Tom Daley's In Love ...

[amateur51]

Funny how none of these people who-according to you- have PMd you with support have come publicly to your defence. These then, are people who read the boards but don't post, but who, rather than doing so, send you PMs instead. How convenient.

Pull the other one.

I mis-spoke, as Hillary Clinton might say.

I meant to write:

"get from people who have posted post on this issue but who are sympathetic to some of the issues raised on some of the thread dealing with lesbian and gay issues."

I can only assume that they are fearful that if they did post publicy in support, they too might be subject to the hysterical responses that you deal out to others.

PACK IT IN! :smiley:

[amateur51]

Lying about stuff is a favourite tactic of yours matey
I guess thats what they taught you in the forces
"the best in the world" indeed

Isn't it instructive that Mr Pee, once so proud of Marine A over on the Poppies thread, has been posting here with accusations of my making stuff up, while he has failed to mention the sentence handed down by the Court Martial today and its reasons for the sentence,. The judgement includes many of the lnes followed by Board members when discussing this case, and it would be nice if Mr Pee could now apologise for the mockery to which he has subjected them for their now-vindicated views.

The chances of Mr Pee apologising have risen especially now that David Cameron has demonstrated that pig semen can fly! (with apologies to BBC's News Quiz on Radio 4 tonight, but then everyone knows that the BBC in general and Radio 4's News Quiz in particular are nothing less than a liberal-lefty conspiracy).

[Serial_Apologist]

I mis-spoke, as Hillary Clinton might say.

I meant to write:

"get from people who have posted post on this issue but who are sympathetic to some of the issues raised on some of the thread dealing with lesbian and gay issues."

I can only assume that they are fearful that if they did post publicy in support, they too might be subject to the hysterical responses that you deal out to others.

PACK IT IN! :smiley:

You're too courteous, amsy - I wouldn't have bothered replying.

[amateur51]

You're too courteous, amsy - I wouldn't have bothered replying.

Too courteous? Have a care!

I have my reputation as sex-obsessed, mischief-making, lefty nancy boy to maintain, y'know :winkeye:

[Mr Pee]

I mis-spoke, as Hillary Clinton might say.

Again, how convenient.

I'm not sure how old you are, but I grew out of having imaginary friends many years ago.

[MrGongGong]

Again, how convenient.

I'm not sure how old you are, but I grew out of having imaginary friends many years ago.

I don't think you have told your "Bear" though :winkywotsit:

[Barbirollians]

We clearly shan't agree. But if it was Britten who was the important link, why did you put it on Platform 3, the board for general discussion, rather than music?

This is not about 'human rights', in general - it is about a right in which you take a special interest and keep raising. The reason that it's the only one that keeps getting moved down here is because, as I said, all the other 'special interest' posters have either given up or left the forum.

What is or is not 'balderdash' in my view and in your view is, again, clearly, a matter of opinion. Some issues have been about gay rights - like the one JLW started about the situation in Russia. But since there are probably only two people on this forum who would dispute the validity of gay rights, with the rest defending them, along with all human rights (and I do recall one or two other who also oppose the concept of human rights altogether) you have, at best a virtually entirely sympathetic audience, at worse people who want to get on with discussing other subjects.

What a depressing post . Discrimination is not a special interest at all - it is something that ought to be enormously important to us all.

There is , as my teacher sister could tell you , a serious continuing problem with bullying based on sexual orientation in schools . Although the bullies may now be in the minority rather than in the majority and it maybe that it now quite often happens to teenagers who have declared that they are LBGT rather than are simply perceived to be .

There is a real problem amongst the liberal middle class who appear to perceive that just because this is no longer an issue for far more people than it once was and in particular amongst those with whom they mix that it is not still a serious problem for many- who still fear the consequences of living the life they want to live and which their biology dictates ? Hence , the don't bang on about it tendency directed at forumites like ams, ferret fancy or flosshilde who had to live through a time when the expression of the orientation was a crime or at the very least led to being excluded or treated as perverted and to be avoided .

I am delighted they are banging on about it - because until it truly is a " who cares "situation - discrimination needs to be banged on about whether on the basis of sexual orientation , race , sex or other status ! Endlessly sending threads about issues relating to sexual orientation into the outer darkness of this board is simply appeasement of the bigoted I am afraid .

[Mr Pee]

I am delighted they are banging on about it - because until it truly is a " who cares "situation - discrimination needs to be banged on about whether on the basis of sexual orientation , race , sex or other status ! Endlessly sending threads about issues relating to sexual orientation into the outer darkness of this board is simply appeasement of the bigoted I am afraid .

"Outer darkness"? It's only a mouse click away from the main board, no different to clicking on Platform 3 or any other header. If people can't be arsed to find their way here- (even if they apparently have the time and inclination to send Am51 private messages of support) <erm>- then they clearly are not the slightest bit interested in these threads- either that, or more likely they're just bored to death of them. Either way, it fully justifies FF's decision.

For most people, Am and co., endlessly banging on about their sexuality and playing the victim card is as irrelevant as it is tedious. The fact the Floss thinks that BBM mentioning his wife is evidence of heterosexual oppression on the wider boards says it all, really. How can one have any sort of meaningful debate with somebody who thinks like that?

I think it would be best for all concerned if this thread was closed completely, and I would hope that the small number of members who keep starting threads on this non-subject will cease and desist. But I won't be holding my breath.

[MrGongGong]

I think it would be best for all concerned if this thread was closed completely, .

right away sir
anything you say
as you know best


(the words "small" and "member" are most appropriate IMV)

WHY on earth keep going somewhere that you think is a waste of time ?
They really did mess with your head in the band didn't they ?

[aeolium]

I am delighted they are banging on about it - because until it truly is a " who cares "situation - discrimination needs to be banged on about whether on the basis of sexual orientation , race , sex or other status ! Endlessly sending threads about issues relating to sexual orientation into the outer darkness of this board is simply appeasement of the bigoted I am afraid .

I completely disagree and I think ff has been unjustly maligned here.

This thread is not about discrimination, or indeed any issue of gay rights, equality, persecution etc and despite its purported connection with the Britten/Pears situation, the latter was light years away from what we have now. Britten and Pears spent most of their relationship years in a time when homosexuality was illegal, and even after its legalisation there remained a social stigma. Now we have openly gay figures in many areas of public life, people whose sexual orientation is publicly recognised and accepted. Among them are British sportsmen, people like Justin Fashanu (now deceased), Gareth Thomas, Steven Davies, Nicola Adams. The tabloids have picked up on the story not because it is a story about gay rights but because it is a revelation about a sporting celebrity's private life: it is more of a celebrity story than a "gay" story or a milestone on the road to changing attitudes about LBGT issues. If every time a public figure comes out as gay it is presented as a noteworthy story then how can being gay ever become normal, unnewsworthy? Arguably to highlight it is simply an encouragement to bigotry.

I think there are important issues about gay rights, equality, persecution which do need to be aired and some of them have been on this board. But I don't think this is one of them, and I think raising it on Platform 3 of the main forum risked provocation. It was surely in (correctly) foreseeing the probability of wrangling and exchange of insults that ff moved it to this board and in doing so has attracted a load of flak herself. She has shown far greater tolerance than some of those who preach toleration here, and I'm surprised in some ways that she bothers to carry on in a situation in which she cannot win.

[amateur51]

I completely disagree and I think ff has been unjustly maligned here.

This thread is not about discrimination, or indeed any issue of gay rights, equality, persecution etc and despite its purported connection with the Britten/Pears situation, the latter was light years away from what we have now. Britten and Pears spent most of their relationship years in a time when homosexuality was illegal, and even after its legalisation there remained a social stigma. Now we have openly gay figures in many areas of public life, people whose sexual orientation is publicly recognised and accepted. Among them are British sportsmen, people like Justin Fashanu (now deceased), Gareth Thomas, Steven Davies, Nicola Adams. The tabloids have picked up on the story not because it is a story about gay rights but because it is a revelation about a sporting celebrity's private life: it is more of a celebrity story than a "gay" story or a milestone on the road to changing attitudes about LBGT issues. If every time a public figure comes out as gay it is presented as a noteworthy story then how can being gay ever become normal, unnewsworthy? Arguably to highlight it is simply an encouragement to bigotry.

I think there are important issues about gay rights, equality, persecution which do need to be aired and some of them have been on this board. But I don't think this is one of them, and I think raising it on Platform 3 of the main forum risked provocation. It was surely in (correctly) foreseeing the probability of wrangling and exchange of insults that ff moved it to this board and in doing so has attracted a load of flak herself. She has shown far greater tolerance than some of those who preach toleration here, and I'm surprised in some ways that she bothers to carry on in a situation in which she cannot win.

I have explained, I think, why the story is newsworthy - this is the first occasion since Justin Fashanu that a top-flight male sportsperson has 'come out' at the height of his career since Justin Fashanu, who I would argue was not as well-known as Tom Daley. Sportspeople at the height of their career are dependent often on sponsorship. Sponsors can be very susceptible to negative publicity. Hence I felt that Daley was being very brave. Others may disagree but that is my opinion.

Female sport stars seem not a attract the same attention as is attracted by male sports stars. I think this has much to do with the social construction of sexism, andof male hero-worship and its relationship to real and perceived sexuality; it also has much to do with the public's knowledge and understanding of lesbians in society. Being a lesbian has never been against the law per se in our society, which is not to say that lesbians have not been treated less that well individually and collectively because of socially-constructed perceptions of lesbians.

I don't think i have ever preached anything and certainly not tolerance as I am not interested in being tolerated.

I am generally grateful to french frank for the excellent job that she does in moderating this Board. I find the frequenxcy with which lesbian & gay-themed threads get sent to the Basement to be tedious and tantermount to pandering to those who members would not want these issues discussed. However I feel that it is more to do with the attitudes of those people than with anything to do with french frank personally. This is the price that we all pay for living in a society in which freedom of speech is highly prized. I agree that it is a situation in which the Moderator is unlikely to win.

[Barbirollians]

I completely disagree and I think ff has been unjustly maligned here.

This thread is not about discrimination, or indeed any issue of gay rights, equality, persecution etc and despite its purported connection with the Britten/Pears situation, the latter was light years away from what we have now. Britten and Pears spent most of their relationship years in a time when homosexuality was illegal, and even after its legalisation there remained a social stigma. Now we have openly gay figures in many areas of public life, people whose sexual orientation is publicly recognised and accepted. Among them are British sportsmen, people like Justin Fashanu (now deceased), Gareth Thomas, Steven Davies, Nicola Adams. The tabloids have picked up on the story not because it is a story about gay rights but because it is a revelation about a sporting celebrity's private life: it is more of a celebrity story than a "gay" story or a milestone on the road to changing attitudes about LBGT issues. If every time a public figure comes out as gay it is presented as a noteworthy story then how can being gay ever become normal, unnewsworthy? Arguably to highlight it is simply an encouragement to bigotry.

I think there are important issues about gay rights, equality, persecution which do need to be aired and some of them have been on this board. But I don't think this is one of them, and I think raising it on Platform 3 of the main forum risked provocation. It was surely in (correctly) foreseeing the probability of wrangling and exchange of insults that ff moved it to this board and in doing so has attracted a load of flak herself. She has shown far greater tolerance than some of those who preach toleration here, and I'm surprised in some ways that she bothers to carry on in a situation in which she cannot win.

I couldn't disagree more - for the reasons I have set out above . This young man had a history of being bullied at school I have no doubt that was because of his perceived sexuality . The media are not the only persons interested in the story - if you go to You Tube his video has had 7 million viewings worldwide and his declaration was trending worldwide on Twitter ,

Young LBGT people continue to suffer serious discrimination and bullying , they are as a percentage far more likely to attempt or commit suicide than other teenagers - Tom Daley apparently faced some less favourable reactions from members of his family but I suggest you look up the Albert Kennedy Trust to see the serious problems that continue to exist of young people thrown out by their parents and carers after they come out . I have been shocked in my career to come across young homeless clients whose homelessness has been caused in this way . As a colleague said you can't believe this is still happening - it is still happening .

Tom Daley's disclosure was interesting and important in addressing discrimination for a number of reasons - first his youth means that it is something young gay people can identify with , second, it is naive in the extreme to suggest that it is no longer an issue in sport - Fashanu's case is a hideous warning from history. There are still no out Premier or league footballers in the UK , Thomas came out at the very end of his career, Stephen Davies was somewhat inexplicably dropped from the one day team despite all the warm words he received - Tom Daley is only 19 , he is not at the peak of his career but on his way up still - he has been endlessly promoted and no doubt all manner of sponsorships may be wobbling especially by brands selling in Russia etc . It is a big story .

The telling thing will be what happens now - will he continue to get the sponsorships , the TV shows etc .

It is a story about discrimination . One of the major problems with discrimination is how much is hidden , how much is misunderstood and even unconscious .

[aeolium]

But if those issues are to be highlighted then they ought to be on the P&CA board, just as all other political subjects are. Why should threads about economic inequality and the suffering of millions under austerity programmes be required to be discussed on this board and not issues of LBGT discrimination - surely the former are just as important? It is because ff has decided, understandably so, that such threads have given rise to rancorous discussion of a kind which she does not want associated with her forum - she never intended it to be one for political discussion. She has made that perfectly clear and it is her forum, her prerogative to operate it as she wishes. I think she's right in this matter and sympathise with her predicament in that the platform she provides for free discussion is all too frequently abused in the way political discussions are conducted. If you are unhappy with this state of affairs there are surely other forums on which such points can be raised.

[french frank]

What a depressing post . Discrimination is not a special interest at all - it is something that ought to be enormously important to us all.

I didn't say it was - I mentioned all the other kinds of discrimination that scarcely get a mention here. And if they ALL got mentioned with the same regularity they would flood the forum. I give all credit to amateur for trying to raise matters of women's rights as well, but on the whole it's not a topic that women want to discuss HERE.

The people who complain about the presence of political so-called debate aren't bigots - they take the same viewabout politics in general on THIS forum. But just as people are called 'bigots' if they say they don't listen to Radio 3 to hear three weeks of music from the cinema blockbusters, so they don't expect people who post here to spend most of their time pretending to put all the injustices of the world to rights.

The alternative to putting contentious debate - whether it's about wearing poppies or religion or anything else - down here is to close the board altogether, and ban all political and religious topics as a matter of House Rules.

[Barbirollians]

I didn't say it was - I mentioned all the other kinds of discrimination that scarcely get a mention here. And if they ALL got mentioned with the same regularity they would flood the forum. I give all credit to amateur for trying to raise matters of women's rights as well, but on the whole it's not a topic that women want to discuss HERE.

The people who complain about the presence of political so-called debate aren't bigots - they take the same viewabout politics in general on THIS forum. But just as people are called 'bigots' if they say they don't listen to Radio 3 to hear three weeks of music from the cinema blockbusters, so they don't expect people who post here to spend most of their time pretending to put all the injustices of the world to rights.

The alternative to putting contentious debate - whether it's about wearing poppies or religion or anything else - down here is to close the board altogether, and ban all political and religious topics as a matter of House Rules.

There is a great deal of difference I am afraid between complaints about a general wish that non music issues were not discussed ( which is a position with which I have some sympathy) and the self-evident bigotry addressed to this issue in particular .

Then again people on this forum appear to be able to start an argument in an empty room sometimes as shown by some of the highly distasteful comments on the Mandela thread.