Reader comments · Stonewall: Prince Harry must apologise for homophobic remarks · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Stonewall: Prince Harry must apologise for homophobic remarks

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Andrew Quick 12 Jan 2009, 2:50pm

    How bloody typical. Everyone has called for his blood over his racist comments but he can say what the hell he likes about gay people. Why am I not shocked?

  2. Bryan Kelly 12 Jan 2009, 3:23pm

    oh for god sake, i don’t take offense at those remarks, at work they called me ‘gay boy’ ‘nob goblin’ and loads more, never in a malicious or hurtful way and i made appropriate noises of camaraderie to my fellow workers, no one took offense and none was taken.

    pc brigade will have us all living in little sterile cocoons were we cant even have a sh1t in private because it may offend someone.

    (note: offensive language was removed from this comment)

  3. Oh Bloody Hell.

    What is Ben Summerskill playing at. There was no Malice, Aggression or Bullying in the comment. If the lad was bent then its just calling a spade a spade. If he isn’t bent what makes being called gay or queer an insult?

    This over sensitive PC Bull will only create a wider backlash than ends with no form of proper correctness. The only persons the Prince needs to apologise to are the two lads in question and that is only if they found it an insult. It was a private event between friends and comrades. Has nothing at all to do with me or the news.

  4. Personally I don’t take offence at that; my real question is though, why do we insist on elevating people to worshipful status because of which family they were born into? this is what happens when people, in this case a chav with a pseudo Estuary english accent, can claim to represent us by birthrite.

    The best way forward is for Harry, Charles, William and so on to compete in a democratic election alongside others, next time we decide who deserves to be head of state, or who should be elevated to hold any other related title.

  5. Classic example of double standards in the media and society. I know the comment wasn’t malicious but it still was offensive.It was using the word gay in a derograty manner along with queer and considering that we are known by straight people(and ourselves)by those 2 words. It attaches negativity to those words therefore to gay people, which results in the sub-concious promotion of homophobia.

  6. Try the Royals to make a mess of things as usual! x

  7. John Lameck 12 Jan 2009, 4:59pm

    For God’s sake grow up! Queer means weird or unusual, not homosexual or gay. This is the 21st century not the 17th!

  8. Ryan Haynes - fyi radio 12 Jan 2009, 5:07pm

    Haha – if you haven’t watched the video it is a must. This is the best I have seen and makes Harry charming and incredibly sexy. Firstly, calling one of his colleagues a Paki (he is from Pakistan – hmmm now that’s totally racist, spade a spade?).

    He is seen speaking to his grandma “Send my love to the Corgis, Bye Bye, God Save You” classic line showing he is a real person.

    Finally a Royal heard to ACTUALLY Swear…naughty naughty

    We discover he actually has ginger pubes – now if this aint done in Jest then what is?!

    In reference to the queer thing- if that was homophobic then I’m heterosexual…

  9. Sadly, this prince is learning the cost of the unconditional privelege bestowed on his little red head. Of course this little prince has choices and is in a better position than most to exercise such. Just like the rest of us over-educated merit seekers, is it too much to ask that he use his brain and perhaps engage it from time to time. Sadly no and it is that we accuse him of; abuse of privelege though lack of thought. And those whose comments lean towards the ‘oh for god’s sake variety’, perhaps you have a layer of skin too many. Lose it and think.

  10. Dan Mcillroy 12 Jan 2009, 5:21pm

    If you’re from Pakistan then you’re a Paki, if you’re gay then you’re gay, Americans are Yanks etc. Get over it! Doesn’t the truth hurt?

  11. Andrew Quick 12 Jan 2009, 5:29pm

    Ryan you are missing the point

  12. Dominick J. 12 Jan 2009, 5:49pm

    I can’t quite seem to understand why ever word and every nuance is so scrutinized especially by the Royal Family. Hell we’ve heard worse from the Religous Right and NO one Can make them apologize! Why pick on this young lad, when we know he’s just trying to be cute!

  13. If someone makes an offensive comment in his own home with no one else to hear, is it still offensive? I do not consider myself racist or homophobic, but I still admit to making stereotypical judgements, as all people have at one time or another. They may or may not be intentional. However, what Harry did was in a private circumstance. I would be more upset with the person who took the video to the media. What was the purpose of making this public.

  14. Dominick J. 12 Jan 2009, 5:59pm

    Hey twits there is NO duplicate remark. It’s not showing up!!!!

  15. Dominick J. 12 Jan 2009, 6:02pm

    This is what I’m trying to post!
    I can’t quite seem to understand why ever word and every nuance is so scrutinized especially by the Royal Family. Hell we’ve heard worse from the Religous Right and NO one Can make them apologize! Why pick on this young lad, when we know he’s just trying to be cute!

  16. @Bryan Kelly – LOL! “nob goblin” Ain’t heard that one before. He he.

    Anyways, you sure – with him being all royal and posh and stuff – that he just didn’t mean “gay” in the “happy” meaning and “queer” in the “odd/unusual” meaning??

    Real Saying:
    “[I want to hear] your ups and downs in the exercise. Highs and lows … Good points, bad points. How do you feel? Gay? Queer on the side?”

    Saying Translated:
    “[I want to hear] your ups and downs in the exercise. Highs and lows … Good points, bad points. How do you feel? Happy? Odd / Unusual on the side?”

    To be honest, I seriously think he never said them in any “homophobic” way.

  17. Ryan Haynes - fyi radio 12 Jan 2009, 6:14pm

    Go Dale!

    Can someone pass these comments to Summerskil please?!

  18. Just to echo back some of those opinions who lack a basic understanding of what’s come to pass. Harry, the prince of the realm, bless ‘im, is the receiver of unconditional privelege. All this poor red is required to do is think. Clearly, he fails at this.

    To those to rush to his defence, until unconditional privelege is removed from the royals – we’ll leave the Queen out of this cos she saw us through WW II, bless ‘er – then there will never be a context by which this prince can be judged as equal to the rest of us mere merit holders. Think, for goodness sakes, it costs nothing is above privelege. :-)

  19. This is all just so much bovine excrement stirred up by the money grubbing editor of the News of the Screws!

    Homophobic intent, like racist intent, is to be found in the manner in which words are used and NOT in the words themselves. In this case there was neither in what the Prince said. If there was any such homophobia or racism, then it emanates from the editors of the News of the Screws, and it is they that should be castigated for it! Point the accusatory finger in the direction in which it truly belongs!

    Try pointing your browser at which claims to be Pakistan’s largest online community.

  20. Ryan Haynes - fyi radio 12 Jan 2009, 7:03pm

    WWII? Wasn’t that like over half a century ago? The time is now – time to stop diluting our words and recognizing the brilliance of the English language.
    I’m queer
    I don’t feel queer

    Is he privileged? No he is not. The only thing he has more than most is money – but money doesn’t make you privileged…having a family, having two living parents, having ambition, having the opportunity to be free and not followed by paparazzi, having a free sex life, having the choice to be whatever you want to be (hairdresser, marketer, doorman) THAT is privilege.

  21. I dont’ think the main point is whether he was offensive or not, it’s the double standard adopted by the mainstream media in reporting and denonuncing his racist remarks yet not saying anything at all about his homophobic remarks. We’ve clearly still got a long, long way to go.

  22. I don’t think the real point is whether he was offensive or not, it’s that the mainstream media are outraged at his racist remarks yet don’t even notice his homophobic remarks. Clearly, we’ve still got a long way to go.

  23. I don’t think the real point is whether he was offensive, it’s that the mainstream media are outraged at his racist remarks yet don’t even notice his homophobic remarks. Clearly, we’ve still got a long, long way to go.

  24. Har Davids 12 Jan 2009, 9:23pm

    Maybe Harry is just like a lot of men of his age: a bit careless in the remarks he makes. Let’s not be too PC.

  25. Ryan Haynes: whether you think ‘Paki’ is an accurate description of a Pakistani person or not is beside the point; it is generally seen as a derogatory epithet, akin to ‘wog’, ‘chink’ or ‘poof’, regardless of whether SOME people within these groups meekly accept these appellations – there are some people who don’t mind being called ‘Shorty’, ‘Jumbo’ or ‘Fatso’: that doesn’t make it generally acceptable, or desirable.

    Having said that, it does seem more than a little contrived that this whole business becomes an issue YEARS after the video was made, which does smack of journalistic manipulation. And it was not intended for public viewing.

    But you do have to wonder how stupid someone who’s grown up in the public eye can be – did the boy not think it could be miscontrued? How can someone like him be so foolish?

  26. Dominick J. 12 Jan 2009, 10:13pm

    Sheeeeeesh, wait till he says something Hateful not hurtful, to some.

  27. Ryan… Think you need to read Chomski and get a handle on words, context, meaning and evolution of language. Additionally, please dont confuse rights with privelege. For example, rights are won – not granted, privilege – assume you can figure that one yourself.

    “Having the opportunity to be free… ” I could dissect that one all night.

    To reiterate… The Prince is Privileged and is not the same as you or I. Otherwise we’d be splashed over the tabloids… :-)

  28. Simon Murphy 12 Jan 2009, 10:24pm

    I’m not too offended by either his racist or homophobic remarks as they don’t seem intended in spite and seem sort of bland. Having said that it would be a quick; easy and cheap way to cut back on expenses during an economic recession by stripping him of his royal title. I see his future – and it looks like Prince Andrew. Cut him out of the royals now – and think of all millions of taxpayer’s money that will be spared over the course of his non-remarkable life.

  29. I think the point about the Harry we see in these film clips is that, despite his many years of expensive education, he hadn’t got the sense to realise that saying those things on film was stupid. If anyone should know how an unguarded remark can come back and haunt you, it’s him. he’s a high profile member of the Royal family and he’s acting up for using his camera and for his mates – it’s not even like he was secretly filmed!

    His mother had her mobile conversations recorded and played out in the press – every move he makes is covered by the press and has been since he was old enough to fart; it’s not like he shouldn’t be aware!

    Is it Racism and homophobia or not? Personally I think probably not – he’s a lad goofing around with his mates and not really meaning to harm anyone, despite the distasteful nature of the remarks.

    I think the real issue here is that we can see for sure that he probably likes the wealth and privelege of hisposition, but desperately wants to be a normal lad. Oh and he’s really not that intelligent!

  30. Look. This is SO blown out of proportion. My son serves in the U.S. Army stationed in Iraq. I’ve heard him and his buddies on base make general comments and nicknames about “queer” or “gay”, but NEVER has he ever put those terms in a derogatory term as such as “faggot”. His buddies know that his Dad is gay, and they are okay with it so long as he is. He and his buddies know of other American soldiers who are gay, but can not be outed … at least until #44 becomes President soon and repeals this crazy law of ours. They also have nicknames such as “Haji” and “Coon” and “Red” referring to multiple nationalities, races, creeds, and religions.

    There number one concern … can I trust that you have my back when I’m being shot at? Everything else is irrelevant during these critical moments.

  31. I think it’s fair to say there are no offensive words – only offensive intentions.

    If Brad Pitt, well known for being very gay friendly, called you a “big old fag” it would be utterly different from Jeremy Clarkson making exactly the same remark.

    The problem here is exactly as ScotsBam says. It is the way the media focused on what could be seen as “racism” and ignored what could be seen as “homophobia”.

    At the end of the day, I don’t care that much what the eventual consensus is on what is seen as offensive and what is not, just so long as it’s a rule that is applied evenly.

    As far as this incident with Harry is concerned, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the matter, if he has felt the need to apologise for “Paki”, he should do the same for “queer”.

  32. Outraged of Tunbridge Wells 13 Jan 2009, 12:49am

    For crying out loud! The man is in the army, and I am sure the language is generally a far sight richer than that. These people risk their lives so that we might be allowed the right of free speech, (unlike many places like Afghanistan or Iraq).

    The tabloid press in the UK (and Stonewall for that matter), needs to get it’s hypocritical head from out of it’s a**e. (Hands up all the people that don’t know what word I mean?)

  33. The first I heard about these homophobic comments was on this website. Disappointed but not surprised that the mainstream media, once again, takes racism seriously but ignores homophobia.

  34. I hope Ben & Stonewall read the comments on this site and take note of the general feeling within our community which seems to be
    a) Prince Harry made some silly off-the-cuff comments to his army mates Three Years ago, that have been blown out of all proortion by our sensationalising gutter press, as usual, that were daft but not malicious. It is a delicate balance between freedom of speech and causing offence and the danger of the rabid PC brigade suppressing all freedom of thought or expression is very real and far more offensive than such remarks.
    b) Calls for him to apologise to the Pakistani or gay communities are ridiculous over-reactions that scream over-sensitivity and just make minorities look ridiculous in the eyes of the wider public
    c) Nevertheless the issue of heirarchy of discrimination flagged up by several commentators is very relevent. Gay people are fed up with the hypocracy of always being bottom of the pile when it comes to certain minority groups being ‘more equal than others’ and issues of race being taken more seriously by those in power (and the media) than our equal treatment.

    Ben take note!

  35. a case of a young man using the language of his group in his group. However, he’s not ordinary; no matter how innocently he meant the words, or how inoffensively they were received, they still became unacceptable once they were publicised (by whichever lowlife broke cover in what should be private interactions) NOT because they were incredibly offensive (the “queer”, “gay” ones were puerile) BUT because they give a green like to the thugs who queer and paki bash.

  36. Erratum:
    I meant “green light”

  37. Come on guys get a life, stop being offended every time someone farts, this is clearly a media manipulated story and you are biting at the first hook dangled in your face, lighten up!

  38. Leave the guy alone! He’s a soldier, anyone know any soldiers? i do and their language when they are talking to each other tends to be rather “colourful” and not for the faint hearted. There’s no evidence that he’s remotely homophobic, and i very much doubt he’s remotely racist. It makes me very angry when there is REAL homophobia in the world, you know like people getting murdered/imprisoned/executed/gay-bashed for being gay, that Activists would waste a minute worrying about something as irrelevent as this.Get over it

  39. Simon Murphy 13 Jan 2009, 9:50am

    Harry is a royal – therefore even if he never uttered an offensive comment he is still a parasite. If the head of state in the UK was democratically elected this would not be happening. Get rid of the royals and become a democracy – that’s what we should be pushing for.

  40. Ryan Haynes - fyi radio 13 Jan 2009, 10:46am

    Great stuff – loving the comments. However Harry’s been portrayed he is not guilty – it’s the portrayers who should look in the mirror and reconsider how this is causing more divisions.

    If words that once had two connotations can only be accepted through their defamatory definitions and be banned from public use then we are losing the essence of the English language.

    Losing their negative positioning is completely understood, but let’s not bin them all together!

  41. ‘ In the film, he is heard asking a member of the squad to run through an exercise they had just completed together.

    ‘ “[I want to hear] your ups and downs in the exercise. Highs and lows … Good points, bad points. How do you feel? Gay? Queer on the side?” ‘

    Where are these comments? I haven’t seen or heard them on the film!

  42. paul macdonald 13 Jan 2009, 12:26pm

    The British army is well known for its colourful turn of phrase. I’m sure Harry is painfully aware of how much he stands out in his unit,because of his role and upbringing and of course because he’s a ginger. I’m sure he is not offended I call him that.
    poor lad probably tries his level best to blend in so If you wish to single him out for this type of conversation you are being wholly unfair as the entire armed forces are equally guilty.
    I wouldn’t wish to pick over the young mans remarks unless I was prepared to step in for him under fire and set a better example.
    I think a bigger issue here is the tosspot who filmed him on their mobile phone and flogged it to the news of the world, nice.

  43. You would think with his education he would stop and think before shooting his mouth off, but I guess Harry Windsor also has the freedon of speech.

  44. Outraged of Tunbridge Wells 13 Jan 2009, 6:09pm

    “Get rid of the royals and become a democracy” – Simon Murphy

    That’s more like it! It’s obvious most of this has damn all to do with minorities and far about class war. Just like fox-hunting, nobody actually cares about the fox, they just like to put down people that weren’t born in a council house.

    As for your so-called socialist democracy, Nu-Lab has brought this country to it’s knees. We are now awash with politically correct bureaucrats dictating to scumbag benefit claimants and asylum seekers whilst the rest of us have to suffer the dictates of yet more Euro-prats from across the channel.

    The Monarchy generate more income than any of your nest-feathering socialist cronies. Leave them alone.

  45. As a gay officer in the Royal Navy I dont feel anyway offened by this comment, nor would I if I had been asked it within the context and situation that it was said. This is clearly the media and Stonewall being oversensitive to an simple comment. Please look at this in a realistic manner and stop chasing a young army officer for anything and everything he says. He’s doing a fine job and hasnt really hurt anyone by the comments he made 3 years ago. This is such a NON news story – there are more important things to be chasing like homophomic bullying in schools. These are the REAL issues of the day and should be what we are focusing on. Leave the guy to get on with his job.

  46. Hey Harry, you’re only third in line for the throne, so you’d better shape up or you won’t get the crown and the ridiculous marching band.

    I think it’s more concerning that as royalty he has a chance to set an example, and what does he do? He fights in a war and kills people. I don’t want Harry getting pissed at some guy and blowing him to Kingdom Come.

    That said, S to the four, Harry- Stop Saying Stupid Stuff. And that uniform is unattractive- get Parliament to change it b/c the beige clashes w/ your hair.

  47. The Prince did not make the statements in public. It is none of our business what he says in private: Royals are also entitled to their own opinions. If the statements are offensive it is the person who published them that should apologise.

  48. Sister Mary Clarence 16 Jan 2009, 4:19pm

    I entirely agree with Nick. Some people will say anything to get their name in papers and it appears that Ben Summerskill is one of those

  49. I’m afraid that, like it or not, what His Royal Highness Prince Harry, future Duke of York and possible King says and does is different from what most of the rest of us say and do, and if he knew a camera and mike were running it won’t do to claim that he was engaged in private behaviour. People close to a Constitutional Monarchy meant to symbolise and represent an increasingly diverse and inclusive society just have to behave with more sensitivity, full stop. And what this episode seems to illustrate is HRH reinforcing the sort of macho culture that I suspect most people visiting this site would like to change.

  50. Honestly Bryan, your workmates don’t officially represent the nation, right. If Harry wants to be the boy-next-door then he should get rid of his princely title. Or apologize of course.

  51. I agree with ScotsBam. It’s not particularly offensive IMO; it’s more that the race-related comments ended up causing something of a shitstorm while this was ignored.

  52. I’m sick and tired of Stonewall shouting about every little thing just to get a few inches of media coverage. For goodness sake these boys and girls are going to go to war and kill people, or perhaps be killed, and we’re worried about a bit of language. There was clearly no malicious intent – it’s a storm in a teacup as other people have said. If you’re going to join the bloody army then you really do need to toughen up a bit. I’m not saying bullying is good – but for goodness sake it’s not the boy scouts is it!

    But I agree it’s typical that the perceived homophobic stuff gets ignored in favour of the perceived racist words. Mind you, perhaps that’s a good thing as it’s a load of tosh anyway.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.