And instead the one on gays?

“One can’t have your own ideas?” “He did very well to cover that logo, everyone is free to choose” “just like that, it is time to finish it with the imposition of unique thought” … these are the typical comments, written on social networks or pronounced by voice, of those who in these days support the choice of footballers who, for mostly religious reasons, have covered the symbol of the fight against homophobia that the French football federation has brought on the shirts of the teams. It had already happened in recent years, someone now pretends to be an injury to not pay the fine, the others instead are sure that they will pay the fine with pride. The same pride shown by all those who exchange democracy with the freedom to hurt others if we don’t like others.

To unmask hypocrisy and the lack of sense of a similar position, in fact, it is sufficient to make a parallelism with another social solidarity initiative that takes place every year on the football fields, when the players take the field with a red strip on the face to testify the contrast to violence against women.

Why did no footballer of no nationality and no religion ever refused to color his face by claiming different choice and personal opinions? The answer is extremely simple: because no person with at least one working neuron thinks that violence against women is a right thing, or even just a theme on which discordant personal opinions can be had. This does not mean, unfortunately, that violence against women is a totally extinct phenomenon, canceled by the face of the earth. But nobody would ever dream of claiming the right to beat women, at least in contexts a minimum democratic.

So why do you hide behind freedom of thought and speech when there is simply the opposition to the violence perpetrated, still today, against those who are not heterosexual? Because this is what means wearing that logo, or trivially saying against homophobia.

It is not a question of wearing stiletto heels or dressing as a woman even if you are men; Either kissing a person of the same sex, or going to bed, or giving their children to someone who makes them become gay with “gender theory” strokes. None of this.

Being against homophobia, and consequently accepting to wear a logo on a shirt or walking on a colored school scale, simply means condemning violence against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals. Just like that red strip on the face on the day against violence against women.

Violence that, unfortunately, still regularly peek between the news of the news. And then, if those players or their fans want to be honest with themselves as well as with others, they have at least the courage to say things as they are: according to them beating or killing gays is a matter of freedom.