The Telegraph is an awful and bigoted rag. Ignore it.
Congratulations on getting ‘hitched’ ;)
So says the usual lefty ranters and Grauniad readers.
Spanner you probably read the daily mail, I think I’ll stay with my “lefty paper”. though I don’t just except everything a newspaper tells me I research my own facts.
I personally prefer the Independent and Guardian, although I do think some stories the Telegraph covers are well researched and authoritative eg the MPs expenses scandal …
I also tend to research the stories myself and form my own opinion which often coincides with that of the Independent or Guardian (but not always) …
The Guardian is a bit too bitter and pompous.
Which is why The Guardian is not the only source of news that I use …
Although their continued efforts in hackgate are to be applauded – and this demonstration of journalistic integrity is one of the things that keeps me going back …
Actually, I read the Telegraph.
Or could the Telegraph be simply reflecting the fact that this is not actually going to be a “marriage”?
We do not have marriage equality, remember?
You could argue that’s what they meant, but then why follow it up by using inverted commas around the word “outed”? You’re either out or your not and if not how would they know about it? Are they implying she’s not out or that coming out is an illegitimate form of self expression?
The whole thing smacks of a snide editorial.
Being generous, the Telegraph probably is trying to differentiate from a legal civil marriage to a civil partnership …
However, the use of punctuation is sloppy and should have been seen as likely to cause offence and suggest a segregation of LGBT people. It would have been quite simple to quote Hill from twitter and refer to the civil partnership without the “need” for any “special” highlighting that “may” have caused “offense”.
I never knew she was out and proud, good for her (and wish her and her partner all the best!) :-)
How can you have a girlfriend thats a cameraman, Just shows what a dumb ass “news” paper The Telegraph, is! I think I used the inverted commas correctly, unlike that rag. Congratulations on your upcomming MARRAGE! I hope you and your wife have many happy years.
They are NOT getting married thoughj
Same sex couples are banned from accessing the contract of civil marriage solely because they are gay.
We are 2nd class citizens before the law and we have to settle for 2nd class civil partnerships (which incidentally were invented specifically to deny us legal equality.)
Civil partnerships were also invented to avoid a showdown with the C of E and other cults, an easy way out if you will to keep some of us appeased. Blair actually admitted that we “didn’t want to go that way”…meaning marriage. It was quite obvious what he was implying with the help of StonewallUK.
Civil Partnerships in the UK are very obviously a form of legal marriage contract. That is what they are. The discrimination is that they are in a different form than for heterosexuals.
May I ask why Keith? Just why?
Don’t waste your muscles Clappity it just seeks attention. Take nothing it says seriously.
I endevour not to, but I can’t help but wonder why. I feel not a little sorry for him, if he has to justify himself by saying such hateful things he must be quite a sad and lonely soul indeed.
Yawn… alright Faker if you say so.
I believe Camera Operator would be the correct term- just gies to show the Telegraph is as clueless as the Daily Fail. Congrats ladies and hope you have many happy years together. On the Civil Partnership vs marriage question whilst equality will be good if and when it comes neither myself or my Bf do religion so probably wont bother to wait ! .
Adrian.Tut tut ;) Apostrophe missing, upcomming, marrage indeed! Just teasing. ;)
The Telegraph were correct to used inverted commas (although who knows what its motives were in using the commas).
Jane Hill is not marrying her girlfriend.
Gay couples are legally banned from getting married. They have to settle for a 2nd class apartheid-style civil partnership instead.
I think apartheid is a little strong and has no respect for the horrendous situation that non-white people suffered under the apartheid regime in South Africa. Yes, marriage is not equal currenty, (but is going to be) and LGBT people have lots of equality in the UK – none of which existed in South Africa for non whites.
The Telegraph did comment on it being a civil partnership but used double quotation marks on the word marry from Hills tweet. Quite correct to use them to identify it as a quote but not to use further quotation marks to highlight “marry”. Those were not part of the quotation they were lifting from the tweet and sufficient prose had been used to mention that the ceremony would be a civil partnership.
I am not comparing the South African Apartheid regime to the civll partnership apartheid system.
Apartheid literally means ‘state of apartness’. The current CP system exists SOLELY to deny gay couples access to civil marriage.
OK … Apartheid can be used as a word to describe various forms of segregation … that I would still find a strong word that appears to be used deliberately in an inflammatory nature …
a) Most people when hearing the word apartheid would associate it with total segregation of a race, as in the South Africa experience, although I concede it can be used as an adjective to describe other forms of segregation …
b) The fact there are proposals to equalise marriage and that gay people are not enforceably set apart … the difference in treatment in terms of marriage is about to be equalised so segregation is an unfortunately provocative descriptor (in my opinion)
And Apartheod is how CP’s should be referred to until equality is achieved.
I have less confidence than you seem tio about the inevitability of marriage equallty by 2015.
It is being scheduled until the very last minute of the current government.
Seeing as the ‘consultation’ on equality is is completely unnecessary and serves only to delay equality, I suspect that the Tories will claim they did not have enough time to introduce it. In actual fact marriage equality could be law by the summer if the will existed in the Law and Justice Tory Party.
You are like those crusty colonels who try to pretend the word gay means happy and not homosexual. The very word apartheid is from Afrikaans and it was the slogan of the Afrikaner National Party. It derived its very meaning from the system in South Africa. It refers to the vicious treatment, torture and murder of innocent black Africans. And you use it to refer to the the state of comfortable gay couples only having a CP rather than a marriage.
But it is true that civil partnership is not marriage… It would have been incorrect to drop to quotation marks. They could have just used the correct terminology and say that she agreed to enter into a civil partnership, but that sounds so silly and most people see it as marriage, so it’s better that they do equate it with marriage like this. It’s a reminder of the urgent need to introduce full marriage equality.
Correct to use the quotation marks for the entire quote, but not to add emphasis to a word that was not there in the original tweet. It was mentioned elsewhere in the article that the ceremony would be a civil partnership – so the facts were told without the need for this “reinforcement”.
I think it is an unfortunate choice of punctuation, but there have been worse examples of use of language etc in the Telegraph previously with regards LGBT issues.
As I said above, CP’s in the UK are very much a legal marriage contract, the discrimination is that they are in a different form than for straight couples, which is both pointless and discriminatory.
Well seeing as they exist, solely and specifically to deny access to civil marriage, it is debateable whether they are marriages.
They are not recognised as marriages in most countries around the world.
In terms of a same sex marriage in Britain that occurs (when marriage is equalised) that will still not be recognised as a marriage in most countries in the world – so that argument is a red herring
They exist partly to allow us to have a statutory, state based recognition of our relationships. Not solely to deny us civil marriage.
The punctuation is grammatically correct whatever the motives were.
Errr….you’re moaning and getting your knickers in a twist over inverted commas????!! Come on – the real news is that Jane and her partner are getting hitched, so let’s raise a glass to the happy couple and keep it real.
You are right, Paul ….
and congratulations to Jane and Sara
The usual whinging lefties moaning about minutiae instead of complaining to the people that refuse us true marriage in the first place.
Some of you people need to get your fcking priorities right.
More than happy to complain to those who “deny it to us in the first place”, as you well know …
As for minutiae … arguably … intentional by Telegraph? … arguably … worth commenting … absolutely …
Worth commenting about “inverted commas”?
Seriously, if you think so, you need to get out more.
You could take it a stage further and say was it worth commenting on; that I thought it was worth commenting on the inverted commas and so on, ad infinitum …
I remember only 10 years back when the Telegraph would report about “gay” people, like it was some new fad.
In the publishing industry these quotation marks are appropriately known as “snides”. The Mail and Telegraph often use them when talking about gay people.
Unfortunately, a civil partnership is just that, we are second class citizens in law, although a civil partnership does have most of the benefits of a hetrosexual marriage within the UK, it will not be acknowledged when one leaves the country nor unless one decides to live in a country that acknowledges same sex relations and has laws to allow this. Perhaps the law may be changed if the European judges agree that civil partnerships are unequal to hetrosexual marriage. Being in a civil partnership since 22nd December 2005, we have faced more discrimination as a couple, ie, council matters, insurances, holidays abroad we can go on. Until we become equal before the law and Same-Sex Marriage is enacted we shall always be second class. In our opinion, marriage should be taken away from the church, although one could have a ceremony in a church, after having had a previous civil marriage in a Register Office.
Back to the old chestnut. I see no reason why it should be either/or. If one were to remove marriage as a legal capability of the church, you would have an out-and-out war on your hands, and I see no reason to upset the applecart. One should be able to have a secular marriage by right, and a religious one as an option should the place of worship choose to offer one. Remember, mosques, synagogues and temples can also marry people.
Love Jane Hill! all we need now is for cuddly welsh Uber Bear Huw Edwards to come out and ill be thrilled!
I didn’t know she was a rug muncher, she hid it well, but she dated Chris Hollins before before changing to be a lesbian.
Mind, she is the best looking lesbian I have seen, most look and dress like men.
Do you look like a man too and, if so, is it by accident?
I doubt Keith looks much like a man but I would imagine the rest was pretty much by accident.
Bigoted, half-witted lesbian hater.
Grow up you pathetic ball of sh1t!
LOL….. you such a fake.
Congrads to Sara and Jane. I consider myself married, even if CP is not fully legally seen that way, but in my head I am.
I know I said I wasnt going to send any more messages in response to you, but I just couldnt resist pointing out the comparison between your views on human rights and the regime the President of China imposes …
Calm down dear, it’s only a troll.
Congratulations hope you will be as happy as we are
Good on them & congratulations to both!
Congratulations to Jane and Sara!! :)
I think we’re all reading into a bit of ambigious punctuation WAY too much here… And cameraman is a perfectly acceptable term, even for a woman – as man can mean both male, and humankind. Perhaps she refers to herself as a cameraman? Maybe not. Either way, we’re missing the point.
Congratulations Jane and Sara! x
Congratulations to Jane & Sara……..I think Jane is gorgeous. I used to hope that Kate Silverton was gay, but alas that’s not the case……….congrats to her too on becoming a mum.
Personally I read the i, great value for 20p.
Sorry to be demeaning to the general PC inverted comma debate, but Jane Hill is hot (42?!) and I wish her and her partner Sara all the best for her forthcoming hitching. Pity this good news won’t be remarked on by rest of the Beeb, as gays and lesbians only now exist in the half hour slot called ‘Stenders…, the holy holy being in charge and all that. (Can I have my money back please, your programming doesn’t reflect me and my life.) And rest.
I’d like my money back too please!! lol And when we are represented it’s in a VERY negative way…Eastenders for example!!!
And when it’s positive (Cpt Jack and Angelo) the bigots slam it!!!
Ok I’m going before I have a hissy fit!!! lol
Whether the Telegraph’s use of quotes was prompted by bigotry or not (I think we can probably reach our own conclusion on that), describing Civil Partnerships “marriage” to indicate that they are not really marriage is accurate and fair. Until we get full marriage equality then our civil partnerships are just as the Telegraph’s quotes describe them – something that isn’t quite marriage and something that isn’t seen as valid as marriage. Once we get full marriage equality, the quotes will no longer be necessary to distinguish our “marriage” with the real thing.
Congratulations to Jane and Sara on their engagement! Hope you have a wonderful day when it arrives and an equally fabulous future!
Everyone else has said plenty with regards to the inverted quotes!
The Telegraph needs to be sanctiond over this and many other articles just recently. It frequently does not follow the Editor’ Code of Practice set out in the Press Complaints Commission or applies them not in ‘spirit’ (sorry about the inverted commas). I suggest people should register a complaint with the PCC because some of these comments are very good.