Reader comments · Docs on Queer as Folk and Harvey Milk for launch of Fruit TV · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Docs on Queer as Folk and Harvey Milk for launch of Fruit TV

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Fruit TV? A bit timid isn’t it? Why not go the whole hog and call it Faggot TV

  2. Keith Bradley-Wilson 28 Aug 2009, 3:57pm

    At least its a bloody start – what gay lifestyle channels DO Sky, cable, or terrestial carry? According to DigiGuide, Virgin carry “Gay Network”?! Well not on MY feed they don’t!!!

  3. The planned programmes look very good indeed. I hope it gets the support it deserves.

    Mike, if you can set up a better channel, go ahead. Otherwise you’re not really in a position to slag off people who are putting in a lot of extremely hard work to provide programming to serve the LGBT people of Britain. Have at least a passing respect for others.

  4. Monkeychops 29 Aug 2009, 1:09pm

    I have no idea why on Earth a gay television channel is necessary in this day and age. Ditto for the .gay high level domain. It’s just a way of showing that we are “different” and need to segregate ourselves – but then perhaps it’s because lots of gay people, quite voluntarily, are not integrated into society as a whole. After all, this station is based in Manchester, the gay ghetto of the UK. We should just be catered for within the existing channels, this is just a superfluous station. Pink TV in France is crap, this isn’t going to be any better, especially when, from the planning so far, it is going to cover all the stereotypical gay subjects: HIV/AIDS, QAF and Harvey Milk docs. These would be better done as part of the main line-up on the BBC, ITV and Channel Four. We would get greater exposure, as more people would be watching those channels, and it would send out a positive message that we are not only being considered by broadcasters, but that we are worthy of airtime. There’s only a limited amount of material we can have on a gay-specific channel – it will just end up with re-runs and vox pop on the street interviews with punters on Canal Street. It’s even called Fruit TV, fruit being a derogatory term for a homosexual – isn’t that just condoning the insults we get? It’s as bad as having Nigger TV or Cripple FM, how backward would that be? From the trailer, this wouldn’t represent me in any way and it will hardly tempt straight people into watching it, which will be necessary for its financial success given that we make up only 10% of the population. One very badly thought out plan from a well-meaning but misguided attempt at equality. I often thnk that other gay people want to remain on the margins of society and stand out as being different to get more attention. Well, this is certainly the way to go about it, but it isn’t going to help our cause. It will just give more reason to our foes to see that we are different and not equal. And it will keep us exactly where they want us – off “their” channels.

    To Mike – do you honestly think calling it Faggot TV would help us? It’s like shooting ourselves in the foot by identifying ourselves using a gross and degrading term. It would just legitimise the use of the word faggot, would it not?

  5. Ashley Byrne 29 Aug 2009, 8:21pm

    As one of the Directors of Fruit TV, i’d like to answer some of the points made above.

    1. Firstly Fruit TV is not a channel, it is an on line TV and radio platform. 50% of the site will be radio rather than television programmes.

    2. The programmes outlined in the recent article are just the start and the platform will also include groundbreaking radio drama and comedy as well. Watch this space for further announcements in coming months.

    3. Fruit TV is not simply aimed at a UK audience. As you can see from the programming so far outlined, we are focussing on a global audience.

    4. For many people around the world, being LGBT is not easy and providing them with an outlet is one of our prime aims. It is not simply to serve the UK market!

    5. In terms of mainstream UK TV/radio and US TV/radio for that matter, commissioners often feel the ‘LGBT thing’ has been done and they steer clear of certain issues. We are all experienced TV and radio producers who pitch week in week out, so we know what we are talking about. And it’s precisely for this reason that Fruit is needed. For example where in mainstream programming would you be able to discuss the minutiae of lesbian health? where would you be able to tackle the issue of bi-phobia from within the gay community? where would you be able to challenge the way LGBT people generally treat each other? Do we really live within a ‘caring’ community? I know loads of people who don’t feel like they ‘fit in’. All these issues and more will be tackled through Fruit TV. It’s about challenging our lifestyles too!!

    6. We will be celebrating our rich global heritage with some brilliant material from the arts and much of it will be interesting to not only an LGBT audience but also to a mainstream audience as well.

    Ashley Byrne – Creative Director of Fruit TV and Made in Manchester Productions

  6. Ashley Byrne-

    From the list of programmes to be shown (Queer As Folk) and personalities to be discussed (Oscar Wilde etc) it seems to me to be a gay man’s channel aimed at gay men, hence the name ‘Fruit TV’.

    Why not put some L Word on there or something like that?

  7. Ashley byrne 30 Aug 2009, 2:04am

    If you look at the trailer for fruit tv at you will see three programmes with specifically gay female content including a feature film, a lifestyle programme and an interview with lea delaria. In future months we will be revealing more content and I can assure you it won’t in anyway be predominantly gay male focussed. The lesbian, transgendered and crucially the often ignored bisexual world will also feature considerably. Watch this space! We’d be foolish to reveal all our cards at once.

  8. Monkeychops 30 Aug 2009, 3:00pm


    Thanks for the clarification, though it does raise a few further issues. Firstly, if it is 50% radio, why is that any different from a) any other radio station that plays music and b) if it is used for discussion more than music, then it surely would be no variation on having TV programmes. The fact remains the same: there would just not be enough material to keep people interested. Something similar like TV Asia works because you have current affairs, sitcoms, films, music etc which are culturally different to, say, the UK or US. Hence the demand. But gay people are only different by who they are attracted to, we are not culturally different to other members of our nation states. And thus existing channels or “platforms” cover what we need already. This whole idea of covering our “heritage” – well, what is that? Other than civil rights movements, we can’t claim anything that is culturally gay, can we? Culture comes from multiple factors and we don’t.

    I can see your point about it reaching out to other LGBT people across the globe, but it would have to be subtitled or dubbed into other languages (not all gay people speak English). Which costs money. And then, in the places you want to reach most, you would have to stop the station being scrambled (Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, China etc). Which governments in the most LGBT unfriendly states are going to let you broadcast? China blocks all sorts already, this will just get added to the list. Again, something like Asian Network exists because it is approved of, this channel isn’t going to be by most places in the world. So, it will remain something only for western markets. Eastern Europe will allow it, but to be honest, they are pretty much western anyway.

    And, why the name Fruit TV when it is an offensive term? Self-mockery between friends aside, this platform is supposed to be taken seriously. But how can it with a name like that? It’s just saying to the world that we are what they say we are. Pink TV was a stupid name, why hasn’t anyone learnt? It just seems too much to make a gay-tailored station that portrays us in a dignified light, instead of just caricatures. It’s cheap, like choosing MacDonalds over steak.

    However, I do applaud your efforts to look into the non-existant caring community. Gay communities don’t exist, it’s just a bunch of misfits out for themselves in the only set of bars, clubs and social outposts that will allow them to pick up a mate. Cynical? You bet. That’s the male species for you. Straight guys would be just the same if women weren’t so different to them. It’s good you also want to show people were to get help on health etc, but I fear this would be a redundant service because everything is so easy to find on the web. It would only be for those not able to use the internet very well, which, as time goes on, are becoming fewer and fewer. After all, the very LGBT people you are hoping to branch out to will have to have at least some grasp of technology to pick up the channel in the first place.

    Lezabella – good point and as much as they try to vary the content, the main focus will always be gay men. Because….gay men are selfish and narrow-minded and won’t watch it if it doesn’t give them its full attention. They aren’t interested in anyone but themselves. Sad, but true, as shown time and time again from the way they conduct their relationships to their cattiness and superficiality. Lesbians are already ignored (because gay men don’t have a use for them) and bisexuals get a rough time even on here (Simon Murphy step up!) for pretending to be “less gay”.

    People, instead of staying home and watching a TV station that may have been useful 15 or 20 years ago, get out and integrate with the wider world instead of hiding in gay ghettos. It’s a great place and I’m glad to be part of it. More compartmentalising by such stations is only making matters worse.

  9. Ashley Byrne 30 Aug 2009, 4:16pm

    Ok then lets address some of these points

    1. Radio is not just about music. It’s about documentary, drama, comedy and much more and can offer different things to TV. We will treat each medium with the respect it deserves.

    2. Fruit TV is just the name and if it ever was a derogratory term in some quarters then I guess we are re-claiming and making it a positive term. But infact it’s actually all about difference and embracing our difference and diversity. The LGBT world is so, so diverse that you just can’t categorise people. And Fruit is about celebrating that difference that exists within LGBT. Too often people feel excluded through labels and Fruit exists to try and break down that barrier within the LGBT world.

    3. Will there be enough content? Yes, yes and yes. It is however about quality not quantity. This is a platform which seeks to speak and raise issues around the LGBT concerns but we are not going to turn down a really good radio drama or comedy just because it hasn’t got a predominantly LGBT angle. If it’s good and it’s quality we’ll commission it if we feel that our audience would be interested.

    We’d be really happy to have a big straight male following (perhaps men a little curious about bisexuality or who would like to understand a bit more about how their best gay friends coped with coming out). I’d quite like a strong straight female following too. Our doc on the library of Oscar Wilde could be interesting to people from any sexuality and so too our programme ‘Rude Britannia’. It’s not about being niche or ghettoising. Instead it’s about celebrating and embracing each others differences – whether gay, straight, bi or trans. If the role of Fruit becomes blurred in the process and people become more engaging and open about their sexuality then we’ll be doing our job. But it’s about at least allowing a platform to exist where specific issues around LGBT concerns can be raised freely and without limitation. I would suggest Monkeychops that would be a perfect platform for you. And who knows we might even address the issue of gay male cynicism. Something we’ve all felt at times given the way some people treat each other.

    This is about challenging lifestyles and I can categorically assure you that it will not inevitably be gay male focussed. Gay men will feature of course but we’ll be making every effort to make sure the L, B, T and even the compatable S is covered as much as possible.

    Finally Fruit TV is not a channel. It is a platform more akin to the BBC iplayer than a traditional TV channel or radio station. I hope that makes sense.

  10. “It’s just a way of showing that we are “different” and need to segregate ourselves”

    umm… doesn’t this very website, Pink News, also do that, then? By being a specialised news service for LGBT?

  11. Ashley Byrne 31 Aug 2009, 12:31am

    That is not what I said. It’s about celebrating and embracing differences and individuality whether it be in a straight, gay, bi or trans context. With a bit of luck Fruit will be universally popular because of the rich and diverse content it provides.

  12. Could you also include programmes for and about the transgender community and people of color?

  13. Brian Burton 31 Aug 2009, 8:55am

    You Slimey Slug, you have raised your slime-ball presence to polute our Gay comments with your Filthy lies. Well, MONKEYFACE, be prepared for a BUMPY ride!

  14. Brian Burton 31 Aug 2009, 8:58am

    Alert, Alert, Alert..MONKEYCHOPS the Fundy Nutter is Here!

  15. Brian Burton 31 Aug 2009, 9:08am

    I can’t wait for the launch of this long-sighted planning. If we can keep on kicking the Religious Fundamentalists like Monkeychops in the groin then bring it on Guys. I’m Proud to be Gay!

  16. Monkeychops 31 Aug 2009, 11:22am

    Ah Brian, nice to see you are still resorting to your usual peurile jibes, offensive language and violent threats, you don’t change do you? If you had the intelligence to write something useful and well-thought like Ashley Byrne, then I would respect your opinions (despite not agreeing with them necessarily). But then, maybe that’s why Mr Byrne has got as far as he has and you haven’t. I won’t berate you too much though, as you must have poor reading skills, given that I have mentioned that I am agnostic (as stated a million times already). You simply cannot cope with the existance of gay men who are not just like you, can you Brian? Now that is very narrow-minded, don’t you think? Hypocrite! Ironically, I am part of the diversity of gay men that you apparently want this channel to represent….or are you really interested in diversity at all? One day, when you’ve picked on the wrong person, you will probably end up with a few teeth being knocked out and you will wholeheartedly deserve it with an attitude (and a foul mouth) like yours! The gay movement does not need people like you, as you put us back 70 years!

    Ashley – again, thank you for your great explanations. I’m afraid I just can’t see how it is going to be as beneficial and profitable as you make out. The part about reclaiming “fruit”, especially, to me is really not good. I mean, would you approve Nigger TV? Paki FM? Spastic TV? I would hope they make you wince as much as they do me. Despite the relevant communities reclaiming them. And they just reinforce all the labels that have been assigned to us by society (if you haven’t guessed yet, I am a bit of an integrationist when it comes to minorities). These terms have been used against us for decades and we’ve only just managed to shed them legally. It’s also a bit hypocritical and shows how we as gay people may not be interested in equality. If a straight person called you a fruit, you could get him reprimanded at work. So, then why is it ok for us to use that term amongst ourselves? It also strengthens the argument for our critics who point out this inequality – one rule for us, one rule for them. An offensive term is an offensive term and it shouldn’t be used on something as high profile as a TV/Radio station.

    Now, interesting point you make about embracing the diversity. You are definitely right, there is vast range of gay people out there, but unfortunately gay people are the very worst at pigeon-holing and criticising those who are not the same as them (as Brian Burton above demonstrates nicely). I’m not a scene person and such a channel would not attract me if it were scene-focused (and that is my right, I don’t have to like it just because I am gay – I know straight people who like it more than me). The historical and political parts would be of interest…but again, I could get that on exisiting web sites. On the other hand, if Fruit TV were to be a mechanism to get gay people themselves to be less judgemental and narrow-minded within their own “community” (I use that very loosely), then that would be a good move perhaps. After all, you’ve pointed out this invisible caring community as being of concern (i.e. because gays don’t really care about each other it would seem). As someone who doesn’t fit the stereotype, I regularly get flack from people on here who just want me to be like them. That’s ok, I can hold my own perfectly well, but it doesn’t make me want to engage with them when they are so closed-minded to other types of gay men being out there. Gay male cynicism, you bet. But then as a non-smoking, non-crystal meth taking, non-crusining, self-respecting man, what on earth would there be for me on the gay scene? Well, very little hence I am very happy mixing with the rest of society. It can’t be healthy to go to Canal Street every time you go out, can it? But, I appear to be a minority on that, especially on here. And nowhere more than this site will you find people desperately denying me the right to have that opinion. It’s as if I am condeming their very existences by not liking it. And I just don’t have time for that. Do you see where I am coming from?

    I also cannot see straight men or women watching it (unless they are in the company of gay people). It will just end up a figure of fun for straight men. Like Gay Rabbit and Gay Times have. They are so ludicrous in their design and content that it’s the kind of thing people will just rip the piss out of. Even I make fun of them, they’re just asking for it. The name, again, will just exacerbate that. But, as you will know being in the profession you are, if you made a gay magazine or show that was not sex-focused or cheap, you just wouldn’t get the clientele. A sophisticated gay men’s magazine would not sell. Doesn’t that say something? I applaud your efforts, it takes balls to attempt a project like this, so I hope it brings the success you intended.

    Rose – I see your view, but this is a just a web site. It doesn’t cost anywhere near the same amount of money to run. Plus it tends to just group together news titbits from other sites. Also, because this site, and many others, exist already….there is even less need for an LGBT-dedicated channel. It’s just duplicating what is already out there.

  17. Brian Burton 31 Aug 2009, 4:50pm

    Jean-Paul and Pumpkin Pie EXPOSED you for the total Fraud you are previously. So, MONKYFACE you revert to threats of violence from what you say there, you total Slime-Ball.
    Get this MONKYFACECHOPS, I am going to dog your Slime trail through these Gay Threads as I know My Gay colleagues will too.

  18. Brian Burton 31 Aug 2009, 5:49pm

    We know you are not ‘scene-focused’ you are what we say you are. A ‘fundy nutter’ invading our Pink comments page….come on own up?? Just one Question Monkeychops, for everyone on this thread and do not wriggle out of it: ARE YOU A HOMOSEXUAL, BI-SEXUAL, or TRANSEXUAL? I await your unequivicle answer with bated breath!

  19. Jean-Paul Bentham 31 Aug 2009, 6:31pm

    How many union guys does it take to change a lightbulb?


    You got a problem with that?

  20. Jean-Paul Bentham 31 Aug 2009, 7:44pm


    Is this what they call a “Learning Experience”?

  21. Stuart Neyton 31 Aug 2009, 8:10pm

    “I also cannot see straight men or women watching it (unless they are in the company of gay people)”

    Lots of straight girls I know love Yaoi.

  22. Brian Burton 31 Aug 2009, 9:34pm

    MONKYFACE…Whays your answer????

  23. John (Derbyshire) 31 Aug 2009, 10:51pm

    Ashley-How about repeating this programme in your radio section? I missed it on Radio 4 last week-and its gone off the i Player.

    You would wait forever to hear a programme like An Interior Life (Radio 4, Sunday) on commercial radio. Come to think of it, it’s not often these days that Radio 4 broadcasts something of such quality. This 40-minute feature was by Laurence Grissell, a monologue by a man in his 80s, looking back on his life, walking round his house, taking his pills, talking about music, his childhood, the war, the two partners with whom he shared his life. It was simple, careful, frank and beautiful. It was also made with the sort of craft that only comes when it can be practised. Such programmes require time to make and a place in the schedule. These days time is money, money is tight and schedules open more readily to familiar names (Stephen Fry, Michael Portillo, for example) than to unknown old gay men, however lovely their story.

    That review was written by Gillian Reynolds.

    Thanks in advance!

  24. Jean-Paul Bentham 31 Aug 2009, 10:51pm

    Stuart Neyton(21):

    Touché, mon ami.

    I just looked it up and know what? You have taught me something today: YAOI ! ! ! What a wonderful world we’se livin’ in.

    It gets better: Monkeychops threw a party and nobody came. Boohoo. Or should I say it as it is : BOO! BOO!

  25. Monkeychops 31 Aug 2009, 10:54pm

    Brian, seriously get some medical help because you sound like a paranoid stalker. You obsess continually over my comments and come out with the biggest, most unfounded pack of lies imaginable as some bizarre defence mechansim due to your own insecurities. Even when everything that is said on here is recorded for all to see and can be easily contested. The bile you spout can only be the words of a bitter, twisted, sick little man with the mother of all chips upon his shoulder. I have been adult until now, I have tried to engage with you in a grown-up manner, but it’s just no use. You are just not capable. And thus I intend to just ignore you from now on, so unleash all the venom and spite you want, it will fall on deaf ears. Most of all though, it is guys who behave in that bitchy, queeny, insecure way that you do who drag other gay people down and generate so much resentment towards us. I would incredibly embarrassed to be in your company, but then I think even you would have already realised that.

    Now, can we please just get back to the subject, Brian’s slandering and ranting are distracting the majority of decent people using this forum.

  26. Jean-Paul Bentham 31 Aug 2009, 11:54pm

    Straight Talk about Going Straight by Dale Carpenter

    Originally appeared May 17, 2001, in the author’s “OutRight” syndicated column.

    IF YOU’VE BEEN THINKING how nifty it would be to convert to heterosexuality, there’s good news and bad news.

    The “good” news is a recent study concluded that, for a very small number of gays, it’s possible.

    The “bad” news is don’t bet on it.

    Whether or not you were born gay, you will almost certainly die gay. So you’d better learn to like it.

    Proponents of so-called “reparative therapy” — the effort to make homosexuals into heterosexuals through a variety of techniques, including counseling and religious instruction — have treated the study as a vindication of their efforts.

    Gay political groups have reacted with horror, attacking the lead researcher himself as biased. Some news outlets described the study as “explosive.”

    However, it turns out the furor is much ado about very little. The study makes an exceedingly modest conclusion based on questionable methodology.

    First, it’s important to know what the study did not conclude.

    It did not conclude that conversion is possible for most — much less for all — gay people, even if they want to change.

    It did not conclude that homosexual orientation is a matter of choice, like whether to have the chicken or the beef in a restaurant.

    It certainly did not validate a particular method of conversion.

    In fact, Robert Spitzer, the professor of psychiatry at Columbia University who led the study, does not endorse conversion efforts at all. Indeed, he was one of a group of pioneering psychiatrists who successfully lobbied to have homosexuality removed from the official list of mental disorders in 1973. If there’s nothing disordered or sick about a trait, why change it?

    What the Spitzer study did conclude is that (1) some (2) “highly motivated” (3) gay people can achieve (4) “good heterosexual functioning” (5) for a limited time (6) after more than a decade of effort.

    Each aspect of this rather limited conclusion deserves closer scrutiny.

    Spitzer’s study, which has not been published and has not been professionally reviewed for validity or methodology, is based on telephone interviews conducted with 200 people who claimed to have changed from homosexual to heterosexual attraction for a period of at least five years.

    Each interview lasted approximately 45 minutes, during which the subjects answered 60 questions about their sexual attractions and behavior in the period before and after their effort to change.

    That’s it.

    There were no face-to-face interviews; no tests for physiological reactions to various sexual stimuli; no objective verification of the respondents’ answers; no long-term study; and no control group.

    Of the 200 self-professed converts to heterosexuality, Spitzer concluded that only 66 percent of the men and 44 percent of the women had actually accomplished their goal.

    Moreover, this was a very select group of people. It was not 200 gay people taken off the street at random and put through some conversion exercises to see what the outcome might be.

    Two-thirds of the participants were referred to Spitzer by “ex-gay ministries” that teach homosexuality is sinful or by a notoriously anti-gay outfit called the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.

    These groups have a vested interest in showing their effectiveness, so they’re likely to submit for review only their strongest candidates.

    Also, there’s a good chance many of the participants had been indoctrinated with powerful and repeated doses of anti-gay ideology and religion.

    Such people are likely to be “highly motivated” (to borrow Spitzer’s description of them) to report they’ve successfully changed even when they haven’t.

    We can’t even be sure they were ever really “gay” at all.

    It could be that many of them were basically straight but had an occasional, experimental gay experience in their teens or 20’s causing them so much guilt they decided to “change” so it would never happen again.

    But since we know so little about the participants, having been acquainted with them over a telephone line for less than an hour each, it’s hard to say anything about them with confidence.

    The male participants claimed to have been trying to change for fourteen years; the women, for twelve years. That’s about one-fifth of the adult years of the average person’s life span.

    And what was the return on this huge investment of time and energy?

    For the one-year period before the interviews, they achieved “good heterosexual functioning,” defined by the researchers to mean having an emotionally satisfying relationship with a person of the opposite sex, having satisfactory sex with that person at least once a month, and rarely or never thinking of gay sex while doing it.

    Only 11 percent of the men and 37 percent of the women interviewed reported a complete absence of homosexual attraction. Even these figures are almost certainly high, since they are entirely self-reported.

    What this study really proves is that, after a heroic and protracted effort, it is possible for a person suffering from an extraordinary level of internalized homophobia to refrain from having gay sex for a limited period of time.

    It shows that behavior can be modified; it does not show that a person’s basic sexual orientation can be altered.

    We didn’t need a study to reach that conclusion.

    The long and tragic history of efforts to “repair” gay people — from electric shock to hormone injections to hectoring lectures about damnation — have amply demonstrated that it’s possible to ruin gay people’s lives.

    Unfortunately, this limited and flawed study will only fuel that destructive fire.

  27. Thanks for the information and explanation Ashley, good luck and I hope it works out for you! : )

  28. Brian Burton 1 Sep 2009, 7:44am

    MONKEYFACECHOPS…Who would trust anyone calling themseves MONKYCHOPS??? And you still refuse to tell all on this thread your SEXUALITY…I knew you would wriggle out of that somehow….I’ll keep dogging untill you tell us MR.MONKY dear???

  29. “But then as a non-smoking, non-crystal meth taking, non-crusining, self-respecting man, what on earth would there be for me on the gay scene? Well, very little hence I am very happy mixing with the rest of society. It can’t be healthy to go to Canal Street every time you go out, can it? But, I appear to be a minority on that, especially on here.”

    Clearly you have a very closed minded, prejudiced view of gay people and the gay scene. What do you think most people do, gay or straight, on a weekend, when they go out? They go out to get lucky. Actually, another possibility is this: perhaps you are the problem? If you start with the premise that Canal Street (which is a long row of bars, loud music, and lots of people having fun) and the people on it are ‘unhealthy’ – don’t be surprised if nobody wants anything to do with your sanctimonious little self.

  30. Well done Ashley on the launch.

    Especially as the mainstream channels, like the BBC, show zero interest in covering LGBT issues (the blackout of the michael causer case was the most disgraceful) – I hope this fills the gap, for serious programming.

    It’s really important – we are seeing a resurgence of fundamentalist religious groups (think: christian legal centre, CCfoN, radical Islam, Alliance Defense Fund) trying to turn the clock back, and it’s time we had more media monitoring these people. I hope the new channel will also look at areas like gays in sport, and in the ethnic communities, too.

  31. “Well, very little hence I am very happy mixing with the rest of society. It can’t be healthy to go to Canal Street every time you go out, can it?”

    This might be a shock to you Monkeychops, but gay people can mix with “the rest of society” and still be part of the scene. These are not mutually exclusive things, so why would you think they are? And as Adrian said, why would you possible think every gay man is a drug user and a cruiser? I find that offensive and insulting to my intelligence, as would all of my friends.

    I think you self-perception as a gay man is seriously compromised, and perhaps you should seek councillor for helping your debilitating self esteem problem, and then maybe you won’t make such appallingly stupid and demeaning generalisations like “gays don’t really care about each other it would seem”

  32. Jean-Paul Bentham 1 Sep 2009, 10:25am

    Monkeychopa will say anything to continue receiving free rent and sandwiches from the fundy church.

  33. Brian Burton 1 Sep 2009, 10:54am

    Jean-Paul Bentham,
    We all know Monkeychops completely disagrees with Ashley. Whilst we are commenting positivley to Ashley, Monkeychops tries to throw in a monkey-wrench or spanner as we say here, in the works on every fake comment he makes.

  34. Brian Burton 1 Sep 2009, 11:15am

    Monkeychops says he cannot see streaght men and woman watching GAY TV. What he really means is, Religious Fundamentalists will not like GAY TV. How the hell dose a cloistered, tiny mind like Monkeychops, know what streaght men and woman will watch on TV? Gay TV is as acceptable as any other TV programme to date. TV Programmes come and go and have done so since the first faultering, flickering 405 lines in the 1950s. Luckily for Gays, homophobia is banned from TV but not on this Pink site with Religious Fundamentalists on the loose like Hank, Skinner and Monkeychops.

  35. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 4:19pm

    Adrian T – perhaps you just can’t face up to what the gay scene is? Or maybe you just can’t deal with criticism of your way of life? You, from your own accounts, fit easily into the stereotype of what a scene queen might be. That’s up to you, but the negative perception that attracts from the rest of society falls back on guys like me who at least try to behave with a bit of decorum in their private lives. This very news site constantly reports about how drug use is higher in the gay community, as are rates of STI infections. And then, whenever I have been out on the scene, this is the kind of thing I come across. Either way, the way that the likes of Brian Burton and JP Bentham conduct themselves is where I realise that I have little in common with other gay men. Whether they are a minority or not, they are the most visible in the gay world. And I don’t want to be tarred with that brush, it would be just plain embarrassing. No-one has condemned them for the way they behave on here, which would indicate that most people are not bothered by it. Do you find the slanderous, bitchy, childish remarks they make (particularly the personal attacks) conducive to getting a better name for the gay community? There are plenty like me, but we fall under the radar by not being out on the scene, hence people like you assume that we are not to be taken into consideration and should not have a view. As for being sanctimonious, well you know my views on cruising, cottaging and the like. I think it’s uncivilised – it is not fair to subject other people to your sex life. In fact, why don’t you read this months attitude magazine and you’ll see an interesting article on the matter.

    Perhaps, ultimately, it’s because you are just a little bit intimidated by the fact I am so sure about what I think is right and wrong. What I think is good behaviour, politeness and respectable. And, more importantly, good for the future of the gay world. If you think I have a prejudiced view of the gay scene, then maybe you should talk to your little mates who go out on it (or work within it) and get them to mull over their behaviour and why it might attract such negative attention. This site, it would seem, is full of typical gay scene types – a bunch of guys (and a few girls) with massive chips on their shoulders who want to blame the rest of the world for the way they have turned out and then use it as a justification for all kinds of extreme behaviour. The paranoia that everyone is out to get you on these pages is disturbing and if anyone needs help, then it would be a fair few of those who comment here. In the free society that we have, you make your own destiny and you have to be responsible for your own actions. If gay men were responsible, they wouldn’t be all of the above. I actually would like to thank you in many ways for reaffirming everything that I thought was negative about the gay world. It means that I know where I belong – and that is at home, with my boyfriend (is that confirmation enough for you Brian?? I have said it before) and getting on with my life instead of taking home a new slag every night to make myself feel loved. Seriously, I pity the lot of you.

  36. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 4:24pm

    Will – you’ll learn. There’s nothing wrong with my self esteem, in fact maybe I have too much. I’m glad to be who I am – decent, honest, hardworking and altruistic. What I don’t have time for are people who refuse to try to help themselves and think the world owes them. Given there are so many on here, it’s hardly surprising that I have been critical of some of the attitudes. But by all means, convince yourself as much as you want that the problem lies with me if it makes you feel better. I’ll be busy enjoying my life instead of frequenting a vacuous set of nightclubs.

  37. “But by all means, convince yourself as much as you want that the problem lies with me if it makes you feel better. I’ll be busy enjoying my life instead of frequenting a vacuous set of nightclubs.”

    This is just a stupid statement and nothing more than base pop physiology in trying to turn around my statement which more than likely hit the nail o the head, and make me think that I’m the problem. Nice try, but a bit puerile, isn’t.

    What a fool you are to generalise like that about the gay scene. I can only assume the boys didn’t want to to play with you, its usually the reason for such silly views. I suspect it is you “with the massive chip on your shoulders who want to blame the rest of the world”.

    God forbid anyone might you’re gay!

  38. Jean-Paul Bentham 1 Sep 2009, 5:40pm

    I’m going to go out on a limb here the way that Harvey Milk would done. For example, maybe we do think we own this site because we enjoy posting here regularly.

    Who knows how communicating with Monkeychops hasn’t done all of us, including him/her, a lot of good in the long run. He/she may be as much a friend as an opponent.
    OIt’s not all his/her fault if I can’t always understand what he/she is saying. I do believe he/she is a hard-working person with an altruistic streak running right through him/her.

  39. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 5:43pm

    “This is just a stupid statement and nothing more than base pop physiology in trying to turn around my statement which more than likely hit the nail o the head, and make me think that I’m the problem. Nice try, but a bit puerile, isn’t.”

    Ummm…isn’t that what you did to me in the first place? Again, another fine example of hypocrisy on these pages. And you are a bit cock sure it hit the nail on the head, aren’t you? Find out below why you couldn’t be more mistaken…..

    “I suspect it is you “with the massive chip on your shoulders who want to blame the rest of the world”.

    Oh, and yet again you do it…..

    You see, now you talk about generalisations – have you not noticed all the generalisations about the straight community on here? That they are narrow-minded, prejudiced etc…..but that apparently is ok. Do minorities have some exemption? No, they don’t.

    And, finally, I don’t blame the rest of the world, just other gay people who cannot adapt to the modern world. Who want to behave as if we are still a hugely oppressed group in the UK, when, conversely, we have more freedom than ever. Some just want to cling on to the victimised lifestyles of our predecessors. I, on the other hand, want nothing more than to embrace the freedom I have now. So I do. But, the gay scene and the negative attention it attracts, annoy me immensely as I get tarred with that brush. It’s almost as bad as being associated with the BNP. Perhaps you don’t have a loving, understanding set of friends and family who are not gay, but I do and that’s why I probably feel the way I do. Being surrounded by negative, paranoid, vacuous gay men in a ghetto would only make me miserable and, ultimately, like them. I stayed away and that’s why I’m happy. Unfortunately, my life is still slightly hindered because a few idiots in society who see only gay scene types assume that I behave like that too. I don’t blame the straight guy, but the gay guys – after all, only they can change the way we are perceived as a whole, yet they insist on behaving so crassly. My problem, therefore, is gay men and their behaviour, not being gay. It makes no difference to me what gender I sleep with, but it does make a difference if other people’s actions cause me grief. Comprende?

  40. I haven’t got the time to read through your repetitive babble, Monkeychops, but I find your slanderous, bitchy, childish generalisations about people you do not know, to be repulsive, and baseless.

    To repeat, if that is what you think about gay people – no wonder people do not want anything to do with you, and no wonder people ridicule you for the idiot you are.

    You love to dish out insults but you cannot take the slightest criticism. Face the consequences for the nonsense you write and grow up.

    I have no clue whether I fit into your warped idea of what a scene queen is, possibly since that definition applies to everyone who disagrees with you; maybe your screeds can be put down to sexual frustration and, you just need a good rogering to sort you out. Who knows? Too bad you’re so up your own arse for anyone else to get a look in.

    “Perhaps, ultimately, it’s because you are just a little bit intimidated by the fact I am so sure about what I think is right and wrong. What I think is good behaviour, politeness and respectable. And, more importantly, good for the future of the gay world.”

    No, I’m not. Why should I be intimidated by a sanctimonious, interfering little busybody like you? Get used to the fact that many people do not share your goody-two-shoes idea of goodness. Since their actions do you no harm whatsoever, keep your nose out.

    (Who is paranoid? Scared for yourself because other people’s freedom might ‘attract negative reactions’? It’s like blaming muslim girls who don’t get covered up for the violent reactions of the fanatics. The language of a coward. How pathetic.)

    (‘politeness’? give yourself a break.)

  41. Brian Burton 1 Sep 2009, 6:05pm

    Thank goodness we have ‘OUTED’ you before you and your side-kicks can do any more damage. It’s just a matter of containing your Funfamentalist Crap as we go. I’ve met your side-kick ‘Bollockchops.’

  42. “Unfortunately, my life is still slightly hindered because a few idiots in society who see only gay scene types assume that I behave like that too.”

    Play the world’s smallest violin. Who has a chip on his shoulder now? Stop behaving like a helpless little baby, and stand up for yourself.

    By Monkeychops’ coward logic, the murder of Michael Causer is totally excused.

  43. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 6:33pm

    Adrian, seriously, you have issues. Stand up for myself? Says you who self-defines as a muscle mary scene queen hiding from the real world. Don’t make me laugh! And if you want to say I am bitchy and slanderous, then fine. But, way back when I used to disagree with you in a formal, polite manner (I’m sure you’ve conveniently forgotten), you never once came to defend my right to difference of opinion, did you? I defended yours, however. And nor have you ever condemned the overwhelmingly obvious vile comments of the likes of Brian. Now, why is that? Because you think the same way and have the same kind of lifestyle? Even if you did, I would have thought you could have at least tried to be above all that catty nonsense. It did me no good in trying to engage in debates by being civilised, it’s something people on here don’t understand. So why bother? You may as well just join in.

    At the end of the day, it’s just a web site and a small number of people. And, with largely crap, tenously-gay linked articles. But on the other hand, it does represent the gay world quite nicely. Self-pitying, selfish, judgemental, bitchy people.

    Now, what I find a bit sick is that you use the likes of Michael Causer to make a very poor point. It’s incredibly offensive to suggest that I thought he deserved what he got. And, actually, you’re not the first bitter man on here to use that, so it must be doing the rounds as a defence mechanism to criticism in your neck of the woods.

    Anyway, Adrian, enjoy your ranting because ultimately, I never have to see people like you. Just feel the effects of your behaviour. A bit like decent black guys get judged because a few of his brethren are a bit trigger happy. You have always ranted at me when I didn’t agree with you, but as I said before, being civil and defending your right to an opinion was clearly too optimistic of me. Not only does it show that you are selfish, but that you aren’t much of a democrat. Or rather democratic only when people agree with you. I don’t and I won’t start to.

    Perhaps you should do some self-reflection – why don’t you ask yourself this question. Why, when the gay media, health groups and government bodies in the UK are pumping millions into targeted awareness campaigns on HIV/AIDs and other STIs, are gay men still the most affected? Because of all the reasons I have mentioned time and time again. And which you choose to ignore. We are stuck in this cesspool of a situation until gay men – not lesbians – learn how to be less selfish and more responsible. End of. Those of us that are continue to live happy, healthy lives. Good luck Adrian, I think you’ll need a fair bit.10 u

  44. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 6:35pm

    Brian – you really should have your own show. As much as you’d like to claim that you outed me, I did it on the very first day I wrote a comment months ago. You are, without a doubt, a muppet. But I’m sure your mother loves you.

  45. “You see, now you talk about generalisations – have you not noticed all the generalisations about the straight community on here? That they are narrow-minded, prejudiced etc…..but that apparently is ok. Do minorities have some exemption? No, they don’t.”

    You talk nonsense. I’m beginning to see why people think you are a fundamentalist. You are a fundamentalist. And if you are actually gay, you’re one f***** up queer.

  46. “Perhaps you should do some self-reflection”

    Oh, and what little I know of AdrianT, he’s way ahead of you in every respect. Your petty jibes, your sweeping generalisations, and your undeniable anger towards gay people…. all very devolved of you. Very puerile. And very much in need of some real counselling. I’d suggest you do the “self reflection”

  47. To repeat, you make crass, bitchy generalisations about people you do not know and then act like a little cry baby when people criticise you for it. You total hypocrite. If you don’t like it, too bad.

    No one in Vauxhall, or Soho, or Canal Street, intends for you to get hurt. No one is causing you to get hurt, by their actions, which have nothing to do with you and do not have any affect with you. You excuse the bigotry of others, who are clearly provoked by other people’s harmless actions. And I assure you, they will be provoked whatever we do…

    Rather than stand up to the perpetrators you choose to pick on gay people whom you do not know. You are a coward and an apologist for bigotry and homophobia, precisely like that which led to the brutal murder of Michael Causer, attacked because someone saw images of him having sex on his mobile phone. I make no apology for that because it’s the uncomfortable truth.

    I don’t see whay I should defend your difference of opinion – your opinion is indefensible in the first place. Still, I’m not stopping you making ill-informed, baseless, childish, slanderous, pig headed remarks. You are free to do that. But this is what you must expect if you attack people whom you do not know. Face the consequences, get used to it.

    PS You admit that you have never seen me (“enjoy your ranting because ultimately, I never have to see people like you.”) yet, claim to know that I “[self-define] as a muscle mary scene queen hiding from the real world.” If you have never met me, how do you know this, and how do you know if or where I am supposedly hiding, 168 hours per week?

    “I never have to see people like you. Just feel the effects of your behaviour.”

    Once again, who is the one on this thread, acting like a whining, wingeing, self-pitying crybaby?

  48. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 7:11pm

    Will – you are very bitter aren’t you? Maybe you, Brian and Adrian should just start a club together and make yourselves feel better. Some of us are strong enough to go it alone. Which, in turn, makes us incredibly attractive to the same sex (as I have found out on many occasions). The longer this goes on, the better I feel about myself, as you just keep proving me right.

  49. Brian Burton 1 Sep 2009, 7:16pm

    I fall about laghing at your childish, schoolyard antics!

  50. “Will – you are very bitter aren’t you?”

    You’re taking the piss, aren’t you? Go read your previous post.

  51. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 7:26pm

    Will – it’s ok, I read yours instead. And they’re the same as they always are. Little content, just slagging off.

  52. Exactly like your ad hominem remarks and apologies for anti-gay violence, Monkeychops.

  53. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 7:31pm

    And what anti-gay violence have I supposedly condoned??? Proof please!

  54. “Little content, just slagging off.”

    Are we still talking about your remarks?

    The silly generalisations? The venom towards gay people? The fundamentalist judgemental attitude? And the transparent self ingratiation?

    Yeah, its me who’s like that all right…. what a muppet. Are you, bi-polar?

  55. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 7:33pm

    PS You admitted you were a Muscle Mary a few months when we were discussing types. It was the same time that we were taking up a lot of the thread and you asked me to sign up and carry on on the chat facility or whatever it’s called. I didn’t sign up though.

  56. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 7:34pm

    Will – there you go again with the slandering. Fundamentalist, gay-hater and bi-polar. All baseless, all fictitious and all in your mind. Pathetic.

  57. No, all based on your posts. Everything I have said I can back up by quoting your puerile, patronising and generalist comments.

    I really pity you, to be trapped in that bubble of hate and think you are happy there.

    He’s an idea, if you don’t like gay people, how about f****** off from a gay site, the you can pretend to be as straight as you like…. you can be lonely and bitter, and we don’t have to listen to your crap. Win-Win situation.

  58. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 7:45pm

    Will – why would I want to pretend to be straight? As far as I am aware, a man who sleeps with a man isn’t, so why pretend? Strange statement for you to make (again). And why would I be lonely? You’ve obviously ignored the fact that I am attached. You seem to do that ignoring trick quite a lot, don’t you. You also only ever respond to criticise other people, you never actively do any questioning of the articles yourself. You’re a reactionary and if you feel intimidated by my curious and active mind, then that’s your issue. Whilst I may disagree with Adrian, he’s certainly far brighter than you and can hold his own. What you come out with is just pants.

    If you don’t like what I say, then why reciprocate? After all, you aren’t obliged to read anything you don’t want to, are you? You reciprocate because you want to be heard. Same here. So don’t pretend you’re any less stubborn or patronising than me.

    So, get to quoting me if you want to sling the mud. I’m waiting for a delivery, so I’ll be here a while…..

  59. “If you don’t like what I say, then why reciprocate? After all, you aren’t obliged to read anything you don’t want to, are you? You reciprocate because you want to be heard.”

    NO, I stand up against idiots like you who chose to generalise and demean gay people, and then act superior because of it. The only think you have in common with someone like me is that you supposedly sleep with men. That’s where it ends. To make statements like “because gays don’t really care about each other it would seem)” shows you lack of understanding of the diversity the exists among gay men, and I can only imagine the patience of your partner to suffer your venom towards his “lack of caring”. In fact, why he’s with you at all after such aggressive and puerile views of gay people, only amazes me. You’re clearly very bitter towards the scene and all gay people. Thats your problem. Don’t drag me to your level, I have no such issue, no matter what you petty insults say. And the insult on my intelligence? Please. That just means you haven’t the brain power to hear with I’m saying. Anger like yours tends to blind rational. Those who demonstrate such generalisation as you do, rarely have much grey matter to think with… that’s why they generalise in the first place.

  60. Brian Burton 1 Sep 2009, 8:30pm

    you are waiting for the ‘mud-slinging’ you evil Troll, how world weary that inane offer of yours must make an inteligent person feel. Why don’t you retire to your dungen of despair somewhere in the depths of your depravity.

  61. Jean-Paul Bentham 1 Sep 2009, 10:17pm

    Tu me fais rire.

  62. Monkeychops 1 Sep 2009, 10:33pm

    Will – people generalise because that’s what humans do. You see a wolf and you run away – but surely not every wolf is going to bite you? No, of course not, but you know that, regularly, they are vicious and can kill from the testimonies of people who have been attacked, from the media and so on. So you avoid them. Most men on the scene I have met have been as I have pointed out further up, the media shows them to be that way (including our very own Pink News, Attitude and most notably that rank outpost of sleaze, Gay Times) and then people on here giving their own testimonies of gay life. It’s all from various sources and the image that has been built up and modified in my mind over many years remains. Because it keeps being reconfirmed. Sorry mate, but there’s always a lot of truth to the stereotype. You do exactly the same with religious people – you associate it with homophobia and make sweeping generalisations accoridngly. Keep your hypocrisy to yourself.

  63. Boys!

    Calm down a bit (and yes I am scouser so ‘calm, down, calm down, eh, eh’ :) )!

    Respect eachother’s opinions and listen to the REASONS for them if you don’t agree, or if someone has made a generalisation ask WHY they think thatand try to understand .

    At the minute it’s catty comments, generalisations of people’s character and habits when you don’t really know eachother, name calling, and ‘you’re wrong, no you’re wrong’.

    Please don’t attack me as this is not directed at anyone/either side in particular, I just hate to see you all at eachother’s throats like this.


    Adrian, Brian and Will, just a little heads up: I’ve spoken to Monkeychops on a few threads here before a couple of months ago, and I believe he is genuinely a gay man in a gay relationship. And he certainly wasn’t a fundie when I spoke to him…….actually I don’t recall him being religious atall.

  64. Is this nonsense still going on?!! Really.

    You make a sweeping statement, that – all gays on the scene are evil and debauched people, and somehow (goodness knows how)the very existence of these people does you some kind of a Terrible Injury; and that gay people are significantly more “selfish” than – presumably – straights.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    1. your experience of rejection, disgust is not the experience of the vast majority of people who go to clubs and so on at the weekend and are out to have a good time. what is more likely, the whole world is evil and selfish, or it’s you? How are gay people selfish? Do you have any statistics to back up your claim that gay people are more ‘selfish’ (e.g. donations to charity etc)?
    2. You claimed that people, whom you do not know, who get intimate with each other are ‘slags’… How a bit of harmless fun, or for all we know, the beginning of a fine romance, offends you I have no clue, but still. in what way are gay people any different from lads and lasses at the Ministry of Sound, Gatecrasher, Cream, or, for example, a typical nightclub in Barnsley?
    3. STIs are also spreading through the straight population. Chlamydia, HPV, herpes among others. I agree, that people today who practice unsafe sex are total f***wits. But yet again, before you go on a mary whitehouse crusade, bear in mind that over 90 percent of LGBT people do not have HIV.
    4. humans do indeed make generalisations – more likely because human brains are not perfect and the truth is sometimes counter-intuitive, as anyone who stares at a revolving satellite dish will know. we spent hundreds of thousands of years in tiny tribes and a couple of hundred in big cities, and as a result have a tendency to think a swallow makes a summer when it comes to stereotypes.

    “It’s all from various sources and the image that has been built up and modified in my mind over many years remains. Because it keeps being reconfirmed.”

    – When you assess the data selectively, or when your sources are slective about the images of gay people, any kind of prejudices can be confirmed. A young earth creationist would come out with exactly the same statement.

    – And PS how does a ‘muscle mary’ harm you in any way (is it likely to bring on a Global Flood, for example?)? how does it strengthen your argument in any way? I fail to understand.

    If you become intimidated by reactions of what bigots might think, then you can condone any intolerant behaviour. The would-be bombers who left a car load of nail bombs and oxygen cylinders outside Tiger Tiger bar in Haymarket 2 years ago, were offended by the very existence of venues where ‘slags’ were hitting it off with the lads. In the same way as you are offended. Virtually any evil can be excused with your logic: too bad if girls get acid thrown in their faces in Islamabad, they should have covered themselves up, and not dared to get themselves an education.

    Freedom of expression comes before protection of ‘hurt feelings’. And if that offends anyone, I care not a jot: they can pick up the phone, dial my number……….. and suck my thumb.

    PPS you express surprise that people might answer you. This is a forum, and this is the point of a forum. I can’t let extraordinary claims go unchallenged, or ringfenced from the usual quality control checks.

  65. Light comes from heat, and I respect nobody’s opinions Lezabella, as you discovered when you became an apologist for the Islamofascist regime in Tehran ;-)

  66. Hmmm, OK, I’m glad we can disagree without turning nasty to eachother Adrian, however I was merely citing the history between the West and Iran (which is on my side), not defending Iran’s current regime. Alas, we have had this discussion before though so I don’t want to start it up again, however I just wanted to make my point that I’m NOT an apologist for an Ayatollah.

    Anyways, I give up, peace-making duties over!

    I’ll leave you dudes to it, this is a discussion about gay men so I’m out! :)

  67. Jean-Paul Bentham 2 Sep 2009, 12:54am

    Nice touch, Lezabella. Thanks for the intervention.

    But and but, Will, Brian and Adrian do not “habitually” disrupt the threads. In all fairness, they are not the disrupters here.
    It seems to me that Will and Adrian are quite rational in their responses.

    Like you, I don’t like seeing people at each other’s throats; who does?

    I am certainly not attacking you, but I agree wholeheartedly with Will, Brian and Adrian…totally and completely.

    The sadest thing is that Monkeychops has succeeded in preventing us from elaborating the issue at hand, starting with the first ambiguous statement he/she made at (3) in response to Mike (1):

    “The planned programmes look very good indeed. I hope it gets the support it deserves.”

    What kind of a dumb comment is that to make…’the support it deserves’. It’s patronizing, that’s what it is, and because it’s ambiguous, ‘it’ can come back at us and say that we don’t have the intelligence to understand him/she. It’s like saying, ‘The flag is not moving; the wind is”.

    Utter nonsense. Drivel. The guys do right to challenge Monkeychops, in my humble opinion, of course.

  68. Is this the script for the new Fruit TV sitcom? Handbags @ Dawn.

  69. Jean-Paul Bentham 2 Sep 2009, 4:00am

    Imbécile. Grande folle. Va sur l’diable.

  70. “Sorry mate, but there’s always a lot of truth to the stereotype.”

    Sorry, Monkeychops, but there isn’t. That’s you just holding onto a personal prejudice, and the belief ion a stereotype helps you validate that prejudiced view.

    I’d suggest you look in the mirror, mate, the hypocrisy is a lot closer to you than you think.

    Lezabella, Monkeychops displays all the traits of someone who loathes gay people, not unlike the religious nuts… if he is gay and not religious, that only make matters worse. Its typically (if not correctly) called ‘internalised homophobia’. I will not apologise for standing up to people like him… its bad enough having to stand against the religious fools, but one of our own going on about how we’re all drug abusers and debauch, just because he had a bad experience in a gay nightclubs??? Please, there’s a white paper for a budding physiotherapist on that one. One word for that: unstable.

  71. Brian Burton 2 Sep 2009, 7:43am

    Do you know Boys and Girls,
    After all the good and bad comments written here on this thread, basically about forth-comming Gay TV. I got to wonder about in years to come, when Gay TV is as ‘normal’ as the staff of life. What will folks make of this ‘Fruit TV’ thread if they were priveliged to peruse it on a wet afternoon? In the old days, nobody pretended to be better than his neighbour. In fact to concider youself better than your neighbour was not pc (as we say now) Nowadays, morality is still coliding with it’s oppersite number. Paragons of virtue trying to break down the doors to stop something they fear, like a Gay TV channel. It is when we are wounded by our own hands or others, that Love should come to cure us. I’ve spoken about Love on these threads before…there is such a lack of it…do we live in the zone of the ‘Black Narcissus.’….who knows what the morning will bribg?

  72. “I’ll leave you dudes to it, this is a discussion about gay men so I’m out! ”

    That’s a good girl Lezabella, run along and make us a nice cup of tea :-)

  73. Monkeychops 2 Sep 2009, 2:49pm

    “Sorry, Monkeychops, but there isn’t. That’s you just holding onto a personal prejudice, and the belief ion a stereotype helps you validate that prejudiced view”

    It’s not my personal prejudice and I would love nothing more than to believe that us gays were the most intelligent, most respectable, polite, altruistic of them all. How wonderful it would be to be part of such an outstanding community. But we’re so clearly not and therefore I could never claim us to be. The reality is very different and you know thatas well as I do, so stop burying your head in the sand.

    Stereotypes don’t just come from nothing, they are partly borne of misconceptions, but more often than not it’s a combination of different, prevailing traits lumped together. It’s also a very human thing to define your “others”, i.e. what is not you. For better or worse. Man defines himself against woman, child against adult, gay against straight, black against white, tall against short. Or are you going to tell me Will that you don’t do that?

    What’s the stereotype of a gay man? Effeminate, bitchy, probably witty and with a lewd sense of humour. Or maybe, the other extreme, muscled, bald, painted on clothing and found in a gym. What’s the stereotype of a Brit? Pink, fat, shaved-headed lager lout. Or polite, reserved, Colin Firth types, on the other extreme. Are you trying to tell me that these perceptions have just been conjured up by an unforgiving media? Just some nasty religious groups out to get us? A sneaky Tory campaign to put us in our place? You seriously need a reality check if you think that it’s down to a conspiracy. It’s our own doing, we can only be judged as humans by how we behave. These views exist because they are the most frequently seen by those not part of that group. Whether in your local pub, on holiday or in the media. And we continue to throw those images out to the rest of society. Now, whose responsibility is it to project a good image of gay men? Presumably…that would be us, the gay men. Or do you think that the state should intervene? They can only give us equality and the platforms to change, they can’t do the changing for us. The gay press revels in effeminate campery, so do you not think that maybe, just maybe, that stereotype has a sizeable chunk of truth in it? That there might just be a lot of people who conform to that stereotype? If there weren’t, then the stereotype would be something else, that’s obvious. Germans were labelled Nazis once because that’s who they voted in and how they behaved, but now we see them as progressive, trustworthy people because they have actively sought to change that image. Moreover, in a country with such huge media freedom as the UK, why is it then that these stereotypes still exist when we have so much power to change them? Because these behavioural patterns are simply the most common and most visible. And partly because a proportion just sits and complain about them and don’t try to change them. If you feel so strongly about it, get on your feet and start the revolt. It’s very easy to agree with the majority, but it takes guts to say something unpopular but constructive. That’s just whatI am doing – getting you to look atthe wider picture and the “other” reasons why we have the gay community that we do and not a better one. Will, I think you just don’t want to accept that reality, or is that because you are too scared of being stereotyped as an effeminate gay man? That alone wouldn’t worry me, it’s other types of gay behaviour we get associated with that would cause more embarrassment (cruising, cottaging etc). Being effeminate is benign, it doesn’t hurt anyone. On this very site, people stereotype against their enemies – religions, heterosexuals and anyone else they feel is oppressing them. But, that apparently is ok because gays seem to believe they have a divine right to do that through some blown-up belief that we are the most hard-done by on the planet. Not buying that at all, how self-indulgent and arrogant to think that!

    Back to the Brits: all in all, whilst the majority of Brits I see abroad on a night out are wasted in the streets causing havoc and the gays I see around in my daily life are slightly effeminate, then that is the overarching view I will have. It’s not down to me to change my views by convincing myself that those I have are wrong. It’s down to those groups projecting those images to counter by influence and evidence. We, as gays collectively, have only ever reinforced the stereotypes society has of us and therefore we cannot grumble when people treat us accordingly. In the very same way that nice, pleasant Brits on holiday cannot be surprised when they are lumped in with the all-drinking, all-puking, George-cross sporting lagerheads. Not fair? Of course not, I certainly don’t like being thought of that way, but these images don’t come from nowhere, it’s perfectly understandable why they prevail when that is all people see and respectable dailies are putting out stats on binge-drinking and STIs that support them. As a Brit, I quite readily tell foreigners that such behaviour is typical and how disappointing it is. And likewise, I do the same for gay men and the behaviour they exhibit. It’s just being honest. If you’ve ever watched The Trouble with Gay Men, then you would know, despite them investigating a cross-section of gay guys, the dominant traits fitted the stereotypes that some people on here bemoan. I totally shared Kristian Digby’s view that it is disappointing to be pigeon-holed in that way, but then what can we expect when as gay men we see the stereotype gay man absolutely everywhere? I am seemingly a minority within the gay world because I don’t fit that type. If people outside of the gay world perceive me as the stereotype, that annoys me mildly, but I certainly don’t blame them. I blame our community as we are the ones who have maintained that view and continue to do so. Legal things are a problem for the state, our actual day-to-day behaviour is our responsibility. Andthe state in the last 12 years have done an immense amount for us (despite some on here never being satisfied with any positive step). Of course, I’m sure that someone will jump on what I have said and tell me I’m a gay-hater, I have internalised homophobia etc (all very prescriptive, formulaic and over-used attack lines when people have little else to say), but then I would expect nothing less. It would just reconfirm my view that you all want to blame someone else. Point the finger at yoursleves for a change, look inthe mirror, look in teh gay press, look everywhere and you’ll see. We are so often our own worst bloody enemies. But we could sort out many of our own problems by taking personal responsibility for our actions instead of blaming someone else. Leaving the police, who do actually help us, to spend more time on helping the real victims of unprovoked, vicious discrimination and less time on irresponsible types getting their phones nicked on Duke’s Mound when their out on the shark.

    Now, I’m sure you’ll come back and tell me that there is a HUGE difference between the stereotyping of Brits abroad and that of gay men because we are some oppressed minority (plays violin), yawn. But then, isn’t it a very typical gay trait to blame absolutely everyone except himself? Look no further than this site! It just seems people here don’t want us to have to be responsible for any aspect of our lives, but yet we still demand all teh rights and equality. Well we have to be, but the mere mention of taking personal, individual or collective responsibility for overcoming the problems our community faces, from drugs to AIDS, from stereotyping to how we interact with other social groups, is met with disdain. All our problems, if you believe people on here and certain gay media, are down to a whole myriad of other groups. Bollocks. If you get HIV because you had unprotected sex with a stranger, that’s your fault – we are all-informed about it. If a straight guy belts you because you won’t stop trying to grope him (as some of my poor uni friends had to endure), your fault, what do you expect when you invade someone else’s personal space. If your septum fell out because you did too much coke, your fault. If you wear crop belly tops, mince and slag everyone off in sight, don’t complain if people stereotype you. And if you choose to spend your life in a gay ghetto to run away from the restof society and then end up depressed years later, your fault. Choices have consequences and before anyone says “oh, but people don’t always have the choice”, in this day and age, you do. The problem maybe is that those in their late teens andearly 20s have actually never had to go through any major difficulties – they were too young to remember the last recession. They’ve never known a world where you cannot get free contraception, advice and support at every school, clinic and university. And they have been brought up by a nanny-state that relieves people of their duties in society. Plonk them in thegay scene, which evades responsibility, and look at the mess you’re going to have.

  74. Me think the lady protests too much.

    Internalised homophobia. We all have to be closet queens to make Monkechops feel better about himself.


  75. Monkeychops 2 Sep 2009, 4:24pm

    Will – there you go, you’ve got bugger all to say for yourself as usual. Crap, over-used quote followed by the even more over-used “internalised homophobia” quip. Perhaps where you’re from that’s big and clever.

    If you seriously cared about the gay community, the people within it, how we are viewed and what our future may be then you would at least engage in the discussion. You don’t ask any questions, you don’t even question what I have to say or why I might think the way I do (but then I have explained it to you already a million times). All you do is make snide comments with no content. You are clearly not interested in opening your mind to another side of an argument. I pity anyone who doesn’t have the ability to question even more than those who do not have the conviction to stand up for what they believe. If no-one had ever questioned, then we wouldn’t have the freedom we do today. Thankfully our gay predecessors didn’t have your mentality of just mocking from the sidelines in an unqualified manner. Be a sheep all your life Will, but it’s a bit boring. And no-one will ever say that you made a difference.

  76. we’ve asked before to Moral Mary Monkeychops, the saint with one giant chip on his sorry shoulders:

    – evidence please, that gay people are generally ‘bitchy, selfish, grope straight people, overwhelmingly on coke;
    – evidence please that gay people go in their masses to Clapham Common or public toilets for sex (straight people do this too)
    – why is being ‘muscled, bald and …being found in a gym’ “extreme”?
    – what evidence have you got that gay people overwhelmingly hide in ghettos? how do you know what they are doing 168 hours per week?
    – who is the ‘gay scene’ anyway? how can a ‘scene’ be responbsible or lack responsibility? nonsensical. responsibility is a personal issue. I happen to meet an awful lot of very responsible poeple when I go out, but hey, maybe that’s all just anecdotal.
    – who cares if all the clubs are superficial and vain, if everyone is enjoying themselves?
    – what makes you think gay men are any different from straight men?

  77. Brian Burton 2 Sep 2009, 5:23pm

    I know you are a total fraud and you know that I know that fact.
    You are still spreading your lies and half-truths on this thread and achieving nothing of your erroneous, secret agenda. Well, the pendulem is not swinging your way Monkychops. Tell me, are you just a ‘Pink cyber loafer?’ or do you have employment and paying taxes? Are you a masochist, self flagllationist? Escapee from a mental hospital. These things I’ve mentioned, are playing on my mind at present.

  78. Monkeychops 2 Sep 2009, 5:55pm

    Adrian, I would gladly oblige if you ever had any proof for the claims you make. But you never do and so I am hardly going to waste my time bothering. It’s not up top me to prove anyway, the views I have are from a vast number of experience – that is evidence in itself. What I have seen out on the gay scene, articles I have read in newspapers, academic studies and on web sites of all different political leanings, the stats that frequently pop up (and which you like to manipulate to your advantage), TV documentaries, Youtube testimonials, talking to gay people of all ages, backgrounds and in/out status, going to Pride in several countries, asking them how gay people are perceieved there and what their main problems are, walking through parks late at night on my way home from a night out and being harrassed by rank cruisers, having my cock gawped at on many occasions by slimy guys in gay nightclubs, being touched up by strangers in gay bars who think they somehow own you because they are so in love with themselves, having been offered drugs on many occasions in gay clubs but never in mixed venues, eavesdropping on the conversations you hear in Old Compton Street, the experiences of gay friends I have, the experiences of gay people who I did not like at university, talking to guys with HIV, talking to my boyfriend who worked for a gay rights charity, the gay friends of my parents who I grew up around……It doesn’t matter how much you try to tell me that gay men are much better people than they are portrayed, I have seen so much that shows the contrary. Hence the views I have. Now, I’m sure you’ll say that this is not enough, it doesn’t count as proof. But, you’re not even going to have half that experience I doubt, I bet you have barely ever set foot outside of the gay world, which is probably why you are so defensive of it. I backpacked round the world in my early twenties and met gay men from all sorts of places with all sorts of stories. And just generally met people from all walks of life, with all manner of views, values, belief systems, traditions and I actually took the time to find out why they felt and believed what they did. Among them were some grossly homophopbic, misogynistic religious nutters, Moroccan guys with wives and kids picking up men, Bolivians who said it was ok to give but not take and where police raided their bars on a weekly basis, the laissez faire attitude of Brazilians in Rio, Finns who were the politest of gay men and who you felt the safest around more than any other gay place, towns where people had no hope for the future, no education and no choices, prostitutes on the streets of France, East Germans who hankered for the good old communist days…..I could go on for hours. And that is why I can see so many more sides to the arguments that go against gay men and generally in life. I understand why people think the way they do and it’s not necessarily their fault. Why? Because I made myself, I like to know why. I’m a person who has been lucky enough to be informed, educated and who has the ability to question – and even so the choice to do so. Gay men don’t question their world or whether they are living a good life, only everything outside it. Because of that, they are no better than the other minorities that gay men claim persecute them. So many gay men just refuse to make any attempt to understand the lifestyles of others. Do you really know anyone who is not gay? I mean, actually know them, understand them, on a deep personal level? Or a religious person? Or anyone who is not British? You wrap yourself up in so much academic crap Adrain that you have completely overlooked the fact that if you want to understand something, you go to the horses mouth and you ask why. You have to talk to real people, inside and outside your own immediate environment. For you, it’s all about winning an argument and justifying who you are. I am not interested in that, I am only looking to figure out why gay men have the problems they do because they affect all of us at the end of the day. The more I go on educating myself on the matter, the more I see it is down to gay men themselves.

    I think the most ludicrous question you have asked is “what makes you think gay men are any different from straight men?”. If we weren’t different, why on Earth would this site exist and why would we be having this discussion. If you think you are straight, then you need help.

  79. “But, you’re not even going to have half that experience I doubt, I bet you have barely ever set foot outside of the gay world, which is probably why you are so defensive of it.”

    Prove it.

    That arrogant nonsense shows you do not know what you are talking about. Like I said, you judge people you know nothing about. You clearly have a lot of growing up to do.

    I’m asking YOU to prove your claims. You are the one making them, not me. But beyond anecdote, which is all you have given above – youtube, backpacking travels = anecdote.

    Case dismissed.

  80. Monkeychops 2 Sep 2009, 6:54pm

    You mean you want to dismiss the qualitative experiences of REAL PEOPLE over a statistical sample of about 100 gay men in inner city London? That shows how narrow-minded you are. And I don’t have to prove that you don’t have the experiences I have, that’s up to you. You never talk about any experience you have of knowing more than me on this issue – why would I take you seriously? I offer up everything I know on a plate as and when required, you don’t. Guess I’m just more open than you. Sorry if you haven’t been backpacking and met real people outside of the London or Manchester bubbles, you really should try it. Then you’ll see how trivial gay men’s problems are when people don’t even have the choice let alone the right to overcome their daily difficulties.

    Case dismissed? I can see you mincing out of your little imaginary court room right now. It must be fun up in that little head of yours.

  81. “there you go, you’ve got bugger all to say for yourself as usual.”

    No, I’ll write something intelligent when you do, okay? That was just self ingratiating nonsense about how the rest of the gay community needs to be more like you. Look, f*** off. Seriously. Don’t expect anyone with any self respect to back yo that twaddle.

  82. Brian Burton 2 Sep 2009, 7:25pm

    What a pity your arguement skills are are always devoid of any interlectual content. Adrian T. is by far your superior and so you just falls flat on your Monkeyface!

  83. Monkeychops 2 Sep 2009, 7:31pm

    Will- again, you prove my point, you have nothing to say except slag off those who don’t agree with you. I mean, you can carry on doing that if you want, help yourself, but it does show that you have no ideas of your own, you are not prepared to sit down and write something with a bit of substance and that you are simply not interested in your views. I would be interested in yours if you actually ever described any. You don’t, it’s just all f-off. You’re better off auditioning for Shameless.

    Brian – I can, at least, spell intellectual unlike your fair self. Or are you going to give me some sob story about you being dyslexic now?

  84. Monkeychops 2 Sep 2009, 7:35pm

    Actually Will, maybe the gay community should be more like me. After all, I’m not the one cottaging, cruising, living with HIV, using far too many mind-altering drugs, drinking too much alcohol, living in a closed-off ghetto…and I’m in a stable, healthy, long-term relationship. That’s a sizable proportion of people covered, so yeah, they probably should be more like me. Better than just reactionaries like yourself.

  85. “Will- again, you prove my point, you have nothing to say except slag off those who don’t agree with you.”

    And again you have nothing new to say but your usual insipid rants about yourself, and your brand of rather repetitive insults. Not to mention the unsubstantiated generalisations. Nothing new, nothing worth noting. Same old crap, over and over again. Look, no one agrees with you. So why bother? Really, what exactly do you want, do you need us to agree with yo? Why do you need that? You’re smug superiority obviously doesn’t run that deep, and what you have to say is rather non-intellectual and sanctimonious. So parson me for not lowering myself to your intellect level.

    “maybe the gay community should be more like me. After all, I’m not the one cottaging, cruising, living with HIV, using far too many mind-altering drugs, drinking too much alcohol, living in a closed-off ghetto…”

    …and we can sit at home hiding under a rock like you bitching about the nasty boys on the scene? Oh, how delightful. Yes, you’re rigth, you are so much better than us. I do wish I was as much a crushing bore as well as sanctimonious idiot like you, really I do… “Oh, no, all the other queers are doing bad things, and I’m such a good gay”. Please. If you actually think that, you’re more of a fool that I thought.

    “and I’m in a stable, healthy, long-term relationship”

    And you are the only one then, in a relationship?!?!?!?!? Ha! You’re a self absorbed idiot to boot. I am a long term relationship, and so is AdrianT. You patronising tosser. Your egocentricity is only matched by the ridiculousness of your bigoted generalisations. F***off and get a life!

    Run along, I’m sure you have some Martha Steward catalogues to read… One wonders why you even bother to come in here.

    You’re a buffoon, sir, and a prize one at that.

  86. 21stCenturySpirituality 2 Sep 2009, 10:31pm

    Monkeychops, who are you to sit in judgement about the choices and values of others? There are many people whose views I disagree with but I still strive to find some common ground with them and treat them with understanding, respect and compassion. Most of what I am hearing from you in this thread seems to about a mentality of superiority, judgement, condemnation, hostility and resentment. I think you should try and be a bit more tolerant and gentle toward others and embrace a mentality of humility and let go of judgementalism and condemnation. Alot of what you say comes across as very lacking in compassion and understanding for others which seems odd for someone who claims to have travelled and read widely ( maybe you didnt claim that last one) but maybe It would be helpful if you did read a bit more widely and engage in the process of challenging your thinking, holding up your beliefs to the light of scrutiny. I have certainly benefited in my understanding and awareness over the last 15 years by exploring and considering different perspectives with an open mind and a willingness to listen to and consider the opinions of others with respect and humility. I dont always agree with what I hear but I keep myself open to new information and understandings and different ideas about life. I guess thats why Im a unitarian and will soon be training as a lay pastor. I am a deeply spiritual person and am driven towards alleviating the suffering of others, to be of service to vulnerable people. I work with homeless people and seek to be of service to the community and the wider world in a number of ways. I feel that that is very much a part of who I am as a gay man, very much a part of my feminine side which I am in touch with and unashamed of as a gay man. Im not overtly camp or effiminate but it does seem obvious to people that I am gay. People say I come across as a very aware and gentle person but also strong and confident. I have engaged in some of the sexual practices you condemn, such as cruising, and I see no reason to be ashamed about that. Im in a stable relationship now which I have been in for 12 years. Im not ashamed of my sexual history and I dont see why I should be. I learned a great deal about myself and others and life from it and I had some great fun. Not every place on the gay scene is as you describe it. There are some quite nice places me and my partner and friends have been to. Yes you can get some of what you describe in some places but you can say the same about straight clubs, but then not all straight pubs and clubs are the same. Let your hair down and chill out a bit monkeychops and go to nicer places. There are some on the gay scene despite what you say.
    Allow each soul to walk its path and try and be less judgemental and condemning of the choices and values of others. Just because you disagree with someone elses choices and values and dont choose them for yourself does not make that person less worthy of your love and respect.

  87. Brian Burton 2 Sep 2009, 10:35pm

    As good as you are and as bad as I am, I’m as good as you are as bad as I am. You wriggle like the worm you are!

  88. To repeat, Monkeychops, I’m asking YOU to prove your claims. You are the one making them, not me. But beyond anecdote, which is all you have given above – youtube, backpacking travels = anecdote, NOT EVEN RELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION.

    Why does backpacking in Bohemia, or wherever you were, make you better positioned to generalise about gay people on Canal Street? It doesn’t. You freely admit to hardly ever going to gay venues – this makles you unqualified to offer even anecdotal opinion on the matter. In short, you don’t know what you are talking about.

    To repeat, what makes you think gay men are any different from straight men – any mopre likely to enjoy sex as fun, any more likely to get drunk, try drugs, get an STI? You make those claims, not me. Justify them.

    It is about winning an ‘academic argument – you make claims without presenting evidence, or shall we say, anything more than hearsay and anecdote. I will see your evidence thanks – statistics or referencees to original sources from peer reviewed journals.

    Quit making bitchy, catty remarks – as I keep having to remind you, you don’t know me.

  89. To repeat my earlier, unanswered challenges to Moral Mary Monkeychops:

    you made a lot of wild claims, without backing them up. Please provide any data to back up your earlier assertions:

    – evidence please, that gay people are generally ‘bitchy, selfish, grope straight people, overwhelmingly on coke;
    – evidence please that gay people go in their masses to Clapham Common or public toilets for sex (straight people do this too)
    – why is being ‘muscled, bald and …being found in a gym’ “extreme”?
    – what evidence have you got that gay people overwhelmingly hide in ghettos? how do you know what they are doing 168 hours per week?
    – who is the ‘gay scene’ anyway? how can a ‘scene’ be responbsible or lack responsibility? nonsensical. responsibility is a personal issue. I happen to meet an awful lot of very responsible poeple when I go out, but hey, maybe that’s all just anecdotal.
    – who cares if all the clubs are superficial and vain, if everyone is enjoying themselves?
    – what makes you think gay men are any different from straight men?

    To repeat, it is about an academic argument. After all, the truth is more important than being right isn’t it, Moral Mary?

  90. Swarmite asked “Is this the script for the new Fruit TV sitcom? Handbags @ Dawn.”

    – It’s a shame that Monkeychops is too busy auditioning for the Waltons to take part in this….

  91. “But, you’re not even going to have half that experience I doubt, I bet you have barely ever set foot outside of the gay world, which is probably why you are so defensive of it.”

    What about sticking £10,000 on the table? Be my guest.

    Based on the wild claim above, you clearly must know where I am and what I am doing at all hours. So, where was I on, for example:

    sat 15 august;
    sun 5 jul
    tue 16 jun
    fri 22 may?

  92. “Then you’ll see how trivial gay men’s problems are when people don’t even have the choice let alone the right to overcome their daily difficulties.”

    Again, in this context, why are gay men’s problems any more or less trivial than straight men’s? or straight women’s? what is the relevance to ‘gay’ in this screed of yours?

  93. Jean-Paul Bentham 3 Sep 2009, 3:28am

    Côtelettes de singe:

    Imbécile. Tu n’as pas la moindre idée de quoi tu parles; pas la moindre idée. C’est tellement évident, pauvre toi. Grande folle.

  94. Brian Burton 3 Sep 2009, 6:45am

    11.15am. GMT September 3rd. 1939. Seventy years ago Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin announced the UK was at war with Germany. Thirty Million men, woman and Children were killed in the conflict. Since WW2 there has been war in malaisia, Vietnam, Cambodia. Isreal and Arabs constantly at each others throats. The Lebanon Civil war, Afganistan and Russia, the 1992 Iraqi war, The Iraqi weapons of mass destruction war and the fall of Sadam. The war in Bosnia still unresolved…..Oh!..and the war on the Fruit TV thread!

  95. Captain Monkeychops ‘Renault’ (well he did say he’d been to Morocco) was ‘shocked, just shocked!’ to find drugtaking going on in a nightclub. I can only assume such a person never goes to clubs at all.

    There would have been no house music if it were otherwise. It reminds me of one of the greatest moments in music. The KLF, a field, Chipping Norton, 1989…. .com/watch?v=I5tR31ccqrM

    PS We don’t judge public opinion and attitudes by asking one person to go out and get a vibe. One well-run survey asking thousand people or so, is indeed worth centuries of you dashing around the world and playing at being Alan Whicker.

    You can go around the world, and still not learn how to think. After all, George W Bush has been all around the world, in his time, as well.

  96. Jean-Paul Bentham 3 Sep 2009, 5:12pm

    Côtelettes de singe:


    Tu n’as pas la moindre idée de quoi tu parles; pas la moindre idée. C’est tellement évident, pauvre toi.

    Grande folle.

  97. Jean-Paul Bentham 3 Sep 2009, 7:09pm

    Imbécile. On ne le dira jamais assez souvent.

  98. Brian Burton 3 Sep 2009, 8:42pm

    You certainly travel in the wrong circles. You seem to need educating in Sex, Drugs, Male Prostituts. You need a good dose of the Leather sex scene where you can troop around Naked, except for a leather throng to cover your winkle. You may have to ride pillion behind a Big Hairy Biker and the big hairy Biker….may!!!
    I better not say…You will Love it Monkyfacechops!!

  99. Jesus and Mohammed! I have only just come to this thread . . . and discovered why I have been all alone on the GMFA thread fighting against denialist there. It’s because you’ve all been dealing with Monkeychops here! LOL! I look forward to reading this whole thread sometime tomorrow! I WONDERED where you all were!

  100. Jean-Paul Bentham 4 Sep 2009, 3:50am

    Did you get a load of what Monkeychops said in post 84:

    “Actually Will, maybe the gay community should be more like me.”

    HA HA HA! Give moi a break! I’m dying of laug!hter here. Stop it. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! Har Har Har GASP ha ha ha ha

    “…should be more like me” Ha ha hahahahahahahahaha ha ha.

    Hi Eddy.

  101. Jean-Paul Bentham 4 Sep 2009, 4:10am


    You must surely be very happy to receive all this attention and to konw that PinkNews’s readership is international. How does it feel to be so famous??

    Frankly, my dear, the world has also read the comment made by 21stCenturySprituality at 86, and if you can’t follow his line of thought, then you are in deep doo-doo.

    21stCenturySpiritualty is anything but a man to be ignored…that is for those of us whose brain is functioning normally.

  102. “Actually Will, maybe the gay community should be more like me.”
    HA HA HA!

    Yeah, I’m crawling under a rock right as we speak, with my guide, “How Not To Be An Overt homosexual – A Guide For The Repressed Queer”… when I come out, I’ll be practically straight! I’ll vote Conservative, go to mass, and turn my nose up at those awful camp faggots.

  103. Now I’ll have to work out how to plug the laptop into the TV shouldn’t be too difficult. This I suppose is part of the TV / Internet convergence that is supposed to be happening well done folks.

  104. Jean-Paul Bentham 4 Sep 2009, 1:51pm

    Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-har-har-har-har..stop it…oh Monkeychops…ha-ha-har-har-har-ha-ha-arrête…tu me fais rire…ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-quelle comédie..oh-oh-ho-hoh-hoh-o-ha-ho-ha-ho-ho-ho..superbe…bravo-oh-o-o-oohoha-har-har-har.

    Joe, let me know when you figure out how to do it…ha-ha-ha…we could make a killing…I mean a fortune here…ha-ha-ha-ha-ha…Monkeychops you have found your calling…ha-ha-ha-ha…Cirque du Soleil needs clowns like you..ha-ha-ha-har-har…..

  105. Brian Burton 4 Sep 2009, 4:31pm

    Monkeyfacechops, I’m sure, and after Jean-Paul’s Laghter. Is racing down the corridoor of this thread shouting: INFAMY, INFAMY, they’ve all got it INFAMY!

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.