Still no reports about this on the BBC News website. Could it be the BBC thinks gays are just good for a joke?
The BBC expects gays to act camp for “their” entertainment like the 4 poofs and a piano.
U,S. Members of “Family” Condemn Ugandan Bill:
Scroll down to story entitled “Uganda’s Slow U-Turn?” by Jim Burroway, and grasp history of the Bill throughout 2009.
Statement on the Situation of Human Rights Violations and Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Africa:
Maybe the BBC should take a long hard look at these gay men in a Nazi concentration camp. The Nazis started off just asking questions about minority groups as well.
Pan African ILGA Press Statement:
Speaking of Nazi persecution of gays, this is a perfect time to promote the movie “Paragraph 175″.
Rick Warren and Uganda’s Looming Gay Genocide:
Gay Europe minister? Your headline is just as sensationalist. Chris, who is gay, as you rightly refer in your article is, Minister for Europe.
But Paolo, the nice thing about the Pink News headline “Gay Europe minister Chris Bryant attacks BBC’s ‘ludicrous mistake’ on gay execution debate” is that it is accurate and descriptive.
If Pink News had run a headline asking if “Should gay Europe minister Chris Bryant be executed?” then it would be entirely unacceptable.
I’m sure they thought they were just being provocative and trying to get a “good debate” going, although sadly they demonstrated a rather shocking ignorance and naivety. The BBC are always about 10 years behind social trends – they’re followers rather than leaders, and their handling of gay issues has repeatedly shown this in the recent past – Chris Moyles, the fact that they practically ignored the Michael Causer murder, the weekly Uncle Tomming of 4 Puffs and a Piano, and now this. They’re like a stuffy uncle who says “I don’t care what you fellows get up to in your private lives but I don’t want to hear about it.”
It would be funny if it wasn’t for the fact that people are being murdered for being gay.
And yet a lot of gay people actually work for the BBC. It really is strange to me. There seems to be two BBCs. One where people just make programmes to entertain, inform or educate people, possibly all three at once, and this sinister organisation with its political subplot. I get the first one. I don’t get the other one.
Come on everyone, let’s not make mountains out of molehills. Some moron wasn’t thinking and set up this ‘debate’. Yes, the BBC should apologise, but suggesting that they’re some kind of huge, bigoted homophobic organisation, as I’ve seen some people comment on other articles about this, is quite frankly stupid.
With online content, instant publishing, it’s easy to make a misjudgement and realise your mistake after it’s gone public. I can understand that. What annoys me much more are the BBC’s crass attempts to justify the whole thing.
Also I wonder if there are some BBC employees in the World Service who believe that homosexuals should be executed or imprisoned? That could partly explain why the question for debate took the form it did.
I’m very happy with Britain being multicultural. However I don’t think people who have dodgy views about women, other races or the LGBT community should be allowed to settle here or work in public-service organisations. We have fought so hard to change things, we don’t need to import people who want to turn back the clock. If we do we are storing up problems for the future.
I talked with a gay Somali man who lives in Britain who said he would fear for his life if his family or some members of the Somali community found out he was gay. We are importing this hatred.
Personally, I don’t blame anyone for re-acting so emphatically to the injustice of the anti-gay legislation pending in Uganda, and to the way the subject of the debate was phrased by the BBC. It is shocking.
What I’ve found out about Uganda while researching this news item is every bit as shocking because the recent headlines are just the tip of an iceberg that was years in the making, and it involved George W. Bush, “The Family” and Rick Warren. Their implication in Uganda’s internal affairs is well documented and was kept discrete for a long time.
Yes, the wording used by the BBC was far below the caliber I would expect from a (formerly) well-respected UK Media.
At the same time it did cast a sharp beam of light on homophobia in another part of the world. We could just as easily have a good look at the systematic murders of gays in Honduras since the revolution in June. It is ruthless and happening in broad daylight.
It does make me uncomfortable to be so comfortable here in Canada, where the least I can do is to educate myself regarding the realities members of my LGBT world community are experiencing, and to keep in touch with various gay-friendly organisations. Otherwise, the combination of knowledge and helplessness would send me round the bend.
I’m literally speechless… what in the gods do the BBC think they’re playing at?
Let’s see them post a debate called “Are black people inherently meant to be slaves?” or “Are women meant to stay in the home?”… see how far they get.
I’m sick of gay people being the minority that it’s ok to discriminate against!
“Could it be the BBC thinks gays are just good for a joke?”
“The BBC expects gays to act camp for their entertainment, like the 4 poofs and a piano.”
It will be interesting to see if Friday Night with Jonathan Ross will be more or less homophobic???
Cleggy: Give it a rest will you? You’re a poof. So am I. So are they. Get over it.
With the rise in homophobic attacks, particularly over the past year and the crassness of this “have your say” article on the BBC, I think there is definitely now a very strong case for television increasing its portrayal of “real” gay characters in dramas. I know they’re meant to currently be in production for a lesbian realistic drama set in Glasgow. I don’t have any problem with camp gay people on TV, they are also people nonetheless, but without balancing it with other “types” of gay people who are not obviously camp or effeminate, then I think television viewers will not have their stereotypical views challenged.
I’m in a gay football team for example, one or two of us are quite camp, most of us are very straight-acting (well, until we start talking after the game about any hotties that caught our eye in the locker-room, ha!).
I agree with George. And yes there is a TV series being filmed in Glasgow but as usual its the BBC and its all wrong from what I understand. There is hope however in an online drama series currently in production also in Glasgow by a company called Bad Pony Media. I saw them filming near my house a few months ago and asked what was going on. I spoke to the producers who seemed really nice.
The show is called ‘Ninety Eight Percent’, and features realistic gay characters from a Glasgow housing estate taking on homophobes in their local community. They have quite a diverse cast, some of them I also met and they seemed really nice and into their roles and the fact that this is very different for television and online.
It’s good to know that there are people out there who won’t just portray stereotypes. The main character is a sociopath lesbian gangster called Casey Spencer.
They have a promo and the unaired pilot episode online, its definately worth watching, however, I warn you about the coarse language, sex scenes and violence lol – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXq6HtG04QI
George: “I’m in a gay football team for example, one or two of us are quite camp, most of us are very straight-acting”
Why do any of you ‘act gay’. Surely putting on an act (or a pretence) must be tiring and annoying. Why don’t you behave in your natural manner? If that is camp then good for you. If that is butch then goood for you.
But putting on an act, as you confirm you do in your post, really is quite sad.
I utterly despise the use of this aspirational, self hating expression and despair that it has become a by-word for “I’m normal really and you’d never guess I’m a poof would you?”
Simon Murphy: “Why do any of you ‘act gay’. Surely putting on an act (or a pretence) must be tiring and annoying.”
Where have you been? Throughout my entire life on the gay scene over 20+ years I have seen LOADS of stereotypical ‘mincing little f_ggot’ types (and they play up to it), with effeminate poses, gestures and other pretences. The next day you see them working in B&Q and they are as butch as Mike Tyson’s jockstrap.
Many, many gay men seem to like putting on this act, I have no idea why, and I like to think I’m straight-acting myself, but with a crowd of gay guys and a few sherbets we can all camp it up when it suits us.
This is hardly big news, but like the TV stereotypes, it does tend to give the average str8 in the street a somewhat slanted impression that all gay men need splints in their wrists.
I think the BBC did the right thing. It’s only when things are expressed so starkly that what’s going on sinks in. You can’t blame the BBC for asking the same question that the Ugandan Government is asking its Parliament. Do you want to kill gay people – or not?
Also, I think the question was very clearly put in context, so stop screaming and do something about this. Lobby your MP, write to members of the Ugandan Goverment. Write to our Ambassador.
Not sure I understand your question Simon. The phrase “straight-acting” is commonly used to make the point that some people (such as myself) are gay, but are not camp or effeminate. I don’t pretend to be anything I’m not, which is that whilst I’m gay I am not in any way camp or effeminate. Many people I meet don’t realise I’m gay unless it comes up in conversation somehow. I behave and carry myself as myself without any pretence. Those in our team who are camp and/or effeminate, well it is clear when you know them that they are also being themselves, its a part of their natural personalities.
I agree wholeheartedly that there are plenty of gay men around who “act” camp or effeminate, sometimes to fit in with the crowds they hang around, sometimes for attention, or possibly for other reasons. I’m not one of those people however.
“The BBC expects gays to act camp for “their” entertainment like the 4 poofs and a piano”
Those 4 guys have sold themselves out, the BBC are using them to continue the homophobic stereotypical view of that we “ALL” act camp. It is a product of discrimination. We are expected to act camp for there entertainment!
When you were young did your so called friends expect you to camp it up all of the time?Yes they probably did, we have been brainwashed from a young age, are very existence is for there entertainment, where else dose camp come from?
Wolfenden Report on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution, recommending that homosexual behaviour in private between consenting adults, over 21 should be decriminalised.
I’m just wondering if he is accidentally being homophobic..and whether such things should really be allowed. I know its a load of fun and trust me I hate this political correctness era.. however there is some truth in what i’m saying i think. I don’t want people to think all gay people are like those old men on the piano for example or think all gay men are ‘puffs’ like the floppy hand image i get when i say the word..
So is it homophobic and should he really be getting away with it on his show?
I just received a standard one-liner reply from ‘BBC complaints’ directing me to the editor’s blog. I’m not even worth replying to directly? Terrible complaints procedure! So below is my reply email….
Dear anonymous person at BBC,
Thank you BBC for your bog-standard, impersonal reply to my complaint. It’s exactly the standard I’ve come to expect. May I expect the same flippant response when I with-hold my licence fee and drag the ensuing court case through the media on the grounds I do not wish to fund an organisation which aids in inciting homophobic hatred?
I am well aware of the editor’s response but thank you very much for sending the link to the editor’s half-hearted and misguided apology anyway.
I will now use other, more public avenues to air my complaint.
You should make a direct complaint to the BBC Trust not the BBC management Mitch.
The BBC Trust are duty bound to investigate unlike the the BBC management.
Go for it Chris, and don’t stop until we get the proper apology we deserve. And the relevant rolling head.
Chris Bryant is an ex Beeboid, so he knows how the system works. No-one will be sacked for this, the BBC trust, i.e. the BBC, will investigate itself, and a ten day course for all Beeboids will be organised to “educate and evaluate” “stakeholders and team players”. A nice trip to Uganda to include a safari and maybe a trip to see the mountain gorillas will be laid on, and at the end of it, no-one will be sacked.
The title of this blog was stupid, and for that reason, whoever did it and was in charge of it should be sacked as they are incompetent. I doubt anyone thinks they advocate killings homosexuals, but if you are crap at your job you should be sacked, even in Beeb land.
No-one will be though, mark my words.
What is Chris Bryant doing sticking his nose into this anyway, he is a Europe Minister, shouldn’t he be hard at work denying us a referendum or something?
should bbc editors be tortured? isnt THIS a fair and balanced question. Yes, it is a stark and disturbing topic but we need to face up to the reality of the situation!
Lets face it the BBC is so busy rimming its coterie of ` celebrities` that they have in danger of suffocating up their own arses..just like the nutters in Uganda.
sorry.. meant they are in danger of suffocating up their own arses.
“What is Chris Bryant doing sticking his nose into this anyway, he is a Europe Minister, shouldn’t he be hard at work denying us a referendum or something?”
He is far too busy posing in his undies on Gaydar and slobbering over his “best mate” James Purnell, who admittedly is quite dishy but not dishy enough for me to break my never s**g a lefty rule.
| And yet a lot of gay people actually work for the BBC. It
| really is strange to me. There seems to be two BBCs. One where
| people just make programmes to entertain, inform or educate
| people, possibly all three at once, and this sinister
| organisation with its political subplot. I get the first one. I
| don’t get the other one.
There are two BBCs. The News division operates quite differently to all the rest, and its history, which continues, fully explains what we see.
Whilst the entertainment and education side has all those gay employees, and stars, and ethnic minority ones too, and takes equality fairly seriously in some respects, the news division has insulated itself on the grounds of journalistic standards.
Even though you see women and ethnic minorities on screen in the news output, and listed as senior executives, they are window dressing for a very much white heterosexual male ethos, and held to very different standards.
It is very easy to understand the mess they have made this week, up to the highest levels, when one knows that the BBC news division still refuses to employ anyone they consider biased towards LGB or women’s causes. They have no one who would know better. And they don’t think it matters.
Until the early 90s, the government security services vetted all employment application to BBC staff positions to keep out all who were considered risky (ie “lefty”, especially communist – Kirsty McCall’s mother and father were prominent early victims), and that was deemed to include our equality activists. Then they shredded all the files but allowed News to operate its own employment criteria.
This is why women’s news issues, and LGB and T ones, are utterly ignored (in marked contrast to US news organisations, for example). So BBC news does think executing LGBT people is up for debate. If you look at their coverage of Afghanistan and Pakistan you quickly see they think women’s rights are up for debate too. And worse. The BBC is never the first to report attacks on girl’s schools, acid attacks, etc.. Women reporters in BBC news are constantly cowed by having to try to fit male standards, and knowing they can be fired at any time on the grounds that their looks are no longer considered suitable, which never applies to white men. Have you ever seen a gay or trans BBC news reporter?
Why else do you think the BBC is currently lobbying to be excluded from the public equality duties of the Equality Bill? The news division regards the idea of promoting equality for all as utterly biased. How could its broadcasts to countries like Uganda, Nigeria, or Iran, be taken seriously it it had to promote equality?
Of course exactly the issues it scorns are becoming the hottest news stories, making the BBC increasingly out of step with western societies. Indeed, it is so out of step that it is risking prosecution now under laws that are more than 50 years old, such as the enactments of the Geneva conventions, one of which outlaws all activity which leads to genocide. The execution of all Ugandans who are both homosexual and HIV positive would certainly be genocide, even if the UN (homophobically and transphobically) failed to foresee that hate-mongers would target sexual minorities. Journalists are specifically included in those who are often to blame. Uganda also has a terrible history of mass prejudice, and is an immediate neighbour to Rwanda, where genocide was very real.
1/ – Yes, people have to be woken up to the horrors that many lgbt people face around the world, but framing ‘Should homosexuals face execution’ as (by implication) a respectable topic for debate in any public forum in a civilized society is totally irresponsable, and, as others here have suggested, a gesture of casual contempt which would probably not be shown to other minorities.
2/ – vulpus_rex – Arbitrary restrictions on harmless pleasures are very foolish. I have very enjoyably sh****d a few Tories, though, admittedly, life-long companionship and love were not in prospect.
Why do 10% of the population get 0% of the BBC programming?
No taxation without representation.
Peter Kay has just been homophobic on the BBC One show what a surprise!!!!
Different day same old homophobic BBC
Friday was Terry Wogan’s last day as presenter of BBC Radio 2′s Breakfast Show. There was a Have Your Say tribute card on the BBC website today, which invited listeners to send Terry some greetings. I posted a greeting and it got published briefly. It said ‘Should Terry Wogan be executed? I accept that this is a stark question, but lots of aging people will be upset by his decision to retire, thereby depriving them of his inane babble early in the morning, therefore we need to debate the genuine consequnces of his decision. Should he live?’
It stayed up for about 30 minutes but got removed for being ‘offensive’.
But the debate about whether gay people should be executed, still seems to be a reasonable discussion topic for the BBC.
I have grown increasingly concerned over the last few years about the BBC’s slant on a number of issues, especially the tabloidification of it’s main news programs. It’s certainly not just LGBT people who feel unrepresented or misrepresented by the BBC nowadays – they’re completely out of touch with much of middle and working-class Britain. Anyone interested in their (mis)representation of the social group most viscerally hostile to LGBT people (Islamists), could try googling muslim infiltration BBC or take a look at: http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/blog/2008/07/does-the-bbc-think-the-brotherhood-represent-uk-muslims.html (especially the 1st comment)