aAnd you got to know us through the trail of rainbow love hearts. It’s time to think in detail about the inappropriate symbol of tolerance adopted by the FA and Wales this week; Token of tolerance to be worn during world Cup In Qatar, homosexuality is punishable by torture and death. And yes, this really sounds like a sweet and gentle symbol of forgiveness.
But can we go further? Should football federations have insisted on a more urgently inappropriate symbol of tolerance? Should it have a bolder font, for example? The statement of public concern, issued alongside the inappropriate symbol of tolerance, is perhaps a more dismissive tone.
Conclusion: Has the symbol of tolerance become “categorical”? What are the eyeballs on this thing? Could it be the inappropriate symbol of forgiveness, hear me, actually genius? Is there something wonderful going on here?
In general, maybe not. Yes, the icon resembles the cover artwork of a rave pop track in the mid-’90s with the vocals of someone who was at Grange Hill. And yes, “Stand up against all forms of discrimination” may be a simple, deliberately vague phrase that is hard to agree or disagree with.
And yes, players wearing this love squad will still do so in a stadium haunted by the ghosts of contract workers. There’s even a case that this entire campaign is nothing more than a piece of empty branding, a piece of messaging so meaningless that it smells like the airless death of the company.
But apart from all that, at least one symbol of love is a gesture, and gestures have value. It was heartening to see her on the arm of Harry Kane, who was adamant in his support of tolerance and inclusion in football. Seeing Kane like this will give support and encouragement to someone in the world. that thing.
The England The task force will also invite migrant workers to their training base, which may or may not assist migrant workers. More practically, the FA has lent its support to the idea of compensating the families of those killed in construction projects for the World Cup. But then, this can also be difficult because Qatar pretty much maintains that no one has been killed in construction projects for the World Cup. What is zero in a billion dollars? Well it’s a bargain!
Gareth Southgate was right when he said England would be criticized whatever they did on these issues, a fact dictated by his second point, which is that “there is a limit to what we can influence”. That’s an amazing statement, if only because it feels like the closest person who’s actually got on the subject to tell the truth.
But not exclusive. Here’s another story from Qatar this week. Dr. Hind Al-Muftah is a prominent Qatari government employee, and she is currently the exceptional ambassador of Qatar’s mission to the United Nations in Geneva. Receive lectures on human rights. In 2016, she was named the most influential social media personality in Qatar.
A year later, she was appointed to Qatar’s Shura Council by Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the same emir who assured world leaders this week that the World Cup would introduce open arms (note: not actual open arms) “to the masses of all”. walks of life”, which appears to be a “gay” symbol.
Dr. Hind has supported the . program Register 4TheGoals “Breaking Barriers and Promoting Cultural Understanding” campaign. Her LinkedIn page says she is “very interested in working with young people and diverse cultures.” She looks cool, progressive and an ideal candidate, as Qatar pressured her, to become the chairperson of the United Nations Human Rights Forum. Which, in the case of Happy Optics, happens as the World Cup kicks off.
Except for judging by the content of her social media accounts, Dr. Hind also appears The belief that gay rights are “disgusting rights” (“God damn them!”) and that “the Jews have dominated, tyrannized and ruled the world,” that they are “our enemies” and should be “paralysed.”
Although this explains why she posted a viral message seemingly promising to “trample the last corpse of a cursed Zionist,” linking to a remark that Jews, homosexuals, and Western society are responsible for “obscenity, decadence, cocaine, crack, nudity, sex and violence.” To be fair, it sounds like Decent night out.
Unfortunately for Dr. Hind’s candidacy, this content was highlighted by the United Nations Watch Organization (UN Watch), describing her as a “hate ambassador for Qatar”, which does not appear to be the right ambassador for a human rights forum during the One Love World Cup.
Why am I telling this story? Because for all its bleak details, and regardless of the fact that Dr. Hind has changed her views, it tells us something real about tolerance and opposing cultural values. Basically, even speaking as a villain, it’s refreshing to hear someone say what they actually think.
What happens with the tolerance symbol is clear enough. There is a fine line between appeasing the audience at home, who care about this version of tolerance and human rights, and not offending your hosts who don’t.
Qatar predicted the future 12 years ago and basically won this long game. Qatar has 200 years of gas reserves in an energy crisis. Qatar is not looking for advice on how to act. Qatar has an army of drones. Qatar has the World Cup and the Glastonbury spider. Qatar will welcome you and will make you an offer. But with the best will in the world, Qatar thinks you’re most likely going to hell anyway. Cool icon though, bro.
Unwilling to boycott, and unable to get away, it’s hard to blame the framers of the FA’s manifesto and logo designers, who find themselves trying to send corporate messages on their way out of a place where nothing can be right because everything seems wrong.
The main villains are of course FIFA, not just to give the World Cup to Qatar, but even to entertain an offer, to take the money, while pretending to embrace the lofty ideals of tolerance, inclusion and all other things. In the face of this what do we have? Love hearts, curtly written phrases. And feeling, above all, the limits of things.