Hitzlsperger: Commend Players Who Wear Rainbow Armbands

Former Aston Villa midfielder Thomas Hitzlsperger publicly identified as gay approximately ten years ago, following the conclusion of his professional playing career. He stated his intention was to “move the discussion about homosexuality among professional sportspeople forwards”. Annually, the Premier League collaborates with Stonewall, an LGBTQ+ charity, on the Rainbow Laces campaign, which aims to advance equality and diversity. Following incidents where Ipswich captain Sam Morsy chose not to wear the campaign’s rainbow armband and Crystal Palace’s Marc Guehi incorporated messages referencing Jesus onto his armband, Hitzlsperger shared his perspective. Hitzlsperger noted significant progress, citing his own experience of sharing his story and coming out as gay in 2014, along with his continued involvement in various facets of football, as evidence. He acknowledged substantial advancements but cautioned against overlooking that a perfect situation has not yet been, and may never be, achieved, given how football reflects broader society. Reflecting on his own playing career, Hitzlsperger recalled instances of team-mates making offensive remarks in the dressing room concerning homosexuality. Regarding the recent events, both Ipswich and Crystal Palace have explicitly stated that their players fully support a tolerant atmosphere. Hitzlsperger expressed his clear hope that this tolerance would be fully demonstrated should a player have a gay team-mate, stating a need to believe in this. He clarified that the rainbow armband’s purpose is not to advocate for homosexuality, but rather to combat discrimination. Hitzlsperger expressed his wish for every player to oppose discrimination, through various means, not only due to potential personal impact but also because it represents a fundamental human right. He emphasized the importance of not being swayed by detractors or skeptics, particularly those in prominent positions, including well-known footballers who, regardless of their personal views, possess a public platform. Hitzlsperger suggested shifting the focus, noting that declining to wear the armband could potentially have an adverse impact on the community. He highlighted that most captains do wear the armbands, and players often wear warm-up shirts and jackets in rainbow colors. He advocated for commending these individuals for opposing division and discrimination, and for acknowledging the positive progress made over time. He remarked that if he had been told 12 years prior that society would reach a point with open and visible campaigns combating discrimination and embracing the LGBTQ+ community, he would have considered it tangible progress. While acknowledging that rainbow flags alone cannot transform society, he stated that their consistent presence over many years constitutes a significant element of ongoing change and improvement. He urged a focus on promoting positive examples of work undertaken by clubs and individuals. He also called for identifying allies, specifically mentioning the numerous fan clubs in the Premier League and Championship, including gay and lesbian fan clubs, suggesting that attention should be directed towards them rather than a small number of individuals. Hitzlsperger cautioned against reacting to a single player’s actions with a negative and uncompromising stance, such as interpreting it as “proof footballers are homophobic.” He asserted that such a generalization is inaccurate and should not be used to represent all individuals. The transfer of former Liverpool captain Jordan Henderson to Saudi Arabia has, he noted, generated divided opinions and moral conflicts. He described the armband as a potent symbol, but pointed out that with only one captain wearing it, there is no way to ascertain the opinions of their team-mates. Recalling his own career, Hitzlsperger remembered instances of feeling intimidated by comments from team-mates, possibly made unknowingly without awareness of his sexual orientation. He stated he was too apprehensive to disclose his orientation while playing and fully respects others who might find themselves in a similar situation. More than ten years later, he expressed a desire to engage in such conversations, to inquire about any issues, and potentially assist by clarifying the meaning behind these initiatives. He acknowledged that some individuals might be receptive while others might not. Ultimately, he stated, players are present to play football, with an obligation to support initiatives on which they sometimes cannot openly express an opinion. He noted that players might occasionally perceive themselves as being dictated to, beyond the scope of their initial career aspirations. Hitzlsperger suggested that the armband permits personal interpretation, which could contribute to differing perspectives. He observed that in this context, it has brought forth the highly sensitive subject of religion, a topic that many, if not most, fans and players have long believed, along with politics, should not influence sport. He concluded that, generally, very high standards are imposed on football players. He pointed out that companies globally utilize rainbow colors, though not in all regions, indicating that this is not exclusively a football-related concern. He questioned whether footballers are being singled out for attention in a way corporations are not. Hitzlsperger differentiated between scrutiny and the processes of education and change, asserting that every such instance should serve to inform and promote evolution.