omg what? A homophobic tory?? Surely not! ¬_¬
Christopher Biggins is a major Tory supporter, to the extent of being one of the few celebs willing to turn up to their conferences. So no surprise he’s rising to defend a Tory against a Labour MP. Not exactly unbiased comment.
Lucky: Of course, you would bring politics into it. Biggins merely says what most level-headed people think:
A complete storm in a teacup, made by some attention-grabbing queen.
Politicians will do anything for publicity.
It does seem to have been blown out of all proportion.
Some people have short memories, perhaps a week in politics is all forgotten the week after. The Public do not forget easily, especially when the Gays are slagging off the Gays, the repressed Gay Community know better than that!!.
Biggins IS a pantomime dame
Osborne linked Bryant’s sexuality with X-dressing (somewhat bitchy, if not homophobic). That is: the forst thing he thought of with panto was Bryant in drag, not as Buttons, So homophobic : Yes, as a weak put down, but suggesting a persona predilictiiion
Biggins is right.
Bryant shouldn’t throw stones if he’s only gonna cry when there thrown back!
Way to sensitive to be a politican me thinks!!
If we are going to put everyone’s comments under a microscope, Bryant likened Osborne to Prince Charming, a character normally played by a woman. So what’s the sub-text here, if every comment has to have one?
…Prince Charming, a character normally played by a woman.
Heh. Good point, SMC.
interesting to see how the conversation splits on political lines: Jock S. Trap, Spanner, SMC are famously on the right, and willing to support the Tories on anything.
This is a storm in a teacup, but does beg the question of why Osborne jumped immediately to “pantomoime dame” as opposed to a character (Widow Twankie?) It just feels he thought “gay=dragging up”
What I would say to the Tories on this site, please examine your side’s performance on the “gay agenda” critically, as you did Labour
Yes but the point is had he not been gay, I can’t imagine Mr. Osbourne thinking to say it. That’s what makes it homophobic,
How do we know that? Your just making assumptions to suit your argument without actual proof.
If he had said it to a heterosexual man you lot would still find something in it to whinge about.
Besides not all pantomine dames are played by Gay men so by what your saying your just stereotyping the part and Gay men which surely is ‘offensive’ in inself. Therefore you must be homophobic??!!
No? see doesn’t work does it.
It was just an off the cuff remark to a comment made to him. If Mr. Bryant hasn’t got a sense of humour then Mr. Osborne can hardly be blamed for that.
@ Mihangel apYrs
Guess thats the beauti of living in a democracy. If all comments were the same that would resemble a dictatorship and how boring would that be!!
Jock S. Trap
agreed, but we still need to question and criticise even those we support. WE deserve to be led and governed by those worthy of us, and held to account by us. I always expect more from my friends than others because I have put my trust in them.
Political point scoring, whatever next?!
Biggins = Gay tory = Duhhh
As it happens, I’m openly on the right, although not a Conservative or on the American/UK free market right, and I also think this has been blown out of proportion.
I think that Osborne was probably not being homophobic – particularly when Chris Bryant called George Osborne ‘Baron Hardup’ and ‘Prince Charming’.
However, I did consider that the advertisements by Labour when they had two flying pigs with the faces of Michael Howard and Oliver Letwin, two openly Jewish men, to be borderline racist. I also considered the Labour advertisement where they portrayed Michael Howard as Shylock and/or Fagin also to be borderline racist.
Mihangel apYrs “Interesting to see how the conversation splits on political lines…”
With the greatest of respect, cobblers.
I would have said the same about whoever the politician was, either side of the fence. I don’t deny I am right wing, but I hold no allegiance to any political party, and I prefer to follow simple common sense. Were the roles reversed, I would still call him an over-sensitive, whinging little queen.
As Jock S. Trap pointed out, he is supposed to be a politician, so if they have to receive as well as to give. To paraphrase another famous politician, the words involved “Kitchen” and “Heat”.
Thank heavens the holidays are almost over , more of these daft stories about Chris Bryant and I think might go mad…
According to Spanner above, a black person should take the heat of racism on the chin, if he/she is a politician speaking up in parliament…
I do recognise your inefffable right to bitchslap ANY whiney little queen. And the “gay scene”.
Christopher Biggins is a ‘sell out’ like so many in the showbiz world. However I’m not sure Osborne intended the homophobic interpretation to which Chris Bryant took exception.
Beberts: “According to Spanner above, a black person should take the heat of racism on the chin, if he/she is a politician speaking up in parliament…”
If it were a bit of light-hearted banter, why not? People are way too thin-skinned. We are not talking day-to-day anyway, this is the commons, Where debate, argument and conflict are an everyday occurrence. If the little drip can’t handle a few barbed comments, he is in the wrong job. I for one wouldn’t want a sanctimonious little drip like him as my MP.
If a black MP had been called a golliwog, then that would quite rightly be racist. Why? Only black people can be golliwogs because you have to have black skin. It is therefore specifically targetting ONE group. The same goes for calling someone a Yid, you are insulting ONE sole group of people.
But pantomime dames are not exclusively gay, straight, black, white, Jewish, Christian, Welsh, Finnish, able-bodied, disabled or anything else. They can be from ANY combination of groups across the world. Even female. Never heard of a woman impersonating a man impersonating a woman? Plus there is the whole Prince Charming argument that others have proposed. It’s all about common sense and rational thought.
Substituting gay with race in this set of circumstances is not relevant because the two issues are not comparable here. It’s just logical.
Those kicking up a storm should maybe look at their own views. It seems they are the ones stereotyping by equating pantomime dames solely with homosexuals. And now it’s in the media, they have reconfirmed those stereotypes for all the impressionable people who dither in supporting us to see. Well done. I have little time for George Osborne, but Chris Bryant is totally wrong on this matter. It’s all very cringeworthy and makes him look quite weak as a person. Let’s not forget, as an elected MP who put pictures of himself in y-fronts on the internet, is he really someone with optimal values and principles? Or any common sense? Just because he is gay doesn’t mean as a gay man I have to like him, I had assumed that was my democratic right.
If we could concentrate on battles that actually need fighting instead of focusing on the irrational, petty complaints of the oversensitive minority, we might get closer to the real equality we are apparently aiming for.
Oh, come on. I generally like Bryant, and loathe Osborne, but he wasn’t being homophobic. I’m fed up of all the Pink News commenters who think every insult’s a jab at their sexuality. Stop being idealist morons and enter the real world.
It’s like those Stonewall t-shirts – “Some people are gay, get over it.”
The thing is, most people ARE over it (and those who aren’t won’t be changed by… a t-shirt.). It’s the gay people who aren’t!
Just had to get that off my chest. =)
When school kids are targetted because of their sexuality and no one moves a finger to help them, you can partly blame the ConDem coalition. The Tories have a history of homophobic gaffes. They occur pretty much regularly in their ranks, and someone, often the top guy will move his lips to deny what is going on. If boy Osborne had thrown a racial banter in parliament, it’d be totally different, but because the incident has been of the homophobic type, top boy and his apologists expect us to take it lightly. This type of attitude can be seen in schools nationwide. Gay kids have to deal with homophobic banters daily in schools, and they expect most of the authorities to ignore or deny what is going on, just to save the school’s name..
“When school kids are targetted because of their sexuality and no one moves a finger to help them, you can partly blame the ConDem coalition.”
Actually you have to blame Labour for that. Whilst it was a good thing that Section 28 was removed they Failed to replace it with positive education leaving the likes of Ian Baynham amongst others victims from uneducated ferrel children dead. The Labour Party can only be blamed for that!
“…they expect most of the authorities to ignore or deny what is going on…”
It is again the Labour Party that failed on this. They had been in 13 long years and this is the result. You can’t blame 8 months of the current government for 7 years of Labour education failings.
This is Just an example but I know and I’m sure some within the Black community know that one person who over-reacts to anything said with the word ‘black’ no matter how innocent the sentence. A bit militant. Well Berberts (and some others) you Have to accept you are the Gay equivalent. Most people within these communities see these people are a strain because they damage us by continously failing to deal with the Real issues, the Real problems we face. Those people are what make us be looked down upon. Instead of targeting the real racism and homophobia we can face sometimes on a daily basis. Of course there are many who don’t suffer with this but try to help make our voices stronger and accepted. Very often it is these militants that just try to hold everyone back, over playing the victim and in the end they tend to end up Very alone.
As for the Tories ‘homophobic agenda’… you mean like taking action on removing past criminal records on legal age consent just a few months into taking office?
Grow up and grow a pair mate!
The stereotypical Gay Labour militant, stuck in the 1980′s that can’t deal with the fact Labour Lost the last election and just can’t get over it —> What a Bore, Get over it!!
Mihangel apYrs: “apologies Spanner, I do recognise your inefffable right to bitchslap ANY whiney little queen. And the “gay scene”.
Thank you. And so you should. These forums seem to be full of spoilt brat whiners that act like four year olds that just want a bit of attention.
Violent physical homophobia is one thing, but whatever happened to “sticks and stones”?
As has been pointed out, the simple fact is, most people really don’t give a tinker’s that you might be gay. That’s your problem, madame isn’t getting the attention any more is she? Must go buy more sequins.
I can’t believe that some people are still trying to argue that Osbourne’s pathetic little jibe was not made with Bryant’s sexuality in mind. Are we seriously supposed to believe that it was mere coincidence that the comment in question (with all its gender bending connotations etc) was directed at a gay man? Come on!
In the greater scheme of things, it might not be the most serious or homophobic incident in the world but at a time when we are trying to eradicate homophobic bullying, is it too much to expect that the rulers of the country set a good example in this regard?! And this is especially the case where the Tories are concerned, with all the homophobic baggage they bring to the table.
And to the handful of Tory cheerleaders on this site, I would simply point out that your party has a shameful history where gay issues are concerned and have only very recently been keen to project a progressive image which is based more on a cold calculation of how times have changed than any genuine commitment to LGBT equality. That lack of real commitment to our issues means we have to be constantly vigilant where they’re concerned and we should make absolutely no apologies whatsoever for calling out homophobia whenever it rears its ugly head.
The previous govt for all its faults did make Britain an infinitely more gay friendly place, moving it from being one of the most homophobic countries (in legal terms) in western Europe to something of a leader in this area. There can be no going back to the 80s or 90s when Thatcher’s Britain had some of the most antiquated gay laws in the western world!
As for Mr Biggins, I have heard him railing against the apparent evils of “political correctness” in the past and like Andrew Pierce, can always be relied upon to deliver a quote that makes the right-wing press and homophobes in general feel more secure in justifying their bigotry.
So verbal bullying and harassment is just fine in your book is it? It’s only if the person gets violently assaulted that we should be worried because of “sticks and stones” and all that. Tell that to the children verbally harassed each day simply for being gay, some to the point of suicide.
You might live such a charmed existence that homophobic abuse doesn’t impinge on your life or then again you may simply be a troll looking for a reaction. But either way you are seriously deluded if you think homophobia is no longer an issue in this country and it’s all about gays just wanting attention.
Now go back to reading your Daily Mail like a good little Tory/UKIP/BNP supporter..
“The previous govt for all its faults did make Britain an infinitely more gay friendly place”
I’m not saying everything Labour did was wrong but sorry, what rubbish. How is it that in the last 10 years I personally have suffered more homophobic abuse than at any time in my life? How is it that homophobic crime has increased under Labour?
Tell the Gay people living in areas where muslim immigrants now dominate and where homophobic abuse and violence when reported the police turn a blind eye, notably Tower Hamlets. Also remember that most of these areas are indeed Labour run.
I actually have to say that the scene and gay life seemed far more enjoyable in the late 80′s and in the 90′s. I’m not saying it isn’t now but there was more to do, better and more choice of places to go. It certainly seemed much more acceptable then. But then thats London for you. Now, it has changed. A couple of friends of mine went out in Mile End and were attacked by a group of muslim youths. When the police arrived my friends were told it was there own fault. That was a year ago. I know plenty of other times similar abuse has happened. Thats NOT better, no matter how you whitewash it.
I always voted Labour, coming from a Labour family with the party background, up until and including 1997 but then things changed and I voted Lib Dem in 2001 & 2005. 2010 was the first year I ever voted Tory in a General Election. Apparently one time may make you ‘famously right wing’ but I could see that if Labour stayed then this country by now… well doesn’t worth thinking about but worse than Greece I should think. Someone had to take charge. I could see the Tories under David Cameron wasn’t the party it once was so for the country’s sake for me it had to be done. Have to admit I don’t regret my vote, so far anyway. However I must say, the likelyhood of me voting Labour with Ed Milibland in charge is Very remote.. Actually I can say with some confidence it won’t happen.
Either way before carrying on blindly about how wonderful it was under Labour for a lot of LGBT people esp in Labour run areas it wasn’t. I guess I’ve come to realise Labour are too divisive.
It strikes me that with the Tories it’s upfront and although I see they have changed sure, you at least know what you may be getting with a few. With Labour run areas where homophobic crime is rife, while those councils ignore whats happening, everything coming through via stealth and pretending its not going on.
Labour had to chance to improve things, improve education. Instead it failed and then brought in the much forgotten, esp amongst Labour supporters, Amendment 70 which will allow schools to discriminate. Much worse than Section 28.
How blind, how double-standard, how hypocritical. All words to Labour supporters that mean nothing.
@Jock S. Trap
I’m not saying for one minute that things were perfect under Labour but it is undoubtedly the case that the legal climate did drastically improve for the better during their years in power – equal age of consent, full decriminalisation of homosexuality, civil partnerships etc.
That’s not to say they couldn’t have went further and there were clearly people in the Labour Cabinet who favoured a watered down approach to equality – Ruth Kelly being the obvious example but Jack Straw, for example, wasn’t exactly a solid supporter either. However the vast majority of Labour MP’s favoured advancing gay rights in the UK as did a majority of Lib Dems. The Tories on the other hand fought practically every reform tooth and nail and are very recent converts to the cause of gay equality, and then only because they recognised how far they had fallen behind public opinion on the issue.
I agree that Cameron is an improvement on previous Tory leaders but I refuse to believe that a party that until fairly recently was advocating blatantly anti-gay policies has been completely transformed. That’s why we need to stay vigilant with regards to their apparent conversion to the cause of equality. You would also think that a party with that kind of baggage would be especially careful and sensitive when it comes to avoiding accusations of homophobia but apparently not.
You also talk about how you noticed an increase in homophobic incidents during the Labour years but the fact is that public opinion as a whole moved very strongly in favour of us during that period. As recently as the late 90s, a majority of people in Britain still regarded homosexuality as immoral. Now only a third do, which is still a third too much but clearly government can shape public opinion by their actions.
I think as far as immigration is concerned, it does bring challenges as well as benefits and whatever party is in power needs to make crystal clear that people choosing to move to the UK have to respect the laws and values of the country and that religious belief more generally does not give you the right to engage in bigoted behaviour.
And finally, I cannot accept that the 80s in particular was some kind of golden gay age. You had openly homophobic police, could be legally fired from your job simply for being gay and committed a crime if you were having sex with a 20 year old (!) while straights were allowed to be sexually active from the age of 16. For anyone who looks back at that period through rose tinted glasses, I suggest they talk to Peter Tatchell who noted that more gay men were arrested and jailed in the UK in the 80s for the likes of “gross indecency” and “cottaging” than anywhere else in Europe. Also, there was a spike in these kinds of homophobic arrests in the 80s compared to the previous decade. But this hardly surprising when you consider the kind of frenzied, right-wing atmosphere that existed during the Thatcher era. And with a Tory led govt in power again, we cannot allow any rowing back on the gains in the area of gay rights that have been achieved.
Could you also provide more details on those police officers who said that the homophobic abuse was your own fault because a formal complaint should have been made and you should definitely have taken the matter further. And if you did what was the outcome? Because in terms of changing attitudes, the police and armed forces have been leading the way in becoming more gay friendly which makes the incident you describe all the more shocking.
Gay people being treated badly by a few police in boroughs like the one I highlighted aren’t isolated incidents. I know of many within areas like Tower Hamlets where, as you rightly say, should have been taken further.
You have to put yourself in there position, though. If you’ve suffered such abuse and get treated like that, unless you know your going to be moved you have to weigh up which is better, keeping quiet and hoping more trouble doesn’t come your way or making the complaint knowing it has every chance of making the situation worse. The depression and illnesses that follows making more problems but worse is the isolation. The councils aren’t interested, why should they, they get their rent. People don’t seem to realise this is what homophobia is, not some pathetic political banter the likes of Chris Bryant wants to present because they lack a sense of humour However don’t be fooled, these councils are Labour run or driven, not Tory.
It’s too easy to say, “Oh I know what I’d do” but for many still in this country they face the risk of violence depending on what action they take. If the police, the very people you hope to defend you are un-willing to help, then that doesn’t give you much in the way of options.
Yes in 2010 this is still happening on our streets. This is not isolated to London Street though. Council estates have the same problem.
Overall, homophobia needs to be highlighted as a genuine problem not something that can just be swept away and hoped it’d go away.
Of course that doesn’t mean all police are the same, it only takes a few bad ones to make people feel they have been failed. Problem is we have some officers who refuse to accept the law that states that homosexuality in the UK is not illegal. Where has Labour been to resolve these issues? They can’t say it doesn’t happen because in many case these are Labour run councils.
Personally. I’d like to see PinkNews investigate councils in the UK, esp London, whoever they are run by, to find out procedure and how they deal with victims of homophobic abuse and violence. From domestic to the police. To find out if the LGBT community are treated the same or differently from racist abuse/violence and domestic abuse/violence.
I’ve always stayed in London feeling it is the safest place for a gay man, esp with HIV, to be. Having lived in London for 25 years it always used to be. However over the last 10 years it is increasingly becoming less so which is a worry. Sadly a lot of that is down to Labour Party allowing mass immigration from homophobic countries when they were in power.
I have always felt that immigration citizenship Should include the law that states the LGBT community are entitled to be legally respected in this country. Anyone that hates that view should be excluded from this country. We are supposed to be a proud nation of many cultures, most of whom do respect us but I fail to see the right to allow those hateful and disrespectful to remain. Free speech is one thing but allowing people with such hateful views just in the chance of Labour getting itself a few extra votes has to put into question what were priorties were. When it came to the choice of a few extra votes and the LGBT community being able to live in peace, the latter came second when we should have come first. Labour sold us out in favour of homophobes they could bring into this country. Thats how important we were…n’t!
In conclusion, this puts this Chris Bryant/George Osborne moment into perspective. It was nothing than festive banter made to each other that one party clearly felt should have been a one way street.
@Jock S. Trap
You make some very valid points and the issue of certain immigrant groups transporting their homophobic beliefs to the host country is sadly an issue that much of Western Europe is grappling with. I don’t think therefore that it can be made a party political issue in the UK context. This is proving to be a particularly bad problem in Amsterdam and it’s infuriating that a country like the Netherlands is having its renowned tolerance thrown back in its face. And while homophobia is not simply confined to immigrant groups, there is a particular responsibility, as you rightfully point out, on new arrivals to adapt to the culture and laws of their new home. I think compulsory citizenship classes would be a good idea which would incorporate LGBT issues and spell out clearly what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in this regard. And this is by no means just a “Muslim problem”. Some arrivals from Eastern Europe also saw fit to bring their bigotry with them when they moved over during EU enlargement. Again, a small minority but noticeable nonetheless.
Also the laws are obviously not being adhered to because any council official or even worse, police officer who turns a blind eye to homophobia are not doing their jobs properly and should be reported. Not easy in every case I know, but that’s the only way to tackle such ignorance. And as for certain officers refusing to accept that homosexuality is not illegal in Britain, well that just leaves me speechless.
I still think all forms of homophobia should be condemned however and those in positions of authority have a particular responsibility to set a good example.
One of the Tory things I do actually agree with is making councils more accountable for their spending. I don’t know how detailed this will be but many councils so far have not acted on this. They have only til the end of the month to make there accounts accessable to us all.
It’s increasing looking like ‘what have they got to hide’.
I think we all know councils probably waste money. As I say I don’t know how detail these will be but I’d really be interested in seeing details on how money has been spent to tackle abuse/violent victims and the education tackling these action.
It would be interesting to see if homophobia is treated on the same par as racism. It would be interesting to see how homophobia is being tackled as well as seeing if racism and domestic abuse within gay relationships are treated as equally as our heterosexual counterparts.
I think this, hopefully, will be a good thing because opening up such expenses will force those failing to take action to better what and how they provide.
Sorry forgot to say, you make some extremely valid points.
One problem Labour also massively failed on with regards to people coming from these homophobic countries is those LGBT people trying to flea them. It’s another reason why proper Citizenship rules need to made for legal stay.
I really hope the Tories are keeping to their word on changing this policy because how can we claim to be a open minded society if those in power do nothing to protect those innocent LGBT people that do genuinely deserve to be here.
Like so many on here, you take the mundane comment and stretch it to extremes. I’ve got a headache, you have a migraine, I have a migraine, you have a fvcking brain tumour.
I don’t deny verbal bullying can be a problem, but Chris Bryant is not a child, and the commons is not a playground. If I call a black guy a darky, so damn what!? He IS darker skinned than me. We are different. Is it a crime to state them?
I am not saying there is anything better or worse about that person, merely there is a difference.
People get WAY too uptight about all this, a factor mostly induced by socialists that use it as a weapon to beat people over the head with. So bald is “follically challenged”, and clinically obese is “big boned”.
Anyone that is concerned about immigration is immediately branded a racist, and now some idiots are even contemplating those denying global warming should be sent to “realignment camps” to learn the error of their warped sense of thinking. Enough is enough. We don’t all think like you, and it is not a crime to say what you think.
You accuse the likes of me of fascism, but the reality is the left in this country is far closer to creating a police state than the right ever were.
I’m not sure the comments about racist jokes are so true. I read about a joke thrown around in the House of Commons about a Jewish MP who was making a particularly boring speech. As the MP was coming to an end, another shouted, “Herbert, when they circumcised you, they threw the wrong bit away.”
I’m not sure that all jokes based upon identity would all be considered racist. And this one, I think is not really homophobic – it displays no hatred of gay people and does not seek to be malicious.
Exactly my point. You can tell a freind to “f* off” with a smile, and it is accepted in the humour it was given. You say the same thing in anger to someone, and it is an entirely different matter.
Many years ago, I went on a 18-30 holiday (Yes, I apologise!), and one of our incumbent group, an Afro-Carribean Brit, showed up the first morning with a T-shirt displaying in big letters “This ain’t no suntan, man. I’m a coon!”
After the initial shock, everyone saw it for the fun it was, and that he (and we) could take a joke. If there was any underlying racism in the group, that incident completely blew it out of the water.
Why is Spanner is allowed to post discriminatory remarks? well I guess we know where pink news stands on racism
No, but they know where they stand on supercilious whining little twats like you James.
“Miss!! Miss! I just heard him say a rude word!”
Christopher Biggins should keep his mouth SHUT!!! He has nothing of value to add to this topic, and, seriously, does anyone really care about his opinion.
It is the perception of the ‘victim’ and/or an eye witness that really matters.
Not that my opinion matters, but I saw it on TV and I thought it was a cheap snide remark, from a cheap snide Tory – He wouldn’t have said it had Chris Bryant been straight and there certainly wasn’t any humour in his delivery!
>Christopher Biggins should keep his mouth SHUT!!! He has nothing of value to add to this topic,
We live in a democracy. He has the right to put forward his opinion on any subject he chooses.
> and, seriously, does anyone really care about his opinion.
Does that matter or in any way affect his right to express his opinion? This looks like no more than you saying that because Christopher Biggins does not agree with you, he therefore should not speak.
What is worse – George Osborne calling Chris Bryant a pantomime dame or telling people who express alternative views that they should not speak? It would be dangerous if such a silencing effect were ever applied to those in the gay community who openly declare their opinions in support of counter-culture.