Originally posted by Lateralthinking1
View Post
-
But the latter would certainly put me off "a union"
-
Erm, what would? Church bells?Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View PostBut the latter would certainly put me off "a union"Comment
-
-
Yes, quite. As for Chaldon's magnificent if not wholly reassuring mural.........Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View PostSpot on, Lat!
http://www.paintedchurch.org/chald1.jpg
(Footnote - This church mural predates marriage)Last edited by Guest; 04-03-12, 18:28.Comment
-
Frenchie, Article 2 of the declaration saysOriginally posted by french frank View Post
"Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."
The list is not exclusive, but examples ("such as") of distinctions that should not be made.
Anyway, as I said, O'Brien is interpreting (wrongly) "men and women" to mean men to women, an interpretation based on his own beliefs about marriage, not on anything inherent in marriage itself.Comment
-
Yes, The Right unWorshipful and disHonourable Cardinal O'Brien's piece is sickening - a rationalisation of a prejudice.
But the school report is heartening, the kids are the future...
the recent playground (and other) usage of "gay" is depressing and damaging though... once you were QUEER BASTARD, then you became a sort of cool accessory for hetero couples, then there was one cabinet minister, then three, then David Beckham said he was fine with gay fans enjoying (ah, so that's what it was called) his photos, well it was all going rather well wasn't it? But then the Church, oh GOD the Church, and then "it's a bit gay isn't it"...
20 years ago and some people were talking about school and how was it for you, and I said "hated every day" and meant it - but couldn't then say why. It ruined my life and I still sometimes feel I'm STILL trying not to let it... can you hear that, Cardinal?Comment
-
Sadly, he probably can't, but he certainly won't if you don't give free rein to expressing it!Originally posted by jayne lee wilson View Post
It never ceases to astonish me that, even today, we still find ourselves up against these prejudices which one might have hoped that changes in the law over the years would have cast to the outer darkness of history well before now; what also saddens me even more is that, then, as now, those prejudices are often more virulent against women than against men. Why should that be? I have less than no idea...Comment
-
It's possibly related to traditional roles and gender stereotypes: virgin, whore, maid, mother, carer, ornament, trophy... these are all roles which serve or relate to others, so for women to be taking pleasure in each other - in themselves - is seen as "selfish", even "barren", breaking up the potential for the family unit and for childrearing, and threatening to some - I stress some - men, who won't like the idea of women not needing them. Gay women have often cultivated a very nondescript (or sometimes agressively plain), "mannish" appearance, stripping away the acoutrements of "femininity" to give at least a subtle message of identity and self-expression, but that has been seen as "unattractive" and "undesirable", even slovenly or "threatening", again denying the male view (often reinforced by decorated, dressed-up, heterosexual women) its usual gratifications. Pop culture, especially in the 1980s, fed off (and into) all these images bountifully. And, tellingly, allowed men to "dress up" even if they weren't gay.
It is all about expectation and continuity, the fear of the "alien" presence in a domestic, patriarchal world.
Of course it's easier now... but almost as if as attitudes generally improve, the remaining outposts of prejudice fight even more fiercely to cling to their atavisms.
But if just one (or three) Premiership Footballers could come out... well, imagine...!
What a news day that will be. As an inveterate media-watcher, I hope I'm alive to see it.
Originally posted by ahinton View PostLast edited by jayne lee wilson; 05-03-12, 03:46.Comment
-
a footballer coming out would be very important indeed.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.Comment
-
A great post, jlw - you've expressed my similar experience perfectly ... hated every day at my top-class all-boys grammar school and each day still brings its own challenges. Some people tell me I sound bitter - you betcha! But I'm thrilled to see things getting better for school kids and young adults today and bozos like this Cardinal must know that this is their last huzzah.Originally posted by jayne lee wilson View Post
Comment
-
-
Just heard the Cardinal trying to wriggle out of his homophobia on R4
one comment that made me smile was
"He no playa the game, he no maka the rules."
(shame about it's origin
)
Comment
-
repeated his nonsense on R4's Today programme (sometime between 7.30 and 8 IIRC). On a lighter note: Rabbi Lionel Blue in Thought for the Day mentioned a gay couple walking behind a hetero couple having a blazing row, with one of the gay chaps saying to his companion: see what comes of mixed marriage!Originally posted by jayne lee wilson View PostMy life, each morning when I dress, is four and twenty hours less. (J Richardson)Comment
-
MrGongGongOriginally posted by MrGongGong View PostJust heard the Cardinal trying to wriggle out of his homophobia on R4
one comment that made me smile was
"He no playa the game, he no maka the rules."
(shame about it's origin)
"He no playa the game, he no maka the rules" was used at a press conference at the Vatican by a retired American general who had just been appointed as a good will ambassador to the Holy See.
He was referring to the Pope's views on unmarried mothers. There was an enormous fuss, official apologies etc.etc. and he was immediately recalled !Comment
-
Comment