Dear Alan,
I played quite a bit of rugby when I was a kid and I was crap. But some of the people I played with and against were not crap at all. Some were champions.
Manly legend Tony Cox, Gordon’s Wally Freeman and ‘Doc’ Cowlishaw, Randwick’s Bruce Malouf and Queensland’s David Codey were a few of the better players I knocked around with. Coxy’s mercurial speed and magical hands used to make me giggle with delight as a kid. Some of the bruises I got packing down in scrums against Bruce and some of the tackles I suffered in backyard games of rugga against Dave still hurt.
There was another player who was even better. In what was then my adolescent opinion he was the best of them all by far. This guy not only had talent and skill to burn but had more guts than any other person I had ever met. To say I admired him is an understatement. To me he was the best young rugby player in the country, maybe the world.
The bloke’s athletic prowess was only a small part of the picture. He was one of the highest academic achievers in a high school known for high academic achievement, he held senior leadership positions at his school and he was respected by his mates, fellow students and the school’s teaching community as a young man of extraordinary moral courage and integrity.
This young bloke was such an exceptional character that even though he would be horrified at such a thing, it would not be too inaccurate to brand him with the pseudonym ‘Superbloke’.
Alan, you were coaching the Wallabies and Manly way back then. If I remember rightly, you also coached top-level schoolboy teams as well. You may have even heard of the courageous young bloke I remember so well. This kid certainly played rugby at state representative level, though I think injuries prevented him from gaining selection in an Australian schoolboy team.
Alan Jones in his coaching days (S&G/PA Images via Getty Images)
Superbloke never became a famous rugby player like some of the guys I mentioned above. For what it’s worth, I reckon that if his life had turned out differently, he could have become a Wallaby. I’m sure of it. It was never to be. This young fella took his own life during his second year of university.
To say that his family, friends, university colleagues and fellow athletes were shocked by this tragedy is an understatement. Fair dinkum. The shock and horror were so intense that people who knew him and knew of the events only talked about his passing in the most hushed of tones. It was almost as though if no-one said anything, we would all be able to go on believing it had never happened.
Horribly, nearly 50 years later the feelings of distress and horror still linger for many. I have tried talking to friends about this guy and responses to questions of, “Why” and, “What do you think happened?” are met with confused responses and blank stares. It is as if friends even today are emotionally unprepared to think about these issues. Is there anything more horrible and distressing than teen suicide?
I remember when I was that age. Maybe for many the teen and early adult years are a breeze, I don’t know, but for me they weren’t. Maybe in only slightly different circumstances, I might have taken the same decision Superbloke did. For years every aspect of my life was filled with existential panic.
Was I a worthwhile human? Why was I scared all the time? What would become of me? What was my sexual nature, and would the world find me acceptable when I found out whatever I was? Did anyone like me? Was I worth being cared about? All this stuff is as self-centred as hell of course, but many teens struggle with such questions about their value. Many teens hover at the edge of a horrible precipice.
Jeez, I’ve got no idea what life was like for you at 18, Alan. Maybe you were one of those cocky bastards I was jealous of who knew who they were, knew what they wanted and knew how they were going to get it. Maybe you weren’t. Given you are anything but mainstream, it would not be hard to imagine that you suffered your fair share of self-doubt as a teenager too.
But even if you didn’t have a care in the world as a kid, you have spent a lot of time with young people over the years. You had a successful career as a school teacher. You were a wonderful sports coach who achieved enormous success at school, club, representative and international level.
That means you spent a huge amount of time dealing with young people, kids and adults, and the stuff they are going through. As a coach and teacher you must have been aware of the anxiety many young people experience even if you didn’t experience it yourself. Even the toughest, bravest and most seemingly durable young people on the planet can also be fragile, and this must have been clear to you.
As a former coach, mentor and advocate for young adults it surprises me that you sympathise with Israel Folau in his confrontation with Rugby Australia over his persistent “warnings” to homosexuals on social media. While you are correct that Folau has every right to hold any religious view he chooses and while it is also true that he has every right to express those beliefs, it is not true that he has the right to publicly declare opposing views to an employer that has a duty of care to protect and defend its stakeholders.
Rugby Australia has a lot of faults, but can they be faulted for standing against people from within their ranks whose actions may potentially cause enormous distress and hurt to their fellow rugby players and supporters? ‘Inclusiveness’ and, even more importantly, the forbidding of the vilifying of rugby folk based on sexuality, race or religion are central elements of the role that rugby plays in Australian society. To suggest that rugby is a ‘broad church’ and can embrace publicly professed homophobic views is a bit like saying card-carrying Nazi or Communist members can reasonably exist within the Liberal Party.
Folau’s views don’t stop at expressing moral concern with being homosexual. He has repeatedly stated that hell awaits homosexuals who don’t repent. It is hard to imagine a crueller suggestion. I am not knowledgeable enough to enter into a theological debate over whether Folau’s version of Christianity is reasonable within the broad Christian tradition, but it seems to me that when Jesus and his apostles taught, they didn’t broadcast blanket rules on social media about which human behaviours would banish individuals to eternal damnation.
Surely the teachings of Jesus and his later followers were addressed to specific groups and individuals at specific places and times and each was designed to elicit a specific response from those groups and individuals. To universally damn a population group, even if that does fit within your religious beliefs, does not seem to me to be okay, and to suggest that Rugby Australia has no right to bar its members from publicly broadcasting those views also seems wrong to me.
Israel Folau (Mark Nolan/Getty Images)
When mates of Superbloke do discuss his death one common theme comes up every time. Most of his friends believe that he mentioned in a final letter his distress at his discovery of his homosexuality. I have no proof that this final confession happened or indeed if there even was a suicide note. Many family members have now died and other family members and friends who would know whether this is true or not are not talking. Silence still reigns, even 50 years on.
That’s why I am not going to mention Superbloke’s name. I for one would love to talk about him personally. I would love to say that his name and memory deserve to be celebrated. I would love to shout out that he was a fantastic young man who I wish I had got to know much better. I would love to say that Superbloke would have made a huge impact in the world if he had had the chance to live longer. I am sure that he would have achieved great things not only in sport but in other spheres as well.
But I cannot say those things because I cannot find anyone who can confirm the facts about his passing and because there are most likely people who do not want his life and death discussed. I do not even feel comfortable writing about him using a pseudonym. If any of his surviving family or friends read this letter and recognise the story, I hope they do not find the contents distressing.
But, Alan, I do think the story deserves to be told because it illustrates why it is important for people to stand up to Israel Folau and to say that his social media posts are not okay. Such views may deeply hurt young people at the most vulnerable time of their lives. Even the most courageous and durable young people may be walking a fine line between deciding to carry on and throwing the world away.
To publicly broadcast a view that homosexuals are destined for hell vilifies those people in the cruellest way. It implies that heaven and earth find them unacceptable. Finds them vile in fact. All people, and young people in particular, should not suffer such vilification.
Millionaire athletes are paid not only to entertain but to represent their sport and its values. Any athlete who is not willing to support those values and embrace inclusiveness – and support young people on their journey into adulthood – should not accept the huge amounts of money they are offered for performing this role. Rugby Australia is entitled to expect not only that its athletes embrace its expressed values but also that athletes who don’t agree with them don’t sign up in the first place.
Alan, you are one of rugby’s greatest ever coaches. You most likely positively influenced the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands, of young men. Many of those young men must have been experiencing existential panic, serious mental health issues and feelings of low self-worth. As a leader and mentor of such people, I find it hard to believe you think Folau should be allowed to express his views in direct contradiction to Rugby Australia’s policy of supporting inclusiveness.
Even if Superbloke did not take his own life because of his distress over his sexuality, his case still reflects the fragility of young people in their march towards discovering their place in the world.
Views like those expressed by Israel Folau are their right, no doubt, but organisations like the Rugby Australia should stand against those views. I hope you do too.
Blasto
Roar Rookie
This is without a shred of doubt the most intelligent, relevant and heartfelt treatments of this situation there is. Six Australian men a day end their own lives. Who knows why but I am sure there are people in that stat who are dead because they are afraid of what society thinks of their masculinity or sexuality. I'm generally not a very sooky kinda guy, but Superbloke's story stirred some emotions in me, and I'm sure many others that really need to be voiced and supported by all Australians. I personally played rugger at school in the 80s with a guy who everyone knew was gay, he sometimes got a bit of harmless ribbing by the lads but nothing vindictive. The coach also knew and never said a negative word about it. I never felt funny getting in a ruck with him, or taking a shower anywhere near him - remember this was in the "grim reaper" days, and blood bins were not a thing just yet either... I actually consider it one of my most valuable life lessons to have been his mate. Luckily he didn't succumb to the same fate. The funny thing is I'm sure there were others, but they kept it low key. My personal takehome: Hell is a construct yet to be proven by anyone. So is every religion, cult, etc on the planet - could well be all hogwash, no proof whatsoever. Other peoples' sexuality is none of our business. Projection is a psychological defense mechanism by which people project hatred and can use others as scapegoats for aspects of themselves they hate. Everyone should have the right to express themselves and work their magic on this earth in the way that they were meant to as long as it doesn't deprive anyone else. The waste of life that occurs when people are afraid of other people's judgment based on old wives tales. To finish, there is only two main driving-force emotions in everyone - love and fear. The others all just derive from those two.
deucer
Roar Rookie
Well, Tim - I won't side step the question, although I do find it funny that you say sport should not be politicised and then ask a question where you politicise sport. Yes, if a Muslim sponsor made a condition of their sponsorship that no player should publicly support gay rights whist wearing the uniform with their name on it, then the players would have to respect that if they signed a big contract. Not really apples with apples as supporting any rights isn't hurting anyone.
Tim watson
Roar Rookie
Deucer, I don't think I am confusing freedom of speech with an employers contract, neither you or I have seen the contract and Folau has said that there was nothing in the contract that forbid him from posting to social media about his beliefs. And further to that if freedom of religion is a basic human right under international law, on what basis would RA be able to justify such a clause. I think the questions you have posed are irrelevant to the case at hand because rugby is sport it should not be politicized and used for social engineering. I think a better question would be what would you say if the major sponsor of a sporting team was a fundamentalist Muslim and he pressured the sporting team to sack a player that was vocal for gay rights. Would you be saying that you shouldn't be confusing freedom of speech with employer contracts.
clipper
Roar Rookie
Don't hold your breath awaiting a reply. I've posed similar questions and only once has someone replied, saying 'they (the gay teacher) shouldn't put themselves in that situation' not realising the same thing could be said about IF! This again confirms my belief that posters carrying on about free speech do so on that the proviso that said speech does not go against their beliefs.
Christo the Daddyo
Roar Rookie
Yep. And he didn't quote the Bible. He paraphrased it. Poorly, obviously.
deucer
Roar Rookie
What a confusing and rambling post - with far too many ... Where did the author express feelings of guilt - feelings of distress and shock, sure. Please do not confuse the authors feelings with trying to assuage IF's and Jone's comments. The basic premise was that every hateful comment, every spiteful post can add to the myriad other factors in a tortured teenagers life. If we can make the world a better place by lessening that hate, why not take it?
deucer
Roar Rookie
Tim - you, like many other posters, are confusing freedom of speech with a breach of an employers contract. Please answer this - would a teacher, at a religious school, be able to post homosexual comments whilst wearing the school uniform? Would a coke employee wearing a coke t shirt be able to post comments saying pepsi is far better?
Ralph
Roar Guru
It is a noble thought, but I don’t think the ability to love was ever threatened here. They humiliated a witch in the village square because they didn’t like what he said.
SandBox
Roar Guru
The Roman Empire had Marcus Aurelius, who has stood the test of time as a great thinker. Yet even he was constantly referring to the ‘gods’. A statement a monotheist would see as untrue. Otherwise, I’d agree with you about those times, having thinkers. However, they were hamstrung by their lack of scientific knowledge. It was an amazing achievement that the Egyptians built the Pyramids, but let’s not forget the reason why they built them. My statement is relevant to you position of people not wanting to address what’s in the bible, because what’s in the bible has not stood the test of time with regard the revolution of societies knowledge and morals. Especially the Torah/Old testament. Latest evidence is we stood up in Africa around 250,000 years ago. We domesticated animals for eating around 12,000 years ago, and domesticated plants, such as wheat around 6,000 years ago. So it wasn’t that long ago that we thought throwing babies into volcanoes would appease the gods, that slavery was normal, that peace was just a break between wars. All the old holy texts are more a tribute to how far we’ve come, than any truth
soapit
Roar Guru
simply..i think there should be an unalienable human right to love and i dont think its a valid choice to have to decide that you never can. that it why it is essentially different .
ScottD
Roar Guru
Thanks for the article/letter Socrates. I avoided reading it for days as I am over the Folau circus. However I did read it this morning and I am very glad I did. Thank you.
ScottD
Roar Guru
Gold NVFS pure gold
Ralph
Roar Guru
Thanks for these thoughtful responses. 1. I think many people over the weeks have both outright stated and also implied that gay people are specially born that way. Maybe not you, but it's certainly right in the debate. 2. I never meant to say we were discussing those other behaviours. The point of that exercise was to take your principle and apply it to other behaviours to see that it stood up consistently or not. I think I showed that the principle leads to bad outcomes. 3. Three points about 'all encompassing'. One is, this looks simply like adding adjectives as I warned about. The core meaning has not changed, either it is a choice or it isn't. Second point, the gay community in Sydney is, historically speaking, promiscuous. So they do often change 'who they love', so not as all encompassing as one might think. Lastly, people don't want to sleep with people the moment they are born either, you have forgotten the biological event called puberty. 4. I don't think you have presented any evidence that, "those that are completely encompassing without fail" is anything more than an idea. To me it sounds like a classic description of what we call 'addiction' (desires we cannot control). There are also many example of people who choose to change the sexual orientation. At this point, I would remind you of the context for this debate. Last year a public sporting figure posted his view that he would not support same sex marriage. This view was deemed to bring a game into disrepute, in spite of that opinion being one side of a national referendum. People called it hate speech; "talk that attacks a person based on an attribute such as race or religion." So they talked as if 'gay' was a scientific principle (an attribute) and not a behaviour. My position is that when you peel that onion part there is little to no scientific basis for that assumption (or direct claim).
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
The bible has stuff on slaves and women being possessions. if you want to go back to that, go and find another country, you aren't welcome in mine. It also contradicts itself in multiple places. So if you postulation of it is all true or all false, then mathematically it is false, because the true case is self conflicting. I believe it is a compilation of stories/fables used as a template to civilize and uncivilized population and to keep it healthy and expanding. I think collectively our Altruistic genes drive us to do what is best for society as a whole. It isn't a bunch of individuals sitting on thrones. Essential services, infrastructure are all results of this. Socialism. There is some bad stuff, driven by greed. Behavior present in most groups.
The Crow Flies Backwards
Roar Rookie
Likewise
Neil
Guest
I don't think that addresses my statement at all vOv I don't think the roman empire was filled with dribbling idiots either. They had engineers and doctors and philisophers. Sure they couldn't make a PS4 in a factory, but they weren't all complete dumbasses.
Neil
Guest
It doesn't work that way though. Either it's all true or it's all rubbish. If it's true, it shatters your whole world view. Picking and choosing what you like is exactly what I said is the problem. People just want to sit on their own throne and do whatever they think is right.
Redbeard
Roar Rookie
Socrates , I do see you, (and others in this forum?), are suffering because of Superbloke.? Were you in a position to help? Did you notice something amiss? It has been said that suicide is a very selfish action, often aimed at hurting those who are closest. And as a parent, friend, or colleague, knowing that someone, whom I thought was a loved one, or friend, had killed them self would be terrible. Life shattering in fact. And yes, such a tragic loss of life, would instill a sense of guilt and remorse to all of his family, friends and social contacts, including his rugby team mates ………………………………………..There were no social media in the times you are talking about? There was probably , the odd after game drinks, or party and training 2-3 times per week, what a social life, not. The team would have been his social life ?. Was the team properly counselled after Superbloke’s death?………………. I’m no shrink, but just maybe what you have written has been somewhat cathartic? If it has been, even in the slightest may I strongly suggest you seek professional help, so you can properly come to terms with those demons in your past. …………………………………………………………………………… Please do not confuse what happened to Superbloke, your feelings of guilt, Alan Jones’ comments and Izzy’s social media posts. Terms like transference and projection come to mind. (Call Lifeline – 13 11 14 (24/7))
soapit
Roar Guru
i. we are not talking about those other behaviours. no one is generally claiming they are born that way as a way of claiming they are unable to act any other way. no one is claiming discimination on this basis. so its not actually a real problem. ii. those behaviours impact the person or society negatively and need to be scrutinised more. iii. those behaviours arent all encompassing like who you love is. you dont always want to take drugs from the moment you are born. you dont only ever want to steal and the idea of paying for things goes against everything you are. there is no problem as immediate extrapolation of the logic to those other areas due to the above. you have mistaken the logic. not all desire can be excused by genetics*. those that are completely encompassing without fail (i have only ever loved gay and never straight) must surely be given credit as being a special case of desire drawn from genetics* . * if we can put aside the genetics vs other factors for now and assume its at their core one way or another.
Ralph
Roar Guru
I see that line of inquiry, but let us use it for a number of other behaviours and see where that goes: If I consistently and exclusively steal it must be because I am born that way. If I consistently and exclusively take drugs it must be because I am born that way. If we have consistently and exclusively been throw the wife of the dead man on his burning funeral pyre it must be because we are born that way. If we have consistently and exclusively killed the majority of female babies in our society for generations then it must be because we are born that way. etc.. The problem is, this argument can be used to justify a huge range of behaviours, many of which are destructive (through empirical evidence) or not appreciated by wider society (impact others negatively). Illegal things could be justified this way. You will notice that I left out the 'desire' word, and yet popping it back makes no functional difference to the meaning of the sentence. The argument is simply that the reason I do a thing (anything ) is because I desire to do it. Even piling on adjectives doesn't materially change the core of the argument. But I "really" desire. But I "truly" desire". But I "intensely" desire". If we conclude that behaviour is driven by desire and desire is genetic, then justice logically ceases to have meaning. I can shoot you and justify that action because I was born that way and if anyone should criticise my behaviour - well - clearly it is hate speech. Of course they same will be true if your widow shoots me dead in return. People cease to be responsible for their actions.