Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Milk screenwriter Dustin Lance Black apologises for leaked unprotected gay sex photos

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. It’s awwful that those were released. How mortifying!

    It also didn’t help that Perez Hilton posted them uncensored.

    Oo-er!

  2. whats the big deal here?? I don’t use a condom with my partner of six years as we are in a trusted relationship.. whats the point of the story – is it just because he is gay? How many straight couples in relationships don’t use a condom… just homophobic press..

  3. Agreed John.

    I just feel sorry for the guy. That would be embarassing for anyone, gay or straight.

  4. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 2:29pm

    I’m not really sure what he is apologising for. A) They were taken in private and should never have been released, B) I don’t know how long he was with the guy in the photo, but like most couples, there is a point when you don’t use condoms anymore. It’s when you are changing sexual partners regularly that you need to. If you’re with someone for more than a few months, it’s pretty serious, monogamous and you have been tested and got the all clear – why would you need to wear one?

    I woulnd’t say there’s anything homophobic about it. It’s more the fact that as a safe-sex advocator, he’s been caught not using a condom. They’d do the same to a straight person – or anyone caught having sex when advocating asbstinence.

    Plus…the worst part in my view, the lack of solidarity from Perez Hilton. There was no need for these to be seen by the world, but in his usual trashy style he has circulated them, knowing full well gays will get criticism for it. If there’s any homphobic backlash in response, some of it can be attributed to him!

  5. Perez Hilton is a scum bag. Great to see a gay man kicking one of the most famous and high profile opponents of Prop 8 that we have. Not.

  6. @ John – Unprotected penetrative sex, even with a long-term trusted partner, is still very very foolish. Keep in mind that there are still a very large number of people in the UK (as well as around the world) who are unaware of carrying a sexually transmitted infection. Just because someone says, truthfully or not, that as far as they know, they do not have any STIs does not mean that is the case.

    The only way to be sure, ever, is for both partners to get tested at their local GUM clinic or GP surgery. Even then, its only a guarantee as from three months previous (in the case if HIV).

    This screenwriter actively campaigns for safe sex practice, so obviously it can be taken as hypocritical, or OK, to engage in unsafe sex when some people see these pictures.

    I do agree that the publication of the photos might very well be attempt to smear his name, but that release is a separate issue from the unsafe sex acts themselves.

  7. Simon Murphy 15 Jun 2009, 2:54pm

    Perez Hilton did not release those pictures. They were released by the Starzlife photo agency. They were published everywhere on the web. Perez Hilton merely reprinted them. And I have no problem with Perez Hilton doing that. He runs a gossip site and when Colin Farrell’s unsafe-sex tape was released that was also printed on his site. Why on earth should there be a double standard between gay and staight?

    Having said that I don’t know why Black has apologised for having unsafe sex. He has nothing to be sorry for. What he does in his personal life is entirely his own business and it is no-one else’s business.

    The only things he should be sorry for is that he was foolish enough to take the pictures and record a tape.

  8. @ Monkeychops – Remember that there are lots of couples, gay & straight, who have only found out their spouse have been sleeping around after discovering they have caught an STI from long-term supposedly monogamous partners they have been with for many years.

  9. Simon-

    I said that it ‘didn’t help’ that Perez posted them (since his site attrcats millions, and millions of internet traffic, 200 million some months!) and that it ‘would be mortifying for anyone, gay or straight’.

    It’s about protecting people’s privacy, whether it be Dustin Lance Black, Colin Farrell or even Paris Hilton. Famous or not, anyone would me mortified at this.

  10. I also wouldn’t go as far as calling it homophobic but there’s definitely a double standard. I doubt straight people would be expected to wear condoms. It would make it pretty hard to have kids if they wanted to. And this is one more reason why DLB’s behaviour is admirable. He could have pointed out this double standard, saying that there are some situations where it’s ok not to wear condoms, but he’d rather take the heat for it and apologise instead of starting to discuss opt-out cases for condom use which wouldn’t benefit his ultimate goal which is to promote safe-sex.

  11. Simon Murphy 15 Jun 2009, 3:27pm

    What he should have done is tell everyone to mind their own business. When Ralph Fiennes was arrested for having sex (unsafe) with a female flight attendant while he was on route to speak at a safe-sex conference in India people did not ask or expect an apology from him.

    By apologising Black is admitting that he did something ‘wrong’ when in fact no-one knows the dynmamics of his relationship.

    Safe sex is important for sure but Black is only responsible for her own behaviour – not the behaviour of gay men in general

  12. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 3:27pm

    @George

    What your saying is not about having safe sex, it’s inferring that people can’t be trusted to be faithful, which is a different issue. Before I have ever had sex with a boyfriend, I’ve made sure we both got tested. The risk of adultery is always there in any relationship, but we shouldn’t have to wear condoms when we’ve been having sex with the same partner for 50 years. Maybe if we had fewer sexual partners, the risk would be low enough for us to drop out of the “high risk” category that the WHO keep putting us in.

    @Valerio

    I see your point to a certain extent, but as we all know, STDs have been our downfall. Whilst there are so few messages in straight mags, there are adverts everywehere advocating safe sex in the gay press. I guess it wouldn’t have got to that stage if it hadn’t become such a problem among gay men. But you’re right, everyone should be being safe, the message should just be universal.

  13. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 3:36pm

    Simon – I know Perez didn’t release them, but he’s not making himself look any better by jumping on the bandwagon and when he knows that this fickle world may look down on gays more than straights in that situation. His contributions to literature aren’t really helping anyone.

  14. Simon Murphy 15 Jun 2009, 4:07pm

    “I know Perez didn’t release them, but he’s not making himself look any better by jumping on the bandwagon and when he knows that this fickle world may look down on gays more than straights in that situation.”

    He runs a gossip column which is equally spiteful towards all celebrities be they gay or straight.

    And he has not engaged in any condemnation of Black – he merely reported on this as a scandal in the same way he reported on the Colin Farrell sextape scandal. It is not Dustin Lance Black or Perez Hilton’s job to represent gay people in the media.

    Closet cases like John Travolta or Queen Latifah or Wentworth Miller or Anderson Cooper or Jodie Foster (until recently) paint a far worse picture of gay people by choosing to lie about or deny their sexual orientation despite working in the most gay friendly industry on earth.

  15. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 4:14pm

    Wow, I can see you’ve got into Perez’s idle gossip column with that list of “suspected gays”. Don’t you think it would be better to wait until they officially declare their sexuality before you assume that they are? I’ve heard so much in the last few days about “self-definition”, after all! I am, however, of the view that people should just come out and be done with it – it’s less shameful for the actors and it’s better that we see what a true percentage of thepopulation we are.

    Re Perez is a representative of gay people, whether he likes it or not, as he is an out-celebrity. He’s also active in raising the gay issue (Carrie Prejean etc) in public arenas. People take note of what is in the public eye. I’d rather he wasn’t doing what he does, but that’s celebrities for you.

  16. Robert, ex-pat Brit 15 Jun 2009, 4:40pm

    Simon Murphy, you’re absolutely right, nobody decried the Colin Farrell video depicting him having unprotected sex. Obviously straights seem to think that HIV is still a “gay” disease. In the U.S. the HIV rate of transmission among senior citizens (pensioners) is soaring. Older straight men are having just as much unprotected sex because they think that women don’t carry the virus, let alone prostitutes, some of whom they frequent. Many are married men and some are single straight men. Its the same mentality.

    If Black and his partner have been tested on a regular basis and are in a long-term committed relationship, no straying, I see no reason why they should use condoms. If that’s not the case, then yes, at all times use protection.

  17. Simon Murphy 15 Jun 2009, 4:41pm

    “Don’t you think it would be better to wait until they officially declare their sexuality before you assume that they are?”

    I agree totally. I assume everyone is gay until they declare otherwise.

    As for the names I mentioned – John Travolta’s homosexuality was revealed by his ex-lover porn star Paul Barresi in 1986. His marriage to Kelly Preston (engineered by the cult of scientology) conveniently happened 6 months later. Miss Travolta was pictured kissing a man last year also. There’s no secret about his homosexuality.

    As for the other people – Queen Latifah; Wenthworth Miller – they are all involved in same sex relationships but they demand privacy about their private lives that is not afforded to straight celebrities. It’s a double standard and it stinks. If it OK for newspapers and gossip columns to discuss Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s personal relationship I don’t see why it is unacceptable to discuss a gay star’s personal relationship.

    It’s a double standard and it is unacceptable.

  18. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 4:49pm

    Simon – Any official citations to back up these claims? It’s hearsay. We have all heard the rumours, but until there is a proclamation, it’s not right to out them, regardless of our suspicions. After all, don’t you remember not wanting to be outed? It’s not our place to do it. In fact it’s nobody’s except theirs. Though I still think it’s best for everyone,especially them, if they do.

    I don’t agree Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s relationship should be up for discussion either. It’s their private life, who cares? You are making two different points though – the “gay couples” you have talked about are not out/officially gay. Hence it shouldn’t be discussed in a newspaper. Brad and Angelina are very much known for being a couple, what with their kids, marriage etc. That’s why they get discussed, everything is official. On that same basis, you can discuss Elton John and David Furnish’s relationship, they’ve confirmed it. But as for possibly in the closet stars, no way, leave them in there until they’re ready. As a gay man, you should know what pressure to come out can do to people.

  19. Hiv in the US and UK is still overwhelmingly a disease which affects gay people far disproportionately than it does straight people. Amazes me we still cant face up to that.
    Perez is a total scum bag. Would Pride magazine break pictures of Barack Obama in the same situation? Of course not. But of course as gay men we never stick together so I can understand why people on here will defend him. We hate ourselves so much. And even if he wasnt gay – is it ok to publish private pictures like these of anyone – no its disgusting and immoral :(

  20. Simon Murphy 15 Jun 2009, 5:00pm

    Brad and Angelina were ‘outed’ as a couple long before they acknowledged their relationship. Likewise with Beyonce and Jay-Z – they were ‘outed’ as being in a relationship long before they acknowledged it themselves. There is no difference between the press discussing Brangelina’s unacknowledged heterosexual relationship and Queen Latifah’s unacknowledged lesbian relationship.

    Like it or not we live in a tabloid culture where the private lives of stars are reported on in the press and on the web. Gay people cannot expect different treatment. Simple as that.

    It may not be nice but it’s the reality.

  21. Simon Murphy 15 Jun 2009, 5:02pm

    #19: Wolf: “Would Pride magazine break pictures of Barack Obama in the same situation?”

    I can assure you that if a sex tape of Barack Obama and Michelle Obama appeared it would be all over the press in a heartbeat.

    They don’t seem stupid enough to record themselves at it however.

  22. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 5:15pm

    I didn’t say I agreed with Beyonce and Jay-Z’s relatiohsips making the tabloids either. It’s true that gay people should accept to be treated equally if that’s what they keep asking for. But, there isn’t full equality. And the US has a pretty bad record on employment rights and homophbia within Hollywood anyway – you can see why people fear for their careers over there. The UK doesn’t face that issue. With Jay-Z and Beyonce, the implications for publicising their relationship are not anywhere near as great as for a closeted actor. What do they have to say? How long they’ve been together and that they’re happy. For a gay actor who gets outed – they’ll want the explanations as to why he didn’t come out, his experiences, his sex life…everything. All at once and possibly without having told his family or friends. Talk about pressure! And that just isn’t fair. The consequences are not the same. Once we have reached a level of equality where these consequences will be identical to both straight and gay celebrities, then fine, everyone’s fair game. Until then, leave them where they are.

  23. @Wolf – HIV is not a disease, it is a virus which can later lead to a reduced immune system which then allows various diseases to take hold. There is a very important difference.

  24. If a man has a wife and children, how can you insist he is Gay, even if he has had a Gay relationship? Should we not tkate people as they present themselves, as we were told here on the thread if Chaz last week?

  25. Monkeychops 15 Jun 2009, 8:18pm

    Niki – fair point.

  26. Jim Pickett 15 Jun 2009, 8:18pm

    Sex without condoms between people of the same known serostatus is not foolish or risky in terms of HIV transmission. Hello!

  27. George: “Unprotected penetrative sex, even with a long-term trusted partner, is still very very foolish. The only way to be sure, ever, is for both partners to get tested at their local GUM clinic or GP surgery.”

    How can you be sure when your scumbag boyfriend is fucking everything with a pulse behind your back?

    The one certainty you can guarantee is that gay men are not to be trusted when it comes to keeping it in your pants.

  28. George, get over self righteous semantics and address the point

  29. Above comment: “Sex without condoms between people of the same known serostatus is not foolish or risky in terms of HIV transmission.”

    This is a ridiculous thing to say. Two positive people having unprotected sex can mean a person is infected with more than one strain of the virus. The chances of mutation are increased too.

    In short: reinfection could render any treatment you may be having useless. See: aids.about .com/cs/safesex/a/reinfection.htm

  30. Simon Murphy (7, 11), Robert, ex-pat Brit (16):

    Between the two of you, you have said it all. What do you suppose Harvey Milk would say?

  31. Ciaran McMahon 16 Jun 2009, 6:56am

    “If a man has a wife and children, how can you insist he is Gay, even if he has had a Gay relationship? ”

    How can you insist he’s straight? Do straight people have same sex lovers? Did bi-sexual cross your narrow mind?

    The simplistic answer Niki, if you bother to read something other than the bible, you’d know many gay men marry to cover their shame with being gay. They’re the ones that skulk about cruising areas and gay bars late at night while the wife sleeps, and its thanks to people like you they feel they have to live in a false marriage… loved you last quote on another thread about how AIDS is gods wrath, by the way. Truly enlightened.

  32. “How can you be sure when your scumbag boyfriend is fucking everything with a pulse behind your back?”

    Trust, thats what.

    If you don’t trust him, then don’t bother being with him. Its that simple.

  33. Ciaran: Bisexuality is bullshit. It is just as you say, gay men, through one reason or another, not being able to face up to their situation and continuing to play the straight. It is very common in Asian communities because of arranged marriages, and if one of them were to declare themselves gay/lesbian, they would be totally ostracised from their families. Also, I have a rent/escort friend who’s business is over 70% married men. Don’t tell me they are bisexual. They are just cowards.

    Will: I wouldn’t trust any gay man as far as I could spit, (or eject any other fluid for that matter), which is why I now don’t bother with anyone.

  34. Its sad you label all gay men with that generalisation, and you chose to be alone than give another a chance. Perhaps you should re-consider the company you keep. My impressions are that gay men are as diverse a group as any… there are cheats, liars, shallow fools as well as hero’s, loyal, and good people. That’s people I’m afraid, nothing to do with just being gay.

  35. Poor lonely RobN…. everyone’s a bitch but you.

    Bitternesses is a way of life for you, isn’t it?

    Ever think the problem is you?

    Or is it just easier to blame a few million gay Britons as the cause of all your problems. What’s with all the generalisations?

    Funny story, you also blamed “black” people for problems in En gland because they were “less evolved” in a previous thread. So, it’s not just gay people, its black people too? And foreigners? You had a go at the Irish as well, despite the fact WE should be apologising to them for what our ancestors did to their country.

    Yeah, that’s it alright…. not YOUR fault at all no one can stick being with you.

    Grow up.

  36. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 9:05am

    Sorry RobN, can’t agree with you on bisexuality. And it isn’t just men, there are plenty of women at it too. Some may be married to cover their shame, but some are also genuinely into both. I recently discovered a lesbian friend from uni was now with a man and saying she was bisexual, but with the caveat that she was attracted to only very specific men. A far narrower range than the women that are generally catching her eye. Sexual preferences are as broad as the mind. With you on not trusting gay men so much though, I generally don’t, but then I’ve had quite a lot of negative experiences with other gay guys. Men are jut not very trustworthy in their nature. Give them a few social complexes and a bit of oppression and you increase that manifold. Women make far better long-term friends in my view (and that is only my personal view). And I’m not talking about fag hags that latch on as “support” or beards.

    Don’t agree to apologising to the Irish, I haven’t done anything to them (like anyone else born after Irish Independence). Quite like them actually, friendly bunch (entrenched Catholicism aside). Most of Ulster want to stay with the UK anyway, it’s not as if we are occupying a place they don’t want us to. Separatists are still a minority. As mentioned in other threads, I don’t like being tarred by the actions of others, this includes my ancestors. If not, I’d be apologising for the French, the Scots and the English. I’ll say sorry when I have personally done something wrong and only then.

  37. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 9:30am

    PS I do actually detest the word “fag hag”, but it seems that this is an accepted term. It’s a rather crass term, but there doesn’t seem to be a more polite way of putting it. Fag is equally nasty, but then to my mind that is a type of gay man, not a general term for one attracted to his own gender. Just to clear up….

  38. Ciaran McMahon 16 Jun 2009, 9:34am

    “friendly bunch (entrenched Catholicism aside). Most of Ulster want to stay with the UK anyway, it’s not as if we are occupying a place they don’t want us to. Separatists are still a minority.”

    Er, I think you need to get your facts right before making such silly remarks. Separatists are technically a minority, but a damn big one. Show a bit of respect, not ignorance, to those who have been persecuted by those who claim to be “unionists” and have their civil rigths diminished. Its the origins of the “troubles” to which the UK turned a blind eye to for so long. And Ireland is not “entrenched in Catholicism”, unless you’re looking at Ireland through 1950′s glasses. So, unless you’re happen to have a TARDIS, and time travel is a particular forte of yours, I think you’re talking a load of shite, monkeychops. Try visit the country you’re going to make silly statements on, or at worst use Wikitravel to get your facts right. And if I may say so, this comment ad ignorance is typically patronising, as most of your posts usually are.

  39. @Monkeychops:- While no-one expects any UK citizen to apologise for prior wrong doings in the past (I’m assuming Linda is just being facetious), no more than we would ask a German to apologise for the Nazi regime, it is, quite frankly, a little naive to be belittling the situation in Northern Ireland to a “majority” situation. Try to be at least respectful of the history of Ireland. A lot of people died at the hands of the British over the occupation (yes, that’s what it was and its how a lot of Irish people see it historically), directly or indirectly. At least be mindful of that before you make silly statements on a country’s history.

  40. Monkeychops did you get your history of Ireland from the Daily Mail? Get a life mate.

    Back to the story, what’s all this hoo ha about anyway? He had sex with his boyfriend unprotected. So what? So do I. How many straight couples use a condom JUST to protect from SDI’s? This is all back to straights are faithful, but gays are not, and that’s just a load of homophobic bollox.

  41. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 10:19am

    Will/Ciaran – A lot of people have died at the hands of others ever since time began. It’s only because Irish history is recent that it’s still being talked about. I wouldn’t expect a guy from Normandy to apologise for killing King Harold. Would you? Move on, de-sensitise a bit, that’s how the world has kept going.

    Re Northern Ireland – Ciaran, you’ve just contradicted yourself and shown your ignorance of what democracy is. Political situations in a country might be complex, but a democratic vote is pretty simple. You say separatists are a minority. Then you say they are a big one – as if that has more importance in a vote. So what? They’re still a minority, when it comes to a vote, they lose and they have to accept that. It’s up to them to convince the majority that their wishes should be granted. Acording to the rules of democracy, the majority gets what they want – 51%.Do you know about QMV? Maybe you should take your own advice and look on wikipedia. result: Ulster stays with the UK. Ever since the Downing Street Declaration was signed in 1993, it has given the right of Northern Ireland to self-determination. Great, they should have that right. But they have never voted for independence. That’s 16 years ago, if they wanted to leave the UK they wold have done something about it by now. They don’t even have an “Ulster Parliament” with the equivalent powers to the Scottish Parliament (despite Labour offering all the devolution they wanted). Independence clearly isn’t the will of most people. I have no idea whether you are Irish, but it seems like you want a monopoly on this. Your statements on Unionists would also imply that you might have symapthy for Republicans (maybe you want to explain that, it might put context to what you are trying to say). Being from a country doesn’t mean you have more right to an opinion on it. How incredibly ignorant is that. Or that you are the most informed or unbiased. I’ve met many a German and French who know far more about England than I do. I wouldn’t ever claim to have a undeniable right to be more wisened on the UK than someone from outside. It’s education, not where you’re from. That shows your ignorance. Can you honestly believe that an English chav knows more about the UK than a Danish professor of European politics? I should hope not.

    I’m fully aware of the history of the troubles thank you very much(I did grow up in the UK where we were everso slightly involved and I very much remember my aunt calling my dad to tell me her husband had been shot on active service – he lived thankfully, but it did make you aware of what was going on away from the media reports). My uncle also married an Irish woman from Drogheda who often recounts the tales of hearing bombs going off across the border when she was at college. Irish politics have always been on the scene in my house.

    There are guilty parties from both communities in Ulster as well as in the UK government, that’s obvious. That’s what politically opposing sides do – they do stupid things to get what they want. It’s been repeated throughout history. Unionists and Republicans have been as bad as each other in many respects – but at the end of the day, more are in favour of staying with the UK. That is simply the point I was making. Do you disagree with that? If so, maybe you want to organise a vote for independence? I don’t remember implying that the situation wasn’t complex. If it wasn’t the case, Northern Ireland would have disappeared from the UK map years ago.

    Will – Of course many people died in that occupation by Brits. Many people have died at the hands of terrorists on British soil as well (and that’s Britain, not Northern Ireland, they are not the same). No-one was denying it was an occupation. The people I really feel sorry for are the poor Australians shot in the Netherlands in 1989 and the German wife of a British soldier who was killed trying to flee the same guys who shot the Ozzies in Osnabruck. Why drag them into it?

    Now, enough with the name calling or belittling of my “silly little comments”. It’s not making me want to listen to your views.

  42. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 10:27am

    Patrick – if you’ve got something decent to say, say it. Obviously a one-line insult about me reading the Daily Mail may be enough for making an argument where you usually do, but not on here. It’s an unfounded claim and that isn’t good enough. If you want to contest my opinions on Irish history, feel free, but put a decent set of reasons together or you’ll just be dismissed. At least I have put together what I think with a bit of substance. Presumably the only way you could find out if I read the Daily Mail would be to have cameras following me wherever I went. It’s a bit of an absurd claim don’t you think? So, are you going to say something meaningful? I’m all ears…..

  43. Simon Murphy 16 Jun 2009, 10:36am

    Let’s not change the subject into a discussion about Ireland (although it is worth noting that in British schools the Irish Famine of the 1840′s where 1,000,000 died of starvation and 1,500,000 emigrated is explained away by saying the potatoes died and it does not mention the fact that during the famine Ireland remained a net exporter of food – only trouble was the food which would have prevented mass starvation and emigration was destined for England and the Tory politicians at the time thought mass starvation and emigration was a nice solution to their Irish ‘problem).

    I don’t want Britain or Germany or the US to apologise for their horrendous crimes as they happened in the past. But it is very sad that people don’t seem to even be aware of the crimes their countries committed.

  44. If you make a stupid comment Monkeychops, you must face the consequences and expect ridicule. You claim free speech for yourself, to call people at gay pride ‘subhuman’ and ‘disgusting’ but deny others that right, it seems. Now, that’s hypocrisy.

    If your feelings are hurt, as you said in a previous thread, ‘tough tits’. Insults are free speech.

  45. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 10:46am

    I agree with you Simon, British education is appalling on Irish history. In fact, it’s crap on British history. Fortunately my shcool did have a very in-depth set of modules on Irish history, where there was a lot of debate and criticism of both sides. There was certainly no shirking of the British government’s responsibilities. Though on other areas of history, the education we got was pretty useless.

  46. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 10:50am

    Tom – I said I didn’t agree to unfounded accusations about me reading the Daily Mail. He’s never seen me, I’ve never said I do. If I had made comments on gay pride having never seen one, the you may be justified. However, I HAVE been to a gay pride (in five countries) and I HAVE seen with my own eyes behaviour that I do not like. Hence, you are not justified. There is no hyporcisy there at all. Free speech can of course be insulting, but as someone said on another thread (it may have been you), to have your opinions accepted is a privilege. I didn’t accept Patrick’s opinion because it was unfounded. I have not denied, however, his free speech. Two different things.

  47. Ciaran McMahon 16 Jun 2009, 11:13am

    “Then you say they are a big one – as if that has more importance in a vote. So what?”

    Yeah, and this led to 3000 people being killed in the UK and Ireland by nationalists taking the only option they felt they could. So, please cop on, the majority does not give the right to suppress the rights of the minority, and the power sharing works BECAUSE each side recognises the other.

  48. Ciaran, your point “the majority does not give the right to suppress the rights of the minority” is well made.

    Isn’t that the very crux of gay rights?

    Even if the majority are straight and religious in nature, they do not have the right to impose that view on any minority and remove their basic human rights simply based on that belief.

    And Simon, a good point made in saying “it is very sad that people don’t seem to even be aware of the crimes their countries committed.” What’s that famous line by George Santayana, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. Monkeychops is entitled to his opinion of course, but is guilty of over simplification and one sided view of the truth with regards to Irish history.

  49. (Monkey, Patrick asked a question, he made no statement. A one word answer would suffice. His right to ask such a question. Your opinions on many topics are closer to Peter Hitchens than Peter Tatchell.)

    Though I was referring to another comment where someone accused you of making a silly remark, in treating all Northern Irish as one group. Not quite as stupid as suggesting gay people should consider having a joint event ‘with other minorities like…the BNP’, which you also suggested elsewhere, but silly, nonetheless.

    You did accuse people having a good time at Pride of being ‘subhuman’, because I guess their expression offends your sensibilities; I think it was on the Doncaster story.

    The fact that you have been to many gay prides (an odd thing to do if you do not like these events) does not make your subjective opinion, that harmlessly celebrating sexiness is in and of itself a Terrible Thing, worth taking into consideration. It’s nothing more than your personal preference.

    The criteria for accepting opinions is not whether someone has hurt your feelings or not though. I’m not going to appeal to you to change your mind on a matter by thinking ‘I’d better be careful not to offend him’. You have the right not to listen, if someone calls your opinions ‘silly’. But if that is what you do, then that is your problem, not anyone else’s, and only tells me that you are not objective about the truth.

  50. Tom, Monkeychops is obviously an imposter.

    At the very least, internalised homophobia runs rampant in him. He disagrees with everyone he meets in here, something is very wrong with this picture………

  51. trix, I had similar opinions about gay pride events when i first ventured out. I see no reason to doubt he is who he says he is (maar ik zou graag van MC willen weten, al hoe lang woon je nou in Brussel?) Still, even that makes no odds. The plausibility of an idea does not depend on whose brain cells it was created in.

    It’s true a lot of people, of all persuasions cannot take criticism. The only remedy is a thicker skin.

  52. Trix: You talk bulls–t. Monkeychops has an opinion just like everyone else. Just because it doesnt fit in with your socialist world view does not invalidate it. I am also gay, I also disagree with almost everyone on here, but why is it that if people don’t follow the predetermined rules laid down by LeftWingShirtlifters Inc. ©1967-2009 A subsidiary of Fag-O-Rama we are considered to be “Internally homophobic”, whatever the f–k that is?

    One thing I discovered when I came out was that there is no “typical person” – we are all different, so stop imposing your pigeon-holing on the rest of us. I am an equal opportunities bastard. I hate everyone the same, so to save me time later, I’ll just politely ask you to f–k off and die right now and do us all a favour.

  53. Oh, and that goes for Linda(35) too.

  54. Another BobN dumbass quote: “I am also gay, I also disagree with almost everyone on here”

    That’s because you’re a sad little misanthrope with issues of your own to deal with. Run along and deal with them, you bore us with your bile.

  55. Oh, boo f–king hoo, no one likes me. RobN, get a life you prattling little twit….. what a muppet you are.

  56. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 1:58pm

    Tom – I had no opinion on gay pride until I went to one. And, yes, of course I said it was sub-human – that is what I think of guys in rubber pants simulating sex at two o’clock in the afternoon, some of whom are in their sixties. In front of children. It’s completely undignified for all the reasons I have stated on various other posts. Having fun and grossing people out with sexual behaviour aren’t two things I’d put together. As I have said before, I am of the view that sex is for in private. Celebrating sexiness – you’ll have to clarify what you mean, as sexiness is surely different to every individual? It can be how you come across (i.e. attractive), how you display yourself (provocation) or something else entirely.

    Not sure what the Brussels reference is, I don’t speak Dutch – translation? Is this something to do with Jubelpark again?

    Trix – You seem sure of yourself that I am an imposter. Could it just be that you aren’t willing to accept that other gay people do not think the same as you? Nice psychoanalysis of my “internalized homophobia”, but as I’ve said before (and will have to repeat for you again), I do not hate same-sex relationships. I hate the sleaze that I get associated with because other gay guys do a great of of making us all look like sex-crazed perverts.

    Wil/Ciaran – The majority hasn’t snuffed out the voice in Ulster has it? Sinn Fein have still been elected, haven’t they? Catholic republicans are still allowed to live as catholic republicans, right? They just can’t have independence if there isn’t enough to vote the motion through. Therefore, in that instance, i.e. THE VOTE, the majority gets what it wants. It can work for you, it can work against you. On the basis you are proposing, you would say it would be fine to give equal status to the BNP because they are a minority. This is where a majority-vote works in our favour…..take the rough with the smooth.

    Plus power-sharing is only a new development, it took years before you could get Gerry and Ian in the same bloody room. They had the chance to talk about it – even if the official political structures weren’t here to let them. They could have sat down, man to man to resolve it. But a few people on either side thought it would be better to take up arms, and so they did. This wasn’t, as you state, the only option they had. Only recently a few soldiers were shot, despite the power sharing. Let’s hope it doesn’t kick off again because the “large minority” are not getting what they want. If I were a Catholic in Northern Ireland (and technically, I am a catholic on paper given that I was baptised as such), I would be furious that terrorists were claiming to represent my cause and claiming all these deaths were justified. If I was a Unionist, I’d probably feel the same (Michael Stone did his fair share of damage too).

    Northern Ireland and the absurdity of the situation is my reference point for having such little regard for religion. I find it totally divisive.

  57. How odd.

    LeftWingShirtlifters?

    Fag-O-Rama?

    Is this loathing of gay people supposed to impress us?

    “Internally homophobic”, whatever the fuck that is?” Answer: You, obviously.

    My god, you have some seriousissues, don’t you? What’s wrong with you, mummy didn’t breastfeed you? The boys wouldn’t shag you?

    Seriously, why do you bother? Just top yourself.

  58. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 2:04pm

    Will – For all I disagree with you, don’t rise to comments from RobN like that. He agrees with me on some things, I know, but when he does things like this, I don’t really want to know. Don’t stoop down and tell him to top himself, stick with your own convictions and don’t listen to him insulting you.

  59. Monkeychops: “The majority hasn’t snuffed out the voice in Ulster has it?

    You lack of knowledge of politics and the civil rights situation in the North astounds me. My job isn’t to educate you.

    But let me keep it simple for you, so you can stop demonstrating your ignorance in public:

    wikipedia search :Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association

  60. “Don’t stoop down and tell him to top himself, stick with your own convictions and don’t listen to him insulting you.”

    On that, monkeychops, I can agree with you. I just can’t pass up a chance on someone who uses strikingly intelligent language like “LeftWingShirtlifters”, less so from a supposedly gay man.

  61. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 2:11pm

    Only a fool would trust wikipedia – anyone can go in and add info on that site, most of it scandal. I’d rather check out their web site directly. I’m sure you’re very high and might while you’re sat in front of a computer, but why on Earth should I believe you know anything about Ireland? You haven’t said anything on it other than begnign comments about me simplifying it or not understanding it. Where’s the content to show that you DO know something about it? I’ve yet to see any….

  62. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 2:12pm

    I reckon he is a gay man, but he’s just a different kind to many on here. Myself included.

  63. Monkeychops, listen to what Will is saying. The situation in the Provence is not simply unionist and nationalist. Its not just about majority. Its more complicated than that. Its about the unionist majority imposing the will of them on the minority, and that majority lead is VERY small. There are a lot of civil rights issues involved, which led to the “troubles”.

    Read the link Will gave you. Learn the history properly. And stop trying to talk about what you don’t clearly understand.

  64. I’m Irish. That’s how I know.

    If you don’t believe wikipedia, look it up somewhere else. I happen to know a great deal about Irish history, but as I said, its not my job to educate you. Look it up for yourself. Don’t, if you don’t what to. Wont change the truth.

  65. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 2:18pm

    I do understand it, actually (please stop patronisng me). Though, like you I’m sure, there will be gaps in my knowledge. No-one can know everything – and people have different party lines to take (yourself included, as you are hinting at being a republican). The civil rights issues are vast – whether you talk about Bloody Sunday or the Gibraltar Three (and Michael Stone’s grenade attack at their funeral). I’m just talking about votes, that’s it. Democracy works on majorities, it always has done. I’m not disputing that Unionists might be imposing their will on the country. And you can argue that their lead is small – but after so many years of fighting and a decade of power-sharing, why is it that they still have that lead? Could it just be that people want that? Or are you not prepared to accept that may just be the case through a belief in a united Ireland.

    You might also want to ask whether Eire wants to have Ulster join with it……

  66. “You might also want to ask whether Eire wants to have Ulster join with it……”

    Fair point.

  67. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 2:32pm

    As I’ve said before, just because you’re from a country doesn’t mean you actually know much about it. I’m not saying you don’t, but it isn’t wise to assume so. I never thought the weird UK class system was odd until a cousin from France pointed it out. The chances of being biased to one side are also higher. I wouldn’t say you have been, but Patrick seems to be hinting at which side he is on. Do you think the people on the Shankhill Rd and the Falls Rd really know about the reality of the situation? As in the overall situation? Or just their side of the argument in depth and what their politcians say? After all, the partition is still there. Accusations come free and fast from both sides of the fence, but it doesn’t mean they are well qualified. I’ve been around both those areas (not in the taxis, didn’t want a biased opinion), but by myself, looking at the murals, noting the personalities depicted and then chatting to locals in the city centre. I could easily have said, I hate Catholics given that they used to detonate explosives in my country, but I haven’t taken that line as I know there are two sides to everything. In fact, I am quite happy for Ulster to become independent, as I am with Scotland or Wales.

  68. Like I said Monkey, this is gay pride. Don’t go if you don’t like it. Yet again, you’ve given an example of 2 people in a crowd of hundreds of thousands. That is not exactly representative of the typical gay pride festival goer is it?

    Being a ‘Muscle mary’ myself – you can check my profile on here, it’s under Adrian-T. (for some reason, I cannot post under AdrianT at the moment, I guess someone at PN needs to get a thicker skin too) I’m pretty much sure you’d be appalled.

    On most of these floats, we dance, dress up in some silly costume, and help ourselves to free beer. Occasionalyy rubbing up next to someone. It’s nothing remarkable. If that offends you, hurts your feelings – that’s just too bad. You have the option to look away, or not be there. I happen not to be alone in wanting floats full of exhibitionist muscleboys, so…here we are, celebrating sex.
    People may as well be aware, statistically, millions of gays are having sex, at any time.

    It should be celebrated, especially as many would seek to recriminalise being gay. Because, to them, sex is nothing more than behaviour. When i think of such people, my thoughts are: how can I earn their hatred and contempt? If I am not doing this to such backward intolerant bigots, I have failed.

    As for the harm it does to children. Well, you may as well say they will be damaged by the loud music, the availability of alcohol. It’s not an event for children, any more than an event in Ibiza, or SW4, Dance Valley, or any other party is.

    Your description of gay pride is frankly over the top – you discard the dozens of other floats, the stalls in trafalgar square from catholic groups to rugby teams, and focus on a specific incident you do not like.

  69. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 3:16pm

    Tom – I went, I saw, I didn’t like and don’t go any more. But, I think it’s to my credit I went several times in different countries to get a better idea. I gave it a chance, you can’t fault me on that. Kids won’t get damaged by seeing the sex, but they’ll be questioning what it is? Please tell me how you would explain to a child of 8 why that man in the rubber bondage outfit is dressed like that and rubbing himself up against that old man in a mesh thong with a studded lead around his neck….I haven’t the foggiest. Let children have some innocence for goodness sake, the world is oversexualisng its youth as it is. There are obviously some truly wonderful outfits, which sadly get overlooked by those still shocked from seeing rubber gusset man chucking sachets of lube at them. And the same applies to the stands from a diversity of groups (Gay Police Association, emergency services, Christian groups, as you mention) – they will be drowned out by the extremity of the seedier floats. My views are not based on one or two people, it is a combination of the sluttiness (getting groped, chatted up by lascivious men), the full-on, in your face sexual provocation (not just occasional rubbing up), the fact that the police are on standby at public toilets to stop cottaging (remember, a toilet is for doing just what it was intended and there will be people of all ages, backgrounds and so on in there who will not want to see or hear guys at it) and also the fact that I see no-one there that I remotely relate to. Nothing represents me at all in any way. Of course, it doesn’t have to, but it’s another point as to why I have never warmed to it. It is also supposed to be a representation of the gay world and it’s shameful that this is it. No culture at all. Just a bit of music, some bright outfits and all of it oversexualised. It’s just very extreme, tacky and tasteless.

    You obviously feel that it’s your right to participate in a sexualized set of floats in public and be as provocative as you see fit. If you do, that’s fine, but then you must face the consequences of that. You therefore have no right to condemn those who do not want to see people displaying their sexuality with such intensity and provocation as homophobes for criticizing you. People will find it just as crass if straight people were up there in gimp masks and whatever else. The thing is, I’ve never seen straight parade like that. Sure, I’ve seen women in bikinis playing calypsos, but they aren’t rubbing their cracks up against passers-by in some tasteless act of titillation.

    Gay sex is great, sex of any kind is great. But keep it indoors and don’t try to make an identity out of it. Sex is a universal right and occurrence, it is not the basis of anyone’s character. It’s also hugely private and personal and this kind of display just cheapens it. Through such an event, we are not displaying ourselves to have common values with the rest of society (which we keep claiming) and it’s just self-marginalisation. I cannot condone and my sense of self-preservation says I should just keep away from it.

  70. Simon Murphy 16 Jun 2009, 4:05pm

    #56: Monkeychop: “They just can’t have independence if there isn’t enough to vote the motion through. Therefore, in that instance, i.e. THE VOTE, the majority gets what it wants. It can work for you, it can work against you. ”

    Interestingly there IS a majority in Scotland who want independence.

    Do you support the idea that they have an election to determine whether they remain part of the UK.

    Or are you engaging in double standards again?

  71. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 4:26pm

    Of course they should have an election to do it. And I’m sure that with the recent local and European results, the SNP will go on to strengthen its influence at the next general election. If they want it, they can have it. The UK government doesn’t have a right to stop secession? Of course, it means they’ll have to go through EU-accession talks like everyone else (which I’m sure they’ll get through), they aren’t guaranteed entry just for previously being part of a member state.

    However, I’m not really sure if there is a majority in Scotland at this very moment. A couple of years ago, for sure. The YouGov stats go up and down all the time and they’ve taken a tumble recently, attributed to the recession – there’s more economic stability by staying with the rest of the UK right now. From what I saw in a survey published in March (in the Times I think, though I tend to leaf through a few web sites every day), it was down to about 33% in favour. Support for Alex Salmond does not mean support for independence though.

  72. Trix (50):

    Now that you mention it, I agree with you. What do you suggest we do about it?

  73. Monkeychops 16 Jun 2009, 5:02pm

    JP – Tu me fais rire! I’m not sure what you are trying to achieve – but pasting that random same message about me being an ex-gay fundamentalist (with no proof, of course, as there isn’t any) did make you look slightly unstable. Well, paranoid at least. So what do you propose doing about my presumed imposture then?

    JP, are you so really terrified of a gay guy that won’t conform to your way of thinking? Especially on a forum??

  74. Midwest Men’s Festival

    The past 27 summers have seen a very special event take place: The Midwest Men’s
    Festival. Beginning in 1982 as a regional gathering for men exploring change in
    their lives and roles, the Festival has grown in size and scope over the years
    to encompass men from many parts of the nation representing diverse walks of
    life, age and personal experience.

    The 28th annual Festival will be held from July 21 – 30, 2009
    at Gaea Retreat Center which is located about 45 minutes northwest of Kansas
    City. Cabin or tent space and meals are included in the very reasonable
    registration fee. Early registration is available until June 15th.

    Although the festival is attended primarily by Gay men, many of whom are
    involved in earth-centered spirituality. it is also a celebration of diversity,
    freedom of expression and community participation. Men of varied racial, ethnic
    and cultural backgrounds, sexual orientation and spiritual beliefs are
    encouraged to attend.

  75. Crian MCmanhon– (32) You lied! Please reproduce the quote you claimed I made on another thread.

  76. Wow… what a prolific thread!

    Apology in advance: Sorry, RobN, I don’t mean to single you out, but this one was just too funny to let it pass :)

    “there is no “typical person” – we are all different, so stop imposing your pigeon-holing on the rest of us. (Comment by RobN — June 16, 2009 @ 13:30)

    I wouldn’t trust any gay man as far as I could spit. (Comment by RobN — June 16, 2009 @ 7:21)

  77. Monkey – who was harmed or oppressed by this ‘perversion’? until you can answer that, it’s not a moral issue. If people condemn harmless actions, yes, I will call them homophobic pricks, who should mind their own f**king business.

    There is no compulsion in any of this. Some things indeed look crass. I have to say, in London at least, I did not see such a massive procession – tsunami – of ‘perversion’. Neither did the hundreds of armed forces, emergency services, religious floats get drowned out.

    I might add, I would like to see more politics in pride. Especially in the current moral relativist climate. It is wonderful to see more involvement from ethnic communities. I hope to see more focus on showing solidarity with those in communities or areas of the world where it’s fine to bully, oppress and kill gays. (especially wonderful to see Iran awakening, right now).
    And by the way, you were suggesting gay people should join up with religious communities. It’s already happening. Well come along in November – I’ll be showing solidarity again with the Secular muslims and the Committe of Ex-muslims, when they call for the protection of children against Sharia-fascism and faith schools. These are 2 groups more gay people should be getting involved with.

    Still, there’s more to life than gay pride, which after all, is just a festival.

  78. Valerio: Touché, but let me quantify that. I wouldn’t trust any man, it’s just the straight ones wouldn’t let me shag them.

  79. Monkeychops 17 Jun 2009, 8:54am

    TomPaine – I think we are harmed by this “perversion”. I wouldn’t call it perversion, but as I said, they all looked like pervs. Very generalising of course, but a straight man dressed and behaving similarly would be called a perv as well. It’s not going to indoctrinate kids, make them gay or anhthing ludicrous like that. But it re-inforces the stereotypes people have of us. Negative stereotypes to be more precise. And thus our image and reputation as a whole is then tarnished. We aren’t really known for anything else. Admittedly, you have a point on the other groups that join in – police, secular Muslim groups etc. And I’m glad they are there to water down the intensity of the sex show. Having said that, a certain percentage of the crowd also seem to be in bondage gear. I’ll aslo admit that it is to Britain’s credit that it has such a wide range of groups taking part. Have you been to one anywhere else on the continent? France was just hideously over the top in terms of its sexual focus and no other groups joining in (other than human rights groups, but no-one outside “the field”). Estonia, well, they didn’t really go that far because th Russian minority thrusting placards and spouting hate through megaphones being held back by the police would probably have charged at them. Another example of where minorities don’t actually get on at all. That was quite a sight, though fair play to the police, they did a good job.

    And, yes, you are right again, there is definitely more to life than gay pride. I just wish the gay media would see it that way……

  80. Monkeychops 17 Jun 2009, 8:55am

    PS Thanks for the offer of coming along in November, but I’m not going to be around, I’ll be off working in a far-off land. I’d wholeheartedly support the abolition of faith schools, I can’t see how Tony Blair thought they woud ever be good for social cohesion.

  81. Well, of course I’ve been to lots of canal parades in Amsterdam. Far more inclusive. Even government ministers hijack the event nowadays. It’s the first weekend of August. PS Even if you’re not around, you should consider supporting the National Secular Society, or the extremely courageous Maryam Namazie. The video of her last conference can be seen on her website. I strongly recommend you see some of that.

  82. Monkeychops 17 Jun 2009, 10:38am

    Already a huge fan of the NSS, it’s the only way we can be on any kind of level playing field. Check out the Telegraph today and you’ll see a Dr Dena Coleman, an Orthodox Jew, who is suing her neighbours over an automatic light in the stairwell of their apartment block because it discriminates her right to darkness on the Sabbath (even though it’s outside her flat). Apparently, even electric light counts (I’m sure people foresaw that when writing these codes of conduct for Jewish society all those years ago!). Even though most other residents agree that it’s good for saving energy and gave longer life to bulbs (much more socially responsible and green). It’s not as if someone was shoving pigs trotters down their throats and expecting them to like it. It’s light. Why not having light on a Friday makes any difference to not having it on any other day of the week or why light should even be shunned at all, I have no idea. It’s these arbitrary practices with no tangible benefit or even a rationale being considered “human rights” simply because they are part of an archaic way of life with no more common sense than voodoo, that turns people against faiths. And I’m one of those turned off by it. How do you engage in a debate with someone who claims this kind of thing? I have a Jewish friend who cannot eat off my crockery because I like a good a bit of gammon steak from time to time and hence it is “contaminated”. Contaminated by the spirit of a pig’s thigh, now there’s a new one. Though, she sees no problem with clubbing under neon electric lights on a Friday night when she is supposed to be at home sat in darkness. She isn’t a bad person in any other way, but she is a typical example of how hypocritical and irrational religions can be. Even she doesn’t know why she does half the things she does.

    Guess there are stranger things than gay pride after all ;)

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

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all