Comments on: Peter Tatchell accuses academics of smearing him

By: RobN

RobN — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:22:36 +0000

Eddy: PPS. You’re a c_nt.

By: RobN

RobN — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:21:56 +0000

Eddy: PS. WTF has homophobic attacks got to do with Peter Tatchell?

By: RobN

RobN — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:20:03 +0000

Eddy: What precisely has he done except alienate the general populace from LGBT people? If I didn’t know better, I would think all gay men were rabid, left-wing politicos that just like stirring up trouble and holding protests, by how Tatchell, Outrage and similar ‘gay rights’ people acted. OK, so that’s *most* gay men.

What I find even more annoying is whenever there is some gay issue, the media wheel out Skeletor every damn time. THAT MAN DOES NOT REPRESENT ME, AND MANY OTHERS! Equally, Summerskill is an ineffectual little drip that does nothing to forward the gay agenda. I may not like Tatchell, but at least he has the bollocks to stand up and be counted.

The point of my rant is that sometimes fighting in the wrong way can actually do precisely the opposite of what it set out to achieve. His heart’s in the right place, but he sadly does all the wrong things for the right reasons.

By: Eddy

Eddy — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:47:07 +0000

RobN wrote “I’d smear him all over the wall, and I’m not even an academic. Tatchell is just a washed-up MP that couldn’t make the grade, so resorted to setting up his own agenda”.

Well, RobN just sits behind his monitor and does nothing more for gay rights than making hateful comments about people who DO make a difference and when yet another gay man has been homophobically attacked in Ilford.

RobN’s contribution to our safety and freedom = NIL.
Tatchells’ contribution to our safety and freedom = MASSIVE.

Peter Tatchell = GIANT
RobN = worm

By: barry

barry — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:52:39 +0000

It’s very difficult to make headlines about gay issues unless the subject has a great deal of “meat” in it; publishers just aren’t bothered with day to day issues, or even the odd gay-bashing story. (and more’s the pity, i might add.)
At least P T remains up in the news, often at times when there is really no news to report. For this he deserves a great deal of credit; he really could do with an effective PR though and, yes, I reslly do agree that he should furnish the media with a more positive set of pictures – although whether they’d be used (or even air-brushed) to his advantage, i wouldn’t like to speculate.
As an afterthought, though, PT, I understand, lives on the breadline – so who’s going to cough up enough dosh to help him to achieve this?

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:06:40 +0000

What a ridiculous situation, extrapolating islamophobia from outspoken gay rights campaigners who are bringing religious haters to uncomfortable attention! It doesn’t matter that apologies have been given etc, those books are out there now…. engendering hatred from homophobes.

I don’t like Stonewall or Outrage particularly, as I believe they are ultimately self appointed and undemocratic. However, as gay society is basically non-existent, it’s all we have – I feel that it would be best start supporting Peter and Ben S.

They are so unlikeable though! Ben appears aloof, and Peter needs to become less of an old queen and a bit more robust/media friendly. In all the pics he looks ill and bitter.

Get some positive PR and nice photos out there Peter!

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:35:22 +0000

Gaby, the statements made about PT are most certainly not “demonstrably untrue”. He is a self-appointed bigot who gives us all a bad name. If anyone should be complaining about being smeared, it us who should be complaining that he is smearing us.

By: Gaby

Gaby — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:29:05 +0000

Yes, Peter is a controversial figure, but so what? The point here is that statements have been made about him which are demonstrably untrue, the authors have refused to withdraw them (making it impossible for the book to be reprinted by a publisher which presumably values its reputation), and now the false statements are being repeated yet again, in some cases on closed discussion lists on which Peter has no right of reply. The whole episode is utterly shameful and Peter is not going over the top in making a fuss about it. For the wider implications in terms of the degeneration of some supposedly “left-wing” politics. see http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/11/01/defend-peter-tatchell/

By: Brian Burton

Brian Burton — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:24:11 +0000

Quite right Charles….hic…back to my G&T!

By: Charles

Charles — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:19:45 +0000

Sorry to sound like my mother, but isn’t about time that Peter Tatchell got a proper job and started to engage with people.

I admire many of the things he stands for, but it is never ending.

By: Brian Burton

Brian Burton — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 08:12:38 +0000

Robin, I would say this to any academic:
As good as you are and as bad as I am, I’m as good as you are as bad as I am!

By: Nauta

Nauta — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:27:00 +0000

Accusing someone who dares to state that some branches of Islam and its Muslim followers hold vile anti gay views isn't Islamophobia! This strange assessment of the situation shows more lunacy out there. The authors have to be on very strong drugs.

By: RobN

RobN — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:52:31 +0000

I’d smear him all over the wall, and I’m not even an academic.

Tatchell is just a washed-up MP that couldn’t make the grade, so resorted to setting up his own agenda.

By: Brian Burton

Brian Burton — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:46:05 +0000

It’s all very well wanting to be King of the hill, but he will have to just weather the knocks as well. Tatchell must know that discontent is the first step in the progress of a man or nation.

By: martin

martin — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:54:00 +0000

Again: Islamophobia – like Budhismphobia or Hinduphobia or Christianophobia – doesn’t exist. The term is invented by muslim fundamentalists in order to avoid criticism of their religion. They cleverly use the language of the oppressed, while in reality that religion is the second largest in the world and uses its power to oppress gays and women!

By: Abi1975

Abi1975 — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:46:00 +0000

They are nobodies Peter who can only gain validity by using your name. I would be asking them to substantiate the claims they make as I cant see any legitimacy in them.

Keep up the fight Peter a reason exists why the books out of print and I guess its they are not any good.

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:40:12 +0000

I’m an academic and I’ve never heard of the article or book it was from. If you download Publish or Perish which tells you about the number of times academic work is cited by other academics, the chapter by Haritaworn has been cited exactly zero times. I don’t think Peter need worry…