Reader comments · Stephen Gately’s widower makes official complaint about Jan Moir column · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Stephen Gately’s widower makes official complaint about Jan Moir column

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Excellent……

  2. This is really goos news -however I’m not so sure we can expect anything from PCC to hot the mail where it hurts

  3. Simon Murphy 17 Dec 2009, 5:52pm

    Paul Dacre – the editor of the Daily Heil is a senior figure in the PCC. I’ll see what the PCC says but I don’t really have faith in them as an organisation. Independent regulation of the press would appear to be necessary.

  4. Great news..I hope the vile bigoted homophobic bitch get sacked

  5. Excellent news.

  6. Jean-Paul Bentham 17 Dec 2009, 6:08pm

    She added: “In what is clearly a heavily orchestrated internet campaign I think it is mischievous in the extreme to suggest that my article has homophobic and bigoted undertones.”

    We’ll see about that, sweetie.

  7. Yt Verbroekken 17 Dec 2009, 6:16pm

    This is so good to see. Andrew you make me so proud of you. She has to know what she did. It did hurt us, Stephens fans, also very much. Hugs from me to you Andrew. XXX

  8. vulpus_rex 17 Dec 2009, 6:51pm

    “Can it really be that we are becoming a society where no one can dare to question the circumstances or behaviour of a person who happens to be gay without being labelled a homophobe? If so, that is deeply troubling.”

    I agree. I didn’t read her article, but the handful of people I know who did were never quite able to say what exactly about it was homophobic – distasteful, mean spirited and tactless, oh yes, but homphobic, no.

  9. I bet she thought this had already been swept under the carpet!

    Vulpus, if you didn’t read the article, how can you comment at all?

    Bernard, what are you talking about? The woman is a sleazy hack who works for a newspaper that plays to every mean-spirited attitude in this country.

  10. Yt Verbroekken 17 Dec 2009, 7:17pm

    Making money over someone that is the kindest and loving man. She should be a shame to make such a article. Bernard, you must be proud thinking like you do. I will love Stephen and Andrew forever. A perfect couple.

  11. Vulpus – are you splitting semantic hairs or don’t you have a clue what the article did contain…
    Not the original article, but a few salient points nonetheless quoted from it.
    If you can’t see the inherent homophobia in implying that 2 unrelated deaths of celebrity gay men constitutes a blanket trend and puts paid to the “…happily ever after myth of civil partnerships”, just try turning it around and applying the same logic to straight celebrities.
    Tiger Woods had several extra marital affairs… that aught to put paid to the “happily ever after myth” of straight marriage.

  12. I defend her right to ask questions. That’s her job as a journalist. Where she steps over the line is in failing to gather or seek any evidence, and so speculates, wrongly, and provides judgement, calling it ‘sleazy’, an in linking this to another ‘gay’ tragedy is inherently homophobic.

    I hope Jan can also apologise to Andrew, and the gay community.

  13. Brian Burton 17 Dec 2009, 10:36pm

    Vulpus rex,
    I hope your defence of the Homophobic Jan Moir has not got ulteria motives like she’s a Camaron supporter maybe!?

  14. Vulpus rex wrote
    “Can it really be that we are becoming a society where no one can dare to question the circumstances or behaviour of a person who happens to be gay without being labelled a homophobe? If so, that is deeply troubling.”

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    I hope we are not becoming that type of society
    I hope we will still be able to debate and question
    I hope Jan Moir now understands that her timing was lousy.

  15. Dr. Robin Guthrie 18 Dec 2009, 12:15am

    So. A Celeb Gay man died in his living room naturaly whilst his partner shagged off with a pick up.

    Does this mean that all gay men are tarred with this brush as this Jan Moir woman portraid.

    Personally, I and my partner of 15 years have never indulged in
    sexual practices that this idiot believes that all Gay men do.

    Piles puts paid to that.

    At the very least, I will not die of uglyness and ignorance….

  16. Stephen who?

    Turn over. Joe McElderry’s on.

  17. Dr Robin- who said any of that is even true? Robn makes another non-contribution
    Jan was homophobic in her column of venom

  18. Chester: That’s because I’ve said it all and vented my spleen over this non-event weeks ago when she wrote it. It was poorly written and ambiguous, but I, and many others don’t see it as homophobic. It’s just sad little cretins like you with a persecution complex that like to read into it what they want to read.

  19. Simon Murphy 18 Dec 2009, 12:52pm

    Why do you post here RobN?

    I mean – if you think that gay people are sad cretins with persecution complexes, then I don’t understand why you post here.

    Your posts are universally negative, aggressive, bullying, sneering and never miss an opportunity to condemn gay people.

    Isn’t the Daily Mail website a more suitable venue for you to be writing on? I mean if you voted UKIP in the last election (which you’ve confirmed – then why not hang out with the other ‘Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ over at the Daily Heil website?

  20. Pumpkin Pie 18 Dec 2009, 1:04pm

    I love the way this horrid little cow and her vapid supporters tried to defend her with the “free speech” argument…and then cried foul when thousands and thousands of people used their “free speech” to condemn her.

    Free speech means you get to say horrible things about people and they’re not allowed to fight back, does it? Ha! How utterly contemptible. What snivelling cowards these people are! You say something nasty, you face the music. That’s how things work in the adult world, kiddies.

  21. Simon Murphy: “Your posts are universally negative, aggressive, bullying, sneering and never miss an opportunity to condemn gay people.”

    Not quite; I just never miss an opportunity to condemn leftie/liberal tossers like yourself that think that all gay people should think and act alike, and support your blinkered socialist ideology.

    I think genuine homophobia is there and should be dealt with, but this constant knee-jerk reaction to every little factoid with a gay connotation and the most tenuous of connections seems to invoke the purple-faced, vein-popping reactions by so many people on here.

    It’s time people got a sense of proportion and recognised the scale of a situation, rather than hit the pedal to the metal every time somebody drops a bollock.

  22. Let’s hope she gets what she deserves and that the Daily Mail makes a suitable overdue apology.

  23. RobN – you consider homophobia a non-event then
    she attacked all gay marriages/CP’s

  24. Chester:
    Like I said, that is a matter of conjecture. Her comments did not, in my mind, attack gay marriage, she merely stated it wasn’t all sweetness and light like some people had led people to believe.
    Why is it so many people are so thin-skinned they jump at the slightest criticism of gay people and view it as a personal homophobic attack? You want to be treated equally? Then take the sh!t along with the compliments, and stop taking everything as a direct attack.

    That’s not homophobia, that’s just personal opinion.
    THIS is the sort of thing people should complain about:

  25. Jean-Paul Bentham 18 Dec 2009, 9:14pm

    Jan Moir = Stonewall Bigot of the Year

  26. Jean-Paul Bentham 19 Dec 2009, 2:49am

    Jan Moir = “American Stonewall” Bigot of the year.

    There is a difference, but you know that, innit.

  27. Yt Verbroekken 19 Dec 2009, 9:41am

    Robin, everyone can put something on paper. I go to bed early, my husband comes a little later. And that Dochev did get money for a story. If he needs money he can tell everything he wants. Its so stupid. Stephen and Andrew have been so happy. Stop with gossip and let Stephen rest in peace. He will be missed so much. Steo and Andy I love you both.

  28. RobN – it was homophobia actually
    opinions can be homophobic

  29. Jean-Paul Bentham 20 Dec 2009, 12:32pm

    Take her out in the back and shoot her, figuratively speaking, of course.

  30. It was the article that was sleazy, not Gately’s tragic death. The complaint is mainly about inaccuracy and intrusion.

    The article was also definitely a put-down of civil partnerships generally, intended to demean them in the eyes of the public, as against straight marriages. The Mail seems to be pushing anti-gay propaganda a lot lately.

  31. Sleaze: I never saw Moir’s comment as a ‘put-down’ of civil partnerships, I just think she rightfully put them in the same context as a straight marriage, and that any relationship, whether officially sanctioned or not, can be liable to go sour and fall apart.

    She has a point that the public / media perception of CP’s was that they were perfect, and that gay men were just so much better at holding down a partnership. Take it as criticism, yes, but not homophobia.

    I slag off gay men all the time, mainly because nobody else dares to, for fear of being painted with the “H” word. Even then, I am quoted as having “Internalised Homophobia”, whatever the hell that is. Sounds to me more like psychobabble-speak from people that just can’t accept criticism.

  32. “psychobabble-speak”? -…sounds like a term made up to avoid thinking about an issue properly, and to back up positional, rather than reasoned, thinking. And babble means speak, you don’t need it twice.

    “slightest criticism of gay people ” – what, like we’re all the same and can all be criticised in one breath? Hardly.

    It’s nonsense to suggest anyone thought CPs were all perfect or more so than straight marriages. On the contrary, opponents, particularly certain Christian groups, have been busy pushing the old lie that gay relationships never last and that’s why we shouldn’t have CPs or marriage. The article appeared to be taking that line, and was therefore offensive to many people on that level, as well as on the level of making a tragedy into something sleazy and disregarding the feelings of those close to the deceased.

    As for “internalised homophobia”, you know perfectly well what that is, if you’re gay. Every young gay person has to contend with that during the coming out process, unless they’ve been remarkably lucky. It’s believing all the myths and misinformation you’ve been fed about gay people while growing up. That’s one of the reasons why there is a high suicide rate among young gay people. Another is homophobic bullying by others. That bullying and violence (verbal and physical) is sometimes carried out by people who are terrified they might be gay themselves as a way of hiding it. It doesn’t take Sigmund Freud to point out the bleedin’ obvious.

    But regardless of whether the article was homophobic, which in my view it clearly was, it was sleazy and highly inappropriate and insensitive, and certainly deserves censure. It’s not a left wing/right wing thing, it’s just a matter of common decency.

  33. Sleaze: Psychobabble is a form of prose using jargon, buzzwords and highly esoteric language to give an impression of plausibility through mystification, misdirection, and obfuscation. The term implies that the speaker lacks the experience and understanding necessary for proper use of a given psychological term.

    “What, like we’re all the same and can all be criticised in one breath? Hardly.”
    Oh, like I call you a faggot? Isn’t that a globally derogatory description that we can all be “criticised in one breath”?

    “As for “internalised homophobia”, Every young gay person has to contend with that during the coming out process.”

    I’m close to 50. I’ve put up with all the teen years and coming out L-o-n-g ago. It’s more to the point that its taken me this long to really figure out what a bunch of selfish, vain, sexually-obsessed bunch of wankers gay men really are.

    The article was yes, insensitive and inappropriate, and the woman deserves a rap on the knuckles, but it wasn’t homophobic, just poor taste. As for censuring it, I prefer to let people have the freedom of the press. If the readers disapprove, they will say so, (as they have in this matter) – I would rather the masses dictate what should be seen, rather than some cloaked figure with a felt-tip pen.

  34. I think she was wrong to center on Civil Partnerships, as I think she was really trying to get at the lack of values within the gay community. At most she constructed a rather suggestive but confused article, which I personally did not find to be offensive, just innapropriate and tastless. She does, however, have a point; Why is it that a man can die in his PJs’, alone on the sofa and not be noticed by his husband for 10 hours as he was too busy having sex with a stranger in the next room. This is the man who should have been there for better or worse. He should have noticed. It does indeed paint a very sorry picture. Why is this considered to be normal? We want equality, but not accountability. The last Gay Pride I attended had half naked men on a float and upwards of 50 men having sex in some bushes. We want to be accepted by society, but want no part of it.

  35. To firther my view, it seems that the article was not intended to be homophobic, but would feel so if you that the critisism also applies to you in some way. I know men who have lost so much perspective to the point that they see cruising or saunas etc. in a similar light to other activities like bowling or dining out! However, they all seem rather quick to accuse predudice when they meet someone with more considered approach to sex. Perhaps this also applies in much of the reaction to the article?

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.