Saying that there is homophobia in the black community is not racism. Its just fact.
The thing is that when blacks get caught red handed (either stealing something, murdering somebody, boiling a child etc) they either hide behind their skin color or claim that those that caught them are “raysiss”
This is really pathetic.
The intro was classic, strictly taken from the homophobe playbook, (“I have gay friends” “I don’t hate anybody” “Its not about people its their conduct etc etc”) as though Lola is trying to justify what this mammal says and avoided the fact that this creature said about his own son.
Either what he said was wrong, or it wasn’t period. Stop with this crying about “raysissim” I hate it. And it sounds even MORE PATHETIC on a gay web site.
Grow up Lola and take Stu’s advice: “Get a thicker skin.”
There is bigotry in both communities and there are people who are members of both communities. No bigotry justifies more bigotry.
Some people will use the race card or the gay card or the religion card as justification for their actions. Occasionally, they will be justified – often they are abused.
I didn’t give Lola that particular advice, pepa – so keep my name out of it – because I personally think Lola has a point
Pepa, please point out in my intro what you’re equating to “I have gay friends”. Because I’d really like to see it.
I don’t know how many times in my article I had to say I wasn’t surprised by the racism, that I’d heard it was a problem, that I knew it was a problem. Your “get thicker skin” advice really doesn’t apply here, because it assumes this is the first time I’ve seen someone post some blatantly racist comment on PinkNews or any other gay site when it come to talking about a person of colour – and it isn’t.
I’m curious though what your advice would be for people of colour who are also gay who sign on and see this type of racist ignorance? Are they supposed to just grow thicker skin as well? Do you not think that post racial slurs in response to someone’s homophobia isn’t alienating for members of colour in our community? Do you think I’m the only one bothered by it?
Er…unless Lola can point out explicit examples of racism I’d put her findings down to reading comments left by trolls.
She doesnt have to point out anything – what shes saying is true – I have witnessed it on here myself – constantly. She’s making a valid point.
There was one troll who calls itself Enoch who said something racist. But I I don’t think they were real, or racist, probably a university graduate trying to be clever and stir things up (like the girl in damascus story) so they could then write a story about racism.
And on the basis of one troll with too much time on his or her hands we get Lola’s version of events. Staircase to be honest with you I haven’t seen any explicit or what I would perceive to be legitimate examples of racism on this site. I’ve read plenty of posts by people like Rich or Enoch and I just put it down to some tool acting the cnut to see if they can get the sh!t to hit the fan.
If just one troll is not enough to be angry – then why should anyone care what Tracy Morgan said in the first place?
It does matter when someone uses bigoted language. It matters if it’s Tracy Morgan and it matters if it’s some “troll” on the internet.
I do agree it matters which is why PN needs to find a way of resolving issues such as trolls like Enoch, Rich etc. without debasing the genuine freedom of speech and debate that exists here. Some of the comments of Rich and Pepa have been ridiculous and should have been dealt with far earlier
But Lola the problem with getting angry with a troll is just pointless. Normally a troll will just write something inflammatory to cause some agro rather than writing anything with some conviction behind it, be it bigoted or otherwise.
This is not an isolated incident. I believe I mention in my article that people often respond to bigotry with bigotry. I don’t care if it’s one troll. Racism IS a problem within the LGBTQ community and it needs to be addressed.
Too right Lola When an article about African anti gay attitudes is posted the common phrase is savages
racism is an issue in lgbt communities as homophobia is in the black communities, How do you suggest a way forward for both?
We should not accept that racism should occure in the LGBTQ communities in the same way as we should not accept homophobia from people regardless of their race.
How do we address that – confronting prejudice, education and by continuing to both normalise LGBTQ and different races into society and seeking to ensure equality means equality.
@stu , i was interested to find out lolas interpretation on that topic but i agree both bigotries are equally stupid, and agree both should be challenged , however homophobia is mostly exempt from that concept by many, as lgbt people tend to be the most persecuted the world over when relative to other minorities and confronting homophobia is sometimes avoided in being challenged as to avoid cultural “sensitivities”
@james! Have to say if a government, country or person supports violence against others based on their sexuality , i’d say the country was primitive and those that espouse this barbaric hatred, savages., their racial attributes are irrelevant.
Eastern europeans are never called savages although they have the same attitude towards us
As a white person, I don’t feel I have the understanding to comment on any specific issue that is within the black community.
I do know that when I see people in my community, the LGBTQ community, displaying bigotries, I feel obligated to comment on that.
I agree with much of what you are saying but am not convinced that LGBTQ people are the most persecuted people in the world … that is subjective … how does one measure it compared to other persecution?
@james , i’ve often referred to the homophobic protesters in moscow as inbred savages .
RE: ‘This is not an isolated incident.’ But Lola in your article you single out Facebook and Pink News as being the sources of racist comments.
Yes, but racism within the LGBT community is not isolated within this one incident. I also mention that as well.
Croation pride attacked by stone throwing mob and not one mention of savages or expelling them from the EU. If it happened in a black country we would see posts of sanctions, boycotts, aminals savages, uncivilised etc. Pure racism
I do agree but there is also a case that while being racist or homophobic isn’t acceptable sites like this allow people to vent their frustration and anger and channel it into debate which personally I would prefer.
People sometimes say thing they don’t mean in the heat of the moment but most people are equally aware of responsibilty even when they are angry.
How is the term savages racist?
I think this is the problem.
We seem to make up words that are now suddenly racist when they are far from it.
If someone describes a country as ‘savages’ because of their treatment of their own LGBTQI community, for example, an opinion of which homophobia is rife within it’s country, where death is an opinion for any homosexual, then the word savages describes those people as behaving in an uncivilized manner through violence.
It can be aimed at anyone, anywhere.
That is not racism.
You are the only one associating the word savages with Africans so it is only you that is only you that is making it a race issue.
Maybe if you’re uncertain you should ask for the person to explain what they mean before branding them.
Most people talk in general but know not everyone.
For example people here are sure to know my opinion on religion, through what I have been through and experienced but even I know not every religious person is like that.
People should be allowed to express their frustration in a responsible manner through debate.
It allows us to challenge those views, to agree or disagree.
I do have to ask James! you also only pick up on this word when it is used towards Africans, not when it is used towards the US or other countries.
@Jock S Trap
I do agree with Lola that any bigotry – whether racist, homophobic, ageist, anti-semetic or on any other grounds is repugnant and wrong regardless of the motivation or provocation.
I also agree that one of the joys of the PN message boards is the freedom to debate and chat without restriction. Yes, that causes a variety of problems – including the infiltration of people such as Rich, Pepa etc but also that some people are offended by some of the frankness of expression. Some of that is due to the difficulty in expressing nuance on message boards and some is due to assumptions made on the behalf of the person writing or reading.
We need some balance – and given recent events with Pepa, Rich etc a free forum but with some level of moderation might be a solution?
I think for most of us we debate how we are but for the likes of Rich, Pepa etc they are so false they use the fact they are hidden behind a PC so try to be all daring and offensive…boring as it is I’d rather the real people.
The rest of us don’t feel we need to pretend.
Jock I said savages is used by other commenattors when describing balck anti gay people . Savages is never used if the anti gay people are white
I agree that many people do engage freely and with some level of self control on here. I do think there are some over stepping of the mark both by the likes of Enoch, Pepa and Rich but also by others on occasion being aggressively insulting and offensive about people purely because they hold belief (its a fine line for that one – its appropriate and right to challenge and debate, but not to stereotype and offend).
I do like the fact that most people on PN are themselves.
Personally, I would call Botha and de Klerk (whites from the S African apertheid era) savages
Lola, when someone has experienced first hand a lifetime of (sometimes brutal) homophobia from black people, you shouldn’t be surprised when they eventually embrace the idea that there is something inherently wrong with the vast majority of black people. I think the same thing about religious nutters, too. (And, of course, there is frequently an overlap between the two groups.) And for those who think I’m a troll, please get a life. I’m as entitled to free speech as Tracy Morgan is. This is the same Tracy Morgan who is employed by, paid by and professionally supported by gay people, but who still wants them dead.
I have been subjected to VERY bigoted comments from some of the people on here.
So when can I write an article and whine about it and submitted to the PN editors?
Under your logic, anybody that has been subjected to bigoted comments on PN is ENTITLED to an article…
This is just typical entitlement behavior exhibited by many blacks. They think they are entitled to anything and everything. Even having their own prides (even though the overwhelming majority of blacks OPPOSE homosexuality).
Again, Lola, When I can submit my article so I can bitch and whine like you.
the jockstrap: “People should be allowed to express their frustration in a responsible manner through debate.”
I almost choke myself laughing at this.
Are you serious?
Is this the same jockstrap? Or did IT change color?
@pepa Everyone’s always been allowed to write an article. I don’t work for Pink News, you’d have to ask them.
I repeat James! no-one I’ve seen has describes Black people as savages.
I have also seen plenty of comment calling savages for all who are this nasty against others White, Black or otherwise.
It has been used against the US just as much as anywhere else.
I suggest it is only you making it into something it’s not.
Jock- the use of savage as a racial slur is probably used by people of Prince Philip’s generation and age group, those that probably still refer to Germans as ‘the Hun’.
Rapture you’re wrong Black people are the most persecuted. A white gay man can pass as straight and go unnoticed
@stu and james! I don’t know of any country in the world where being black is illegal unlike being gay? where some face the death penalty . I’m also aware that there are only a tiny few countries in the world where gay people can marry , that principle does not apply for black people or inter racial marraige. The same applies for adoption and so on.
I accept your arguments.
However, there are plenty of countries where people are in actual or economic slavery as a result of the colour of their skin – I am not aware of anyone is a slave (except in a kinky way) due to their sexuality.
The number of murders that are race related opposed to those based on sexuality are significantly higher.
I really don’t think comparing oppressions does anyone any good. Trying to be the “most persecuted” does nothing for anyone and just derails from comments. The fact is, privileges and discriminations intersect. To say “being [x] is automatically worse than being [y]” is oversimplifying things a bit.
@lola but you are comparing oppressions by the very title of your very lazy , patronizing white woman acting as speaker to those who you assume have no voice, in an almost colonialist saviour type article and i note you have made no suggestion or attempted to , on how to confront this issue.
That was kind of my point by pointing out the subjectivity of which form of persecution is worse …
My attempt to explain was far more clumsy
Regardless of its form or prevalence, any persecution or bigotry is wrong
Actually, I ID as genderqueer.
My point was that using one bigotry to fight another doesn’t work. I never argued once that homophobia was identical to racism or that they should ever be compared in a quantitative sense.
I also never said I spoke for any person of colour. I said I was tired of the racism I myself witnessed and that I expected more of white members of the LGBTQ community.
If I did try to suggest what could be done in the black community to stop homophobia – that to me would be coming across as a white saviour. That would assume I know anything about what it’s like to be black and I could address the issues of the black community as equally as I could the LGBTQ community. I can speak as a member of the queer community because I’m part of it. I cannot speak about the black community. My commentary is not a suggestion for how to solve the problems of the world and the assumption that I even have all the answers is, IMO, way more of coloniser, white saviour idea.
@James…not always – thats a tired & lazy comment
“Rapture you’re wrong Black people are the most persecuted. A white gay man can pass as straight and go unnoticed”
What kind of delusional thinking is this?
I would say that blacks have it WAY better here in America than whites or gays.
Blacks have special entitlements, affirmative action and quotas. Whites and gays don’t.
“I really don’t think comparing oppressions does anyone any good.”
Agreed. So when are you going to write an article for a black website using this statement as your thesis.
All I see on these black web sites is a pissing match on who is the most oppressed.
I didn’t know they gave out medals to the most victimized and losers.
“My attempt to explain was far more clumsy”
What else is new?
So are you going to tell Lola what you told me that when you get “insulted” by PN readers just take it and grow a “thicker skin?”
Cuz I already did.
Clumsy maybe, more like long winded.
@pepa I wrote to PN to address the LGBTQ community because it’s a community I’m apart of. I’m white. I don’t think it would be right for me to comment on the black community when I’m not apart of it.
Again, never one to let facts get in the way of your misrepresentations are you – Lola is not black …
Secondly, by all means use words I have used but do not ascribe them to me without my consent
Cheap jibe at my honesty about clumsiness – but cheapness is something I would associate with you
You know not only do you sound like an obsessed individual but more and more as though you have the insight of a petulent child – no wonder other websites bar you.
“ I’m white. I don’t think it would be right for me to comment on the black community when I’m not apart of it.”
But YOU DID.
You are lecturing us about black people.
“by all means use words I have used but do not ascribe them to me without my consent”
Since when do you ask for my consent when you do the same to me?
Just take your own advice and “get a thicker skin.”
@Pepa, 1. I’m not lecturing you about anything. I’m actually expressing frustration that there’s so much racism within the LGBTQ community. And if I was “lecturing” you about anything – it would be to not use the n-word in response to homophobia. Is that something that needs a lecture? Really?
I’ve already apologised if I came off as patronising. It wasn’t my intention at all. But as I’ve said to others, I can’t help feeling like you’re willing to read patronisation from whatever I write.
My own advice is not to “Get a thicker skin”. My request is that we not use racial slurs within the LGBTQ community since, you know, there are people of colour that comprise our community that it hurts. Are you suggesting they “Grow a thicker skin”? Because I certainly am not. You don’t “grow a thicker skin” when it comes to hate speech and slurs. No one should have to. People should not use them because it’s not right.
Don’t inflate your own ego with the (wrong) belief I would want to claim any of your sorry words. The vile you spout is not something I would wish to have any connection to.
possibly a goldsmiths student ermmmm…
Agree eddy two
This is the problem of course with a site that allows multiple names to be used, people can just come back with different names to make the same bigotted comments.
Some outstay their welcomes others sense when we’re on to them and just change their nickname (or use someone elses!).
It’s really no surprise that we get these creeps on here with such lax name security on here.
Enoch, I care about what’s in your heart just as much as I care about what’s in Morgan’s when he said what he said. What you said was vile, disgusting, racist, and inappropriate and no amount of detailing your history is going to change that.
And I stand by it. Because I didn’t start it. And being equally hateful is the only answer. I’m going to appease the “brotherhood” by trying to teach them their “way” is wrong? I’d rather they all died in drive-bys or from dirty needles.
Of course that would help you so much, Enoch
I believe there was more than one troll making racist comments on this subject. I also agree that Pink News should follow closely complaints about trolls because they can falsly claim to be gay or lesbian and impugn the rest of us as rascists. That’s the goal of trolls – to stir up sh@t, make the rest of us look bad, and get lots of attention. We should address racism wheather it comes from trolls or true racist gays and lesbians. We should call it out.
I agree with you, CMYB. In this instance, Tracy attacked the entire GLBT community. As a group. That makes it bigotry. An attack against Tracy as an individual, even if it is based on his race, is not bigotry unless the speaker intends the negative comments to apply to all persons of the same race. Otherwise it is just fighting back against the attacker with angry language.
If he’d attacked with a weapon and someone fought back with a weapon, killing him, it wouldn’t be construed as a wish that all black people would die. We need to apply that logic to Lola’s analysis.
Lola sounds like one of those “can’t we all just get along?” people that work my last nerve. Of course we can’t all get along and it’s foolish to think we can. Lola’s arguments are facile and specious at best and an embarrassment to commentators everywhere. I hope she’ll think through her logic more carefully in future comments.
what complete nonsense…
Lola’s article isn’t saying anything as vacuous as ‘cant we all just get along’ – her article is saying that fighting bigotry with bigotry a) doesn’t work and b) isn’t the way forward.
For a man who knows the word ‘specious’ you should be ashamed of yourself for saying something so ridiculously inflammatory as to suggest that she should ‘think thru her logic more carefully’. That’s just arrogant bollocks.
Lola’s basic argument was a good one. Good enough to rattle you into coming up with the twaddle of yours…”An attack against Tracy as an individual, even if it is based on his race, is not bigotry” – What a complete load of unthought out racist twaddle!
What a stupid response to this article. There is no reason why the black community and the lgbt community can’t get along it is only our own prejudice which is stopping us getting along this idea that we can’t all get along is half the problem have we ever tried?
My partner is black and not often but sometimes even in my local I’m the one that gets the racist comments said to me because of or aimed for my partner and thats From the LGBTQI community.
It’s not acceptable dispite what my partner says, it spolis a night out, esp when it comes from people who should know better.
Have to say we get it more in a Gay bar that a Straight one.
Where the hell do you drink Jock? I can honestly say I’ve never witnessed or been privy to racist behaviour in all the boozers and flop houses I’ve visited over the years in London. I’ve seen plenty of racist behaviour in Scotland but that was amongst the straight community towards black people.
I have to admit when a friend of mine (who happens to be black) was over last year I was surprised at some of the comments that were made. I wasn’t expecting so much overt racism on the gay scene.
The last time we was outside Comptons, Soho, last summer.
I think that is another good point.
Very often we get to comment on an individual on a story that suddenly someone takes issues with then they take that comment on one person to mean for all.
That is a problem with some people here.
You are correct. Sometimes though if not challenged what was intended as an observation of one person can be extrapolated to include a wider section of people either by the initial author or others. Where it is unclear we should either clarify or challenge.
I agree , i have a flashback to equally unmeasured essays , we would write in school (so nothing enlightening by any means in her tired old crusade), even then her tired simplistic notions were fallible.
If “graduate student” hadn’t been noted in Lola’s bio, you wouldn’t be saying such things. You’re just trying to stereotype her any way you can in order to dismiss her views. You wouldn’t have made this remark if her bio didn’t mention she was a grad student. You would most definitely have come up with a new ad hominem to fit the alternate bio, though.
By all means, prove me wrong and point out specific fallacies. You won’t. Because you can’t.
You are very wrong .I’m not here and don’t have time to waste on you, to take you by the hand and guide you to the inaccuracies in her commentary because you lack an inquiring mind.
As I said, “You won’t. Because you can’t.” :D
I can and i do , i guess thats what makes us very different , thank goodness. Pumpkin, i’ve already privileged you with enough of my knowledge to help you with a greater understanding to your shortcomings on here. You are nothing but a repressed individual who espouses your ill thought out rants online
That some friggin ivory tower you’re preaching from brother, some condescending tone …
it may appear like that to a wishy washy, fence sitter lacking conviction and principle because i’m able to formulate a strong view.
What part of “I support anger” don’t you understand?
You can deconstruct Morgan’s argument and tell him off without resorting to racism. And if you can’t do that perhaps you ought to think more logically.
Fantastic humane comment, much welcome after a week in which we have seen more anti-Muslim drivel from the usual “liberal” suspects. Let’s fight homophobia without resorting to an oppression Olympics of us against them!
Absolutely amazing heartfelt and fully insightful comments.
Fighting homophobia by belittling others with other forms of bigotry or insult is demeaning to those passionate about ensuring LGBT rights are respected and enhanced
Thank you so much for saying this, both Lola and Andy. I no longer post on Pink News because I am so angered and saddened by the anti-Muslim hatred that pours out here, day after day. This site must be the most alienating possible place for a queer person of faith or colour – it’s pretty bad for me as a white lesbian. I’m really glad that they gave voice to Lola’s impassioned and righteous critique.
I agree that there is extreme anti religious bigotry on this site.
It disturbs me.
I do engage – and I recognise that some criticism of some people of faith is appropriate but the vitriol from some contributors on here is heinous.
Yes, there is. I was hounded off this site recently because I’m a Unitarian and there probably one of the most progressive and gay friendly religious organisations in the world.
I don’t share your faith and I query the rationality of it, but thats a debate we could have elsewhere. Whilst I may perceive you as having irrational beliefs in one respect – that does not mean that you are incapable of rationality.
You are entitled to your views and beliefs without fear of ridicule that is offensive and unconstructive. Too often some of the anti religious repostes on here lack balance or a sense of proportion.
You should go on some muslim sites , see whats said about lgbt , non believers , if you are too ultra sensitive for this site as a white lesbian , you would be devastated on islamic ones
Just because there is more bigotry elsewhere does not make bigotry on this site acceptable
i never said it did, i was advising this white lesbian who claims to no longer post here, after her comment, that by comparison to other online sites for various communities that if she claims this site to be the most alienating for lgbt of faith and colour , she should visit some others to put it into perspective.
That may be an enlightening thing to do – however, your argument does not in any way change the fact that bigotry on this site (or elsewhere) is not acceptable
I don’t expect you to agree with how I make sense of life and the world but I would ask what you see as irrational in my understanding. I have not said a great deal about what I do actually believe other than to use the term ‘Unitarian’ and since the term does not necessarily convey adherence to one particular religious perspective or set of doctrines I wonder what you are basing your assumption of irrationality on. Unitarians see truth and value in various spiritual perspectives including humanism (if that can be considered a spiritual perspective in the strictest sense). Unitarians have also been called ‘religious humanists’. I have come to consider Unitarianism not as a religion in itself but rather an approach to religion, and one which is very rational and reasonable. You use the term ‘faith’ but what exactly do you mean by that? If you mean ‘to believe something without proof’ or ‘to blindly follow without question’ then that would not reflect a Unitarian way of thinking and being in the world. I’m not exactly what you would call ‘a bible believing Christian’. I’m not out to convert or ‘save’ anyone or persuade them to follow a set of dogmas and doctrines. Or tell them who they can and can’t love or foster self loathing and dependency . As you say, this is a debate we could have elsewhere, and I would enjoy a thoughtful dialogue with you so perhaps we could continue the discussion on another site.
Sounds like I have some learning to do and that we could have an interesting exchange of views and debate. My understanding (maybe wrong) of Unitarianism was somewhat different to that which you describe and if I have prejudged you on my own limited knowledge then I apologise without reservation. I would be more than happy to discuss elsewhere – where do you suggest?
I have a group on Facebook called ‘Banned & Censored On The Christian Institute Facebook Page’. Perhaps we could have it there. Do you have any ideas for a topic heading?
I shall go and look for you shortly … something along the lines of follow on from pink news????
Have made a request to join the group
Bit wordy but full marks :o)
The truth is that oppression focks people up – and the more layers of oppression a person has experienced/endured then the more multiply focked up they’re likely to be.
You just have to read the comments on Pink News to see that in action – the minute someone is in target they’re off blunderbusting with all guns blazing. Often with no coherence to their argument which is usually based on nothing but counter prejudice and historical vitriol as if these things somehow work to make the world a better place or convince others of the error of their ways.
Which of course they never do and never can. It is in appealing to someone’s shared humanity that all social evolutionary progress comes – not in belittling them in order to make ourselves feel that tiny bit taller.
I too found it a bit ‘under grad dissertation’- esque. Another rich white kid trying to keep it real while her folks back home bankroll her epiphanies.
Rich White Kid …. folks back home bankroll her epiphanies… Wow, you got that way wrong there.
lol good for you, Lola! :o)
(I could see that one coming….lol)
You’re going to have to fill us in, I can’t be doing with trawling through the website of a modern witch to see what she has to say about her genderqueer studies relative. Does anyone have a normal job title in the US? Like shop assistant or hairdresser or junior vice president?
Actually I do have a “real” job title, I just keep my business life separate from personal. You said that her parents were bankrolling her and she was rich. I’m her mother, and I’m far from rich. I am however extremely proud that when she sees an injustice she stands up for it. Be it LGBT or not. AND she worked for her Master’s, no one paid for her. She’s an amazing person, with a great mind.
I’m not sure what you mean about “trawling through a website of modern witch to see what she has to say about her genderqueer statues relative” You’ll have to clarify if you’d like that addressed.
Lola has had first hand knowledge of living in the LGBT Community. Her website is listed if you’d like to see her information.
I am without a doubt privileged in many ways. I was able to go to university – both as an undergrad and grad, which a lot of people haven’t been able to. I won’t deny I have a lot of privilege in this instance.
But does that make my words any less valid? Does that make racism okay?
What’s the point in necessarily critiquing the way I phrased my words other than to invalidate what I’m trying to say? Is there something so wrong with asking people to stop being racist?
Nothing wrong – there is too much hatred in the world and that includes on these threads
And a nice mum too :o) bless her :o)
“Does anyone have a normal job title in the US? Like shop assistant or hairdresser or junior vice president?” lol You’re just making Lola’s case for her you numpty. FOCUS young Skywalker FOCUS…..!
Forgive them, Renee – they know not what they do – often whilst ironically thinking simultaneously that they do lol
PS this is effectively the problem with the comment threads in general – that noone actually focuses on the actual article itself
(and I too am now guilty of this myself so I’ll shut up! :o)
God Bless x
What I would say though is that the bigotry attacking bigotry is not a phenomenon known only to the LGBT communities. It is also prevalent in religious, race and other communities. I have witnessed racism being attacked with homophobia, religious intolerance attacked with ageism etc
None of it is acceptable.
Definitely. Hence why I mentioned the UCLA incident. It’s not something ONLY LGBTQ people do. But it doesn’t make me any less sick of seeing it.
Fair point – any bigotry whether by LGBTQ people, towards LGBTQ people or others is sickening and wrong
I agree with her, resorting to racism isn’t the answer but…..I can’t really speak for Facebook but there were no racist comments on here that I saw and I read through most of them and the first 20 or 30 on Facebook had none either so I think I would like to see examples as well of racist comments.
Also just a little annoyance for me is her ‘queer community’ comments a couple of times. I’m not part of that I’m gay not queer. I hate that word describing us. But hey.
Totally with you on the ‘queer community’ terminology Paul- I do think that’s an Americanism to be fair and I do hate the word ‘queer’ being used in any form. For the life of me I can’t see any racist comments on the Pink News messageboard, I haven’t looked at Facebook yet to see what she’s talking about.
I hate the word queer, but I use it like a black guy might use nlgger, especially when talking to homophobes. I don’t like the word gay either, cause I’m not always happy and it was originally used by heterosexuals as an insult, just like queer, faggot, puff, etc. I hate the word homosexual, because it’s a medical term. I hate same sex love because it’s so long. I wish the gay/queer/homo community would come up with a word themselves.
how bout the word nobbledeyjoy? lol
I just made that one up :-)
can you see yourself feeling comfortable with that one then eddy? lol
(perhaps your discomfort has less to do with which word is being used than the way you feel about the concept the words actually refer to?)
PS there’s a lot of ‘hates’ in that comment! lol (I counted 3 plus 1 “I don’t like” and 1 “I’m not always happy”)
So nobbledeyjoy it is then! :)
It also rhymes with ‘boy’ which is useful for songwriting purposes lol
No, I don’t like nobbledeyjoy, sounds really stupid. Worse than queer, gay, homo, puff, bent. Maybe we should just keep the offensive terms the ‘straights’ have labelled us with if that’s the best you can do.
Happy with gay, queer and bent … no problems there
I thought you’d be HAPPY with it. Simple Jack. You m m m make me happy.
I was trying to be helpful and followed your suggestion lol
what do YOU suggest then? lol
(I still think nobbledeyjoy works quite well for many of the commentators on here at least! lol) Try it – go on – just for a week – report back at the end of it and tell us what you discovered by using it…..lol
I’m sure its amusing to you – its wasted on me …
Why do we need a descriptor?
Just to say that I was told by a gay man that the word gay was originally an acronym for “Good As You”.
Also, I agree with Lola – fighting bigotry with bigotry doesn’t help anyone.
I thought that but apparently that was used after gay had already been used as an offensive term for us.
Thanks for making me smile
Apologies for getting narked at your comments on another thread
Been here before, me thinks.
I totally understand that not everyone wants to reclaim the word “queer”.
As someone who identifies as “genderqueer”, I find “queer” more accepting and useful for me. I apologise, however, if it was alienating for you. That wasn’t my intention.
By the same token, why do you not refer to yourself as a “Genderqueer Ni**er?” – Or would you rather not reclaim that word as well?
I find the term queer just as offensive.
I’m white. Did you read my article?
Spanner you sad sack of ish
Is that really necessary?
Lola met James! LOL
“Queer” is a totally legitimate descriptor that encompasses the LGBT community as a whole. And anyone who says “I don’t like that term, that means I get to say n****r” has serious issues with proportionality.
N****r is comparable to f****t. It is one of the absolute worst things you can call a black person. To compare it to a term that a great many of us openly and unironically use to describe ourselves is completely intellectually dishonest. And please don’t come back with “some black people use n****r just like some of us use queer”, because that’s not true. Some black people use n****r in the same way that some gay people use f****t. No matter how often you hear either of those words, you should never forget how much gravity they possess when compared to less offensive, but still contentious, terms like queer or coloured.
Also, eddy two just came out as hating every single term we’ve ever used to describe ourselves as. I guess we can’t use any term because it might offend somebody then, right? Or, how about we grow up a little and acknowledge that a) you can’t please everyone and b) different words carry different weight. Don’t cry just because you can’t call people n****rs. They can’t call you f****ts, either. It’s a fair trade-off. So what if they can call you queer? You can call them coloured. Some black people hate that term, just like some of you hate the term queer. So, if it makes you feel any better, then run around telling black people they’re coloured. See how many new friends you make.
lol you must be American – it took me AGES to figure out what f****t was! lol
The word faggot really doesn’t move me either way…lol
(of course in UK the word ‘faggot’ means a kind of sweetmeat meatball thingy – and the word ‘fag’ just means a cigarette so I’m completely insensitive to it as in insult.
Which is the interesting thing about insults – they have to have some kind of cultural weight behind them in order to become insulting. And it is in using the words to evoke those cultural weights that we are actually being insulting.
Oh, I’m from England, but you’re totally right – that is more of an American term, isn’t it? I suppose over here, “poof” is the big insult. “Faggot” is just what I hear online more, what with there being far more North Americans than British commenters.
Maybe you should have gone back a few days later to find the racist comments. I live in Canada and am a dual US/Canadian citizen. Typically I don’t get my link to this site until most other comments are 2-4 days old. I saw more racist comments than I wanted (which would be zero) and that was after the period of time I mentioned.
Where I saw mentions of nooses, lynchings and slavery in the posts responding to Tracy Morgan’s homophobic outburst (and it was HOMOPHOBIC, not “heterosexist”) these were not suggesting that because of his skin colour he should be subjected to such abuse, they were claiming that if anyone had made a similar “joke” or rant using these topics and tried to hide behind “artistic licence” or “edgy” comedy then a half-hearted and insincere “apology” (“I’m sorry, but…”) would be rejected as insufficient.
What I’ve seen on the comments isn’t fighting bigotry with bigotry – it’s people making a point that if racial bigotry is wrong, so it homophobic bigotry. It saddens me when I hear gay people being racist. It saddened me to learn that black and Hispanic people mostly voted for Prop 8 in California. I have this expectation of empathy – that people who have been oppressed should know how crappy it is to be on the receiving end of bigotry and hatred. To use an example of unacceptable bigotry (i.e. racism) to show how unacceptable Morgan’s comments are, that is not bigotry it is illustration by example. Claiming that this is bigotry disarms the critics. I think that either Lola has missed the point, or feels that some bigotry is more acceptable than others.
Lola hasn’t missed anything – but I think you may have…
….Bigotry is bigotry, oppression is oppression.
I’m not disagreeing with that. I’m disagreeing with the general tone of the article which seems to be bent on pointing the finger back at gay people. Almost “let he who is without sin cast the first stone”. Yes there are people here who display bigoted thinking (see the post under this thread), but I doubt you will see any high profile gay advocate, or any person on this forum who is capable of displaying capacity for reasoned argument, defending bigotry whether it’s based on race, gender, religion, age, disability or any of the other countless ways people find to put someone else down. You will find people defending Tracy Morgan, though. So – as I said – some bigotries are more acceptable than others.
No bigotry is more acceptable. Period. And if you seriously believe that, holy crap, I don’t even know where to begin. I WILL hold people responsible for the bigotries, regardless of what community they are in.
Thats simply not true – look at any of the comments on articles where someone involved in the story is Muslim or Catholic – the comments go riotous. And certainly most of the ‘top ten’ posters are equally responsible for that. (Look at the comments to the articles concerning the black Christian couple who were barred from adopting….or the articles about Uganda’s endemic Homophobia). The list goes on….
I do get frustrated by some of the attacks on religious people on here.
I am non-religious and I recognise that some religious people are bigoted and some have carried out heinous acts. But I also recognise that saying because someone is Catholic they are a paedophile, or that because someone is Muslim they are a homophobe is as reliable a barometer as saying a gay guy is effeminate. The stereotyping and generalisations (often based on personally experienced pain) is also bigoted and wrong – like the pain some have experienced.
BECAUSE THE BLACK COMMUNITY SHOULD KNOW BETTER! They are the first to complain about discrimination against them, but its o.k for them to dish it out apparently! They are happy to reference the civil rights movement when it suits them, but not when they want to refuse otehrs their own civil rights. 9/10 homophobic attacks i read on are committed by black people. I was never racist but since coming to London, I have only ever experienced hate from the black community,. I fail to see what advantages they bring frankly. ,
WOW . really?! Here is the dumbed down version genius, US VRS THEM dose NOT help. YOU are making yourself part of the problem. gross. Go crawl back under your uneducated, fearsome, prejudice rock.
‘Advantages they bring’?!?!
WTF are you talking about?
If you’ve ‘only ever experienced hate’ from ‘the black community’ that says more about the friends you have and friends you don’t have than it does about any mythical ‘black community’.
Anyone, black or white, committing an attack on another person is not (by definition) going to be committed civil rights devotee….
Also I think you should re-examine the facts – something tells me you’re allowing your pre-existing prejudices to cloud your reading of ‘the facts’
Unfortunately, being a member of one minority group does not mean you understand what it’s like to be another minority group.
I remember quite distinctly when looking at the clubs in my university, seeing a Queer Women of Colour group. I remember reacting with, “Why do they have to have their own group? What’s wrong with us?”. If you would have asked me why LGBTQ people needed their own group, I would have been able to get that immediately. But I didn’t understand the concept of white privilege and I refused to believe I had privilege because I was white – mostly because I had dealt with classism, attacks against my religion, homophobia, and ableism. Sometimes, people who are marginalised have a hard time accepting they could ever have any sort of privilege because they’ve gone through so much hatred themselves.
I would’nt want you in my group either , oh you’re not part of the lgbt community though are you ? just dipping your toes in as a social experiment, hence to the vague gender queer id. less commitment whilst a rad student.
I really don’t need to justify my queerness to you.
The racism found within the LGBTQ community would still exist and it still does exist – regardless of what you think of me personally.
Genderqueer is a subcategory of transgender. You remember that term? It’s represented by the T in LGBT. You going to apologise for that choice bit of transphobia, or just try to sweep that under the rug, too? By saying that, you insult not just Lola, but all our transgender users.
Blimey, this is exactly the situation the article was referring to, just replacing racism with transphobia! Shame you didn’t learn anything from it. Only this time, nobody had to insult you to bring out the bigotry. You’re just a total creep.
You insult genuine trans people by assuming that you are as a gender non specific or as you put it genderqueer (makes you sound a bit more skins and rad ) speaking on their behalf. In your definition genderqueer is a subcategory of transgendered not in mine so i dismiss your stupid rant of transphobia as a means to silence criticism of your stupidity.
And you should apologise to genuine transgendered people for your blatant disregard in assuming that they are not aware of their specific gender by attempting to make yourself inclusive in the trans community. you are such an idiot , its pitiful.
@PumpkinPie I appreciate you going into detail about what genderqueer means, but the focus here isn’t what my identity is.
Racism is still a problem that should be pointed out. My identity is not important here because it’s only being used to distract from the original point, which is that racism is not an appropriate response to homophobia.
Alright, I’ll just leave this dead-end discussion with one last note. Transsexuals acknowledge concepts such as “genderqueer” or “third gender” as legitimate gender identities. rapture, you’d know this if you actually had any knowledge of the transgender community. Alright, that’s the end of that.
Under what capacity do you assume transexuals acknowledge genderqueer? Your arrogance concludes that transgendered incorporates those who are androgenous/genderless which is not what encompasses transexual traits.Not any transexuals i’ve ever encountered and there have been many , have no concept of your gender queer label that you use to describe yourself . You are definitely not a person with a gender dysphoria, more a teenage angsty possibly stunted individual. This is a dead end topic as you are trying to purport your half thought idea odf being gender non specific and how it is somehow part of the trans community.
Even lola has abandoned you as an embarrassment to those who are more capable of defining their id status. Also lolas identity is irrelevant here as she said ,but you wish to single handedly have put the terminology of genderqueer into disrepute. tHere have been gender benders, androgenous mutations , genderless, asexual, many more non gender specific terms used by many before , genderqueer is just another word du jour but nothing new in this concept , however to insist that a gender non specific individual is appropriated by the trans spectrum is debatable at best.
Rapture, Don’t tell someone else what my intentions are. I’ve abandoned this because it has nothing to do with the subject. I’m not debating my identity with you. My identity is not relevant to the main point which is about racism in the LGBTQ community.
@lola well looks like some genderqueers have ambushed whatever the purpose of your incipient commentary was as your genderqueer status is obviously more controversial .
No they haven’t. You’ve attempted to derail the subject of the article by focusing on my identity, which is not only none of your business but irrelevant to the main point. Now do you have something to contest about my commentary or not? Because I really don’t think I need to identify as anything in particular to realise that using racist language is wrong.
Hello Lola. If you really want to not fight bigotry with bigotry, stop using the word queer.
Agreed. The idea of “gender queer” implies that there is something unnatural or abnormal about same sex attraction. I don’t think that the argument of “reclaiming” this word holds any water.
And in fact rather than signally ‘ABnormal’ it signifies ‘outside of the norm’ – ie outside of the claustrophobic confines of the normaloid (and heterosexual, Judao-Christian) Western world.
Oxford English dictionary:
queer a. Strange, odd, eccentric; slightly ill or faint; (derog) homosexual; v.t. to spoil.
If you take it to mean homosexual, or even just “not 100% missionary position heterosexual” that doesn’t mean that suddenly your usage takes precedence over the cultural context of the word. There is nothing positive in there at all.
Like I said – at least 30 years….
where you been?
In a living breathing language things change.
I have looked in four dictionaries and only one defines queer as being negative when relating to orientation.
I think the following definition is interesting:
“Originally pejorative for gay, now being reclaimed by some gay men, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered persons as a self-affirming umbrella term. Caution: still extremely offensive when used as an epithet”
Genderqueer is a gender identity. Please look it up.
The word ‘Queer’ has been a widely acceptable political term used by the LGBT community for a very long time now (almost 30 years). I’m kinda confused as to why you (and others) would chose this forum to pick up on that now.
We or certainly I have picked up on this term before now Staircase and on other stories apart from Lola’s post. And who agreed it was an ‘acceptable’ term to use? Cause from what I’ve read again and again there are plenty of people who don’t appreciate the word ‘queer’. And before you or anyone else calls me a ‘self-loather’ (which is another term all too readily cast about on this site) I most definitely am not.
what on earth made you think I was about to term you a ‘self-loather’ just because you havent noticed the use of the word ‘Queer’ in gay politics over the past 30 or so years? lol
Because anybody that is gay that doesn’t follow the leftie “party line” is immediately branded as such. If you are straight, they simply call you homophobic.
Self loather is not a phrase that would occur to me to use … and speaks to me more of petulant bullying and name calling than any rational debate or discussion
Durrr. Do you want me to respond to your comment Stiarcase or just roll my eyes and shrug? Hey, I’ve just done both.
You have a right to not be comfortable with the term “queer” when used by gay people, but others have the right to be comfortable and to use the term applied towards themselves. So let’s just let people call themselves what they want. If some one who’s gay uses the term applied to you and you don’t like it. Just politely tell them you don’t want the term applied to yourself, otherwise ignore other gay peoples’s use of it. You know what they mean by it.
I find this one a hard one …
I think everyone should be entitled to use whatever form of description to identify themselves that they wish … be that gay, straight, queer, bi, trans, whatever …
I think we need to bear in mind that some people may be offended by our use of words.
How we balance the two – because we will not always be aware in advance that the other may be offended, is awkward …
I personally don’t find the term queer offensive – in fact there have been several bars called queer that I have enjoyed frequenting!
I do think bringing up the use of the term may be a distraction from those who recognise something in the authors discussion of bigotry attacking bigotry
But Stu, you’re so nice you don’t find anything offensive. And in terms of a distraction of the real story. Let’s not forget that this is about a homophobic comedian who has a very public voice, not racist trolls on pink news. Talk about distraction, why don’t we focus on homophobia. This is a gay news site.
Because there are people of colour within the gay community who are silenced and alienated by the virulent racism demonstrated and that deserves comment.
B@@locks I find plenty offensive
I think gay politics are important and that is one of the reasons I contribute to this site – but I also recognise LGBT people can do things wrong too – including me (and shock horror including you too eddy two). That means we have a responsibility to not respond to bigotry with bigotry. Unfortunately there are examples of that on PN.
Lola, maybe because I’m into black guys and black culture I just don’t know what you are talking about. I thought being black was a bonus.
Eddy two, I have no idea what point you’re trying to make, but “being into black guys and into black culture”… I have no idea what you’re trying to quantify with that but it sounds a bit screwed up.
Stu takes step back and realises he over stepped the mark on debate – apologies guys
Good on you Stu! I totally agree.
B@@locks is only one @ but two L L’s!
Being black can be a bonus – but not always!
Widely acceptable? I’ve had this discussion with friends and none of us like the word. It may have been “reclaimed” by people who like to think they lead the vanguard of militant thinking but for many of us it is still a term of abuse.
Just cause you don’t like the word doesn’t mean it hasn’t been widely acceptable by the LGBT community over the years.
Maybe it didnt spread outside of London then? lol
(it has after all only been 30 years…)(or so….)(give or take 5 years…) lol
Again, I apologise if my use of “queer” alienated anyone. Personally, “queer” is a far better descriptor of my orientation than “lesbian” or “gay” is. I prefer the word vastly over the other terms and would rather use it to describe myself.
My reclamation of the word is not equal to bigotry. I don’t expect everyone to reclaim the word, but to compare it to bigotry is really laughable at best.
Its one of those competing rights, Lola.
Of course, you or I have the right to use whatever label we feel is appropriate to describe ourselves – and I have no probelm with gay male or queer or many others. However, I do recognise that others may be offended at some of my choice of descriptors. That probably speaks more of their insecurity than of mine – but in a decent society its incumbant on us not to offend each other if it can be avoided.
I agree with most of your article and find it disturbing that some queers (with apologies to those that find that term demeaning) think attacking homophobic bigotry with other forms of bigotry is acceptable.
Well written article. Lola
Aside from anything ‘QUEER’ makes a great t-shirt design lol
Depends is a queer does the artistry …. lol
I personally find the word queer more helpful to me because I am different from the supposed norm in several ways, not just by being bisexual, so queer is like an umbrella term for all of my non-normative sexuality. I understand that not everyone finds the term helpful, but there’s now queer theory and queer theology and both of those are full of very helpful ideas which are useful tools for deconstructing heteronormativity and explain in some depth why some people (on both sides of the Atlantic) have chosen to reclaim the word queer.
Well said Lola. There is often quite a lot of borderline racism/disablism/deep unpleasantness about other LGBT people on these message boards.
If anything Lola’s writing inadvertently highlights the legitimacy of posting messages on blogs and message boards. Whether it be that dude in Edinburgh Uni posing as a Syrian lesbian or people posting deliberately inflammatory messages on here to get a rise from genuine readers her argument doesn’t really amount to much in the context of what she’s read and reported about on internet message boards. Now if we had some televised debate re the lgbt community and bigotry and named actual people were quoted then you’d have a more concrete factual story.
I believe that’s why it’s listed as a “Comment”, not an article.
Not at all – if you lot cant get your shot together on a message board how the fock you think thats gonna suddenly magic itself into a coherent strategy with John Snow chairing on televisual? lol
Aside from anything else the boards would be dead all day if you lot were busy in make-up giving good face to the great British of Isles! lol
Joking aside, I do think that there is an issue re the trolls on these comment threads and that there must be a better way of monitoring them
I agree Stu – I think they should do a secure login option for people at the very least – that would help enormously. And stop people from hijacking people’s name-tags maliciously.
But even bigger sites like Gaydar for example which have ‘monitors’ don’t do a particularly effective job. Pink News should have in place a robust policy which people have to sign up to though – and a swift enforcement of that policy. That would go some way towards dealing with some of the nastiness of the postings on here.
But this notion of ‘troll’ is however such a ridiculous one who’s time has come – after all most of you guys are on here all day long – does that make you ‘trolls’? lol
In my experience ALL message boards create the same kind of playground bullying them and us mentality. (which is in itself very very odd) Something about the mentality of people who use them (and its invariably men by the way) – very odd….
You raise an interesting sociological point about it being mainly men – be interesting to explore why that is …
I do think one persons troll is anothers advocate, but its about understanding rights and responsibilities …
Bullying is never acceptable and there needs to be a more rigorous enforcement of the message boards on here – I for one would be happy to engage with PN and help discuss how this could be resolved – I am sure others would be happy to do so as well.
i agree with this artical. reading some news on this site makes me upset, but reading the comments make me feel worse
Agreed Daniel. It seems that with every article I read, there’s a chorus of people picking everything apart. They seem to take pleasure in disagreeing and being negative. But you’d bet that if you met them face to face they’d be far too cowardly to ever disagree.
Some of that is good debate … but I do concede sometimes there is unnecessary negativity (IMHO)
ENORMOUSLY unnecessarily negative….
should I go on….? lol
Agreed I’ve given commenting on stories that talk about Islam as I know the comments im going to heat and I can’t be arsed with it all
There are some very strident views on religion on here that extrapolate their opinions on holding faith to mean that anyone who does is stupid. That is claerly untrue and a bigoted view.
Engaging with such dogmatic views as a non religious person is difficult as often they try and make me fit into a particular box – which I choose not to fit.
Attacking people for their beliefs is as unacceptable as attacking people for their orientation – full stop.
That does not justify some of the horrific actions of some people of some faiths.
But nor is the actions of some an excuse for ridiculing others who have no responsibility for the actions of others.
Groan out comes the race card.
If he was northern, female, had a lisp, was disabled, was common etc people would have picked on that.
Had he NOT said anything ant-gay people wouldn’t have mentioned his colour. The trouble with gay people is we just take it. There is NO high road.
The “race card”, eh?
So, saying someone shouldn’t make references to nooses and joke about sexual assault on slavery plantations is now “pulling out the race card”.
It is NEVER acceptable to insult someone based on the colour of their skin – regardless of what ignorant opinions they may have. One bigotry does not excuse the other. And there IS a way of rejecting what Morgan said without resorting to racial slurs to do it.
Again if someone says something about minority when they are a minority themselves they should expect some people to retaliate. If they don’t like it then perhaps they should not of said something in the first place. While you may not like it surely you can understand it?
This ISN’T a race issue. If he had been ginger haired, had a speech impediment etc that would have been the focus of the “backlash”
You are confused whith what bigotry is.
A man who made an unprovoked attack on gay people deliberately trying to stir hatred is a bigot.
Gay people who said negative things about that mans ethnicity is a human reaction.
They are not the same.
Lola would you have written your article had Tracy been red haired? I think not. Perhaps you need to try and get a clearer understand of what actually happened here.
If Tracy would have been ginger, no one would have called him a racial slur, would they?
You’re really the one who’s not understanding the issue. Racial slurs are never okay. It does not occur to me to call someone a racial slur because they are homophobic. If it occurs to you, then that’s part of the problem.
So what you are saying is racial slurs are not acceptable but to comment on someone being red haired is???
You missed my point.
I did say had Tracy being a different minority that would have been the focus of the retaliation.
However the comment about hanging and slavery did go to far but not all the comments come out of racism.
Your comment was a very simplified view.
Re: Andy. No I’m saying that if you really think that being ginger is identical to being black you’re either sadly misinformed or being intentionally thick.
I could give a crap less if someone would have made a bigoted comment regardless of what minority he was. It’s not right for racial slurs to be used. Period. And you hypothesizing over what *would* have happened is irrelevant.
I never once said ANYWHERE that EVERY comment was racist. Nor did I say gays had a monopoly on reacting to bigotries with bigotries. The only thing that’s simplified is your reading of my commentary. Go back and read it again, pull your head out of your bum, and stop trying to justify hatred.
Racists are the first to deny its existence just like anti gay people
Right. And if this had been a gay comedian making a racist joke, and the black community had responded with homophobic remarks, what do you think the people here would have said?
“He should have expected it”, or “look how homophobic those black people are, let’s respond in kind”?
If you think we’re justified in responding to homophobia with racism, then straight blacks are justified in responding to us with homophobia (and I suppose queer blacks would be justified in responding to us with more racism). It just gets unnecessarily messy and unpleasant.
Any mentions of nooses etc were made in connection with the physical threats of violence towards the black community by white militants in the US. The references were made to highlight what black people were subjected to and the irony with Tracy Morgan’s suggestion that he’d kill his son if he was gay. I think you went looking for issues that weren’t present Lola.
That’s certainly not what the person who mentioned a noose on facebook said in response. They said specifically actually that Morgan deserved to have racist slurs thrown at him so he’d know exactly what it feels like to have homophobic slurs thrown at him.
Again, these comments are not isolated incidents of racism within the LGBTQ community. This is a larger problem that’s illustrated, but not composed entirely, within SEVERAL comments that SEVERAL people made on the PinkNews Facebook.
Er actually – no – the ‘problem with gay people’ isn’t that ‘we just take it’ at all – the article is pointing out that what ‘we’ do instead is come out flailing our arms everywhere lambasting people with old prejudices when what we should be doing is making a coherent and spirited defence against those who take against us.
All that flailing is a waste of time, energy and focus and simply both misses the real point and turns people against us who are actually on our side…
Lola makes a good argument when she points out that white gay men are effectively thereby telling black gay men for example that they are not welcome or part of the ‘gay community’. Which is of course complete rubbish.
Gay politics and Gay Pride wouldn’t exist as we now know it without the monumental efforts of black gay men and women, drag queens, transsexuals, bisexuals and anyone else aligned with the Queer community (Stonewalls).
That gay humour has so long focused on belittling people who scare us does not excuse, condone or even justify it.
It doesn’t work – pure and simple. Its simply inflammatory bollocks which gets us nowhere. Its divisive and corrosive and needs to stop. Right now.
I fully support what Lola is saying.
While you agree, you are incorrect about ‘white gay men are effectively thereby telling black gay men for example that they are not welcome or part of the ‘gay community’
Just want to add for myself, I don’t think you’re incorrect or melodramatic at all.
I could say that’s because you are both but I won’t.
e_e It’s sad when you have to result to saying “inflammatory melodrama” to prove a point you obviously don’t have. Your refusal to believe that the LGBTQ community isn’t always a friendly place for POCs doesn’t make it magically a friendly place, unfortunately for us all.
Thank you Lola for addressing LGBT’s dirty little secret. No other commentator has addressed it. Time for the LGBT community to grow up and realise it is not perfect and has no moral high ground while accepting this racism as the norm.
I don’t often agree with you – but on this I am with you 100%.
I do think, so often, the LGBTQ communities are so self absorbed that they perceive anyone holding a different view must be wrong. There is a sense that the LGBTQ communities will always have the moral high ground – and some of this comes from a victim mentality (not all but some).
Equally, there is a lack willing to examine our own motives and morality in terms of how we treat others.
These are generalisations and not every LGBTQ person will react in this way but there is a tendency to a holier than though approach.
The irony is Black people in the uk had no beef with gay people. There are plenty of gay people ,clubs and bars in Brixton. Black people have a problem with the racism.Sort that out and you’ll see the change
Black people have no beef with gay people? Are you sure about that? Are you saying it’s just white people who are homophobic? You sound as racist as the idiots that think its only black people who are homophobic.
Of course, there are homophobic people of all races, sexes, religions (and none) etc
Equally there are racists who are gay, straight, bisexual, trans etc
Eddy there are loads of black gay people in Brixton. When I was growing up gay people were seen as rebels and welcome in the community. As black people became intergrated into the scene the secret came out.
Not strictly true, James – Kevin Maxwell did an excellent piece a little while back on the issue of racism within the LGBT community
I agree with the commentators who say this is a black issue. I’ve never liked Tracy Mogan – she’s a crap comedienne – just like her fellow black ‘comics’ – Iris Robinson, Melanie Phillips, Jan Moir. When they have an International Day of Homophobia, all these black women will take over Loose Women for the day…
What, you say? Tracy Morgan isn’t a man and all the others you mention aren’t black? But they have to be. I tells you, only black people are homophobic. Says so in the Bible, dunnit?
This morally, intellectually, emotionally and observationally bankrupt argument that ‘black automatically equals anti-gay’ is such a witless philosophy that I despair. And if another person brings up the ‘black support for Prop 8 in California meant that it succeeded’, I’ll probably fight hard against the desire to throttle them. Given the way the vote went, it didn’t matter one way or another how the black community of California voted it made no difference to how the vote turned out.
No, but Melanie Philips is a man.
Tracy Morgan was born that way but he wasn’t born a homophobe.
Iris Robinson is an adulterer who used homophobic comments as a smolescreen to divert attention from her sinful activities with the local butcher and his son (and Lord knows who else)… Jan Moir?
Can I ask why you’re referring to Tracy Morgan as a “she” and saying he’s not a man?
Now you are being a pain Lola.
Some PN comments clearly went too far but none so far as to say they would stab black homophobic comics.
But on behalf of some here on Pink News who went a bit too far, I want to apologise to the black and homophobe community for their choice of words in response to Morgans recent anti-gay stand-up act in Nashville.
A pain? Hrm, because I’m questioning the intentions behind someone’s comment. Because calling out racism is fine with you but pointing out where there may be some possible misogyny/transphobia isn’t?
If that’s me being a pain, then good.
Or because you needed a slant for whatever essay you need to hand in by next week?
Actually, I’m done with my essays. But good on you for trying to make yourself feel better about your own ignorance by attacking my status as a graduate student. Because, you know, having a bit of education means I can’t really care about anything about my education.
Trust me, I really don’t need random ignorant people on the internet to give me essay ideas. Luckily, I have plenty of those of my own.
Why do we have to distinguish people as either he or she? Isn’t that rather sexist?
Why assume Tracy Morgan is a man? Isn’t that sexist too?
Certainly Tracy Morgan looks a bit masculine facially and the article does refer to Tracy Morgan as “he” but taking a closer look at the delicate hands and arms there’s room for doubt.
If Tracy Morgan was a real man he’d have no need to make a show of his “manliness” by putting down gays.
What is your point?
Your are sounding incoherent …
Are you trying to say that we all judge people … if so, yes we do …
However, we dont all display bigoted views – and some LGBTQ people do to others and others do to some LGBTQ people … neither is acceptable – however you try and market it
Pavlos, I agree I see something problematic in distinguishing people in binary gendered terms as a genderqueer person, absolutely. I think it’s pretty obvious to assume that Morgan identifies as a man and with “he” pronouns. And to assert there’s a such thing as a “real man” and anyone who doesn’t fall in line with that should be called a “she” is really sexist, because you’re asserting that “she” is less than “he”. Maybe that’s not your intention, but it is how it comes off. Also, when you talk about “real men”, it makes me wonder if a “real man” has to be manly or masculine at all.
I think we can critique what Morgan said without it having to be about manliness. No one should have said what Morgan said, whether they’re “manly” or not.
Stu, my point is that you can take this too far, especially here where Lola was calling out Dazzer on possible misogyny/transphobia when he/she is totally with Lola against racist bigotry if you read what Dazzer wrote more carefully
“This morally, intellectually, emotionally and observationally bankrupt argument that ‘black automatically equals anti-gay’ is such a witless philosophy that I despair”
Lola, it’s very manly for a man to be in touch and at ease with his feminine side.
Dazzer is in possibly in touch with Tracy Morgans feminine side to an extent that Tracy Morgan himself can never be aware of.
Just because someone agrees with me about racism, doesn’t mean their possible sexism or transphobia is okay. That’s precisely the problem I’m pointing out in my article. Don’t respond to bigotry with bigotry.
I could care less about what makes a “manly” man or not. You’re still assuming men have to be manly and that men being manly is necessary and a requirement. It also is completely irrelevant to Morgan’s comments. The issue is that what Morgan said was homophobic and horrible. It has nothing to do with him being manly or not.
You’re talking out of your alcohol drenched bum, Pavlos….
Tracy Morgan is a man (while you’re now busy being a mouse) ;o)
and ‘pip’ and ‘squeak’ are two words that spring to mind….
Nutcase2: Shut it!
Fraid I have to agree with Staircase2 and Lola on this Pavios. And now, because you are feeling slighted you’re starting to call names. Is that what this thread has been about? Reponding to homophobia with bigotry and hatred – wheather it is racism, sexism, or what ever you might want to pitch to try to negate your opponent’s arguments. There’s a word for it. Actually four words – an ad hominem argument.
Lola using ‘she’ to describe Tracy Morgan is a joke because of his name. Like A Boy Called Sue, Nothing perjorative about it. Just used for absurd effect like calling Iris Robinson et al black. Pavlos got the joke. I’m sorry that you didn’t.
I got the joke … and found it fairly amusing – didnt quite understand Pavlos continuation and run with it
Cause Lola didn’t get it presumably.
Not undestanding your comment ….
Stu, do you think perhaps you are overdoing the “seek clarification” thing. There is no such thing as perfect comprehension and there’s not much that’s more tedious than having to explain every word.
Lola is choosing not to have a sense of humour today, she’s wearing her professional gender studies hat, has her career to think of, this stuff is in print remember
A career in what exactly? I thought my art degree wasn’t worth the paper it was conceptually printed on, but a gender studies degree, whatever. I’ve come across (not in that way) people on Gaydar doing their gender studies degrees and posing (a la that weirdo 40 year old Edinburgh student) as gay to ask X amount of questions from X amount of gay guys and filter all that bullsh1t into something they can present as a well argued case study in what being male and gay means.
I am clearly seeking to understand what others are saying, if you have a problem with that, then quite frankly that is your problem.
There is no such thing as perfect comprehension – and when I dont understand it might be due to my misunderstanding, my limitations, my wrong perception, some nuance that wasnt intended by the author or the author making a typographical or other error in what they had said.
I did get your joke. I just didn’t find it funny.
lol and why would you – it was badly executed for starters lol
And I think I’m right in saying that Lola’s article says that she is studying International Studies. It gets easier to see from one comment to the other that you lot don’t even read past the headline when it come to commenting on articles….
oh PS – It suddenly struck me that if could take almost any comments page on any article and shuffle them all around and put them with different articles and you lot would STILL be saying exactly the same mindless drivel over and over again. The subjects are the same regardless of the title.
What’s up with that?
@Lola, if you understood it was a joke, why were you trying to accuse me of mysogyny or transphobia? or whatever. Why didn’t you say: ‘OK, got the joke – try harder next time.’
I’d have replied ‘OK, suit yourself’.
Instead, you – the author on a piece on bigotry – immediately attempt try to turn something you understood to be an attempt at humour about racial bigotry into my potential bigotry!
I will continue to speak out against bigotry as and when I see it, but I don’t think that in the future I will pay attention to you.
You seem to be a divisive eather than unifying force in the LGBTQI population.
I’m sure Morgan thought he was just making a joke as well. Making it into a joke doesn’t make it appropriate. Misgendering Morgan as “she” when Morgan identifies as “he” in an attempt to be funny IS transphobic. And if you’re doing it in an attempt to make him seem less than “manly” as if “man” is less than “woman”, than you are being sexist as well. Whether that’s your intent or not, it’s not a funny joke. It’s not even hardly a joke.
Because Dazzer she loves the sound of her own voice, a loud opinionated self server.
And while I’m on this rant, I feel compelled to point out that the No to Prop 8 campaign was largely bankrolled by the Mormons – a hideously white organisation.
Having said that, I see precious little anti-black comments on Pink News.
However, if you’re gay and a Muslim on this site, then Allah/God/FlyingSpaghettiMonster help you.
The abuse aimed at openly gay men on this site has been horrific.
But back to the point of this comment about Tracy Morgan. Having read a lot of websites about what Mogan said, Pink News is positively lamblike in its comments. Look at American sites like Towleroad and Queerty to see real, proper racism in operation. The only American site I’ve read where Morgan’s comments are discussed, rather than his race, is AfterElton.
One of the reasons I like this site is because Lola’s comments can be discussed in relative civility. I’m not sure an American site is ready fo this kind of debate just yet
I agree with Lola & the content of her comment. I believe her point is that some of the LGBTQ community can be hypocrites when using bigotry to fight bigotry. Just because we have suffered, it doesn’t mean that it is acceptable to cause others suffering, by casting hate onto others, even if they have spewed hateful comments towards any of us. Two wrongs don’t make a right! I believe that the most effective way to challenge prejudice, hatred & ignorance is to appeal to the verbal assaulter’s better side, by asking them non-judgemental, direct & mind-opening questions, rather than capitalising on the situation and using it as an opportunity to spew other unacceptable forms of bigotry at others, especially against those who are in a vulnerable position in society. Some people here are making false conclusions about others, from their comments, which is unhelpful & unnecessary. Maybe the term Queer was not ideal, but I feel that it depends on who uses the word & in what manner or context.
If confused about a persons view on something we should seek clarification rather than presume – I know I am guilty of presuming sometimes …
Yes, I admit I can be presumptuous on occasions. My rants are usually aimed at corrupt politicians, bankers or people in a very responsible who abuse the power they have. We have to be careful not to presume that all we think or say is always justifiable, especially when we’re angry! Whether or not a comment is in the heat of the moment doesn’t alter how potentially harmful it can be to the individual and the wider community!
Also, there has been alot of hate from this site from zealous LGBT religion haters towards members of the LGBT community who have religious beliefs. Those of us who still have a spiritual faith should not be shown so much hate and at times blamed for all the prejudice and lack of support from certain aspects of one’s individual religion. I personally don’t stay as a Christian because I agree with what my church is saying about issues I don’t agree with them on. I nearly left 10yrs ago, but stayed because I met so many other LGBT christians who I shared a positive affinity with. There are so many ways someone can believe in God. To subscribe to a faith you don’t have to agree to all it’s laws. Change & growth has happened through the ages, due to the hierarchy being challenged, although painfully slow on several occasions! Those of you who have something negative to say about this, please respond without hate or prejudice, which relates to what I believe is the spirit of Lola’s article.
Zealous LGBT religion haters? you aren’t setting a good example by being immediately provocative and then doing the full “holier than thou” speil.
In a sense LGBT Christians are acting like a human shield for the extreme institutionalised bigotry of the religion you shore up, in that sense you are useful to your churches in that you to try to block adverse criticism here, but the much proclaimed persecution from atheists supposedly endured by Christians is clearly not so severe that Christians are committing suicide or being attacked and bashed in the street by atheists.
I hope you don’t think I am being hateful or prejudiced when I say get a sense of proportion Tony.
As a non Christian, there is a huge difference between justifiable debate and criticism and outright hatred and bigotry agianst people of faith and belief – and both are visible on these message boards.
@Stu. Yes, usually in response to gratuitous hit and run comments by anti-gay, allegedly Christian trolls here.
Similarly I consider the recent high profile cases taken up by the Christian Institute and the Christian Legal Centre to be gratuitous hit and run attacks on gay rights.
Absolutely there are some hit and run comments from Christians (and those of other faiths) which are offensive, bigoted and wrong and they should be condemned – they do not justify the same in reverse and there is plenty of evidence of people lumping all people of faith into one group on here. That is as simplistic as saying all gay men are limp wristed, effeminate, Kylie loving airline stewards.
“I hope you don’t think I am being hateful or prejudiced when I say get a sense of proportion Tony.”
No you’re doing it when you opened your comment by talking about his “spiel” as being “holier than thou” lol
You sure you aren’t Melanie Philips? Thats a very Daily Mail use of (ye) olde English….
Come to think of it you lot have a remarkably close energy to the Melanie of Philips and the Richard of Dawkin…lol remarkably close!
(things that make yer go, ‘hmmmmmm’)
@Pavlos: I’m unsure why you think I see myself as “holier than thou!” I certainly don’t think I am!” Human shield comment ill-informed! Institutionalised bigotry is totally unacceptable, especially when it’s a religious institution because of it’s multi dimensional influence & power around the world. Just because I believe that Jesus’ life is a perfectly balanced example for anyone else to live their lives does not mean that I or all other Christians believe that they are living their lives in an ideal manner. The hate that has come from religion is insidious, especially when certain people in responsible religious positions influence their communities by spewing prejudice and hate, somehow claiming that God would back their evil argument! God would NEVER approve of discrimination. Jesus was also against prejudice. It’s the prejudiced religious people who cause most of the problems. Most religious people I know are understanding and don’t have prejudices or discriminate against others.
It was something to do with your opening line “there has been alot of hate from this site from zealous LGBT religion haters towards members of the LGBT community who have religious beliefs.”
You are not accusing me of being hateful are you?
I am a secular atheist but I support LGCM, not because I think there is a jot of truth in Christianity but because they are working from the inside (sort of) to tackle the institutionalised anti-gay bigotry of the church .
Its that kind of level headed balanced view towards faith I yearn to see from the LGBT communities. I understand the skepticism from many and I know there are some horrific examples of bigotry, abuse and worse from people of faith. However, responding like for like with attacks isnt the way forward – your approach of supporting those who wish to tackle institutionalised homophobia is to be congratulated!
Stu and Pavlos – you’ve found something to agree with each other on. I too agree with both of you. I am a secular huminist and I too get fed up with “pushy” religionists, but making generalized negative statements against all people of religion because of the “sins” of some is just as bigoted as the religious judgments of us as gay people by the religious bigots. Let’s all keep some perspective.
Absolutely we need to maintain perspective – not minimise the wrong doing of some (including some leaders) but recognise that taking a simplistic approach to views within a large group of people can lead to bigoted actions.
@Pavlos: I wouldn’t say you were hateful, no. You jumped to a few conclusions about me, which can be easy and/or convenient, although I can understand why you thought I may have applied the ‘zealous hater’ term to you. I also support LGCM and agree that they help to raise awareness and challenge prejudice, fear and hate towards the LGBT community. The point I was trying to make was that I have received some hateful &/or prejudiced &/or narrow-minded comments from Pinknews users which I found disappointing, pathetic and definitely unhelpful regarding building bridges between different communities within the LGBT realm. It’s very disappointing when so many religious people behave in a manner contrary to their faith, as it’s totally hypocritical,as well as creating a false impression of who they are. I can totally understand LGBT objections against religion. It’s the hateful comments from the ignorant members that I feel are unacceptable. It can demonstrate that ANYONE can be prejudiced!
And the beautiful thing is that Darwin came along and cut through, and said, ‘well actually it’s my theory that is the way, the truth and the light’.
I’d protect anyone’s right to their faith – so long as it is not forced on anyone else – but I don’t pay much attention to those who cry of hurt feelings, because I might ridicule their beliefs.
We have had this discussion many times before …
Question, debate, challenge, etc … all reasonable
Ridicule, belittle, Offend … not reasonable … and potentially borderline bigoted
I can completely agree with this point. Even if the racism or whatever the hell you want to call it does not occur on here. the fact is that it occurs. After all Martin Luther King did not have success through blasting the “white man” know he understood that not all white people hated him. Just as not every straight person, or official or otherwise hates us. just as war only leads to more war, bigotry only leads to more bigotry and all anyone does by fighting bigotry with bigotry is ensure that a vicious cycle continues.
What a load of rubbish.
We get it. Discrimination is bad.
Why write a 1000 word essay saying “it’s hypocritical to be discriminatory if you are the subject of discrimination”? Firstly it isn’t if the forms of discrimination are different. Second the incidence of racism is so minimal as to be not comment worthy.
Libtards getting their knickers in a twist over nothing as usual.
“the incidence of racism is so minimal as to be not comment worthy”? What a tub of bollocks!
I say once again – great article, Lola.
And like I told your mother earlier – forgive them – they know not what they do (quite literally!) lol
(and some of them (again – quite literally!) do not what they know!) (And I think this is the most dangerous of the two……)
You’re absolutely right. I was mistaken The article is full of insight, statistical proof and in-depth analysis of the supporting theses and evidence. It’s not hyperbolic ranting at all.
“It’s not hyperbolic ranting at all.”
Yeah, point in case your dribble about “Libtards” and the “incidence of racism is so minimal”. Insightful and utterly lacking a basis in reality. Well done.
Will, your statement isn’t supported by facts.
If you need a 1000 word essay to tell you not to be racist, there’s something wrong with you.
Is Lola Olson a new muse come to our blackened land to tell us tales of a place without racism?
This essay is pointless.
Is Lola of the impression gay people are more racist than others? I wonder…
The article certainly is insightful
There is some analysis and thought.
There is reference to evidence within PN – which is the basis for the discussion.
In such discussion there is no clear need for empirical data.
So TrollfromDamascus you are right – you are mistaKen …
and no racism, homophobia etc is acceptable
“There is reference to evidence within PN – which is the basis for the discussion.”
The essay is an essay on the racism evident on PinkNews?
Or is the essay attempting to demonstrate racism is prevelant in gay people to a higher degree than society at large?
“I do expect us to not resort to racism or to think racism is okay due to homophobia”
If you need a 1000 word essay to tell you not to be racist, I think you have problems.
It’s redundant and pointless.
Statistical proof doesn’t seem to be heavy in your comments either, Godfried. It was a comment – agree with is or disagree with it – but why bother tearing something down if you say you don’t believe it to made of any depth?
As I said: “they know not what they do (quite literally!) lol (and some of them (again – quite literally!) do not what they know!) (And I think you’re the in the second and most dangerous of the two……)”
“Statistical proof doesn’t seem to be heavy in your comments either”
It is. The fact is the original essay was a rant about nothing which bears no relation to reality.
“why bother tearing something down if you say you don’t believe it to made of any depth?”
The legion of support this nonsense gains is frightening. It’s scremongering.
As for your biblical quotes, I think you’re a little bit loopy.
My you are aptly named arn’t you?
It is my experience that for whatever reason message board/chat rooms generate this kind of nonsense. I have long known that it isn’t Reason or quality of argument which makes people see the light – thats simply down to personal consciousness. And you can’t enlighten another person – you can only inspire them to want to become enlightened. (“You can take a mouse to water but you cannot make him think” perhaps?)
Its an interesting thought though as to why it is that the internet is so overwhelmingly filled with negativity and limited consciousness, narrow thinking and small mindedness. Given the global nature of the net youd think this wouldnt be the case. But we often forget that for most of us, most of our internet interaction is based on connections with other people who are occupying the same geographic, emotional, social and educational spaces that we are.
The web is literally just that – a web of many many people all focussing in the same direction. Given the immense amount of time we all tend to spend online these days its not surprising that we all eventually succumb to a certain amount of net fatigue.
I believe that its this net fatigue which amplifies the negativity which we experience. It does this simply by gradually wearing down our own natural positivity and replacing it with negativity which we then also pass onto the next person we come across who ‘gets on our last nerve’.
My experience as a teacher has taught me that I need to be energised and centred in order to be able to perform properly. Teaching a group of adults of kids when I’m tired is simply a recipe for disaster. The same is true for us all in terms of our internet interactions.
Maybe the answer is ‘little and often’ lol
God Bless x
Now you are being insulting to Atheists, don;’t you ever stop, whatever happened to civility, manners and consideration for others.?
It must be an artifact of the discussion site medium.
Dog Mess x
Perhaps you could enlighten me as to how this has anything to do with ‘Atheists’ and also while you’re at it what ‘dog mess’ has to do with anything?
You’re quite a confused bunny aren’t you – and perhaps if you read with your eyes instead of your bile duct you might actually understand what I said….Re-read it ….
To Right all this fighting between different minorities is stupid we need to help bridge the gap on our side atleast.
Well said. I totally agree and think this is a really important point. thanks.
Thought provoking article.
Brings a good debate.
Though whilst it may not be acceptable I think people sometimes just react first out of anger before calming down and debating.
I think there is sense that one persons bigotry is another persons debate.
We all tend to define different things as bigotry.
Clearly there is the straight forward racism and homophobia etc that just isn’t acceptable but I do feel too often some will use the words racist and homophobe not because the person they’re accusing is, not in the slightest but simply because they don’t like someone having a difference of opinion so throw these words to stall the topic, to distract.
Whilst I do feel Lola makes an accurate case it must also be said that at what time do we stop debate?
Many people may saying things in the heat of the moment against what others just feel they have a right to be hateful and that creates the fear and anger to retaliate.
I think most people know whats too much and not acceptable, we see it here at times as stated.
Sometimes those idiots remind us why we have to stand up and be counted but they always push it too far.
@Jock S. Trap agree with you completely. As an illustration of your point, I made a ‘joke’ above in support of the author of this article, whereupon she turned round and intimated that I was misogynistic/transphobic/whatever. However, even as she did that, she realised I was making an attempt at humour. I feel the opportunity for her to cry ‘bigot’ was too great a temptation for her. It was easier for to make an accusation of bigotry rather than telling me face on she didn’t think much of my sense of humour.
In debates about bigotry, it seems simple principles of discourse leave the room and let accusations and counter-accusations rule the roost.
No, I said your joke WAS misogynistic. And it was. It was a pathetic attempt to insult Morgan by misgendering him and you should apologise for your mistake and own up to what you did.
Anyone who throws around the n-word a heated debate needs to grow the hell up. Words matter. And using the n-word, joking about slavery, and purposefully making comments about Morgan’s skin colour IS bigotry. It’s disgusting and there’s no room for it in any debate.
I said I support anger. I do not expect people to turn the other cheek, and that’s where you failed to read part of my article. But I do expect people not to resort to bigotry to support their claims.
Then again, as I said, I continue to be unsurprised. I’m unsurprised that it happened – annoyed and furious – but still unsurprised. And I’m stil unsurprised that there are a bunch of people in these comments who can’t go, “You know, maybe using the n-word and other racial slurs to respond to homophobia IS kind of ignorant and we should do better”, but instead feel the need to whinge and piss and moan because someone dared ask them to act decently.
Because, you know. What I’m asking for in my article is friggin sainthood.
JUST SHUT UP!
So I take it from your responses you do think racism is an appropriate response to homophobia?
You’d have worked well at the McCarthy witch hunts in the 40s and 50s Lola. If everyone doesn’t bend over and agree with every word you say then they’re a racist.
Please point out to me where I’ve called someone a racist for not agreeing with me.
I’m merely wondering why you seem so intent on shutting me up – when my message is that racism is not an appropriate response to homophobia.
Well here for instance- So I take it from your responses you do think racism is an appropriate response to homophobia?
I don’t believe I called you a racist. I believe I questioned your need to silence me. Either you agree with the premise of my commentary or you don’t. And if you agree, why are you trying to shut me up?
I’m torn on why you make that comment to the article.
Part of me sees the need for this article and has agreed it’s a good piece of writing but there’s a part of me that feels you weren’t prepared for people to really debate it.
Thankfully it’s very rare to see the n word or the f word here but like I said Clearly that racism and homophobia isn’t acceptable.
That kind of discrimination is wrong and most people here know that with Freedom comes responsibilty.
We sadly do get Troll here who do run riot using inflammatory language and some who brand us all ‘activist’, ‘rapists’ and ‘child molestors’ the bitch and complain that people aren’t responding in kind.
Thankfully the majority of us have decided to ignore those creeps.
Your article came the same day or 2 that Evan Davies comments that people should have the right to be bigots, so well placed.
I’m not prepared for people to debate it? I guess my willigness to talk about it and respond to criticisms = lack of preparenedness?
I’m more than willing to debate it. I have been debating it. Unfortunately, all anyone wants to do here is drag my personal details into and sweep everything else under the rug.
If you think one troll is all of the racism that exists in the LGBTQ community – you’re wrong. It’s not an isolated incident. I’ll say it – again – my response was because of the Facebook comment, yes and because of the Morgan incident, but that does not mean that this is all the racism I have witnessed and others have witness in the LGBTQ community. It is a problem and it pisses me off because, even though I shouldn’t, I expect better.
You clearly miss read my comment Lola.
I’m putting what ‘I’ see.
Oh and yes I know about racism within the LGBTQI community Thank you.
Having a Black partner for 18 years you kinda get the jist of the discrimination, ta.
My point is far from debating you actually seem disappointed that people haven’t said why you wanted or expected even those as I said most agree with you
If you know about racism in the community – what is the point of trying to pick me apart?
I’m having a hard time understanding what you’re saying because of your sentence structure. Am I disappointed in the white members of the LGBTQ community when I see the racism, yes. Am I surprised? Unfortunately not. What emotion would you prefer I have in response to this?
Is it too much to ask for people to agree not to use the n-word against a comedian because he went on a homophobic tirade?
I don’t see most agreeing with me here. I see most people would rather focus on my personal details than talk about racism being a real problem.
To be honest Jock – I don’t see why Lola would be prepared for this kind of shot unless she had spent the last ten years on the web encountering equally focked up gay men on a daily bitter&twisted basis.
Its not healthy boys! Give it up!
Mind you, to describe this tired old flood of bollocks (quite literally as it happens!) as being ‘prepared for people to really debate it’ is somewhat wide of the mark! This lot wouldn’t recognise debate if they were hit over the head with a hammer branded with the word ‘DE’ being wielded by a man calling himself ‘Bate’. MasterBate more like!
You don’t want people to be bigots fair enough I and most would agree but you sound disappointed because people haven’t written what you either expected or wanted but fact remain most have agreed with you, including myself.
My point is different people have different levels of what bigotry is.
James! for example (nothing personal James!, it’s what I respect about you..(oo-er respect!!)) is in my eyes very sensitive about these issues whereas I find I’m not.
Maybe that has something to do with me living through such behaviour I don’t know but whilst all bigotry is bad sometime good comes from it.
Some people don’t realise they are saying terms that are deemed bigotry so there must be room for the learning curve.
There is also something I find worrying is some in that when some people ask about a culture out of pure innocent interest they can be branded a bigot.
It seems sometimes we cannot win and instead cause confusion but using th eterm far too easily.
I don’t know how many times I have to say it. I don’t care what’s in people’s “heart”‘s. Who gets to decide where someone’s “learning curve” is? Who gets to decide who’s pure of intention and heart? Hrm.
Intent is not magic. Because when you step on someone’s toe, it doesn’t matter if you didn’t mean it, if you’re not a toe stepper, if you’ve got friends with toes you’ve never stepped on. I could care less if Morgan intended to hurt anyone. I could care less if the people calling me a faggot in high school intended to be homophobic. Intent is irrelevant. Words matter. They hurt.
And if you care a bit more about “winning” and proving how pure of intentions you are rather than the person you’ve just hurt – well that’s part of the problem.
“I don’t know how many times I have to say it”
Then stop saying it.
You put the debate out there, now people are responding to it.
It doesn’t mean you have to repeat yourself it means everyone has a different take on it.
Your article is indeed a great article, you can tell by the fact it got so many comments but your article was your view for all to see, you don’t need to repeat it.
Why should you?
It’s created such interest and personally I think you should be proud of that but now the floor is opened for all who have an opinion.
I know I’ve help can’t people’s opinions off the LGBT community by them just taking the time to get to know me and others.
That the learning curve I’m talking about.
There are many bigots out there and a lot would change if they stopped assuming and instead got to know the actual facts and mores to the point got to know us as people.
There will always be die hard abusers I’m afriad but luckily they’re less than those who are willing to see and change which we do see.
So let me get this right, Jock. I don’t respond to criticisms of my article – then I’m unwilling to have a debate. I do respond to it then I’m repeating myself and being self server or whatever it is.
I’ve not attacked one person here. I’ve debated the issue. I’ve responded to criticisms of my article. I’ve not made anything personal. I guess my question for you is why you feel the need to tell me to stop commenting – as if me commenting is stopping others. It’s not stopping others. I’m not doing anything to prevent anyone from debating anything.
And in fact, I think I’ve had quite good interactions with a few people about my article and I’ve been able to clear up some of the way people read me. Personally, I don’t think I’m harming anything because I’m not resorting to personal attacks (not saying you are) nor am I going so far as to be nasty. But you’re welcome to disagree.
I would much rather a reasoned debate, heated, written and the changes to put the point across AND listening to others than people being shut down and silenced.
People know what’s acceptable and what’s not, it’s common sense if anythingbut sadly here we do attract some who just knowingly want to go that extra mile and spoil it for everyone else.
Debate should be championed but yes in a reasoned and respectful way.
People know what’s acceptable, do they? That’s why some of the debate on here has been reasonable, right? That’s why there’s been less focus on these commenters on racism – which is the real issue – and more focus on me as a person, my identity, and anything else people can use to try and detract from the issue. Because people know what’s acceptable.
So speak from the issue and leave people guessing about the rest.
Fvck Lola if they that intereted in you I guess you’ve made it and jolted a few nerves, surely a sign of a good journalist.
If they’ll only be on about who you are etc, they clearly haven’t got anything to say, maybe your theaten them, not everyone can write articles you know and even more just don’t bother.
I think you just need to ignore the focus on you and put it down to being a good writer and putting something out there that challenges peoples opinion.
Seriously Lola 500+ comments? It’s not you that has the problem if others can focus on it you and not the article.
Thats success for you.
I AM ignoring the focus on me. You lot are the one who keep bringing it up. I’ve offered nothing about my personal life except to deny outright hilarious bogus claims. Re-read the thread. Seriously.
Wow Lola you take compliments like insults I see.
Me thinks maybe you were the wrong people to write an article.
Sorry but way to sensitive.
How is you telling me to shut up a compliment?
And please, if I were sensitive I would have said I was surprised by the virulent racism I witnessed. I’m not surprised. I’m pissed off about it. And I’m even more pissed off that people here can’t seem to take a simple, “Don’t use the n-word to insult someone just because they say homophobic things”, without winging and trying to pick apart my credentials – as if that message NEEDS to be picked apart or if it matters who the heck I am. That message is still there. And I’m not going to stop repeating it so long as people continue to ignore it.
Oh dear Lola.
Where have I ever told you to shut up?
Maybe re-read the comment where I am actually trying to praise you and your article but hey-ho.
What I offer is my take, my opinion. I apologise that that seems to be so difficult for you.
Like I said clearly you were the wrong person to write an article.
Where would we be if the likes of Melanie Phillips had your attitude on things she wrote?
Think we’re done now!
Don’t call us.
Um, how about where you tell me to stop saying it. Maybe you need to re-read then.
Also, you’re doing a fantastic job of agreeing with me and complimenting me now, right?
This thread seems full of horrible misunderstandings :( Lola, I haven’t read all of the comments here but that one of Jock’s where he mentions the 500+ comments you’ve got and how people could be being nasty to you because they know they’d never bother to do what you’ve done and write a Comment, really honestly sounded like a compliment.Genuinely.
I know how hard it is to pick nice bits out when you’ve read through loads of snide remarks and outright attacks on you, but when someone mollifies their tone, it depresses me to see them leapt on (general observation there).I’m not surprised if you’ve got the feeling that everyone’s against you but that’s not the case and maybe you’ve even persuaded some people here to change their view of you, so that’s excellent.
You made an important point about racism and it’s sad to see it bogged down in hostile comments because in the end it makes everyone paranoid that the most innocent-sounding remark is a veiled insult and that derails all debate.
He also told me to stop commenting. Repeatedly. Maybe we’re misunderstanding each other, but where I come from “Shut up” prefaced with compliments is still a “shut up” nonetheless.
I appreciate that Jock likes my article and agrees with me, but you don’t compliment someone by telling them to stop repeating their messages – especially when their message isn’t being heard.
Lola, I can’t find the ‘shut up’ bit from Jock, but that could be because there are so many comments here, so I’m not doubting you. But I detected a substantial shift of tone in the comment I was referring too. I saw it as an olive branch and then it was upsetting to see that pushed back.
None of that or my previous comment was meant as a criticism of you. It just pains me to see this kind of stuff because it’s so unnecessary. Yes – I just wish people could all get on :D
Tone is difficult to read over text and if Jock didn’t MEAN to sound like what he was really saying was, “You’ve done a good job, now stop debating people in the comments because it makes you look bad!” then I do apologise. It seemed like Jock was saying I was contributing to all of the personal jibes and nonsense, but if that’s not what Jock meant, hey we misunderstood each other then.
Yes, tone is so hard to get sometimes, and even emoticons can look like people are being sarcastic or something so they’re no answer either. Just one of the disadvantages of non-face to face communication, I suppose.
Thanks for taking the trouble to reply to me.
Gay children are hated by their families and no amount of legislation changes that. The comedian, who is very funny made a joke about that. He should have been braver to stand by it and explain the joke.
And for those who reported my last comment and had it removed. The joke was valid. Comedians speak up and illuminate that which is unjust. To say that he would kill his son is to make clear that point.
So you think he was making an ironic joke, I tried hard to see it that way too at first too but unfortunately everyone knows that irony is not appreciated nor understood in Nashville.
I do think it might have been an attempt at humour – it wasnt funny though … and its not a justification ….
Some of Lola’s language in her article and subsequent comments gives her away as Christian do-gooder.
“as righteous as our anger may be”
“The internet graced me”
“something in my heart had a little faith.”
“coming across as a white saviour.”
“attacks against my religion”
“I believe” …etc.
There is definitely a “holier than thou” attitude being presented here.
Unfortunately if you fail to accept that every person who comments on PN and on facebook is an individual representing nobody else’s pont of view other than their own, you tend to label and compartmentalise blame onto groups, religious, racial, sexual etc.
Why has preacherwoman Lola been given a special and privileged front-page platform to blame LGBT’s as a group for racism rather than slug it out here with other ordinary individuals who post on the comments pages to maintain some balance.
Don’t be nasty back to nasty people is her message, let’s all sit round the fire and all sing Kumbaya, but all dressed up as her thesis.
Have to say regardless of her motivation the message tackling bigotry with bigotry is wrong, is a reasonable message.
Your response comes across as someone who feels under attack and vulnerable – maybe thats not your intention but thats the message I get from what you say.
You also come across as though you wish to vindicate bigotry – seeing it as acceptable … and I just dont see that …
It disappoints me that LGBTQ people would feel they are vindicated in being bigoted because they are a minority who have been subject of other forms of bigotry.
I’m not feeling under attack, I have never made racist comments here and would not want to. It’s ust patronising that someone comes here and preaches to us individuals as though we are a group to be ticked off.
Some people who use racist language do so very deliberately for there own reasons, I am not about to make any justification for that but when they do someone or other will almost always step in to couter their comments and that is how a discussion site like this should work, I don’t think there is a problem. Lola ios trying to claim some sort of moral high ground, in doinmg so she’s claiming something that is not hers to claim and insulting the rest of us.
Excuse typos: their own reasons, counter, is, etc.
And Stu, please stop stop bundling every individuals comments under the title LGBTQ because individuals speak for themselves here, they are not representing the LGHBTQ as a group.
Re my comments as LGBTQ – if you don’t like the descriptor thats a personal preference, I am very careful to describe it as LGBTQ communities i.e. plural so that it is clear that not everyone in the LGBTQ communities are the same .
I haven’t suggested that you have made racist comments – your recent comments on this thread do seem defensive however. I see nothing wrong in a contributor to these threads voicing their own opinion as to the conduct of people on these threads. I happen to agree with much of what Lola says (and it appears I am not the only one). In the past when I have confronted some bigotry then where I have stood my ground against what I perceive to be vindictive and unwarranted comments I have been subject to offensive comments. Now I accept, that is rare and sometimes I have been backed by other participants but I find that conduct wrong.
I do agree that open, free speech on here mades the discussion interesting and dynamic and I would not want to ….
…. dilute the ability of people to comment.
However, there is a balance to be achieved between preventing offensive comments including those seeking mass murder of people, racist comments and anti-semetic comments etc and ensuring free, intelligent, reasonable and responsible debate …
I was insulted by the tone of this article too. We all know racism is wrong and I for one don’t appreciate be lectured to. Seek out the racists, call them out, report on their posts, but don’t patronise the other decent folks here by assuming we’re too dumb to have noticed or, worse, don’t care.