web analytics

You say potato; I say pervert

By Mike Cunningham On January 7th, 2015

“Stephen Fry’s fiancé was banned from driving today for speeding at 101mph

Fiancé, that is rather a strange term for a type which used to go by the collective name ‘Rent Boy’?

 

But hey, what’s in a name, as William would have asked?

 

125 Responses to “You say potato; I say pervert”

  1. Bizarre that one grown man would be so interested in the private life of another grown man that he would bother to blog about it.

  2. …too true Paul, but ATW has it’s tabloid tendencies now and then.

  3. The post has been categorised by the author as garbage – enough said !

  4. You have to be sorry for the mother.

    You put all your love and hopes and dreams into your son, only for him to be outed as an old, mentally-disturbed, homosexual druggie’s bumboy.

  5. You have to wonder why some supposedly robustly heterosexual men seem to be so bothered and fixated by the existence of homosexuals.

  6. …bisexuals are fixated by both.

  7. Very good Bernard 🙂

  8. Colm,

    No-one is particularly bothered by such degenerate behaviour, if it is kept private. It is when they flaunt their perversions to a public who, in general, find such behaviour, – to put it mildly, – as unpleasant, and all in their pathetic attempts to get their aberration more widely accepted.

    ‘Nature or nurture’, is still open for debate! even, if or when, an answer is found for that one, it doesn’t mean we all have to accept or indulge it.

  9. It doesn’t mean we all have to accept or indulge it.

    No it doesn’t that’s why I feel it’s none of my business. Blogging it would certainly seem like indulging it.

  10. Are you suggesting that we shouldn’t comment on things we find repulsive or offensive? Most of the comments here are re things posters see as wrong and are ‘up for debate’.

    As you so ably proved by being the first to comment!

  11. No-one is particularly bothered by such degenerate behaviour

    Clearly Ernest, as the rest of your comment proves !

  12. Are you suggesting that we shouldn’t comment on things we find repulsive or offensive?

    Two men doing 101 mph in an Aston Martin and one of them being prosecuted for it is repulsive or offensive?

  13. //No-one is particularly bothered by such degenerate behaviour,//

    Bothered? I’d say a large majority of people don’t even consider it degenerate.

    //a public who, in general, find such behaviour, – to put it mildly, – as unpleasant,//

    Rubbish. People like you and Muslim extremists etc. find it unpleasant “to put it mildly”, but don’t speak for anyone else.

  14. Colm,

    You missed the last part of that sentence – ‘if it is kept private.’ which, in this case it clearly isn’t!

    I suspect that he and others like him are subconsciously looking for sympathy, – after all he cannot really wish to be known for evermore ‘as just another dirty old man!’

  15. Oh yes Ernest I must have missed the part where Mr Fry and his partner had sex in public.

  16. Noel,

    “but don’t speak for anyone else.” What a joke! – and yet you like to think that you do – speak for everyone else! that is.

    Come back with such remarks when you grow up and have a wider experience of life in general…

  17. We all here speak our own opinions. None of us speak for anyone else.

  18. Colm,

    What? you want it all explained in detail? – or are just looking for a cheap thrill?

  19. The case was about two men who live together being caught speeding in a car. Hardly salacious stuff.

    Come back with such remarks when you grow up and have a wider experience of life in general…

    How very ageist…

  20. Ernest

    What are you on about ? If it somehow gives you a thrill to explain homosexuality in detail to me, go ahead be my guest.

  21. How very ageist…

    Good observation Paul. Ernest is very quick to upbraid anyone who mocks his age (and he’s quite right to do so) – but he’s also very adept at using his age to patronisingly sneer at the views of others who haven’t lived as long as he is and whose opinions are supposedly therefore inferior.

  22. //you like to think that you do – speak for everyone else! that is.//

    Listen, you said that the public in general finds homosexual behaviour unpleasant – “to put it mildly”.

    That’s wrong. You do, maybe a lot of your acquaintances do, but the “public in general” certainly does not.

    As I said, that prejudice belongs to people like you and conservative Muslims. Please keep the rest of us out of it.

  23. Colm,

    No, I wouldn’t demean myself – perhaps Paul or Noel might oblige you, – they seem to be more knowledgeable on such matters.

  24. Ernest

    It is you who has chosen to come back on to ATW after a while away to specifically and solely comment repeatedly on the ‘gay story’ thread. It seems that you are more than willing to improve your knowledge on such matters 😉

  25. Noel,

    So only you can speak for ‘the public in general’? quite hilarious really – you accuse me of ‘speaking for the public in general’ – and then you do exactly the same thing in response.

    You little boys do have delusions of the range of your experience don’t you? and yet you cheerfully deride those who have been around for a lot longer than yourself.

  26. They seem to be more knowledgeable on such matters.

    Such matters? I’m going to repeat what I said above in case you missed it first time:

    The case was about two men who live together being caught speeding in a car. Hardly salacious stuff

    As I also said before; it’s none of my business.

  27. Colm,

    Read it whichever way you want, at least it is UK ‘news’ rather than yankee doodle drivel 🙂

  28. //So only you can speak for ‘the public in general’? quite hilarious really – you accuse me of ‘speaking for the public in general’ – and then you do exactly the same thing in response. //

    Except, unlike you, I know what I’m talking about.

    The graph shows less than 30 pc of people in Britain think homosexuality is wrong or mostly wrong. A sizeable majority considers it not wrong at all or rarely wrong.

    // yet you cheerfully deride those who have been around for a lot longer than yourself//

    Time on this planet doesn’t matter. It’s the experience that openness brings that matters. There’s a fellow in the UK who’s been in jail for almost half a century. You probably consider his opinion, with his advanced age, more valuable that a younger lag. Be my guest.

  29. Ernest

    Speaking or myself, I do not deride you for having been on this planet longer than I have, I only deride those opinions you express that I disagree with. I make my views on the subject matter not what age you are.

  30. Colm,

    Read it whichever way you want, at least it is UK ‘news’ rather than yankee doodle drivel 🙂

    As for your ageist remark , – well you called your opinions inferior, I didn’t – perhaps when you demonstrate a superior opinion, who knows? I may even acknowledge the fact…

  31. yankee doodle drivel…. spoken like the gnat on the ass of the world that you and your piss ant nation truly are… 😉

  32. Oh Ernest, you just had to yank (pardon the pun) Troll’s chain didn’t you – just when he was managing to stick to his ‘peace and love to y’all’ New Year resolution 🙂

  33. Troll.

    Yep! that’s why you choose a UK blog to air your views when you have a seemingly perfectly viable blog of your own. Of course, it doesn’t have many readers, but there could be several reasons for that shortage.

    Suffice to say that readership of this blog is not what it used to be and that could also be down to a few different reasons.

    As for gnats on a donkeys arse – it takes one to know one! – and I acknowledge your superior knowledge on that one!

  34. You little boys do have delusions of the range of your experience don’t you? and yet you cheerfully deride those who have been around for a lot longer than yourself

    I don’t see anywhere where I or anyone else has derided you. If I have I apologise, it wasn’t intended.

    I will however remind you of the above remark the next time you accuse someone of ageism.

  35. //No-one is particularly bothered by such degenerate behaviour, if it is kept private. It is when they flaunt their perversions to a public ….

    ‘….it doesn’t mean we all have to accept or indulge it.//

    Ernest, if you look at the link to cartoons that Peter posted on the “MY RESPONSE TO THE CHARLIE HEBDO SLAUGHTER” thread, you’ll realise that the madmen in Paris today agreed with you and were willing for demonstrate their unacceptance with AK47s.

  36. someone has to educate the rabble like yourself… might as well get it honestly from the likes of me Ernest.

    The rest feign respect where your feelings are concerned me I view you for the shell shocked being that you are. Nothing more, nothing less.

  37. Noel,

    Aw! come on, get a semblance of reality in your comments, – you must really be desperate to suggest that because I hold one view similar to a muslim that I must agree with the rest of the misguided baggage they call a religion. You really are one narrow minded fella!

    Even if they are terrorists that they can get one thing right could mean there is still some hope for them.

    Some catholic priests condone child abuse, even to the extent of partaking in the forming of PIE, – as a Catholic yourself, should I assume you agree personally with that perversion? Of course not – it would be as narrow minded as your assumption that I am a terrorist at heart.

    Comparisons work when ‘like is compared with like’, not when it suits your convenience

  38. Thank you Troll, – spoken like the true ‘zero hero’, ‘clip and paste’ artist we all know you to be!

    So rather than prove your own blog to be a success, – I agree almost an impossibility – you prefer to come and create mayhem on ATW.

    Yankee doodle drivel – whether politically or musically just about sums it up!

  39. Hi from Cleveland where there is a foot of lake effect snow

  40. ATW’s far right wingers and conspiracy nuts would usually be complaining about the nanny state enforcing speed restrictions. But since a gay guy got pulled over the story becomes for them about homosexuals.

  41. You have to be sorry for the mother.

    You put all your love and hopes and dreams into your son, only for him to be outed as an old, mentally-disturbed, homosexual druggie’s bumboy.

    Not according to the Blessed Mail, Pete.

    Earlier Mr Spencer’s parents spoke about the upcoming wedding, saying they are ‘over the moon’ after the star revealed he will marry their son, who is 30 years his junior.

    Robert and Miranda Spencer, from Southampton, admitted they are delighted about the couple’s decision to wed after their whirlwind romance.

    The couple were first seen together last November, but the pair are understood to have become serious over the summer.

    Mr Spencer’s parents have given them their blessing and Mr Fry said: ‘I have met them and they are very nice’.

    What difference does their age difference make anyway? It’s only 30 years, less than the difference between Clint Eastwood’s age and his 2nd wife (35 years), Fred Astaire’s 2nd wife (45 years), or Pablo Picasso (45+ years). Or is it just because it is two men involved, which might say more about your own sexual insecurities than you might think 😉

    No-one is particularly bothered by such degenerate behaviour, if it is kept private. It is when they flaunt their perversions to a public who, in general, find such behaviour, – to put it mildly, – as unpleasant, and all in their pathetic attempts to get their aberration more widely accepted.

    I didn’t know that inconsiderate driving was a bugbear of yours, Ernest. Oh wait – you weren’t referring to the story at all! You decided to have a go at their sexuality – even though, as has been pointed out, they weren’t having gay sex at 101 MPH…

    You say potato; I say pervert

    Remind me never to send you to the shops for a bag of spuds, Mike.

  42. Seimi,

    That their wedding has been in the news for a few weeks now is the reason that the speeding ticket made the news.

    The media merely saw it as an intro to further discussion on the unusual use use of the word ‘fiance’.

    Both you and Mahons do seem rather naïve if you thought the item was just about speeding. As I mentioned earlier, they seem to find any excuse to keep making the point re the ‘normality’ of such relationships, and celebs themselves assume that any news is good news. ‘To know them is to love them!’, or so they think.

  43. Ernest- of course it wasn’t about speeding. If Fry was marrying a man exactly his own age the anti-gay crowd here would still be going bonkers.
    I think a multi decade age gap is problematic, for heterosexual as well, but if they are consenting adults it is their business.

  44. Ernest makes a valid point

    The use of the word ” fiance ” in this situation is absurd.

    It is doubtful than anyone here, including the trendies who think that the use of the word here is as normal as apple pie after Sunday dinner, has ever heard it used in that way before.

    But yes, let’s do pretend that he’s a fiance,like a blushing Diana before she married whatshisname, and let’s pretend that this is a normal use of the language.

  45. Diane was a fiancee. A man who is engaged is a fiance.

  46. But only if he has a fiancee!

  47. Not anymore. Course no one among the anti gay crowd seems put off by the phrase rent boy or pervert when describing a homosexual.

  48. Mahons,

    The age gap is of course controversial, ‘Sugar Daddies’, and those who use them have long been the butt of derisory jokes.

    Moving the idea onto the ‘homo’ scene, takes it one step further to the point where by the incessant drawing of attention to such partnerships, let alone the fact of comparing such pairings as ‘marriages’ has become annoying and an insult to the original concept of marriage.

    The age gap in these instances being seen, not as a joke, but as something rather more sinister, from ‘Sugar Daddy’ to ‘Dirty old man’. Perhaps if the participants had touch more discretion and self-respect they wouldn’t attract so much ire

  49. // let’s do pretend that he’s a fiance,like a blushing Diana before she married//

    In her case, it was probably more finance.

    //Remind me never to send you to the shops for a bag of spuds, Mike.//

    Brilliant, Seimi!

  50. Ernest

    Celebrities in relationships has always been news and always reported. There is nothing more ‘incessant’ about the news reporting of Mr Fry’s planned marraige than the usual heterosxual celebrity couplings we have always been used to hearing about. That homosexual couples can now get married in law is a simple fact. Some people like Ernest may prefer the ‘good old days’ when such people hid themselves away, were seen as ‘shamefull perverts’ and had no recognition of their relationships by society or State but that is no longer the case and there is no reason why they shouldn’t be open and honest about their lives as everyone else.

  51. Ps – Yes Seimi’s ‘shops’ comment was ace.

  52. Colm,

    And that is the generational gap in a nutshell! That such relationships have recognition in law, seems to be all a part of the continual erosion of what might be termed ‘communal morality’, the very cement that holds communities together by protecting the most vulnerable among us, and that includes the gullible who seem so impressed by ‘celebrity’.

    Is the next step the legalising of paedophilia? after all, it seems to already be a triviality among our ‘upper and governing’ classes.

    That sexuality has been one of the major and essential factors in the existence of mankind, indeed of all creatures, it is quite ironic that it has also been at the root of the demise of most civilisations since time began. You name it and you will find that moral degeneration has played a large part.

    And the next paragraph is all about ‘two edged swords’ and the dangers thereof…

  53. Ernest

    It is a good and beneficial development that civilised society no longer feels the need to ostracie criminalise and hound people simply for being homosexual. There has never been any logic in espousing the views you support which has not been done for reasons of morality but simply because heterosexuals are the majority and have the power to bully the minority who are not. There is no more logical reason to treat homosexuals differently than there is to penalise left handed people differently (as children used to be in schools) just because they are fewer in numbers and use the ‘wrong’ hand.

    As for paedophilia, it is today that the stories are starting to be exposed and investiagtes about how such abuse went on uncontested decades ago. It was easier to get away with molesting children back in the ‘moral past’ you long for Ernest than today.

  54. That their wedding has been in the news for a few weeks now is the reason that the speeding ticket made the news.

    Their intention to get married was only made public 2 days ago, Ernest.

    Are you saying that you knew about it weeks ago? Is there something you aren’t telling us? 😉

    Phantom & Ernest – what is so unusaul about the term ‘fiance’? They are engaged to be married, therefore one correct term (for either of them) is ‘fiance’.

    Do either of you have a better term – one that doesn’t involve the word ‘pervert’ (or, apparently in Mike’s case, ‘potato’)?

  55. Colm,

    The paedo stories now being revealed are largely from the 60’s onwards. That the cases now revealed are being dealt with in an almost casual fashion and fail to address the problem with any degree of serious intent.

    Yes it did exist prior to that time but was largely controlled by a much more moral community climate, with marriage being the norm and the sense of a protective community being far stronger than anything found today. Folk also tended to regard their personal and more intimate lives as being rather more private than today.

    That the homosexual tendency is so prevalent in the entertainment industry of course helps to spread the idea that it is OK as a lifestyle, attitudes being led by example, which brings us full circle to debating whether the practice is motivated by ‘nature’ as you suggest, or by ‘nurture’, as I suggest.

  56. Seimi,

    I am sure I read about their intentions just before, or about Christmas time, which surprisingly is about two weeks ago! I could be wrong, this always such a hectic time of the year.

    It really didn’t concern me until I saw this post, when it struck a nerve! and is probably quite correctly filed in the ‘Garbage’ folder! 🙂

  57. Ernest

    Are you ‘suggesting’ that a Homosexual lifestyle is being ‘chosen’ by some people, simply because some celebreties/actors/whatever ‘choose’ it? Or is it not more likely that, given today’s more tolerant society, some people choose to be more open about their homosexuality, perhaps following the lead of same celebreties/actors/whatever, who, given their very public status, are more able to present their sexuality in a non-threatening, open and honest way?

    (I presume that you don’t feel threatened by the fact that 2 consenting adults, albeit of the same gender, but of different ages, have decided to commit to a life together?)

  58. Ernest

    You must be an avid follower of Mr. Fry’s working and private life! 🙂

  59. Seimi,

    No, of course I don’t feel personally threatened, I do however feel some concern for the long term effect on what we might call ‘communal morality’ and the consequences it might encourage at a later date. How long I wonder before our concept of civilisation collapses – as many others have done, – from a case of severe degeneracy.

  60. Seimi,

    Hard to avoid him when in the UK – he seems lately to have carved himself a niche on tv, both as a presenter and a news item. Which is, of course, also an indication of the extremely poor and infantile quality of current British tv!!

    The less time we spend in the UK the happier we are.

  61. Oh stop whinging Ernest and love life as it is. Stop being a Victor Meldew 🙂

  62. Colm,

    Anywhere but here! 🙂

  63. Is the next step the legalising of paedophilia?

    I wouldn’t imagine so. The age of consent exists because a child isn’t deemed mature enough to make informed choices as adults are considered to. Adults like the two adults in this article.

    Yes it did exist prior to that time but was largely controlled by a much more moral community climate

    If you’re referring to paedophilia Ernest I think the adjective you’re looking for is hidden rather than controlled.

    Yet again we see paedophilia being introduced into a conversation about homosexuality. I wonder how many paedophiles are homosexuals?

  64. Seimi 327

    How about ” fake pretend marriage crony ”

    No one can have a problem with that term!

  65. Phantom

    Apart from the fact that it is incorrect.

  66. Paul,

    No, I used the word controlled deliberately. Of course there was some degree of paedophilia even ‘back then’, and it probably has always been so, I refer to a pre-60’s era, when marriage, families and real communities existed, the days when families, including grandparents, aunts and uncles all lived within a stones throw of each other, in other words they were a real community, and they enjoyed a degree of safety and control of such problems as a result.

    As children we were well advised as to the antics of ‘dirty old men’, so were not surprised or ashamed to tell our parents if it should occur, we were well prepared for the vagaries the adult world held for us, the problem was more controlled at that time, even if in a vigilante fashion.

    Today that doesn’t seem to be the case, today we seem to depend on regulation rather than education, and coupled with the breakdown of family life and the relaxation of the laws governing the sale of pornography in the local newsagents the problems of sexual deviation seem to be far more prevalent.

    By the way, one Leo Abse M.P. was responsible for getting the laws on porn being sold in newsagents, he was also an active ‘gays rights’ campaigner.

    Today the problem is neither hidden nor controlled, to the detriment of communities in general.

    As for the oft mentioned link between paedo and homo, if only in folks minds – apart from the obvious sexual link, it seems that one man’s peccadillo is another man’s perversion.

  67. No, I used the word controlled deliberately. Of course there was some degree of paedophilia even ‘back then’, and it probably has always been so, I refer to a pre-60’s era, when marriage, families and real communities existed, the days when families, including grandparents, aunts and uncles all lived within a stones throw of each other

    Controlled? I remember reading that the sexual abuser of a child is overwhelmingly statistically likely to be known to them, often within the family/ family friends circle; a horrendous thought but also quite a sobering thought in the context of your ‘grandparents, aunts and uncles all lived within a stones throw of each other’, not to mention clergy.

    Again, I think the adjective you’re looking for is hidden. Take off the rose tinted glasses.

    As for the oft mentioned link between paedo and homo, if only in folks minds – apart from the obvious sexual link

    And again: how may child sex abusers are rampant homosexuals?

  68. Phantom @ 7.27
    If that term makes you feel better, then go for it. It won’t change the fact that ‘fiance’ is the correct term.

  69. Ernest is not going to falter in his belief in the rosy old communities of yesteryear where everyone would come together to protect the children from ‘dirty old men’. It is a false history and I believe the reality was a deeply hypocritical ‘see no evil’ culture that allowed religious and social authority figures to sexually and physically abuse children and indeed allowed other ‘respectable’ men to get away with all sorts of sexual abuse in a society that did not want to deal with such matters and where women who were raped and children who were abused largely had to keep quiet about it and were often blamed for causing embarrassment if they dared have the courage to mention the abuse.

    We may and indeed we do have a lot of problems caused by more sexually open times we have today but no society will ever be without human abuse of others but I most certainly believe we have a more honest and healthier approach to dealing with these matters today than in the suffocating invisible ‘sweep it under the carpet and keep quiet’ morally hypocritical past and I firmly believe men who raped women and abused children were far more likely never to be exposed or punished for their crimes 50/100 years ago than they are today.

  70. //It is a false history and I believe the reality was a deeply hypocritical ‘see no evil’ culture that allowed religious and social authority figures to sexually and physically abuse children and indeed allowed other ‘respectable’ men to get away with all sorts of sexual abuse//

    One example I learned of recently was of when Mary Whitehouse and her organisation were villifying the likes of harmless TV presenter Hughie Green for allegedly “smutty” remarks they granted their annual award for wholesome family television to Jimmy Saville.

  71. Noel

    Read also about the experiences of the people who operated the first rape and sexual abuse telephone helplines which were set up in the early 1970s. They were overwhelmed with thousands of calls not from young women who had been raped in the permissive era of the ‘swinging sixties’ but from much older women who had been raped decades earlier in Ernest’s golden ‘moral community’ era and had never been able to speak or had never been listened to before. Their abusers had never been punished for their crimes ( thousands of Jimmy Savilles) and it wasn’t until the modern permissive 1970s that these women were able to even have some listen to them. Ernest is so very wrong and deluded in his views on this matter.

  72. Ernest — You really are a deeply unpleasant person. And Pete’s like a school boy that never gets any action with girls so has to overcompensate but hating on gay people.

  73. I don’t think Ernest is unpleasant at all, Petr. Old-fashioned values, perhaps a bit of naiivety regarding the ‘good old days’, but not unpleasant. A gentleman, I would say, with strict moral codes that perhaps don’t stand up too well against cold, hard facts, but certainly not unpleasant.

    Pete (who is the same age as me) is of course, like myself, in the first flushes of youth 😉

  74. Seimi — I admire your generosity but I have a zero tolerance policy on homophobic bigots.

  75. Thank you Petr, from you I consider that to be a compliment. I have long had a similar feeling about you.

    You and others here are the epitome of narrow minded bigoted thinking, denying eye witness accounts of past events while preferring to believe politically adjusted figures and writings. As they say, – ‘it’s no use having an open book if you have a closed mind!’ – so very true of yourself, Paul and Noel.

    Perhaps if you appreciated the context in which events happened rather than assuming that people and conditions are the same today as they were ‘all those years ago’ you might understand the how and why things happened.

  76. Petr Tarasov, on January 8th, 2015 at 11:05 PM Said:

    Seimi — I admire your generosity but I have a zero tolerance policy on homophobic bigots.

    This is the person who demands tolerance by others.

  77. I have little time for homophobic bigots either, Petr, nor any other type of bigot. However, I have always found Ernest to be polite, informative, informed and very well versed in certain subjects. I have also noticed that he and Agit8ed would often hark back to the bygone days, where life was tougher but better, and I always thought there was naiivety involved in what they talked about. As Colm and Noel etc pointed out above, it was a time when ‘crimes’ such as Homosexuality, rape and spousal abuse were ‘hidden’ and, for quite a few people, suppressed.

    Ernest can only comment based on his own experiences, if he is to be completely honest. I find him to be just that – completely honest. For that reason, I can tolerate his viewpoint, because it is his perspective, honestly given. I may not agree with it – in this case I totally disagree – but I respect his right to have and to voice his opinion.

  78. Petr,

    I understand your thinking and I do wonder how much your personal proclivities influence your opinion to such an extent that you to show a certain bigotry on this topic.

  79. Ernest — Very poor syntax. I thought they schooled you well back in the good old days.

  80. Petr – do you consider me to be ‘intolerant’? If so, what should I tolerate and why?

  81. Allan — I consider you to be stark raving bonkers.

  82. Thank you Seimi, – isn’t that the point of a blog, to civilly discuss contentious topics?

    After a lifetime of experience of human frailties, of being absolutely certain in my opinion, only to change it later, sometimes not that much later, I quite accept that others have their own opinions. Such a pity that some folk cannot accept that opinions are formed by experiences and circumstance, and we all have different experiences don’t we?

    Best wishes for 2015…

  83. Petr – you are a genocidalist who wishes to destroy white people, and you’re not joking either: you’re serious.

  84. You got me, Allan. And in addition to that, I also ordered the Code Red!

  85. Seimi — Young gay men are killing themselves at an alarming rate. Online homophobic hate plays a huge role in this. Nobody under 30 reads ATW so in one sense it doesn’t matter, but it’s worth noting that what Ernest is indulging in literally kills people.

  86. So now, if one opposes gay marriage (*) one is guilty of hate, and is partially to blame for those deaths. That is what you are saying?

    No one should engage in ” online hate ”

    (*) a position held by such notable right wing haters such as Obama and Bill Clinton and others say six years ago

  87. Ernest: “degenerate behaviour… repulsive”

    Nah, it’s not hatred. It’s love doncha see.

  88. A few thoughts…

    I wholeheartedly agree with Seimi’s take on Ernest. I find him to be an intelligent, thoughtful and good-hearted man based on our many years of debate and discussion. He’s a fine fellow and entitled to his opinions – he always states his position in a polite way and is always willing to engage civilly with anyone who’s able to do the same.

    Colm, your 9:18 comment was almost perfect. 😉

    Petr, I think you’re completely wrong-headed in your harsh condemnation of Ernest. The only reason gay people are gaining civil rights, like marriage equality, on such a broad scale is because the LGTB community and their allies have made an effort to be understanding of people who hold Ernest’s position (the vast majority until recently) and have undertaken civil – I mean polite – efforts to engage their empathy and understanding. You aren’t going to change a person’s perspective or heart with vile, socially damning invective. Your words are counterproductive and unkind, Petr.

    As a mother of a gay son, the only thing I’ve found offensive on this post/thread was the headline. At first I gave Mike the benefit of the doubt, considered it might have referred to the age discrepancy between the famous couple, but we know that’s not the case. It’s all about the yucky gay sex.

    Look, I would prefer that everyone acknowledge my son’s equal rights, protections and privileges under the law. My heart would be glad if everyone could see him for the fine, responsible, intelligent and talented human being he is without having to add the descriptive “gay” to every reference they make in his regard. It would be wonderful if he didn’t feel the need to closet himself out of fear of rejection, humiliation, discrimination, verbal harassment or bodily harm.

    My very masculine, sporty, intelligent, soft-spoken, musically gifted son passes as straight all day long. Not by deceit, but by design. He just is who he is. No one would ever know he’s gay, not even old school guys like Ernest, Mike, Pete or Phantom.

    What I would ask of these gentlemen is to be aware that when vigorously expressing opinions of gay folk, actual gay people or their parents may be listening. Who knows, they might even be close family members.

  89. Why ATW still exists for me – someone who can write like Daphne.

  90. xxxooo

  91. Wonderful thoughtful and loving comment Daphne. My only objection is to the use of the word ‘almost’ in your third sentence 😉

  92. Seimi — Young gay men are killing themselves at an alarming rate. Online homophobic hate plays a huge role in this. Nobody under 30 reads ATW so in one sense it doesn’t matter, but it’s worth noting that what Ernest is indulging in literally kills people.

    I think that is unfair, Petr. Ernest does not engage in online crusades against Gay people. He has his opinion of Gay people, which he voices here and possibly elsewhere, but you cannot say that he is ‘literally killing people.’ I have always found Ernest’s comments more in keeping with the 1970s attitude towards Homosexuality – poofters, mincers, that kind of thing. Agit8ed’s attitude I always found to be worse, coming across as it did with Biblical quotations etc, which can be much more harmful than calling someone a Poofter. DV’s attitude is much more in line with Agit8ed’s – Slouching Towards Gomorrah etc.

    We live in a much better educated, freer society nowadays, and I feel that whilst Gay people might be repulsed or angered by the opinions of the likes of Mike Cunningham towards Homosexuality, they would view Ernest’s opinion as that of an older man, set in his ways.

    I do think you are being unfair to him here.

  93. Seimi,

    Yeah sure. “degenerate behaviour… repulsive”

    I’m sure they wouldn’t mind a bit.

    I notice a number of people fell silent after Daphne’s comment. Shame?

    Daphne — I take your points about me on board. Thanks for your comment. Your sons sounds like a great guy.

  94. Thanks for giving us that, Daphne, and congratulations on your great son.

  95. Petr

    I don’t for a second support Ernest’s beliefs, nor his unattractive way of putting his points across. I do however support his right to voice those views, as he, I’m sure, would be equally supportive of my disagreeing with him.

    I am totally and utterly opposed to any attacks – whether they be physical, verbal, cyber or otherwise – on the Gay community, but I do think that that particular community are by now well able to handle the views of some of the ‘older generation’ voicing their opinion on something which, in their lifetime, was hidden and severely frowned upon, to put it mildly.

    People like Ernest comment on other peoples’ posts. Perhaps the people you should be more vocal about should be those who write the initial posts – on this site it’s usually DV or Cunningham.

    Don’t attack Ernest just because he agrees with someone else.

  96. I would be interested to read Ernest’s response to Daphne’s thoughtful comment. I think her impassioned response to the discussion on this thread deserves wider replies.

  97. Colm — A number of people who had been having a great time commenting up until Daphne posted suddenly fell silent!

  98. Petr

    Threads do die naturally you know. Although I see you have valiantly ‘viagra’d this one tonight to keep it up for longer 🙂

  99. 🙂

    As you said yourself Colm, it is worthy of more replies.

  100. Petr

    I hope you don’t include me in your comment above…

  101. Not for a second, Seimi. I am very clear on where you’re coming from on this issue.

    Thanks for your replies. Read all with interest.

  102. Ok, Petr. Thanks for that.

    I do find it strange though that Colm introduced Viagra into the discussion – something you want to tell us, Colm? 😉

  103. Only that it’s that time of night when I need a stiff…….. drink 🙂

  104. //A number of people who had been having a great time commenting up until Daphne posted suddenly fell silent!//

    One thing I’ve noticed is that even the greatest “homophobe” seems to go all mild in his phobia when someone he knows and likes turns out to be gay. They just don’t seem to meet – knowingly – many in their own lives and this keeps their prejudice intact. There is, for example, no reason why a son or brother of Mike or Ernest etc. isn’t gay, and I’d like to think they would love him none the less if one were.

    For people like my old mother, for example, the very notion of gays was an absolute horror, an evil disease. Then when she was told that that nice lad down in the supermarket, the one who always has a joke for her while packing her groceries, is gay, and then some of her favourite TV personalities as well, she got a bit of a shock, but then in a day or two that phobia had completely gone and from then on her attitude was little different to mine.

    That’s why it’s so important for gays to be open about their sexuality in society. It’s very difficult for some in many cases, of course, but they are doing a great service by being so courageous.

  105. Droll doesn’t even begin to describe that, Colm… 🙂

    In seriousness-

    Daphne’s comment about her son does warrant more discussion. It shows how difficult it is for a Gay man to integrate in a ‘straight’ society. Fair play to him, and to you too, Daphne. He sounds like a son you can be proud of 🙂

  106. Nice comment, Noel. And yes, Seimi, fair play to him indeed.

    If Daphne’s son was to fall in love and get married Phantom would consider his marriage to his beloved a sham and claim that they were not married at all. Such a strange perspective. Simply makes no sense beyond, ‘this is the way it’s always been so it must stay this way’.

    My partner and I choose not to marry. But for those who choose to, all the best to them.

  107. My partner and I choose not to marry.

    Careful, Petr. You could be considered a degenerate around these parts…

  108. I know, Seimi, I know. They probably think I’m repulsive too.

  109. I appreciate you taking my thoughts under consideration, Petr. I do understand your feelings on this issue and your gut level reactions are perfectly normal if you happen to be gay. Your use of the term partner isn’t clear, as everyone uses it nowadays, so no assumptions on my part.

    Fortunately, we haven’t had to deal with openly hostile people within our circle of family and friends. I’m quite sure if I were to come across someone spewing vitriol about gay folks to my face, they’d probably get punched in the throat or stabbed in the eye with one of my red-heeled stilettos.

    That said, I’m quite sure it’s very difficult for many of the older generations to accept and understand that people they happen to dearly love (grandchildren) and acquaintances they truly like (me) might be gay or have gay children. People weren’t out in their day, nobody talked about gay family members or spoke up in their defense. They assume they don’t know anyone of that persuasion and take for granted that it’s some broken societal problem that has no real bearing on their close knit world.

    Maybe they haven’t experienced the situation first hand because family members hide themselves from expected derogatory bile or hurtful rejection. Truly, many people cannot fully understand until they’ve loved, befriended or worked with a wonderful human being who happens to be openly gay. It’s easy to keep a closed mind if you haven’t been confronted with an alternative.

    I have empathy for their position and hope to engender reciprocal empathy for my son.

    I agree with Noel – the more people who can safely come out the better for everyone. All of the accountants, engineers, trash bin collectors, ditch diggers, attorneys, business owners, grocery clerks, teachers, politicians, churchmen, salesmen, etc. Show the world you’re no different in your everyday boring, pedestrian workaday lives as straight people.

    Most gay folks aren’t busy crudely displaying themselves in pride parades or angrily suing local businesses or the government. The vast majority are just trying to get by like everyone else, experiencing the same private disappointments and joys we all do.

    What I’m pragmatically aiming for is full recognition of legal rights for my son. He deserves the exact same treatment under the law as his two brothers – no more, no less. He is a human being, a good one and deserves to be included in all the protections and benefits offered under federal law for natural citizens.

    I don’t want to fight with the Mike’s, Ernest’s, Pete’s or Phantom’s of this world, I would rather persuade these good men to support my son’s legal rights even if they continue to find his natural born sexual persuasion distasteful.

    Sorry for going on so long, way too wordy for this format, my apologies.

  110. //Show the world you’re no different in your everyday boring, pedestrian workaday lives//

    That’s the key, Daphne. Acceptance can only come at the basic, personal level, not through lobbying or lawmaking etc.

    A lot of homophobes seem to assume gays spend all their free time camping it up, chasing partners or engaging in promiscous sex. They are wrong: some gays are interesting, some are boring, some radical, some conservative, some promiscous, some chaste – i.e. the same as everyone else.

    Only when people realise that so many normal folk around them are gay will acceptance come. This generation of gays will have to make a sacrifice by coming out in the face of such hatred, and as such all decent people must support them, but it will be worthwhile in the long run.

  111. 100% agree, Noel.

  112. For Mike and Ernest I suspect the generation gap is simply too much. Bewildered by such developments as civil rights for black people, women in the workforce and indoor plumbing, the idea of gay people being tolerated is to them akin to dogs teaching algebra.

    The others here who offer homophobic ramblings don’t really share the generational excuse, and rather tend to offer repeatedly debunked arguments in spite of themselves. I am somewhat hopeful that their constant obsessive raising of gay issues at least provides them with a chance to learn something.

  113. expecting them to learn something… ROFLAO

  114. Who here has ever said that ” gay people should not be tolerated “

    Feel free to be as specific as you like.

  115. It has been said here that they should not have equal rights, they should not be allowed to adopt, they should not be allowed to marry, that hotels and restaurants should be permitted to refuse them service, that employers should be able to discharge them if they discover they are gay and not hire them if they find out they are, that stores be allowed to not do business with them and that public displays of affection not be permitted to them in the same way that it is tolerated of heterosexuals. You may avail youself of the archives for multiple examples.

  116. on the topic of this thread Daphne’s take on the thread and the topic are 100% on the money even if her view of Ernest is laughable her views on the gay topic sound, honest, and reasonable.

    I have never understood why people get so upset about the gay community. I can’t believe that everyone doesn’t know someone that they respect or are friendly with who is gay and amazingly they are friends or associates with.

    The Gay community screwed up. They had won what they were always entitled to under Recognition of Civil Unions. Instead of jumping for joy over their victory the Political Lobbyist in your face wing of the group then insisted that it MUST be called a Marriage.

    This stance was taken for no other reason than to be able to use it to attack the church. Whether the bonding of two gay people is called a civil union or a marriage doesn’t effect any rights that each spouse is entitled to under the law. What it does is provide a Legal Foundation to take the church to court for discrimination forcing them to either perform the ceremony as a religious one or be shut down. We see it played out in our headlines regularly. A Baker has to bake a cake or he looses his business.

    One of the examples of this that I found very disturbing was a couple that has an old colonial plantation that they rent out for receptions. There was a gay couple that had their reception booked. They asked if they could have the ceremony at the location. The couple said no. They told the couple they had no problem hosting their reception, but since the actual ceremony was against their beliefs they didn’t want the ceremony there. So the couple took them to court to accept the ceremony at their location. Either they accept it or loose their business.

    There will always be people like we have seen on this thread, Bigots.

    I’m sorry I support full rights for gay couples under Civil Unions. What I condemn is the part of the gay community that feels if your beliefs are different than theirs they have the right to FORCE you to discard your beliefs and replace them with theirs or you loose your lively hood. That is morally wrong.

  117. You are throwing in an emotional dog’s dinner of examples, several of which have nothing to do with toleration of any person or persons.

    Adoption is meant to serve the needs of the child, first. The rights of prospective adoptive parents should be a very distant secondary issue. Or maybe they shouldn’t even necessarily have any rights. It’s not about them in the first place.

    Brothers and sisters are not allowed to marry, which does not mean that the existence of brothers and sisters are not tolerated by society.

    I don’t think that employers should be able to fire gays for being gay, but in the US, where worker protections are few, they can fire a person pretty much at will unless the employee is in a protected class ( age, gender being others ) . They can fire you for being a Red Sox fan. This does not mean that Red Sox fans are not tolerated by American society.

  118. In the case of adoption, the hierarchy of rights should be

    the child first

    society second ( adoption solves a societal problem )

    the would be parents, last.

  119. Daphne; Beautiful comment, if only every gay man and woman had a parent like you. I really hope that your son makes a happy, prosperous life for himself.

    The fact of the matter is that homosexual people aren’t a great deal different from hetrosexual people. I have a gay cousin, a gay newphew and a number of my former schoolfriends are gay. I don’t know what makes people feel attracted to people of the same sex but it’s certainly not a ‘lifestyle choice’ as some here would claim.

    Petr, I feel that you’re being rather unfair to Ernest. Despite his tendency to dismiss opposing views to his own as the insolence of young pups I have always found him to be perfectly courteous. I agree with Seimi; I think that Ernest’s views on homosexuality are more in tune with the John Inman/ Larry Grayson ‘poofter’ stereotype of the seventies than with the rabid religious fundamental intolerance which others around here have shown.

  120. Daphne,

    I totally agree with Paul, – your comment was excellent, and I can understand and agree with the sentiments you expressed, a perfect demonstration of family life in action and at its best. I have experienced similar feelings within my own family, albeit for a different reason.

    I also agree with the idea that some have mentioned that my (our) antipathy towards the gay communty is somehow ‘age related’. While we were never that naive to imagine that such things never happened, we only rarely saw it mentioned in the media – no such ting as tv until 1949 – and folk were far more concious of the value of the privacy of their personal lives and sexual lifestyle and rarely flaunted it in public, the overall effect being that ‘gay bashing’ was never heard of, the term ‘queer’ being the colloquialism of the day.

    Another consideration was the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases, warning posters being displayed in every public toilet, male or female, their display rather dampening any tendency ‘to putting it about’, or regarding sex as anything other than a marital act. All that, coupled with tales of the gentry, even royalty, being infected with syphylis to the point of disfigurement, all rather put a dampener on too much promiscuity.

    The advent of anti-biotics, the ‘pill’, not to mention improved condoms rather put paid to all that scary stuff and thus the age of sex as something more than just an expression of a loving relationship but in a rather more casual light almost as a ‘sport’, and in some cases, a competitive sport, came into being.

    In the light of the above, I think that us older folk have ably displayed our ability to change our personal attitudes towards being more sympathetic to current mores, fads and fancies. Perhaps not as fast as some would like, but there you go!

    Remember – ‘What you regard as intelligence when young, becomes wisdom as you grow older!’…

  121. I am pleased to see that Daphne’s cri de couer has generated a response it deserved. I would like to think that all regulars here on ATW would wholly applaud the sentiments she has expressed in love and pride towards her son and I am pleaed that Ernest has read and responded to her words.

    I would only say that I don’t necessarily agree with the oft expressed sentiment that attitudes of older people on matters like homosexuality and the moves towards modern openness cannot be expected to match that of younger people. I think attitudes are more individual and related to a lot more than just age. After all. older people are not living in another time zone or planet, they are just as much a part of everyday modern experiences and live through the same events as everyone else. They have been exposed and lived through all of the changes experienced in recent decades as everyone. Modern more open attitudes are not new or more shocking to them , there eyes and minds are not closed to society and how it evolves day by day. I think it is a patronising view to say “You can’t expect old people to understand modern life” – they ARE modern life just as much as everyone else of all ages living in 2015.

  122. Colm,

    Of course its patronising to suggest that older people just don’t understand ‘modern life’, when in fact they understand it very well, – but it is presumptuous to expect them to change their point of view to suit every twist and turn of what, in many instances, are changes due to fashion as much as to any thoughtful progression, whether such ideas are political, civil or moral, is immaterial.

    One only has to look back over the last century or so, to see that far more mistakes have been made than successes in the field of ‘public opinion’.

    As for your remark that ‘they are part of modern life’, maybe so, but with diminishing influence, and probably due directly to less respect being shown in modern society in general. Whether that is a good or bad thing is another debate for another day.

  123. Ernest

    I wasn’t trying to suggest that older people should automatically jump to embrace every new twist and turn that emerges as time goes by and I certainly didn’t mean to imply a negative judgement on views that don’t instantly chime with modern expectations . I was just making a point about what I see as a false presumption many people make to generalise about peoples views according to age brackets (and that applies to young as well as old). Individuals can do and should make their own minds up about social trends/ political issues and I certainly don’t believe that the present belongs to or can only be shaped by ‘the young’.

  124. Colm,

    I’m glad you clarified that point, I was beginning to think that you thought otherwise….:-)

  125. Fair play to you Ernest. A well-put and thoughtful response.