Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Holidaymaker jailed after drunken homophobic slur

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Brian Burton 29 Sep 2009, 10:29am

    What a heart-warming story Homophobic Oaf Jailed…Keep up the good work!

  2. Good. As ex0cabin crew I remember NEVER being backed up by the straight male or female No. 1’s. They use to just say to get on with it and not to make a fuss.

  3. How old are these people? 12?

  4. The headline is misleading.

    He wasn’t jailed just for making a homophobic slur. He was jailed for air-rage, being drunk and discorderly and for threatening to kill somebody. It wasn’t just homophobia.

  5. Brian Burton 29 Sep 2009, 12:15pm

    Vince, We are capable of deciding what the Oaf was Jailed for!

  6. I would hope you are capable of deducing that Brian. But the impression given by the headline is that the homophobic slur is the reason he was jailed when quite clearly that is only a slightly contributory factor. The death threats are the main reason obviously.

  7. vulpus_rex 29 Sep 2009, 1:18pm

    Sorry Brian but I agree with Vince – the headline is very misleading.

    I had just unloaded the soap box, and was about to step on when it became clear that the man was jailed for being drunk not homophobia.

    Whilst technically correct that the man was jailed after making a homphonic comment this is more a function of chronology than the law

  8. On this occasion I agree with Vince and Vulpus… my first reaction was a 10 and a half year jail sentance seemed a bit steep for simply calling someone a poof, but obviously that was just the icing on the cake. I would say that it was primarily air rage, and the homophobic slur probably had little to do with the sentence.
    Much as I dislike casual homophobia, if we jailed everyone for using the word “poof” I think it would rapidly result in prison overcrowding and a huge tax burden. I’m sure there are less draconian ways of getting through to homophobes.

  9. Oops… I meant 10 and a half month jail sentance… my mistake!

  10. Sounds like his defence line was also homophobic. If some is not a “poof”, but instead “behaving like a poof”, then in what way is the derogatory term “poof” any less homophobic?

    How would people take if some used a racial slur instead, such as some not being “black”, but “behaving like a black man”? Still just as horribly insulting I think.

    Its no different with a gay being used instead.

  11. Sister Mary Clarence 29 Sep 2009, 3:10pm

    I’m in agreement with the various people who have now said the headline is misleading. My first thought was the sentence was a bit over the top but the homophobic comments was just a part of the incident.

    The defense was a bit bizarre as well, “It’s a phrase used in some areas … to be homophobic”

  12. I find it wierd that some gay people on here do themselves an injustice when they defend the use of the word poof or any other towards a gay person or the community. Rightly so this guy got what he deserved. If you lot were in a queue and a person abused a black person with words that were meant in way that was to cause that person distress and harm , you all would be outraged and rightly so. But you seem to just take it on the chin when it is directed towards us, why? Do we not warrent the same respect. Remember it is not just the words that are used , but the way they are said and the sentiment that lays behind them. If I was walking down the street and a person called me a poof or the like, I would call the police and expect that person to be dealt with , that the law allows. I have seen first hand what words can leads too, as I am sure we all have.

  13. Brian Burton 29 Sep 2009, 4:11pm

    Dave Darling,
    We have been ‘Taking it’ on the chin and elsewhere for years!

  14. Brian Burton 29 Sep 2009, 4:15pm

    Sorry Vulpus, Is that mis-leading?

  15. Dave – I don’t think gay people should take casual homophobia ‘on the chin’. But I would be utterly appalled if someone was jailed for 10.5 months simply for calling me a ‘f****t’ or for calling a black man a “n****r”.

    By all means if someone uses a racist or homophobic slur they should receive a caution. But to jail them would be way over the top. Jail is more suitable for physical assault.

  16. What Vince said – if someone kept calling me ‘poof’ and backed it up with the threat of violence or it’s part of a sustained hate campaign, I would class that as a different matter to some drunken idiot shouting it at me to impress his scuzzy mates. It’s about the intent. A police caution or a small fine is usually enough to discourage an off the cuff homophobic jibe, it’s the homophobes that back their comments up with flailing fists or come back for more that I worry about.

  17. I have to say, I’ve seen this a few times recently, you commit a criminal act somewhere, you get X, you do it on a plane, and it’s Xx20. The judiciary take incidents on aircraft VERY seriously. I have to say I think maybe a bit too much.

    As usual the slutty-pink-rag ramps up the homo-value by including the fact the assailant took a verbal pop at the trolley dolly.
    Ho hum. Had it not been for that, it wouldn’t even be in here.

  18. RobN,
    I’m sure the reasoning behind taking aircraft incidences more seriously is the fact that when you are in an aircraft with a drunken buffoon, you can’t simply get away from the person. At least when you’re on the ground with such a person, you have a chance of getting away from them. So I wouldn’t necessarily say that it’s taken too seriously.

  19. SamH: Based on that theory, one would expect equivalent sentencing for drunk and rowdy people on trains or Intercity coaches.

    Considering the way some flight crew treat the passengers (ie like cattle) crammed like sardines in a hot box with constant advertising screeching in your ear and that cheap flights allow any moron with £20 on a plane, it is not unsurprising that people a) lose their rag, b) get drunk to numb the experience – or both.

    Flying should be a pleasant, civilised experience, which why on the rare occasions I do fly, I go business class with a reputable airline that actually delivers you on time, relaxed and in the city you actually want to visit, not one 50 miles outside.

  20. Alex, Brisbane, Australia 30 Sep 2009, 10:04am

    The headline is misleading; apparently he was ‘going to kill somebody’ as well.
    However, when the sentance is less for a rapist or child abuser, it’s a very concerning headline.
    So, Pink News, why?

  21. Brian Burton 30 Sep 2009, 1:32pm

    I think everyone on an Airliner should behave with the utmost decorum. Otherwise, you can always JUMP!

  22. Simon Murphy 1 Oct 2009, 12:28am

    Ryanair and Sleazyjet make no pretence about caring about their passengers. If you travel CattleAir then you can expect all sorts of folk. I fly a lot and I don’t mind the stench of civilians on the cheap flights. They are cheap and usually short flights. And if you have to travel 1600km on a bus to get from Albania to the city you thought you’d bought your ticket to – Amsterdam – then it’s all part of the package.

    Long haul is different. A bit of comfort is essential. The trolly-dollies on the long haul are far more pleasant and professional. And if you’re trapped in a small space for 8 hours with a potential psycho then I can understand why incidents of air-rage are taken seriously.

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

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all