Comments on: Ian McKellen on being a second-class citizen

By: Brian Burton

Brian Burton — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:31:51 +0000

Remember, remember the 5th of November, gunpowder Treason and Plot?

By: RobN

RobN — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:20:48 +0000

Doug: Have you never seen an Indian with a jet engine on his head?

By: Doug

Doug — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 03:10:45 +0000

Anita, I’d love to see you wearing a turbine, it would ‘generate’ a lot of comment!
I was 17 when homosexuality was partially legalised in the UK, but for many many years afterwards, if you were openly gay, you risked losing your home, your job, and being stalked by vicious bigots determined to exterminate you – as happened to a friend of mine, who had a soda syphon smashed over his head and died. The last thing we thought about was marriage and kids, we just wanted to be allowed to live. If you wanted kids, you married a woman and had boyfriends on the side, and maybe, just maybe, came out later once they were grown.

By: Anita Greencard

Anita Greencard — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:50:45 +0000

Jews in Europe?… you choose your religion. You don’t choose to be gay, you choose to be honest with your life.
The western world is getting to be a much better place for gays. Sadly most immigrants don’t hold our values from third world countries and bring them “here”. We have to be aware that most countries don’t value EQUALNESS… and that’s all gays have asked for. Nothing more nothing less.
To be a gay you don’t have circumcise your baby boy, have 8 wifes, wear a turbine, etc.
Gays are inclusive.

By: Chester

Chester — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:13:09 +0000

are you for real Brian? when has separate ever been equal?

By: Brian Burton

Brian Burton — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:37:58 +0000

You wailing whachos VP etcetera you dont know your born yet you sreaming Jackasses! My Civil Partnership makes me equal to anyone so stuff your wailing, washout thoughts and put masking tape across your mouthes.

By: Vincent Poffley

Vincent Poffley — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:32:48 +0000

Apartheid. Noun. Meaning “separateness” in Afrikaans. A system whereby people are divided into separate groups and treated differently based on arbitrarily decided criteria. The hallmark of Apartheid is the idea that people should be “separate but equal”, which of course never results in true equality.

The situation with gay people being given their own patronising “separate but equal” version of marriage qualifies absolutely. It is not the same thing. It is not equal, culturally or legally. It is apartheid pure and simple.

I think it is you who does not understand what apartheid is.

By: mike

mike — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:27:42 +0000

Vincent, People from South Africa know what apartheid is. You don’t seem to.

By: jako

jako — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 04:16:43 +0000

I know what Ian is saying but I have to add I think it is wonderful to watch the confidence and the progress of young lesbians and gays. Our coming out in the 60s and 70s was extremely fraught with danger, loss of jobs, difficulty in letting homes ect ect ect. But we compensated with lots of fantastic sex and usually when the rest of the world was asleep. So to watch the progress towards full acceptance to what we were born as is just fine by me.I think the future will be fraught in ways we have not imagined yet so the more confident we are with who we are the better.

By: Niki

Niki — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:15:34 +0000

Of course, a man could not dream of having a husband! Men have wives, and wives, husbands. That’s a Straight relationship, which is different from a gay one, because the sexes involved are different!

By: Lucius Malfoy

Lucius Malfoy — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:12:30 +0000

I can see what Ian means. It would have been really horrible to be gay when he was growing up. Things are much better now, but unlike any devil’s advocate would say, we’re still second class citizens under the law, which is one (of many) reasons I moved from my native USA to Sweden. I’m not going to pay taxes and be expected to enjoy being a second-class citizen at the same time.

By: Vincent Poffley

Vincent Poffley — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:09:25 +0000

But, even though gay people are still second-class citizens (thanks to marriage apartheid, the blood ban, and lingering cultural homophobia), it is somewhat insulting to compare the discrimination most of us face today with that suffered by people such as Sir Ian forty years ago. That’s no reason for complacency, ye gods no, but by any measure things have improved massively.

In my opinion Sir Ian is right on the money about the psychological damage that past discrimination has wrought. I grew up under the nasty auspices of Section 28, and my confidence, self-esteem and sense of worth suffered terribly from a mere silence on gay issues. I can only dimly begin to perceive how horrendous it must have been when homosexuality was both illegal and reviled.

By: Vincent Poffley

Vincent Poffley — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:01:22 +0000

Ah yes, the old “there’s no inequality, because gay men can still marry a woman” canard. I’ve yet to meet anyone who really, seriously thinks that’s a reasonable argument.

It would be like imposing a law that everyone must write with their right hand. There’s no discrimination there, surely, because all the dextrals are forbidden from using their left hands as well! Or how about imposing a ban on wheelchairs. That doesn’t discriminate against the disabled, because able-bodied people can’t use a wheelchair either! See, perfectly equal!

By: RobN

RobN — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:08:33 +0000

Paddy: I don’t do this because of my sexuality. I just like a good row! lol.

Simon: I’m not offended generally, I just think in a lot of cases it’s worth playing Devil’s advocate in the hope that people might see the other side of the argument instead of following the ‘party line’ all the time. You might notice I do actually go with the common consensus from time to time, and where in my comment was I being in your words “aggressive, unpleasant and confrontational”? – I thought I was the one trying to show the optimistic outlook in that comment.

Some peoples glasses are half full, others see theirs half empty. In Simon Murphy’s case, somebody’s nicked his f_cking pint.

By: Paddy

Paddy — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:57:38 +0000

RobN says “My sexuality is just one small facet of my life” yet he’s prowling around these boards night noon and bloody day!

By: Philip

Philip — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:21:33 +0000

Good actor I liked it when he played the Frankenstein director the bride of Frankenstein.
I tracked down the website and all he seems to boast about is Lord of the rings.
When he played the character the director of bride of Frankenstein, I felt very sorry for

him. Most films I just a little bit silly grown-up men playing children’s games but

sometimes you can forget yourself and enjoy a good film.

At the moment I’m under a great deal of stress with the local council
asking me a million questions to try to cover up for their wrongdoings.
I watched his film again.

Physically I have always been able to take care of myself but when the
establishment turned against you or seem to you do realise suddenly that
you are a second-class citizen you are tolerated rather than accepted.

“My friends friends is a homosexual they are harmless really”
most of you are just that gay person from number blah blah blah.
You are not Philip David Terry Johnny and so on you that gay person
from number blah blah blah.

Your sexuality is not a small part of your life it is your life. The person
you love is not of the “norm” the people you walk past and find attractive
is not what they find attractive.

When you’re working out in the gym you are trying to look attractive to your own sex.
Your sexuality is not a small part of your life it is your life. It is part of your
conversations it is your lifestyle.

Blah blah blah and blah blah blah.

My eyesight is slightly damaged does anybody know a good quality text-to-speech program?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULDq2ikigtM
He wants somebody to Love but he is an abomination.
Dictionaries definition “something that you dislike and disapprove.”

Gods and Monsters (1998)
The Father of Frankenstein (USA) (working title)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhK0ia7oG0

By: Simon Murphy

Simon Murphy — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:43:44 +0000

No 8: Vulpy:

“1) Like any straight man I can marry any woman I chose
2) Like any gay man a straight man may enter into a civil partnership with another man.”

Both true, but:

3. A gay person cannot marry another person of the same sex.
4. A straight person cannot enter a civil partnership with someone of the opposite sex.

By: moamaom

moamaom — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:37:38 +0000

vulpus_rex, the “gays already have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex” argument is just stupid.

This same argument was used in the US to defend laws banning interracial marriage. The common view was that anti-miscegenation laws don’t violate the equal protection clause of the constitution because they applied “equally” to everyone: a white man can marry any white woman of his choice and black man can do the same with any black woman. No-one has the right to marry someone of a different race so where’s the inequality?

The right to marry the person of your choice is a fundamental human right. The ‘inequality’ is that straight people can marry the person they love and gay people can’t. Giving us some second-class marriage substitute doesn’t suffice.

By: Brian Burton

Brian Burton — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:29:10 +0000

You are all a damn lot of MOANING MINIS and Simon Murphy the atheiest whacho is the biggest. Get a life you ‘Prissy Pricillas.’

By: vulpus_rex

vulpus_rex — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:22:05 +0000

I don’t wish to be a pedant but to all those moaning about inequality:

1) Like any straight man I can marry any woman I chose
2) Like any gay man a straight man may enter into a civil partnership with another man.

A straight man can’t marry another man as far as I am aware so where’s the inequality?