Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Soho pub closes to avoid gay kissing protest

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I hope the staff (aside from the Landlady, I mean the ordinary workers) don’t get their wages docked for these shifts being cancelled.

    1. Jock S. Trap 15 Apr 2011, 5:10pm

      Well thats the qestion they need to take up with the Landlady. It’s not the protesters fault.

      1. Did I say it was?

    2. Queer Power!

      Let send them into bankruptcy

      Homophobia is unacceptable in the 21st century

      1. Chutneybear 18 Apr 2011, 10:25am

        Fu<k off calling it queer power its these type of labels that I hate, call it gay rights but if they were to use the word queer a lot of you would be up in arms. Fu<kwit

  2. The Kiss-in is still happening. It doesn’t matter is the pub is closed. we are still meeting outside

    1. Can someone explain why 600 people turn up for a couple thrown – out of a pub for kissing? If a gay person is murder ed on our streets why are the 600 people for that?

      Gav

      1. Gav, I went to the vigil in Trafalgar square when Ian Baynham was murdered and there were lots lots more than 600!

        1. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:37pm

          can you direct me to the facebook page for that vigil Dromio? or at least post a link.

      2. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:42pm

        @Gav.
        …..this is what gives the gay ommunity such a bad name.. There are probably at most an hysterical 50 or so screaming nellie queens who have latched on to this story, just for the exposure. The meat market on the Dilly is pobably emptyas they are all so engrossed in this charade. disgarcefull. I heave been asked and have had to dismiss this charade several times today as i’m “the only gay in the villiage” and its getting to be a pain in the arse tbh.

  3. dave wainwright 15 Apr 2011, 4:57pm

    Congratulations , already this little act up has engendered more coverage on BBC NEWS and a longer slot than gay pride and Euro Pride managed to do when more than a million gathered in central London and the protest hasn’t even begun yet :) I guess the BBC think it is ok to report cute little protests but is still keeping the truth from the British Public about the scale and size of the 2nd biggest annual event on the London calender .

  4. Hahahaha

    The protest next Thursday has 700 confirmed attendees.

    Will the pub shut then as well?

    This bar is learning quite fast that homophobia costs money.

    1. What homophobia?

      1. The remoival of a gay couple for kissing, (which witnesses describe as non-obscene), while a straight couple engaging in similar behaviour were left alone.

        Are you being deliberately obtuse again Spanner?

    2. Pathetic.
      Some fags will do anything as an excuse to kick up trouble.
      No wonder homophobia continues when you give the rest of us a bad image.

      1. Spanner, go and crawl back under your stone. Hopefully they don’t have an internet connection there.

      2. Spanner is a troll

        *DO NOT FEED THE TROLL*

        1. Anyone else think Spanner is William?

          1. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 8:26am

            I did think that for a while but I actually don’t think they are the same people, sadly.

      3. There is always some one who will put a “Spanner” in the works.

  5. I am George’s total lack of surprise

  6. Jock S. Trap 15 Apr 2011, 5:09pm

    Nothing like showing their guilt. Maybe we should organise protests for a week til they apologise or close.

    I think they are in the wrong part of town to be so ‘Straight’ laced about things!!

  7. Snogging in public? Outrageous. In 30 years of drinking in pubs I’ve never seen people snogging ever.

    Well, apart from a couple of times each night that is.

    1. Ian Townson 16 Apr 2011, 9:44pm

      As far as I understand it this wasn’t a full on snog and even if it was so what? Like television sets customers can switch off if they don’t like or turn away. It isn’t as if the gay guys concerned threw a brick thorugh the pub window or started af fight. Anyway 40 years after gay liberation I do feel a little progress is needed rather than totally closeted affections.

      1. Jock S. Trap 17 Apr 2011, 7:40am

        Here, Here. excellent comment Ian.

  8. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 5:19pm

    Well that’s a omission of guilt if ever I’ve seen one. Guilty people close the doors and hide away till it lows over, innocent people face the world and demand justice.

    The John Snow and its management are guilty as charged.

    1. ‘Admission’ Helen, surely?

  9. Friday night is the busiest night of the week for bars.

    Lots of cash wasted by the John Snow.

    There’s another kiss in on next Wednesday at 5pm.

    Show your support:

    http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/event.php?eid=142109969192062

    1. http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=209153389109287

      this event was the first one organized to happen Thursday the 21st, it has now hid its attendace but a few hours ago it was over 900 attending and over 5000 invited,

      i will try my best to do both , but will be attending the Thusday one instead

  10. Keep doing it! Keep protesting, theyll soon realise it’s not worth the lost revenue just for the sake of a couple kissing.

  11. See you next Wednesday then. They wont get away with this. Anybody knows about tonight vigil at Eros on Piccadilly. What time?

  12. I hope this dump stays shut.

    The hypocrisy and bigotry is mind-blowing.

  13. what a bunch of wa*kers i mean the pub owners and that land lady cu*t is really silly

  14. Respect for the pub and it’s staff, if the couple couldn’t abide by the staff’s requests they should have been removed from the pub
    It is nothing to do with the way the couple live their life, any bar owner have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason

    1. The staff were behaving in a threatening and obnoxious manner. They deserve no respect.

      2 other people who were in the bar made statements to the police to say that the gay couple were behaving in a perfectly acceptable manner.

      The bar would not have behaved in such a way had a straight couple been kissing.

      The JOhn Snow deserves to be driven out of business, A pub in Soho cannot treat gay patrons in this manner.

    2. “any bar owner have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason”

      Such as being black, Irish, or disabled?

      I think you’ll find that there are limits to the bar owners discretion. That’s why we have laws that trump bigotry.

      1. Tim Hopkins 15 Apr 2011, 6:07pm

        Exactly – the pub must comply with equality legislation. They must not treat LGB people less favourably than heterosexual people, and they must not treat same-sex couples less favourably than mixed sex ones.

        If they have a clear policy of throwing out all couples who kiss, and they genuinely apply that policy to mixed-sex couples as well, with the same degree of rudeness, they may be within the law, although they also need to ensure they don’t abuse people so much as to constitute a public order offence.

    3. any bar owner have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason

      INCORRECT . Try reading the Equality Act

      1. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 9:06pm

        @griffin….
        ……actually the Licenceing Act 2003 has supercedence, believe it or not. All the landlord has to say is that in his opinion the security and safety of the patrons in his establishment was his primary concern, and as such he felt that the incident had the potential to compromise that, so he had no alternative but to eject the two men in question in order to ensure the incident didn’t cause further problems, which he would potentially lose control of. end of story. That is the Law and you can check it out at city hall come Monday. It is very easy for him to establish those facts and to provide “witness’s”
        Please don’t attack me for pointing this out. That is the facts and i can’t chenge them to suit the situation even if i wanted to. Furthermore the Landlord has the potential for action against the organisers of tonites “kiss in” as it had an adverse affect on his business by forcing him to close his premises for the same reason as he ejected the two smoochers.

        1. And the fact that there is no question that the landlord has absolute power to eject someone is obviously the reason that police are investigating. Oh, wait..

          Would you care to provide a specific reference and/or case law for your claim that the Licensing Act of 2003 renders irrelevant the provisions of the Equality Act of 2010? Vague handwaving isn’t going to cut it.

          1. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:04pm

            @David S…..
            …a quick visit to the ugov web site will confirm for you.Likewise a visit to City hall will confirm. Your legal representative will also confirm.Shouting abuse at the messenger will not change the Law in your favor … Laws governing the sale of Alcohol are strict and supercede certain equality laws for obvious reasons. Shout ing abuse wont change that.

          2. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:06pm

            Case law has no bearing on the licenceing Act 2003 and cannot have for obvious reasons. Each case is considered on it’s own merits and precedents do not apply.

          3. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:08pm

            also what i have stated above aren’t claims. Just the Law as it stands atm.

          4. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:12pm

            just because the landlord has the powers he has , shouldn’t have any bearing on whether the Police investigate or not. They MUST investigate all complaints made.
            Even if that investigation only means asking the landlorrrd what happened.
            Again this is NOT my opinioin , just the way things are atm.

          5. I’ve read both acts, and your claims are not borne out by either.

            You have claimed that the Licensing Act of 2003 supercedes the Equality Act of 2010.

            Please provide specific references for your claim – the precise wording, or section of the relevant acts that carves out an exclusion for pub landlords from the provisions of the Equality Act.

            I’m intrigued, and so far you are just waving your hands….multiple times. Not very convincing, no matter how fast you try and dance around the question.

          6. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 11:27pm

            @David s….
            …Either you are lying or you are ignoring what you have read in an effort to try winning your corner.I have no interest in argument with the disingeneious and will not respond to your taunts. Facts are facts and if you have read both as you claim, you clearly don’t possess the intellect to understand what you are eading. Once and for all the Licenceing Act 2003 supercedes the Equalities Act 2010 in several places, and no amount of bluster from you is going to change that.. To go through the Acts and point out the relevant sections to you would be futile as you clearly are unable to understand what you have already read if in fact you have….otherwise you wouldn’t be grandstanding as you are.

          7. “…Either you are lying or you are ignoring what you have read in an effort to try winning your corner.I have no interest in argument with the disingeneious and will not respond to your taunts.”

            In other words: no, you can’t point out where an exception has been carved in the Equality Act to allow for landlords not to have to treat all people equally.

            Why is that so hard to say?

        2. I’m not familiar with licensing legislation. I’m happy to accept that it gives landlords the right to refuse service to punters if, for example, they’re drunk or disorderly, but I’d be extraordinarily surprised if it gave them power to discriminate on the basis of the protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010, with the obvious exception of age (and, possibly, pregnancy). In fact, I’d be willing to bet a fairly hefty sum that any such provision would be in breach of the EC equality legislation on which our anti-discrimination law is based.

          If you could give me a link establishing your point, I’d appreciate it.

        3. Incidentally, given that there are conflicting eye witness accounts, is anyone on this board really in a position to say whether the chucking out was the reasonable response of a business owner to inappropriate behaviour or anti-gay discrimination?

          Not that I, as a lady gayer, would like to see such a thing, but I think we should be shown high resoluton footage of this alleged slobberfest and take a vote.

        4. No. It simply doesn’t work that way, either in relation to the initial ejection or to the loss of business.

          Courts hear this sort of, er, bar room lawyer stuff all the time and are not impressed. He can claim all he likes that he had an opinion as to the security and safety of patrons, blah…but if he cannot provide objective grounds for those fears, then his views just don’t cut it.

          And if you mean that he feared that two men kissing would so enrage other punters that they might be attacked, then he had a duty to summon the police to eject those he feared likely to do the attacking. Not to eject the kissers.

          Loss of trade due to a demo is complex and likely to be expensive to pursue. In general, though the law won’t recompense for any self-inflicted loss. So again, unless there is absolute objective evidence the pub HAD to close due directly to the demo…the landlord is on a hiding to nothing.

          jane
          x

        5. I had a similar situation occur to me a few weeks back. A transphobe, on public premises, took exception to my presence. He threatened to hit me and then made various threats to me in the presence of the Centre manager.

          Apart from the shock and alarm this caused me i was temporarily worried that the Centre might exclude me as a cause of possible incident. It didn’t.

          TO my great relief, the Centre manager concurred with my view, that the man in question had been intimidating and threatening. The police were informed. They had words with him: he was warned that any repetition of his behaviour would lead to his arrest and probable charging.

          The Centre may well have excluded him.

          Now, back to the kissing. The landlord would need to show the kissing itself was a direct threat to the security, etc. Any suggestion that the threat came from other patrons and he ejected the kissers rather than them…and he’s in even bigger trouble than already.

          It just doesn’t work.

          jane
          x

  15. Paris Lees 15 Apr 2011, 5:48pm

    I have gay friedns – that old chestnut!

    1. Just like the “I’m gay, but I deplore this behaviour” comments in the daily heil.

    2. So they are unable to give their names, what does this really say ?

      It speaks of a lack of integrity.

      These people know that homophobia is shamefull in 21st century Britain, and they do not fool anyone with their, we have gay friends rhetoric. So hitler had jewish friends, how perverse.

  16. Craig Snider 15 Apr 2011, 6:00pm

    This makes me wish I was gay so I could come down and snog my boyfriend in the John Snow. Its disgusting that instead of making a statement about the problem they’ve locked their doors and are refusing to address it. As far as I’m concerned, the more nights they stay closed the better, it reduces their income and empowers the gay community. I would love to see the gay community keep this up every Friday until you eventually make your statement. The longer it goes on the louder the statement will be heard.

    1. Bring your girlfriend Craig and kiss. or just kiss a bloke when you get there!!! come along gay or straight the more the merrier!

    2. Craig you don’t have to be gay to come to the kiss-in! Read the information after following the links above to the facebook pages. If you take issue with this, regardless of sexuallity your support is wanted! It won’t just be LGBT couples kissing.

    3. Keep doing this until they are forced to declare themselves a kiss and affection free zone. LOL

    4. @Graig

      You do not have to be Gay to kiss another man.

      If men were allowed to kiss each other, without fear of disgust and loathing being raised, men gay and straight, might be able to feel more comfortable and less inhibited at displaying loving intimacy with each other.

      This is not just about gay rights, this is also about the emancipation and liberation of men of all sexual orientations!!!

  17. would a straight couple be asked to ‘moderate’ their behavior? I doubt it. I was in a london pub last saturday and a straight man was groping his girlfriend between the thighs and she was making orgasmic faces and noises and they were full on groping and snogging for an hour. The customers around were wincing but nobody asked them to stop or leave.

    1. Why wouldn’t they? I have actually seen it, and many years ago as a barman, done it. It is a public place and people should show a little respect for others around them.

      1. I’m waiting to hear from some straight couple who have been thrown out of the John Snow for snogging.

        I mean if the John Snow is not guilty of homophobia then there must be plenty of straight couples who have been ejected fior snogging over the years.

  18. HOPE THE OWNERS OF THE PUB SUE THE ORGANIZERS OF THIS SO CALLED PROTEST FOR LOSS OF TRADE

    THERE ARE PLENTY OF CLUBS THAT CATER FOR SAME SEX COUPLES, SO PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE OFFENDED BY SEEING TWO BLOKES KISSING CAN AVOID THIS TYPE OF THING.

    IF SOMEONE WENT INTO A GAY BAR A STARTED MAKING ANTI GAY STATEMENTS, WOULD THEY BE MADE TO FEEL WELCOME, OR WOULD THEY BE ASKED TO LEAVE

    1. I find it offensive to see gay men snogging in a gay pub. It’s not a matter of sexuality, it is just yucky.

      1. Spanner, you’ve got some serious issues. How can you find two people kissing offensive? Weird.

    2. Oh Lorraine in your infinite stupidity.

      ON what grounds would the pub owners sue the protestors.

      Free assembly and freedom to protest are basic human rights that far outstrip the JOhn Snow’s right to sell beer.

      And what part of equal provision of goods and service to someone irrespective of their sexual orientation do you not understand.

      1. SO IF 100S OF PEOPLE WENT IN A GAY BAR PROTESTING SAYING SAME SEX RELATIONSHIP SHOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW, YOU WOULD BE HAPPY FOR THEM TO DO THIS UNDER ‘FREE ASSEMBLY AND FREEDOM TO PROTEST’

        1. Can’t you find the Caps Lock button, hmmmm? Maybe if you looked at the keyboard instead of smashing your face off it to bag out your tripe, you’d find it. Or maybe its just too difficult for you. Have a cup of tea, and take a break, there’s a dear.

          1. AND MAYBE YOU SHOULD GET A LIFE, INSTEAD OF INSULTING DISABLED PEOPLE

          2. And maybe you should get an edcuation rather then insulting gay people?

          3. “I’m disabled so I have every right to be a bigot” – oh, boo-fcuking-hoo, Lorraine. Actually, it just makes you a pathetic bigot. The rest is irrelevant.

        2. You stupid, stupid individual

          The fact that you think protesting for the removal of someone’s civil rights is the equivalent as having a snog speaks volumes about your utter lack if intelligence.

          1. IS IT WITHIN SOMEONES CIVIL RIGHTS NOT TO HAVE TO SEE SOMETHING THEY FIND OFFENSIVE

          2. Kissing is offensive? To who exactly. Get out much? Obviously not.

          3. If you find kissing offensive, and a breach of your “civil rights”, I can only assume watching TV must be an intensely traumatic affront to you and your sensibilities, Lorraine. What a joke you are. Grow up, woman.

          4. friday jones 15 Apr 2011, 11:27pm

            No it’s not “within your civil rights to not to have to see something they find offensive,” What a childishly simple perspective you seem to have on civil rights. What if the person is a bigot who finds, say, a dark-skinned face “offensive?” Or two gay men kissing? Neither of those is inherently “offensive” because they are based solely on the identities of the people involved rather than their basic activities.

            Unless the same level of kissing results in straight couples being bodily ejected as this gay couple was, then the only actual “offense” is inherent in the identities of the parties involved, and is therefore bigotry and not actual offense.

      2. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 9:34pm

        @david…..
        ….actually you are wrong and Lorraine is right.
        The right to free assembly and protest does NOT allow for flash mobbing a legitimate business premises for the purposes of causing mahem and adversely affecting the legitimate business of that premises.. especially a business selling alcohol.
        The initial couple can and probably will be cited as co respondents and all costs and damages will be awarded the landlord ( brewery). Being militant and having a tenous grasp of the laws of assembly will not protect the organisers should the landlord (brewery) choose to take action and as he closed the doors it would seem that is his intended course of action.
        Again please do not hurl abuse at me for being the messenger. It will not change the inevitible outcome.
        Licenced premises, because of the nature of their business, ie, alcohol, is a wholly seperate set of laws and and are reviewed every year which is why one must renew ones licence every year.

        1. the business premises were not operating at that time, it was choice of owners to close pub for a day, so not sure how it is
          “…adversely affecting the legitimate business of that premises.. especially a business selling alcohol….” ?

    3. I do hope you pull your head out of your arse long enough to notice where the CAPS Lock key is located – use it next time.

      That said, I would imagine not, as that would be homophobic and illegal, just like it is in this instance. This isn’t a ‘straight’ bar (god forbid one exists), it’s a pub. In the middle of freaking soho. Gay bars don’t discriminate based upon sexual orientation, neither should other entertainment venues.

      Simple really love.

      1. I USE A SPECIALIST KEYBOARD THAT DOES NOT HAVE UPPER AN LOWER CASE BECAUSE I HAVE ONE USABLE HAND AND THAT ONLY HAS A THUMB MIDDLE FINGER AND RING FINGER, SO MAYBE YOU SHOULD PULL ‘YOUR’ HEAD OUT OF YOUR ARSE LONG ENOUGH TO REALISE MAYBE NOT IS EVERYTHING YOU THINK IT IS

        1. Then here’s one for you, dear: don’t bother. Save your effort on people who give a crap about your bigotry.

        2. So you’re disabled eh?

          And will you be supporting the ‘right’ of builders to not be required to make new buildings wheelchair accessible, There are plenty of buildings which are already wheelchair friendly., Shouldn’t people in wheelchairs just use those buildings instead of expecting able bodied people to accommodate them.

          That’s what you are arguing for Lorraine.

          And it is remarkably stupid.

        3. Hey Lorraine, do you agree that it’s okay for bars to ban disabled people from the premises for showing affection? Or how about they just ban them all together?

          I’m sure there are plenty of bars for people with disabilities, so why should everyone else be expected to put up with you? After all, nobody should have to have that kind of thing shoved in their faces, right?

          Your logic is repugnant, as the above demonstrates.

          Bit of an own goal there, Lorraine. Assuming you actaully exist. it’s hard to believe that someone who has probably experienced at least some degree of prejudice would so gleefully embrace bigotry. But then, perhaps you really are as woefully stupid as you seem.

          1. “perhaps you really are as woefully stupid as you seem.”

            My money is on that square.

        4. Staircase2 15 Apr 2011, 7:37pm

          of course given that using upper case letters is considered ‘shouting’ on the internet (and rude) – youd think that they would have stuck the keyboard on lower case letters instead wouldnt you?

          Youre not the first person Ive met who has said this though so it may be true but its still considered rude to be ‘shouting’ like that and that was decided long before most people, disabled or otherwise, had computers at home or keyboards – so youd think they would have thought of that when they stuck the shift button on permanently.

        5. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 9:45pm

          @lorraine…
          ….actually your keyboard will stil have lower case facility. Read the manual that came with it and also look up accessability options in your Windows system or Apple system. If that is what you have. The default setting on your keyboard Must be lower case to comply with Internet protocols. It has just become reset on upper case but you can deffo change it.

        6. Maybe you should read the Equality laws we currently have and the Goods and services laws

    4. “THERE ARE PLENTY OF CLUBS THAT CATER FOR SAME SEX COUPLES, SO PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE OFFENDED BY SEEING TWO BLOKES KISSING CAN AVOID THIS TYPE OF THING.”

      Huh? Do you mean that the straight couples who would be offended by same sex couples should stay out of gay bars (which is how your sentence actually reads), or that gay couples should only kiss in gay bars (which is what the rest of your rant implies you actually meant)?

      And just to add that putting an entire sentence in capitals doesn’t actually add emphasis to anything. Putting a couple of WORDS in capitals helps make them STAND OUT and improve your argument. But only if you know how to put a proper sentence together in the first place, otherwise it just makes you look like an ass.

      1. IF YOU READ THE ABOVE YOU WOULD SEE WHY I TYPE IN CAPITALS

        1. Yeah, but it doesn’t explain why you are such a bigot. You’d think a disabled person would understand prejudice. Apparently not. Didn’t learn anything at all, did you? Maybe you just prefer to take your anger on those you perceive to be “weaker” than you. I assure you honey, none of us are anything like the stereotype, so be a dear and give your one finger and that keyboard a break and spare us all your repugnant nonsense.

        2. I have now seen that and I am sorry that you cannot type in lower case due to your keyboard and disability – that said, I must congratulate you with your speed of typing though as you are still managing to reply and comment at an astounding rate! Your WPM speed must be very impressive and far better than my own.

          But it doesn’t change the fact that your disability only explains the capslock, not the homophobia.

        3. @Lorraine

          So you are a disabled bigot!!!

          . . . and you think that warrents our sympathy?

    5. You bizarre troll. Your argument makes no logical sense whatsoever.

    6. Staircase2 15 Apr 2011, 7:40pm

      lol as I said elsewhere I hope they do it every single week – or every single day during the summer – that’ll teach em….

      the whole point is that people have no right to kick people out of a pub simply because theyre homophobic and are ‘offended’ by 2 men kissing.

      ‘anti-gay statements’ is not actually the ‘opposite’ of 2 men kissing….lol

      what I want to know is how people who feel the way you do ever decide to come on here in the first place – bit odd that isnt it?

    7. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:20pm

      @Lorraine ….
      …..whovere told you you can’t change the capslock on your Keyboard was lying to you. It can be changed in several ways, simpllest being the capslock key. However this can be disabled by your operating system. look under Accessories> Accessability>Accessability Wizard for instructions on how to change it.

    8. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 8:43am

      Lorraine

      So let me get this straight, (excuse the pun!)

      Your argument to two people showing happiness, friendliness and possible love it to equat that with a protest of people, like you, with a message of hate and anti gay? Seriously?

      Educated much? I don’t think so!!

  19. Spanner and Dave, straight couples have been seen snogging in pubs for decades. One straight couple were in the John snow and the man had his arm around his female partner and occasionally kissed her, they weren’t thrown out and the landlady said she would apply the same strategy to straight couples. She’s nothing but a barefaced liar.This IS about homophobia whether you like it or not. If they’re not guilty, then why close the pub for the day? Truth hurts for sure.

  20. Lorraine, the thing is, straight couples don’t go into gay clubs or bars to shout antigay epithets because they know what the consequences would be. They’d have to be drunk out of their minds to do it, so stop with the red herring nonsense as well you know. We don’t complain when we see straights kissing and groping in non-gay pubs and we don’t complain they’re shoving their sexual orientation down our throats just because they’re the majority. You might as well support a ban on straights snogging and holding hands in the streets and other public places while you’re at it. We NEVER complain about it either, not would we. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Deal with it and grow up. There are other people in the world besides people of your ilk.

    1. ‘THEY KNOW WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES WOULD BE’ YEP THEY GAYS WOULDN’T LIKE IT – DOUBLE STANDARDS

      1. Caps Lock? Still can’t find it? Maybe start with early Primary school, and work your way up?

        1. WILL I DOUBT YOU KNOW WHAT A PRIMARY EDUCATION IS

          1. Well, you can let me know when you get one, can’t you?

          2. Hey Lorraine with your 1 hand.,
            Wil you be lobbying for builders to be able to save on costs so they don’t have to acommodate you?
            If you believe that gay people are not covered by the Equality Act, then equally you must believe that disabled people should not be covered,

            After all you claim to be against double standards.

            Or are you just a bigot troll?

  21. Lorraine? Your are the John Snow landlady aren’t you? You obviously have time on your hands this evening…

    1. REGRETFULLY I DON’T KNOW THE LADY, WHO HAS THE COURAGE OF HER CONVICTIONS

      1. Regretfully, we have to endure you, though.

      2. Lorraine – the self proclalmed disables lady who believes that the Equality Act should not apply toi disabled people.

        You’re a truly dim, piece of work Lorraine.

  22. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 6:37pm

    I would like to e able to walk home after a night out and not see heterosexuals shagging like dogs in the streets.

    Don’t the dirty hetros have have homes to do that sort of thing in? instead of shagging standing in some drunks urine or sick!

  23. gino meriano 15 Apr 2011, 6:51pm

    they used the terms PASSIONATE and ALL OVER EACH OTHER, if that were true gay or straight its not right to do that in public. media spin what a disgrace

    1. However 2 other bar customers gave witness statements to the police stating that the gay couple were not behaving in an inappropriate manner.

      And we have yet to hear from a straight couple who have been chucked out of the John Snow for kissing.

      I accuse the landlord and landlady of telling barefaced lies to disguise their homophobia.

  24. Ouch! Having to shut on a Friday night is going to smart. Well they can close on Friday, but then there is Saturday and there are plenty of gay people in Soho on a Saturday. And the weather is getting warmer and Soho in the Summer is generally packed to the rafters. All they have to do is apologise and promise it will never happen again. Or they can try and hide and watch their business go down the tubes.

    1. Staircase2 15 Apr 2011, 7:33pm

      agreed

      I hope theyre innundated lol

    2. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 8:49am

      Here, Here!!

  25. So now we know. It was a full on snog, not a couple of mere pecks on the cheek. Quel surprise. These attention seeking qu**ns provoked their ejection from the bar, and now the militant parade of pink extremist nutters are planning a campaign of harrassment ala the Christian guest house couple, and won’t let up until they have had their ounce of flesh.

    This sorry charade makes me ashamed to share the same sexuality of these bespectacled wimps and their pack dogs. “You wouldn’t think in Soho, this kind of thing would happen,” one of the Militant Marys told the BBC. WHAT?! Just because Soho attracts a lot of gay people does not mean that every business within its quarter mile is duty bound to sign up to a gay code of conduct, does it?

    Oh how the baited have become the baiters. And you wonder why gay-bashing is on the increase as PC PCs are pulled off their beat to deal with your puppy tears and take copious notes and statements? Disgraceful, and yes BBC, quote me, a gay man, on that!!

    1. “This sorry charade makes me ashamed to share the same sexuality of these bespectacled wimps and their pack dogs”

      Ironically, your sorry charade makes me ashamed to share the same sexuality as you, your are a disgrace to humanity, let alone gay people.

      1. I like your comment! Agreed!

      2. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 8:51am

        Couldn’t agree more Will.

    2. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 7:21pm

      I bet you flagellate yourself after every sexual encounter you have!

      Although someone as sad as you probably only gets it off in a dirty toilet.

    3. Oh, look, its William the troll. Still here? Sadly, yes, it seems. You and Lorraine should get together, you will make wonderfully stupid babies. At least you can both put up with each other, I’m sure none else would.

      1. “Oh, look, its William the troll. Still here? Sadly, yes, it seems…”

        Well that’s rich – and somewhat ironic – coming from Rob. On another thread on a different topic you were supposed to be masquerading as me under a duplicate alias and vice versa by this paranoid rag bag of barrel-scraping delinquents. Just proves the depths they are prepared to resort to to shout down all opposing (ie – balanced) viewpoints.

        1. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 10:58am

          Coming from someone who accuses all others of being victims, playing victims…

          Hypocrite!

        2. Er, there’s only one Rob allowed on here? Not too bright, are you? Probably form all that lunatic screaming at cars and stuff, you don’t get much time to read much.

    4. Another vomit of nonsense on a keyboard from William. Yawn. To be a mentally retarded bigot is one thing, but boring, that is just a travesty.

    5. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 7:25pm

      William the creep that lurks in dark dank toilets, drilling holes so he can see other men’s willies why he flagellate himself.

      William the toilet perv

      1. Maybe he’s just ugly outside as well as inside? Its not his dazzling wit and personality that will get him anywhere, that’s for sure.

        1. (Besides, I think he’s really Spanner)

          1. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 7:30pm

            And Spanner used to be Neville

          2. Oh, what a Machiavellian web of deceit they weave for us.

      2. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 11:35pm

        @Helen Wilson…
        …only boring because you either dont understand his argument or just dont agree with it. The former i suspect based on the level of intellect obvious in your posts to date. Abuse is the last refuge of the ignorant.
        On what level do you think what you are posting is legitimate debate.?? Ho w do you know for instance that William is a”toilet perv”??

        1. @Paddyswurds That’s rich coming from you. If “Abuse is the last refuge of the ignorant” as you say, then hey You are pretty Ignorant yourself! and I’m just going by your posts.

  26. Lorraine, give it up. You know damned well that no sane straight would frequent a gay bar or club to stir up trouble, you imbecile. Why aren’t you against straights groping and kissing in public, or having sex standing up in doorways on a friday or saturday night or even in a car? I’ve seen that a number of times over the years, but we don’t complain about it. Live and let live. Obviously you can’t, you’re too busy obsessing about what gay people do instead of getting your own filthy straight house in order first, look around you before you start throwing the first stones, moron.

  27. Staircase2 15 Apr 2011, 7:32pm

    Do it every single week until they stop closing their door

  28. The Guardian web site’s vain attempt at whipping up a frenzy and stirring up a backlash today has resulted in 640 responses to date, but the most popular by far, posted at 11:42am by “zounds”, succinctly says:

    “I’m absolutely not planning my own protest, because there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this situation was in anyway homophobically inspired. I’m quite angry at the Guardian for indulging in this sort of Daily Mail nonsense, essentially creating/whipping up a non-story. If a landlord feels someone is behaving inappropriately in his/her establishment, s/he is legally entitled to eject them. As I understand it, this couple weren’t ejected, they were asked to stop. If there is evidence that this power was used discriminatory fashion, then yes, there is a story, and action should be taken against the Jon Snow. As it is, the Guardian is weighing in in what is essentially a pub argument in a quite ludicrous fashion…”

    Hear hear! A victory for good old common sense!

    1. Broken record. YAWN!

    2. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 8:34pm

      Wrong, maybe you should learn to read or be honest or both if you are capable.

      Top post is

      renaissancemoron
      Recommend? (641)
      15 April 2011 11:30AM

      No need to kick anyone out — usual response is just to tell them to get a room.

      zounds
      Recommend? (523)

      If you are going to lie at lest lie about something we cant check up on!

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/apr/15/kissing-in-public-live-blog?commentpage=all#start-of-comments

      1. Helen dear, so desperate. So “zounds” is the second most popular. Does that really make an ounce of difference to the fact that most Guardian – yes, Guardian!! – readers don’t give a fig, as they recommended his well-observed post above most others? And what did number one “renaisancemoron” have to say, hmmm? “No need to kick anyone out — usual response is just to tell them to get a room.” Hardly waving a pink banner with victim written in bright yellow caps, is he now. Oh how the militant fruit loops scrape the barrel to support their lost cause. Sad. So very sad…

    3. @William

      Really!!!

      O dear!!!

  29. Just such a relief to know among my many “normal” and level-headed gay friends that the loopy nutcase fringe who infest these boards do not represent the mainstream of gay people who just want to get on with their lives quietly and not draw attention to themselves like these sad attention, nay, publicity seekers desperate to keep the gay cause drum banging loudly and, ahem, proudly. Why not just save up that “Look at poor me, I’m gay so I’m a victim” energy for the next anxiety-fuelled freak show, sorry, “Pride” march. Hysterical qu**ns? Who needs ‘em.

    1. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 8:25pm

      Get back to toilet lurking perv

      1. “Helen Wilson”, a.k.a. Jock Strap in drag. So obvious.

        1. Good one Spanner.

        2. Helen Wilson 15 Apr 2011, 9:00pm

          How’s it going with the drilling holes in toilet cubicles perv?

          1. They should probably drill holes in his skull, release some of the pressure on his brain, he sounds positively deranged.

          2. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 10:34pm

            Which one of you lot is rapture, as i notice he is strangely missing as is CMYB or whatever he’s called. Another shouter missing is the hugely intelligent Eddy. All very weird. Countdown ….10 9 8 7……

    2. “Hysterical qu**ns?”

      LOL! Look in the mirror lately, your histrionic moron.

    3. “Hysterical Qu**ns”

      It does appear that the land lady, and her rather parochial cliental, were rather hysterical.

      Interesting of two men kissing can whip up such an over the top knee jerk reaction.

      Curious to see such hysterical disgust and homophobic hatred, alive and kicking in “Gay friendly” Soho

      1. typo

        “Hysterical Qu**ns”

        It does appear that the land lady, and her rather parochial cliental, were rather hysterical.

        Interesting how two men kissing can whip up such an over the top knee jerk reaction.

        Curious to see such hysterical disgust and homophobic hatred, alive and kicking in “Gay friendly” Soho

    4. My god, what a complete duche you are William. Get back in the closet where you belong and do us ALL a favour.

  30. landlady expressing small town mentality

    1. “Small town mentality”

      In Soho?

      What ever next!!!

  31. If this was not, as one person put it, “homophobically inspired,” I would have thought the pub landlady/lord in question would have made a statement by now. Actions speak louder than words, and their decision to close and peer through curtains speaks volumes. The only people I see clutching at straws here are those that would seriously suggest a straight couple snogging or kissing otherwise would have been ejected from any pub. A pub in Soho at that!

    I’ve seen such behaviour before, my friend was a manager at Frankie & Bennies and her colleague (also a manager) saw two men kissing in a restaurant across the street. He said he would be ask them to leave had they done it in his establishment, and when questioned by my friend, clarified it was their sexuality being the problem in a “family restaurant” and not their actions.

    This pub deserves every lost penny so they learn their bigotry WILL have consequences, even if they wish to stand by their so-called “morals” and not apologise.

    1. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 11:43pm

      @chris…
      ….i would imagine that the management have been advised by the brewery to say nothing for now as they are understandbly preparing for law and will then make their position known. I wouldn’t like to be in the posiyion the origonal two men and the organisers of the “protest find themselves in in the fullness of time. the fact that they closed the business on a Friday is indicitave that they are confident of recoverein lost revenues from those who will be sued over this debacle.

      1. In which case at the very least I would have thought the brewery would have released a statement saying, “We have no further comment about this incident pending police investigation.” So far I’ve seen one comment from the license holder, saying, “I have nothing to say.”

        I imagine if the brewery did attempt a legal battle to recover lost earnings it would only result in even more lost earnings. And further, who exactly are they going to sue? Some unidentified crowd of protestors? The two men this entire furore spawned from, who did not organise the event in the first place?

        This is no Rosa Parks by any means, but I whole heartedly agree this kind of discrimination (which I sincerely believe did occur) should be fought against. You seem to hold feelings of disdain for any fuss caused about discrimination against gay people, thinking that gay people cause more of a problem by protesting than they solve. I’m afraid I disagree, but I respect your opinion.

  32. The day this moronic landlady ejects a straight couple for the same thing, then maybe, just maybe, I might believe her. I don’t think one straight couple has ever been ejected from a pub kissing, snogging or whatever. I want to see the evidence for that. I don’t think there will be one gay man or woman complaining if it ever happens.

    1. Perhaps the moronic “Landlady”, has stepped on a “Gay Landmine”

  33. dave wainwright 15 Apr 2011, 10:03pm

    on sky news in a moment

  34. Owner was absolutely correct!
    Some homosexuals acting out as pigs, and that’s nobody should tolerate! Period!

    1. @Rich

      So two men kissing is like two men acting as pigs?

      Rich, are you Robert Mugabe?

      1. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 2:42pm

        No, he’s just an idiot!!

    2. Well by law you have to “tolerate” it. And so does the landlord. Get out of this country if you don’t like it because it’s only going to get “worse” (or, in most sensible people’s opinions, better). Your despicable views just make watching social change that little bit more entertaining.

    3. The same person -now calling himself “Rich” is trolling the site today with his insults. Don’t waste your time with him.

      1. Indeed. The recourse of the stupid is to repat the same thing over and over again…. alas, here, they get the bonus of thinking they make their argument one bit less ridiculous if they look like it came form many stupid people instead of one.

        1. Paddyswurds 15 Apr 2011, 11:14pm

          …The low level of intelligence on this thread is only surpassed by the by the lack of intellect..I have serious doubts that a number of the posts were made by different people. I am sure that at least ten or maybe more of the tags are all actually one person. Quite a few of the usual suspects are strangely missing and i suspect that they are useing different tags on this thread to give the impression that theres a lot of people in support of the two twerps who caused all this fuss in the first place.

          1. Paddy, the point of the Equality Act is self-explanatory. Gay people demand equal treatment under the law and cannot be discriminated against because of our sexuality. This means we can behave exactly like our straight counterparts in whatever venue we choose because gay men are not, as you seem to suggest, second class citizens. We pay tax and contribute to society in much the same way, the only marked difference being our gender, and the fact that most of us won’t breed (thereby not contributing to over-population, and “selfishly” denying the gov’t a next-generation of duck house taxpayers). To call two men lightly kissing in a pub “yobs” is offensive in itself. After decades and generations of gay men and women tirelessly fighting for YOUR rights, you have the audacity to spit in the face of two young men just for being themselves. Your vision of social etiquette be damned. We shouldn’t have to check our behaviour at the door because some bigots can’t cope with homosexuality.

          2. Paddyswurds 17 Apr 2011, 6:37pm

            @paul…
            …the Equality Act is not is not a carte blanche licence to behave like pigs. The act also assumes that those it protects will act in a responsble manner.These two were asked quietly to cool their ardour in an essentially straight environment where at least one complaint had been received because of their behaviour. They chose to ignore the request and became beligerent and confronted the management. The management chose rightly to eject them and as a consequence the two then chose to make a homophobic incident complaint. The police are investigating and the chances are that the two could end up being charged with causing an affray. As a gay man who abhors the unedifying behaviour of some of the more militant wing of the gay movement, i sincerely hope that this is the eventual outcome of this disgraceful incident. These people are what gives us all a bad name and the sooner they are put in their place the better.

          3. Well, ironically, we have proof that you like using multiple names to get your “gay militant” point across….

  35. What’s wrong with a full-on snog in public?

    1. I once sat opposite a tongue-wrestling straight couple in Patisserie Valerie on Old Compton Street. Put me right off my lemon tart. I wish someone had chucked them out.

      I am only half-joking.

    2. depend on who you ask, but even if u dont like it that doesnt give u right to act in a way that awful women did

  36. The pink Pound packs punch! whilst I can’t speculate why Samuel Smiths declined comment, I would speculate that the landlord in question has caused them to have been red faced over this situation. if SS had perhaps stated whilst they were aware of the situation which was isolated and didn’t reflect the breweries gay friendly business ethics.

    By avoiding comment they could certainly be seen to be protecting the Landlord, by not even had intimated any kind of admonishment to the landlord could also provoke the gay community to justify buying other brands or drop the product nationwide as happened with Coors in the states a few years ago.

    1. @Stephen

      I agree, we should show our pink-pound muscle

      This is “Capitialist 21st Century”, the market rules, like it or not.

      1. Will they claim thousands in compensation like the b&b pervs for hurt feelings? It is another attention seeking set up by two poofs.Plenty of Queer pubs in Soho.

  37. Will they claim thousands in compensation like the b&b set up? Plenty of Queer pubs in Soho.

    1. Jock S. Trap 16 Apr 2011, 2:44pm

      Blimey, how many name changes is that now?

    2. I was wondering who opened your “Zipper”, Zipperlip

  38. The reason the publican closed the pub at 3 p.m. on friday is quite obvious. He or she couldn’t face the truth that they’re liars when they said they’d eject straight couples for the same thing, let alone having a large number of us having a kiss-in. I want to see the documented evidence from any London pub where straights have been ejected for snogging.

  39. pumpernickel 17 Apr 2011, 3:56am

    the only reason why i keep reading these threads is coz i love the way every one of you is always having a go a each other….. is it any wonder why inequality exists when all you can do is protest amongst each other how can you expect tor be accepted into society if you bitch amongst yourselves all of the time hence forgetting the real issues

  40. Your treatment of a disabled person is a disgrace and just because you differ in opinion, you feel you have the right to personally insult others.

    When visiting Soho, perhaps two or three times in the year and not out of choice. I always head for a non gay establishment. I know that I will not be surrounded by screaming drama queens, all waiting for the next opportunity to maul some poor individual, who is less indulgent than them. Rudeness and ignorance seems to be the constant chant. One can’t go to the bathroom without being approached by some individual, hell bent on fulfilling the gay lifestyle myth, perpetuated by the gay media and the drug dealers, of total self destruction.

    So it is a refreshing change to see a landlord prepared to take a position to protect his clientele from this sort of behaviour. Long may it remain a straight bar, which welcomes gays people.

    I think he was rather tolerant to say the least, as both the people have stated they had spent several hours in the pub and received three warnings. I steer clear of people who think that kissing and fondling in public is suitable behaviour, let alone on a first date.

    People are not granted equality, so they can stomp around making everyone else’s life unbearable. Yes hetros do not go into gay bars, why would they want to, when a lot of gay people don’t want to go there. We also have doormen on the door who actively turn straight people away. Did the John Snow pub have doormen telling gay people that it is a straight bar, no they didn’t.

    It is a much nicer pub than such places as the Gay venues around Soho, which provide a terrible third rate service to their clients. Why are the gay community not up in arms demanding the same service as the John Snow from the gay venues?

    In the John Snow I have always been treated with respect and professionally. I can not say that about the gay venues. The amount of attitude and total lack of customer services skill from bar staff is a disgrace.

    If there ever was a need for another Stonewall it should not be the John Snow. It should be the Gay hellholes that are dotted all around Soho.

    I saw the news coverage and videos of the picket or kiss-in. I was shocked by the behaviour of people and the threats of violence from Paul Shelter the organiser of the event towards other picketers. This is truly shocking and does not represent me or my community.

    This nonsense should stop now and gay people should focus on gay venues and not be used as part of some peoples political agenda, which is what is happening here..

    1. Jock S. Trap 17 Apr 2011, 11:03am

      Wow, the level of an uneducated comment, so many in 1 comment.

      Bitter much?

    2. Jock S. Trap 17 Apr 2011, 11:05am

      Sorry but that comment is just so funny. It’s pathetic.

    3. Jock S. Trap 17 Apr 2011, 11:06am

      I think people see through you “Michael”.

      1. Jock, ’tis a sunny Spring Sunday at 11am and you are as ever clamped to your laptop policing and poisonously rebuking all comments and voices of dissent that oppose your narrow, blinkered and victimised view of life.

        You are taking this empty, loveless obsession to near-pathological levels of delusion. Well, they do say the meds can have an affect on the psychiatric welfare of the user. You say you have a “hubby”. Really? Or is that what you call your computer?

        You clearly don’t work yet deny you claim disability benefits which you are in fact entitled to, even if it does then look like WE are paying you to be ever-present on PN. Or are you in fact an undercover full time staff member of Stonewall’s PC police unit?

        Your perpetual tenancy here raises so many questions. Prey isn’t it time you were more transparent about your, ahem, credentials, and what makes you think everyone is on the edge of their seat waiting for the next posting by Judge Jock (and jury, and executioner…).

    4. Michael Wrote

      “So it is a refreshing change to see a landlord prepared to take a position to protect his clientele from this sort of behaviour. Long may it remain a straight bar, which welcomes gays people.”

      Michael, your contradiction is astonishing, I bit like your hysterical rant.

    5. “One can’t go to the bathroom without being approached by some individual, hell bent on fulfilling the gay lifestyle myth”

      LOL! Who are you supposed to be, Kenneth Williams? What a load of repressed nonsense.

      1. Jock S. Trap 18 Apr 2011, 8:48am

        Stop messin about!!

  41. I laughed so much when I heard that the pub had closed early, hilarious, well done to the landlord.

    Vote Yes in The AV, and allow the BNP more chances to get this country back to how it was, and to abolish the equality act.

    1. Nothing like going back to the past, eh? Not to mention the right you should have to beat your wife silly and give those negro’s what coming to them! Ah, the old days – even better when remembered by fools!

  42. The pub can just refuse service, they dont have to give a reason or they can make one up, and it would be for the law do decide if it was ilegal.

    Ive advised The Met of all the protest details and have written to the pub to encourage them to press charges for intimidation and harrassment caused by what this two individuals have stired up.

    I hope the riot police are out in form and have their battens at the ready.

    These millitant homosexuals must be stopped.

    Vote YES in the AV, this will give the BNP greater chate of getting more chances of taking the country back to how it used to be, and make it better, and abolish the laws brought in by Labour.

    1. “I hope the riot police are out in form and have their battens at the ready.
      These millitant homosexuals must be stopped.” This is insightment to violence and most definitely illegal. Given your obvious enthusiasm for the law, I have advised PN to forward your IP address to the police in case of future litigation and/or harassment of the couple involved. Ironically, “intimidation and harassment” is EXACTLY what the John Snow is being accused of. To anyone claiming that gay people are the REAL culprits of hate: shame on you. We have been denied rights, murdered, imprisoned, cast out of our families, kicked out of our homes, tormented by our peers, driven to suicide and made to feel worthless for centuries. We have finally found our voice and are using it to demand equal treatment, and you have the nerve to condemn us for defending ourselves again? To quote Johann Hari: “Don’t demand the right to spit in the face of gay people, and claim you’re being picked on when you’re asked to stop.”

  43. Charles Bayliss 18 Apr 2011, 2:28pm

    Sweet Revenge. The pub lost money that evening for the pig-headed landlady.

  44. So, the true face of gay extremism shows its true, hideous face:

    http://youtu.be/8QnQ6Y2AEMs

    Paul Shetler – organiser of the contemptible “kiss-in” – exposed as a thug and a bully prepared to intimidate and shout anyone down who opposes his viewpoint, just like his cohorts Jock Strap, Will, Eddy and all the usual suspects.

    I hope this video goes viral quickly so the true face of the gay fruit loop brigade is exposed and shamed before it can cause more hysteria and outrage in the name of gay rights…

    1. “just like his cohorts Jock Strap, Will, Eddy and all the usual suspects.”

      Or anyone that disagrees with an uneducated and mentally imbalanced fool like you, you mean? Cheers, I’ll take it that I am nothing like the brainless bottom feeder like you to be the height of complement.

  45. The level of self-hatred on this board is astonishing. Here supposedly gay men actively campaign AGAINST gay rights, viciously slandering anyone who opposes their views. Clearly, the majority of posters agree the management of the John Snow behaved inappropriately (or at least over-reacted), but the fact that so many have revisited this thread time and again to attack – not genuinely debate – shows ignorance and massive disrespect. Evidently, the repressed and out-of-touch visit PN to vent their frustration, conditioned to believe themselves perverted. Obviously affronted by overt homosexuality, they quickly devolve into Mills & Boon-like histrionics, shrieking Daily Mail fever dream cliches ten-to-the-dozen. “How dare these sick YOBS! These PIGS! Utterly DISGRACEFUL!” This is Stockholm Syndrome at its very worst. All they did was KISS. That’s it. The end. Get some fcuking perspective, and let the rest of us live without the burden of YOUR internalized homophobia.

    1. Is this Paul Shetlar who was on BBC Breakfast Time and who co-ordinated the kissing demo last week? With all due respect sir, in light of the spitting video wouldn’t it be best to lie low for a while? You do our community do favours with your boisterous temperament. I well remember you from the club scene as someone with a heated and intensely fiery nature. You draw attention to yourself as you stand out in a crowd and you scare people, frankly. You obviously have a bee in your bonnet and will not let it go. That will be your downfall if you don’t just chill man, ok? I mean all this in the name of solidarity. Sometimes we are totally unaware that we are being controlled by our egos and need to hear it from others. Peace.

      1. I’m not (nor am I familar with) Paul Shetlar, so can’t really defend or admonish him. Sorry.

    2. “All they did was KISS. That’s it. The end”

      You don’t know because you weren’t actually there were you?

      You just believe what you want to believe, that being anything that justifies your moral indignation, and anything that justifies you calling anyone with a different point of view “repressed” or “out-of-touch” or “conditioned to believe themselves perverted”.

      You can tell people who never learned reason and argument because they fall for every trick in the journalist’s box, most of them being logically false arguments, leading you to believe something despite there being no evidence for it.

      For example the idea that the couple were kicked out because they were gay, so inextricable set in the minds of most people here, yet backed by no valid reasoning. Mere circumstance and we have a baying mob.

      The reason you don’t hear about this happening to straight couples is because they don’t have such a ridiculously precious lobby group, not because it doesn’t happen.

      1. “You just believe what you want to believe, that being anything that justifies your moral indignation”.

        Pot-calling-kettle-black, perhaps? Based on their own account, eyewitness testimonials, and the frankly predictable way the male landlord of a certain age behaved – yes, I believe they kissed. Why is this so hard for people to believe? That you apparently WANT them to be guilty of virtually fcuking over the table says more about your low expectations of gay men than anything else. Also, your reasoning that I couldn’t possibly know because I “wasn’t there” is utterly ridiculous. Based on your ill-informed opinion, you would have us believe the couple were caught having hardcore sex right in the middle of the pub. Oh, those poor abashed heterosexuals! The facts, however, speak for themselves. Regardless of this, anyone – gay or straight – who believes grown men being intimate with one another in a pub setting is somehow “indecent” needs to take a long, hard look at themselves.

        1. @Robert: “The reason you don’t hear about this happening to straight couples is because they don’t have such a ridiculously precious lobby group, not because it doesn’t happen.”

          Jesus Christ. The reason straight people haven’t been discriminated against for kissing in the John Snow is because it’s considered normal, healthy behaviour by the mainstream (and evidently yourself). Our “precious lobby group” exists because of decades of persecution, and is directly responsible for all the legal rights and privilages you enjoy today (presuming you are gay). The majority don’t NEED a lobby group. Their rule holds sway through sheer force of numbers. Only by constantly demanding our rights did gay people even get a foothold. Because you’ve apparently never experienced discrimination of this sort doesn’t automatically mean it doesn’t exist. Thankfully, the majority here don’t consider themselves inadequate, second-class apologists to a facist, heterosexist culture.

          1. “The reason straight people haven’t been discriminated against for kissing in the John Snow”

            I have seen straight couples on several occassions being asked by the management to stop kissing and fondling in a pub. The difference being they didn’t instantly leap to the conclusion it was some form of discrimination, and then didn’t continue kissing in direct contradiction of the expressed wishes of the pub’s management.

            If you could stop seeing everything through your persecution lens, you might just realise that people kissing other people in public places tends to upset some other people. Whether straight, gay, black, white, male, female – it’s actually fairly common.

            When a landlord receives a few complaints about something, they tend to ask someone to desist. When ignored, they will throw the people out.

            As soon as its a gay couple involved, craziness rules. If it were a black man and a white woman kissing, no one would assume this was racially motivated. Pathetic reaction.

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.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all