Anyone of the candidates apart from Livingstone. I just feel I couldn’t trust him.
As for reports of increased hate crime. A lot of that I would put down to people feeling more confident in reporting these incidents and that they’ll be dealt with more appropriately than they use to.
I feel it’s more of an increase. Even if more people felt confident they could report them, it must mean there was an increase in crimes happening for more people to report them.
No that’s illogical.
If for example there were the same amount of actual hate crimes this year as last, but more were reported this year.. then of course you would see an increase
Boris was a washout, Ken did really well. I will definitely be voting for him, he is the only one who will do anything.
You do that. I won’t be voting for Ken Livingstone.
I have no business voting for someone who champions what is, even in its ‘moderate’ forms, an ultra-conservative, homophobic, patriarchal and authoritarian religion.
Ken clearly has no principles because, frankly, there’s no way one can, at the same time, be pro-gay rights, pro gender equality, pro-reproductive rights and so on and, at the same time, be pro-Islam.
ken is against any form of hatered be it homophobia, racism or islamophobia and pro any minority and not all muslims are homophobes but majority of them suffer from islamophobia including yours
will vote for ken
Why didn’t Ken condemn homophobia in tower Hamlet’s council chamber and the ‘gay free zone’ posters? These people are Ken’s friends. If Ken cared so much about tackling homophobia, why the hell did he invite a Muslim preacher who wants us dead? Ken is lucky so many in the LGBT community give him a free ride, liken you. next time Ken invites these vile people to London, make sure you’re hugging and kissing them too – let’s see where they gets you.
cant be bothered with your broken record mentality
were you actually there, Boo?
That’s because we keep asking Ken, and he keeps avoiding the question, which is why we continue to repeat it.
The man is as slippery as a bucket of eels.
Let me guess, SamB
You will be voting for UKIP?
You state it is not possible to be pro-gay rights, pro-gender equality, pro-reproductive right etc and also pro-Islam. I disagree. I am.
I suggest you also consider:
The Al-Fatiha Foundation is an organization which advances the cause of gay, lesbian, and transgender Muslims. It was founded in 1997 by Faisal Alam. In the beginning of the first surah of the Qu’ran, Allah is described as compassionate and merciful; the organization’s founders believe in these attributes, rather than hatred and homophobia. The foundation also promotes sexual equality. Al-Fatiha works to combat homophobia within Muslim communities, it faces the challenge of not provoking an Islamophobic reaction among non-Muslims.
Irshad Manji is a Canadian lesbian Muslim author who is also founder and president of Project Ijtihad, a charitable organization promoting a “tradition of critical thinking, debate and dissent” in Islam, among a “network of reform-minded Muslims and non-Muslim allies.”
To be fair, I’m sure you’ll admit you’re in a minority.
And what exactly is Ken Livingstone’s position on all this?
I don’t actually see him building many bridges between those in the Islamic community who hate us, and the gay community.
Last time I was in London I voted Paddick 1st pref, Livingstone 2nd. This time I’d probably voted Paddick 1st pref, Jones 2nd even though 2nd pref would be almost definitely a wasted vote. Livingstone is tainted by his lies, and Johnson is.. well he’s Johnson!
Well, at least with Johnson you know what you will get. He may not everybody’s cup of tea but at least he carries out what he promises. Ken, however will do precisely the opposite and offer all thongs to all men until he gets in, at which point he will drop all pretences and do what the bloody hell he likes, just like all typical scummy champagne socialists.
That was a seriously Freudian slip of the keyboard. ;)
FYI 2008 results, refer http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/elections/london/08/html/mayor.stm unless there is a mjor swing in votes, it will be a party party choice?
And http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/mayor/publications/society/facts-and-figures/population , http://www.londonelects.org.uk/ and http://spatialanalysis.co.uk/2011/02/mapping-londons-population-change-2011-2030/
What has pissed off LGBT voters more?
The loss of Soho Pride – paid for by pax payers money
The loss of a LGBT adviser who was paid 100k a year to spend millions of money, to do what I don’t know!
Ken Livingstone inviting Islamic Extremists into City Hall
Ken Livingstone having close links to extremists in Tower Hamlets and wanting London to be a beacon of Islamic
Boris withdrawing City Hall from the Stonewall Index
Which is it?
For me it was Ken inviting Islamic extremists to City Hall and that did not feature in his manifesto at all.
“The loss of Soho Pride – paid for by pax payers money
The loss of a LGBT adviser who was paid 100k a year to spend millions of money, to do what I don’t know!”
Do gay Londoners (a LOT of Londoners I might add) not pay taxes too?
“Ken Livingstone inviting Islamic Extremists into City Hall
Ken Livingstone having close links to extremists in Tower Hamlets and wanting London to be a beacon of Islamic”
Neither of these things are true. I do not like the mainstream Islam Qaradawi represents, but he is no extremist. Mayor Luftur Rahman is not an extremist of any definition and is not even homophobic.
“Boris withdrawing City Hall from the Stonewall Index”
Lets turn that on its head. Boris Johnson drastically cutting valuable services that would have made life in London safer and more equitable for the gay community or Ken Livingstone daring to consort with those bloody muslims.
Oh course gay Londoners pay taxes, this is my point.
In times of austerity, why is Ken proposing to spend money on a piss up in Soho? If LGBT want a piss up in Soho, they can pay for it themselves. City hall already gives money for London Pride – that’s good enough for me.
What the hell will a LGBT adviser do? Please tell. If ken Livingstone understands LGBT people, why on earth is a LGBT adviser earning 100k and spending millions needed?
You claim ken did note invite an Islamic extremist to London and you also do not recognise Ken helped a Islamic extremist in Tower Hamlets get elected in 2010. Press Complaints Commission believes homophobe and Muslim extremist Luftur Rahman can be described as extremist. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100125165/lutfur-rahman-can-be-described-as-extremist-backed-rules-press-complaints-commission-but-we-will-publish-his-denials/
As for cuts to funding, just where the hell is this free pot of cash coming from?
I’m not sure Ken gave a salary or budget to his LGBT advisor – sounds like alarmist, speculation from Boo.
and boo resort to biased and out of context spin on the story by andrew gilligan, famous for series of nonconstructive critiques when it comes to livingston
Itotally go with it.
Pride is no longer a political vehicle, it’s just an excuse for a party. That is not how any taxpayers should see their money spent. The same goes for the Notting Hill Carnival.
I would rather see more coppers on the beat or a reliable and affordable transport system.
“Do gay Londoners (a LOT of Londoners I might add) not pay taxes too?”
It the bars and the drug dealers in Soho want more people there spending money, I suggest they dig deep and fund it themselves.
There are 101 other things I would rather my money was spend on.
What kind of knee-jerk bollocks is that? Since when did the Mayor of London engaging people in debate become a bad thing?
I really don’t get this to be honest – AT ALL
Since when did a Mayor have to put in his/her Manifesto that he/she might at some point in his/her term of office engage in debate with people who other people might view as extremists…?
That’s EXACTLY the road The Sun and the News of The World took with Ken Livingston back in the 80s when they ‘leaked’ that he had been in discussion with the IRA…
Politically inspired hogwash to divert attention away from the very real issues with Boris Johnson’s term as Mayor by smearing his main opposition – exactly the same tired old crap that the Labour Party indulged in when trying to discredit Ken simply because he had dared to stand up to Blair…
is anyone else finding the headline (and mayoral coverage in general) a bit misleading on pink news at the moment.
In order for something to be classified as insignificant it has to have a measurable affect of less then 0.05%… *feels that he’s earnd his BSc Economics now*
Whoops… this was meant to be replied to Kens post about the london gay vote being insignificant below. My bad!
“…clearly no-one should take London’s 350,000 gay voters for granted.” Ben Summerskill.
That means gay voters make up less than 5% of the voting population in London – a proportion that could be rightly classed as ‘insignificant’!
5% in a race where last time the winning margin was only just over 6% is quite significant don’t you think??
Yes, this was a very anti-Ken headline.
Perhaps he shouldn’t have quoted Muhammed – I’m sure he knew damn well it would make headlines.
Did he think p1ssing of the relatively small number of gay people there would be more than offset by the publicity he would generate quoting Muhammed. there’s got to be a reason – there always is with him
There is absolutely no reason at all why he shouldn’t mention Muhammed.
Anyone (gay or otherwise) who believes that mentioning Muhammed makes Ken homophobic is insane – they are very clearly racist and Islamophobic…
Ken . . . I understand it rattles you that LGBT people are seen as valuable, but the 1% of Fundemantalists Christians in London are seen as not only irrelavant, but not worthy of being considered in mayoral election debates.
I like the fact that you did not compare LGBT to ‘Christians’.Rather you compared them to ‘Fundamentalists Christians (whatever that is).
That said, you should be aware that it is only somebody who is irrelevant that struggles for attention. Christians do not need to as the politicians go out of their way to seek them out.
By the way, I could NOT find any reference to LGBT in Boris Johnson’s manifesto. Perphaps you can point me to it?
“By the way, I could NOT find any reference to LGBT in Boris Johnson’s manifesto. Perphaps you can point me to it?”
Only some one who has lost the plot resorts to abtuse and circular rhetoric . . .
That is irrelavant. LGBT are Londoners too. They suffer non-homophobic crime, crap transport and high council taxes just like everybody else.
The trouble with Livingstone is he tactically targets minorities to try and turn them around on piddling little things that only affect them, instead of concentrating on the bigger picture like Boris does.
For instance, if there were more police, then crime would go down, which would also include those of a homophobic nature. Stop being so bloody isolationist!
Its entirely appropriate to compare the LGBT population to people who oppose marriage.
Not all Christians oppose marriage, therefore comparison with the entire Christian Population would be wrong.
Even those LGBT people who are not convinced about marriage (eg Ben Bradshaw) support the equality of it and Bradshaw intends to vote in parliament for equal marriage.
So, which Christians do oppose marriage – predominantly the vocal fundamentalist Christians, indeed in a recent poll 61% of Christians support equal rights for LGBT people (including marriage)/
Clearly Boris, Ken, Brian and Jenny believe the LGBT vote is significant and relevant or they would not have agreed to participate in the Stonewall hustings.
I’m disappointed by the headline for this article. It has a very definite subliminal message. Boris is portrayed in a positive light and Ken is being linked to Islam (far be it from me to suggest this is a clumsy attempt to play up to the anti-Islamic feelings amongst LGBT people and the UK population in general). That aside, I will vote for the candidate who has done the most for gay rights. In my humble opinion, that would therefore be Ken. He was campaigning for gay rights when it was most definitely not the done thing to do. Of course Ken has his faults, and some pretty big ones at that, but when the two are compared in terms of actively campaigning for LGBT rights, Ken is way ahead of Boris. I think it would be sensible for all LGBT people to look beyond the media headlines and actually scrutinise the candidates. Look at everything in full in its proper context. If you still feel Boris is the better candidate then so be it.
you are right, with title like this not sure how seriously should we take the pink news disclaimer:
PinkNews.co.uk does not endorse any individual candidate in London’s mayoral election next month
Pink News has long been pro-Ken so I don’t agree they’re showing unfavourable bias.
So you do not recognise any of this:
Ken Livingstone inviting homophobic and Islamic extremist to City Hall in 2004. Ken claiming he wants London to be a beacon of Islam – he believes Islam is tolerant – tolerant of homosexuality? I’d love to see the proof. Ken did absolutely nothing when his mates jeered gay councillors in Tower Hamlets and said absolutely nothing of the anti gay posters put up in Tower hamlets recently. Ken also campaigned for a homophobic extremist for T/H mayoralty in 2010. Ken also worked for homophobic Press TV (Iran wants gays DEAD!). Ken recently declared the Tories were RIDDLED with gay people. The choice of word is disgraceful I think the Pink News headline is absolutely fitting to Ken at this point in time. If Boris, in 2012, had done any of this, you, Labour and some in the LGBT community would be going crazy, but because it’s Ken, no problem. Well, sorry, Ken in 2012 is disgraceful.
Yet, Boris gave the suggestion that if gay marriage is acceptable so too should be a union between “three men and a dog”.
The are numerous quotes of Boris re same sex marriage e.g. “Gay marriage can only ever be a ludicrous parody of the real thing.”
When he defended Section 28, Boris said “The essence of that Tory case is unchanged … it is more sensitive to spare parents’ anxieties than to allow leftwing local authorities to waste taxpayers’ money on idiotic and irrelevant homosexual instruction.”
or to link his views on same sex marriage and section 28, he said: “We don’t want our children being taught some rubbish about homosexual marriage being the same as normal marriage, and that is why I am more than happy to support Section 28.”
or his views on gay people in the church: “The clerics gave us a wigging for being so mean to the Church of England … Why did we draw attention to tricky subjects like homosexuality, aka the Pulpit Poofs issue?”
For the last four years Boris Johnson decided not to enter City Hall in the Stonewall Index – despite the fact that, in 2007 and 2008, they were ranked 3rd and 2nd respectively. Mayor Johnson’s refusal to take the lead in setting a gold standard of employment practice is yet another display of his gross lack of vision and understanding. He is once again letting Londoners down.
“Tory Boris Johnson, however, seemed like a dubious contender for the post of London Mayor. Calling Africans “picaninnies”, George Bush “liberator of Iraq” and that for obese people it’s “their own fat fault” or claiming that the people of Liverpool (who had to contend with the Hillsborough disaster legacy) were a city “wallowing” in its “victim status”., Londoners are anxious about seeing the blonde bombshell in charge of a budget of £11.3bn (€14.5bn) and a city of 7.5 million multicultural residents.”
The above is a quote from Le Figaro at the time of the last election, what has changed?
What has changed is that he has turned out to be a damn sight better than the last mayor. Keeping a tight control of budgets. Stopping the annual hike in council take. Addressing crime. Supportive of the gay community.
This is predictably bollocks, boo…
You along with all the other knee-jerkers on here should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves with your reactionary and rabid rants…
This is political propaganda pure and simple and is wrong…(as well as being deliberately misleading…)
While Ken is not perfect, not by any means, I feel he’s the most pro-gay out of the only 2 who are likely to win – him and Boris. No disrespect to the other candidates, but none of them have a realistic chance.
Yes, Ken did cosy up to extremists and all the rest of the stuff which turned my stomach but at least he’s never spoke about being gay in negative terms like Boris has – I mean, Boris compared gay marriage to bestiality.
As for the headline, all newspapers are politically biased, so I don’t think Pink News would be any different.
Boris said stupid things in the past but that was then and it is 2012 now and made it perfectly clear he is in favour of same sex marriage. Ken Livingstone does have a really good past when it comes to supporting LGBT rights, especially in he 1980s and 1990s. I do recognise this and respect him for it. However, as it is 2012 now, I can not overlook Ken’s links to Islamic extremists and bringing in people to City Hall who want me dead. Boris never did this for four years and we have had no guarantee from Ken Livingstone this wouldn’t happen again. In fact he has given us signals he will do it again, i.e Ken campaign for an Islamic extremist for the Tower Hamlets mayoralty in 2010. If Boris was doing any of this in 2012, he’d be in trouble and would be condemned hard by the LGBT community and Ken shouldn’t get away with it.
Just like you can’t forget Ken’s consorting with extremists, I can’t forget Boris and his comments in the past. You want us to forgive and forget when it comes to Boris but not when it comes to Ken – you’re applying double standards to suit your own views.
No, Because Boris has moved on whislt Ken IS still close to Islamic extremists.
I think its more to do with the fact that Livingstone is moving in the wrong direction.
If nothing else he knows the gay community is uneasy about his relationship with some members of the Muslim community who are ‘not moderate’, but does little to reassure us that his support of them is not at out expense.
But Ken hasn’t changed his views on gay equality due to these links, has he?
I’ll vote for the candidate who will do most for LONDON not just the one that suits my tribal interest. Livingstone should have been hounded off gay pride, yet year after year he gets his smug mug seen along the way.
He has no contrition about his alliances with those who would kill us.
So you see this statement as pro-Boris and anti_ken, when both statements are true and neither are at all derrogatory.
That says to me it is you that perceives this headline the way you want to. Don’t shoot the messenger for simply giving us the information.
Spanner, It is not a case of me simply shooting the messenger or me perceiving the headline the way I want to. I knew perfectly well the ‘outrage’ it would cause when Ken is linked yet again to islam. Just look at some of the comments that have been put in response to my comments.It has caused a great deal of anti-islamic comments. (Some of which should be removed for going too far). I felt that the headline was playing on this to provoke a reaction. At no point did I say that the headline was factually incorrect. The headline has now been changed again and I feel that it is now fair. If this had been the original headline, I would have had no issue with it. As I have said elsewhere, I am not some pro-labour troll. I’ve never voted labour (or for ken) in my life.
Well said gatta!
Exactly what I was thinking…
Significant too that if you try to retweet the article its too long to do so – which means it take extensive editing – which is likely to mean the story is buried…
I agree there is quite a weighty anti-Ken bias going on in Pink News – which is shameful and contrary to Pink News’s official stance on the subject.
I find 350,000 gay voters to be a very small number out of several million Londoners. I wonder why that is?
Not sure how I will vote. I voted for Brian Paddick last time. This is going to be a tough one.
Incidentally, regarding Brian’s wedding, he had a civil marriage in Norway, not a civil partnership which aren’t weddings under the law. I hope he speaks up during the consultation to highlight the inequality of civil partnerships since he wasn’t able to marry in his own country.
He’s been speaking up since well before the consultation.
On marriage equality, we don’t have anything to worry about with Paddick (or Jones, and probably not with Livingstone but suspect we should worry about Johnson on that front). Not that the London Mayor has any power over it, but nice to know where they stand.
Jae, I hope he continues to bring that up during and after the consultation. We can’t get enough of it. Nobody seems to be on top of it. All we read about is the negativity coming from the right wing and their exposure and message promoted in the Telegraph and Mail. It’s sickening. We could have also done without Bradshaw’s input of course which hasn’t helped matters. The Mail and Telegraph had a field day with that one and made a lot of hay out of it.
Absolutely. The fight against homophobia in sport has Gareth Thomas and Ben Cohen taking the leading roles and sending out positive messages. Sadly marriage equality has been bad mouthed by so many for so long (within the LGBT rights movement) that there is simply no one to take up that role. Lynne Featherstone is great but she’s a Minister and Peter Tatchell struggles to get attention unless he gets hurt (which we don’t want!) so we are in quite a bind. We need a hero!
And yes Bradshaw’s comments were completely unhelpful and misguided. *sigh*
It’s getting so frustrating. Nobody with any influence or power is speaking out loudly and strongly enough. Lynne Featherstone, Theresa May, Tony Blair, Francis Maude have only commented once since the consultation. This has to be an ongoing process to counter the opposition’s rhetoric as and whe it arises, although that’s beginning to become a daily occurrence of late. We’re not pushing back on them, certainly not StonewallUK. I’ve not see any positive articles in the Guardian or Times since the beginning of the consultation have you? Meanwhile, we’re subjected to almost daily taunts by the Telegraph and Mail, no thanks to C4M, Lord Carey, Cardinal O’Brien, Archbishop Nichols, and the infamous Ben Bradshaw who has not apologised for the negative and hurtful comments against the majority of us and who did nothing more than aid and abett the right wing in this country. Unforgiveable in my view. He’s a traitor to LGBT people even if he votes in favour of equal marriage.
Robert, FYI http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/05/27/gay_london_feature.shtml
It hasnt been updated since 2005!
Not that I can find/know of Ben, refer http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1505277/Six-per-cent-of-population-are-gay-or-lesbian-according-to-Whitehall-figures.html
Just another thing this country seems to be out of date on then!
He quotes the doctrine of a long-dead psychotic paedophile?
Bye Ken! xxx
I am disgusted to see Pink News once again open up an article which incites the right wing Islamophobic elements of our community to puke their hateful racist bile on these comment pages. The Tories – and perhaps even the EDL – will be rubbing their hands with glee at this write up. I am ashamed to see such cheap Tory-loving tabloid journalism. Rupert Murdoch would be proud
And when will Pink News – well Blue News obviously – start to take their responsibility for good community relations seriously – especially given their profile? Because it will be LGBT Muslims that will suffer most from this cheap right wing electioneering dressed up as objective journalism.
Come on, be more analytical, in what way was the headline racist? WTF!
Islam is homophobic, some of its followers way not be, but the religion certainly is. Just Like Christianity. I am disgusted with you constantly ignoring the fact that Ken’s latest record on him cuddling up to extremists and playing divide and rule with Londoners, just to win votes. If you want London to be a beacon of Islam, go to Pakistan or Iran first and see what it is like for LGBT people. In Iran, they either execute you or force you to have a sex change – Ken doesn’t mind pocketing from the regime though and then avoding tax on those earnings in the UK.
Pointing out what Ken says and does it not racist, Islamaphbic or detrimental to LGBT Muslims in the slightest, it is speaking the truth and you just don’t want to hear it. Oh, you do, only if it’s about Boris.
Many on here are hoping to give a furtive one-off blowjob to an Asian in the near future. Anything that reminds them that they’re sucking the proverbial devil’s knob is anathema to their ears.
Oh my god… Did you just equate all Asians to Muslims? And did you just imply what I think you did? I’m ashamed of you…
Being gay and Asian, atheist and an immigrant, I must say, it was precisely being in such minorities that made me sensitive to the sufferings of others, and to the prejudices they face. To see such vile hatred displayed here… I don’t know what to say.
Einsamheit, a lot of people on here including Jock S Trap think it is a stretch of imagination to call someone, who make islamophobic remarks, a racist. Dexter Morgan eloquently demonstrates how wrong they are
Lets be clear, Kens consorting with some Muslims has not been his best PR stunt ever, nor has it obviously been helpful to building safer communities (assuming that his reasons for trying to speak to such people were those he claims).
However, nor is rabid Islamophobic commentary helpful.
This mayoral election is about a wide range of issues – from schools and transport to hate crime and environmental issues, from tax and investment to policing leadership and congestion – and of course, equality issues relating to the LGBT population, racial equality, disability, religion and otherwise.
Some people are Gay – get over it.
Some Muslim people are not homophobic – get over it
Some right wing people also believe in equality and do not follow the right-wing speak that equality is a bad thing – get over it.
No problem though if they suck up to champagne socialist Nu Labour though I’m sure.
You should take your head out of your @rse for a moment and maybe talk us through what Livingstone has actually done to bridge the chasm between extreme Islam and the gay community.
I have nothing wrong with your run of the mill, keep your head down and get on with life Muslims, which frankly is probably most of them, but the elephant in the room, that whingers like you seem to overlook, is the the small, but vicious and vocal minority that want us all dead.
Dear God I’ve slept with more Muslims that you could shake a stick at so I’m well aware that there are plenty of gay Muslims knocking around, but you’re banging on about LGBT Muslims suffering, but in reality, if a few more of them stood up with the rest of us things wouldn’t be so bad.
At some point is will take the Muslim community to take a stand against homophobia within it if it is ever to be overcome.
Did anyone mention that all four of the candidates publicly supported campaigning for marriage equality before Stonewall CEO Ben Summerskill did?
For me that’s the real lesson of the event. We have a joke of an organisation attempting to represent us while politicians from Tory boys to Greens are there supporting our right to marry who we love. It’s shocking that Boris supported equal marriage before Ben Summerskill. How can this be so? It should have been Ben pressurising Boris to support it. In reality Brian Paddick had to shame Stonewall at Lib Dem conference. So wrong.
Ben Summerskill is a traitor. He’s more concerned with his own progress than anything else.
Why did no one push Ken on his links with Muslim preacher Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Banned from entering the USA and now i believe France, why has Ken stuck by a man so homophobic it makes everything else he says on the subject just pale away! If he can’t come clean over this then what confidence does this give the LGBT community in voting for him? Its mine and i’m sure many others big stumbling block with Ken and if he can’t or wont give a clear answer then don’t cry in the thames after the event. We are a big minority vote in the capital and it could cost him the election.
Some in the LGBT community are doing their best to either spin the fact Red Ken had invited Islamic extremists to London or ignore it entirely because it’s completely reprehensible. We should not forget this because ken has failed to apologise and continues to dig a deeper hole by wanting London a beacon of Islam.
Because Livingstone worked out the numbers, like he always did, and there are many more votes in sucking up to extremist islamic views than in LGBT rights.
It’s that simple. I knew this guy when he was a councillor in Lambeth and that’s the way he worked back then. It’s been a winning formula for him on most occasions..
Only thing that gobsmacks me is how some people who call themselves Socialists cannot see what Livingstone really is.
I totally agree. The guy is a bottom feeder, using whoever, whenever to further his own agenda.
The headline of this piece is utterly disgusting. This flagrantly misrepresents the hustings and Boris Johnson’s attitude to the LGBT community. It implies that he has made positive steps towards promoting LGBT rights when the complete opposite is the case. He was howled down by the audience when he gave the insulting excuse that he had withdrawn the GLA from the Stonewall index because it cost £2,000 a year. His behaviour exposed him as deeply cynical. There is not a single mention about LGBT issues in any of his five manifestos. It was evident to everyone at the hustings that Boris doesn’t care about homophobia or gay rights and I am appalled that Pink News, a newspaper that is supposed to represent LGBT people has chosen to act in such a biased and partisan way. The results of the Mayoral elections will affect the life choices and living standards of LGBT Londoners. Pink News should report it responsibly. It is failing to do that and it is a complete disgrace.
Sophie, Thanks for the feedback on the headline, I need to check why it was used. Will ask the editor. I wasn’t at the hustings, so I have no idea what was said!
Stephen Gray must have been there if he wrote the piece and will know that this headline is a total misrepresentation. And he’s your on-line editor.
Sophie, I couldn’t agree more with you. I notice the headline has since been changed slightly but is still very biased. It is a shocking attempt to sway the readership in favour of Boris. It implies that Boris was doing something to further LGBT rights, ignoring the fact that it was Boris who withdrew the GLA from the Stonewall Index in the first place. In recent months, Pink News has been accused by several people who regularly comment, of being biased towards the Conservative Party. I’ve always sat on the fence on that one until I saw this article headline. This is definitely something that Pink News has to investigate. Otherwise it is no better than the Daily Mail in furthering an Anti-Ken agenda.
What is incorrect about the headline? It’s factually correct, there’s nothing wrong with it. It’s that you don’t want to acknowledge Ken’s words when it comes to inviting Islamic extremists to City Hall or remembering Ken want’s London to be a beacon of Islam. You’d rather go on about the Mail or something that is absolutely irrelevant. Let’s talk facts.
Ok Boo – lets talk facts – please tell me what Boris has done for LGBT people? Boris wasn’t able to tell me so perhaps you can tell me on his behalf?He said very little at the hustings that was remotely positive or proactive, yet the headline still gave him a positive spin. I can tell from the multiple comments you have left that you feel that Ken’s actions with regards to Islam far outweigh any good he has done for LGBT people. I am more than happy for people to vote for Boris if they have done full research on the candidates and feel that Boris is the right choice for them. My problem with the headline (which has since been modified) is that it is phrased in a way that is using positive terminology with regards to Boris and contrasts that with Ken and a link to Islam, ignoring everything else he said. As I am sure you are aware, language can be twisted to give a subliminal message to readers. Tabloid newspapers do it all the time. I strongly believe Pink News should be above that.
Boris when in Parliament voted against Sec 8 and voted for civil partnerships too. Now he is the mayor of London there is much less he can practically do, however, he does support same sex marriage, wants to clamp down on homophobic bullying, stopped Christian nut cases from displaying posters highly offensive posters, ever invited Islamic extremists to City Hall and treats LGBT Londoners like any other Londoner, not one with special interests.
Ken Livingstone does have a really good past when it comes to supporting LGBT rights, especially in he 1980s and 1990s. I do recognise this and respect him for it. However, as it is 2012 now, I can not overlook Ken’s links to Islamic extremists and bringing in people to City Hall who want me dead. Boris never did this for four years and we have had no guarantee from Ken Livingstone this wouldn’t happen again. I fact, Ken supported an extremist for the 2010 T/H mayoralty, therefore I expect more of the same with Ken.
As regards to this apparent PN bias towards the Tories, I don’t see it. No one has still pointed out what is factually incorrect about the headline or indeed, about the article? Maybe the headline does’t quite give the spin you’re looking for? Ken did say he wanted to make London a beacon of Islam, may LGBT people support this (as away of fostering community engagement), therefore, what is the problem? There are articles I could say have a bias towards Labour or are anti Tory, if we’re both arguing the opposite then I suggest PN has it about right.
Remember, a headline making out Boris hates gay people and is totally against our community would be equally Daily Mail like and incorrect but that is what some people on here want.
I’m guessing we will never agree on this issue but thankfully, as adults, we can agree to disagree. Just to clarify my position and clear up some points. I am not pro-Labour. I’m 37 and in almost 20 years of voting, I have never voted Labour. I believe strongly that news organisations should be 100% impartial. I do not want the UK becoming a mini-USA with the incredibly biased media they have there. It is not that I disagreed with direction of the spin on this headline, it was because, in my opinion, there should have been no spin at all. I did not say the article was biased or that the headline was factually incorrect. But, from the hustings, and the article, how the writer can come up with that headline shows political motivation. I feel the mention of islam in the headline was a deliberate attempt to play-up to the anti-islamic feelings within the LGBT community. There were a lot of other things Ken said at the hustings that could have been used in the headline…
…I’ve tried not to be drawn into the pro-islam / anti-islam debate. I am no friend of any organised religion, being an atheist. However, I acknowledge that islam is now part of London, whether Londoners like it or not. Ken therefore has to deal with that. I have very strong issues with the stance he has taken on several occasions and have written to him regarding this. However, I believe that the vast majority of the media attention paid to Ken and his pro-islam/anti-jewish ‘bias’ is exaggerated and taken out of all context. He has been hated by large sections of the media for decades. I note your use of the term Red Ken. I’ve done quite a bit of reseach into Ken’s pro-islamic stance and realise that it is a lot less sensationalist than people make out. At no point has he become anti LGBT as a result of his ‘links’ to islam. Therefore, on balance, I feel Ken to be the better candidate.
Ben – just wanted to thank you and your staff for continuing to try to steer a path through the minefield of political reporting.
The Labour trolls are well out in force again, as they were before the last election, fearful that Labour are going to fall flat on their faces again … which everything suggests they are.
I suspect that unless you have ‘Vote Ken’ in banner headlines across the home page daily you’ll never satisfy them.
In reality if a candidate, from whichever party, says something news worthy, then it is only right and proper that you report it, which you have done.
I have absolutely no doubt Livingstone knew what he was doing when he did what he did in front of a gay audience. As a result he has got far more column inches that he would otherwise have I suspect.
Hang on a moment
It is good that PN try to steer a path in political reporting.
Didn’t Sister Mary Clarence claim that PN were biased and pro Labour a few weeks or so ago, though …
“Labour trolls are well out in force again”
What’s the difference between a Labour troll and a Labour supporter? If you support Labour then of course you’re going to be biased towards Labour and against the Tories and angry at any perceived bias by Pink News towards the Tories.
Surely, by your own description, you are a Tory troll?
What I find particularly impressive about this photo is that I doubt it could or would be seen in any other capital in the world even if it is opportunistic politicking!
In what way is it a misrepresentation?
What is incorrect about the headline? It’s factually correct, there’s nothing wrong with it. It’s that you don’t want to acknowledge Ken’s words when it comes to inviting Islamic extremists to City Hall or remembering Ken want’s London to be a beacon of Islam.
Boris pledged to re-enter City hall into Stonewall Index and ken Livingstone did quote Muhammed’s final sermon. It’s factually correct. Admit it, you’d prefer something awful about Boris as the headline and something like Ken wanting to appoint a completely useless LGBT adviser (a Ken crony no doubt) on 100k a year to splash millions on absolutely nothing – but the headline giving it positive spin. You;d have no problem with the headline then would you?
I completely agree with Sophie and gattagiudecca. I too was at the Stonewall hustings and I am shocked as it was clear that the biggest political issue was how poorly our Tory Mayor of London performed.
Firstly, Boris was heckled, once again poorly briefed and, it turns out, has nothing about LGBT communities anywhere in even his crime manifesto – despite Boris protesting how “hideous” homophobic hate crimes are and how many times he has raised this issue with the Met. Nothing. It is as if he couldn’t care less. This is shocking – he is the Mayor of London, and now responsible for policing in the capital. Homophobic and transphobic hate crimes are rising and there have been at least 6 anti-LGBT hate murders in London over the past five years. What is Boris doing and where is your headline?
As you know – Ken Livingstone is the only candidate with an LGB&T manifesto – drawn from grassroots consultation with the LGB&T community and reflecting the issues that matter http://www.kenlivingstone.com/ken-launches-lgbt-manifesto-ahead-of-london-gay-mayoral-hustings. Objectively Ken is by far the best candidate on LGB&T rights. The Greens do have some references in their manifesto and Brian Paddick may be gay but, again, no clear raft of policies – as Ken has clearly prepared – that will protect, defend and celebrate the brilliant lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans culture of our beautiful city.
Secondly, quite how Boris Johnson vowing to re-enter the Stonewall Equality Index is the headline is beyond me. The Index measures the quality of employers regarding lesbian, gay and bisexual equality; under Ken the GLA was the best public sector organisation in Britain. Boris withdrew from the Index when elected and stated today that this was to save £2000 (the scheme is actually free as Ben Summerskill from Stonewall pointed out – at which point Boris said, oh he would re-enter). In short Boris was saying that upholding the rights of LGBT people at work is not worth 0.003p per LGBT person in London. Nice to feel valued by your Mayor, eh?
There is already an article on PN regarding Ken’s LGBT manifesto, why do you want TWO articles? Now, that would be biased.
ken can help protect, defend and celebrate LGBT people if he promises not to campaign for Islamic extremists and welcome them into City Hall. That would be a good start, but you fail to acknowledge this at all. Shame on you!
So NONE of Boris’s manifesto will appeal to LGBT people? You think LGBT people will be happy with Ken’s proposals for a Soho piss up and a 100k LGBT adviser….? I find that extremely insulting. I pay train fares ad council tax as well you know! Yes, crime is important to me and it was a shame Boris did not make provisions in his manifesto for LGBT people but that doesn’t mean he isn’t focussed on ridding homophobia. If you have any proof of the opposite, let’s see it.
Once again the issue for Pink (read Blue) News is the quality and objectivity of your journalism and the way it incites a core of your trolling comment makers to make racist and Islamphobic comments (without any action appearing to be taken by the site).
Of course it will be LGB&T Londoners who will ultimately suffer if you cannot write critically – and objectively in our interests. It also happened when Ken threw a fundraiser last month at Shadow Lounge attended by 200 people and all you wanted to do was focus on the handful of Tory protesters outside.
London is one of the best places in the world to be LGB&T. Our Tory Mayor – who once voted for Section 28, compared marriage to bestiality and as recently as 2005 said: “Gay marriage can only ever be a ludicrous parody of the real thing.” – has claimed he loves the gays [continued... -> ]
What exactly are you complaining about? Give specific examples. Where are the racist and Islamaphobic comments?
Ken’s fundraiser was a disaster because it was downgraded because it wasn’t as popular as Ken thought it would be so cut the price of tickets to ten quid each and the fact there were some Tory people outside is a headline in itself. I remember when the Tories had a night out in Manchester and Pink News reported on the few protesters outside of that too.
Boris has said some daft things in the past but the last 4 years he hasn’t done anything against LGBT Londoners, he see’s us as Londoners. Boris did not vote for Sec 28, that is an out and out lie. Evidence: http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-10&number=109&mpn=Boris_Johnson&mpc=Henley&house=commons Boris voted to repeal it.
So none of Boris’s manifesto appeals to LGBT people then? LGBT people don’t get trains, don’t get robbed, don’t pay council tax… the whole manifesto appeals to us, just because it doesn’t mention LGBT people. I wonder if it mentions people with blue eyes? I have blue eye’s you see.
If you think the article is biased ten give specific examples instead of whining and ranting. I have read through it and found it to be factually correct, there isn’t anything made up in it.
Oh right, I get you now LGBTLondonequality, you think balanced coverage is where Boris Johnson is given a negative headline….
That isn’t necessarily balance, that is pure politics and pure bias from you. So it’s not balance you want, it’s pure negative stories about Boris and positive stories about Ken. Ken wants London to be a beacon of Islam, you’re happy with this, what’s the problem?
Boo, you’re absolutely spot on, but on a hiding to nothing I suspect.
We’re gay so we’re not supposed to be interested in anything other than the price of poppers and when Kylie’s next single out.
The few readers who are moaning about the headline of this article also not minded by Ken wanting London to be a beacon of Islam – believing it’s a positive thing. Fine, what’s your problem then?
You can’t say it’s a positive thing then moan when it’s put in the headline…
“”not all muslims are homophobes”"
No, just the vast majority. For example, research carried out not too long ago – I think it was 2009 – found that 0% of British Muslims thought homosexuality was morally acceptable.
i might not agree with something it doesnt mean i want to ban it
Crap answer. You’re supporting on principle something that is worse than the KKK. There’s either something wrong with you, or you have a crush on a Muslim. (Same thing.)
oh because i dont agree with somking but at the same time dont want to ban it, that makes me worse than kkk. great logic, can wait for more of that incredible wit
Are you saying that someone having a relationship with a Muslim would be a bad thing?
Purely because they are a Muslim?
I find abortions abhorrent but I am pro choice
You’re quoting erroneous figures brought to prominence by disgraced plagiarist, Johan Hari. The figures are obviously crap, being as I’ve known muslims that had no problem with my sexuality. I’ve known gay muslims ffs. So that begs the question, how many muslims do you know, personally, that’s brought you to the conclusion that literally 0% of muslims find homosexuality morally acceptable? Is it actually through personal experience, or are you relying purely on the word of a hack?
No, the figures are from research done in collaboration between Gallup and the Coexist Foundation.
you are sure it wasn’t ComRes
The Gallop/Coexist poll was conducted in 2009 and showed other nations eg France had 34% of Muslims being accepting of gay people (which begs the question why do UK Muslims take the particular stance the Gallop/Coexist poll seems to suggest?).
However, in a more recent poll by Demos in 2011, it found that 47 per cent of Muslims agreed with the statement: “I am proud of how Britain treats gay people.”, whereas only 46% of Christians agreed with the same statement.
The findings in the Demos poll are not necessarily in conflict with the 2009 Gallup poll. It is possible to believe that homosexuality is morally wrong according to the tenets of one’s faith while at the same time opposing oppression and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. This is a distinction that was lost in at least one report of the Gallup poll results, which asserted that “Muslims in Britain have zero tolerance of homosexuality”.
my thoughts exactly
Maria – I looked into the Gallop/Coexist poll and the methodology was not sound and differed from country to country. It would be difficult (unreliable) therefore to compare countries against each other and I am very surprised Gallup put their name to it.
In the UK interviews were carried out in home, face to face in areas with a high concentration of Muslims and when dealing with a potentially sensitive subject, it is probably the least likely way to secure accurate results.
If you imagine yourself for example, if a interviewer came to your home to interview you about your sex life and your dad and your granny were sitting on the sofa opposite, would you be quite as open as you might be if you were sitting alone in front of your computer completing a web questionnaire.
I have no idea of the levels of tolerance to the gay community across the Muslim community as a whole, but that was an altogether bad piece of reseach.
Er, the 2009 Gallup survey showed that (statistically) ALL British muslims were homophobes. (French and German musilms weren’t ALL homophobes, but the vast majority were). http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
The Gallup survey was drawn up and supervised by … a muslim! So, don’t go bleating about bias.
Gay life has been driven out of east London. 20 bars two decades ago, down to 4 now.
I think you will find the numbers of gay bars have plummeted across the country. This is not necessarily indicative that Muslims are responsible. Pubs in general are closing at over 10 a week, due to high prices, huge taxes and duty levied on alcohol, and the biggest pub-killer of them all, the smoking ban.
On top of that, the internet has crucified gay bars as people no longer need to go out to pick up, so they have suffered a double whammy. I have seen countless gay bars shut across the capital, including the West End, so East London is not alone.
Thats not true in Newcastle where I am a student, nor in Belfast where my boyfriend lives. The gay scene has increased in both cities.
I am also a gay man who is from a Muslim family (3rd generation Asian family in the UK). My family are reasonably supportive (some more than others) although some family friends have said some hurtful things behind my back to my family.
I do not think Muslims have anything to do with attacking gay bars to my knowledge though.
And you’re Toryphobic! If those who are against Islam are ‘Islamophobic’ then you, with your dislike of Tories, are Toryphobic. If the term ‘Islamophobia’ makes sense – which it doesn’t – then so does the term Toryphobia.
Why is it wrong for someone to be critical of Islam but it’s acceptable for you to bash Toryism? They’re both ideologies. Both sets of beliefs. Why should Islam be immune from criticism? Oh, what is that you say? You’re against the generalisation of Islam/Muslims? Well, then, dimwit, don’t generalise Toryism/Tories.
The moral of the story: don’t use BS nonsensical illogical words like ‘Islamophobia’ and don’t criticise people who are critical of Islam. God knows, there are lots of good reasons to be anti-Islam x
I know of one suicide since the tory cuts. but they managed ri find enough in the pot to cut taxes for the rich. uncle tom poofs make me sick
I’m not defending/excusingh Toryism/the Tories.
What I am criticising are those who defend Islam/Muslims.
Read posts properly before posting stupid comments.
your views with regards to social politics in this country are clearly shaped by daily hatemail and telegraph, not surprised then you are incapable of comprehending the idea that muslims might suffers from prejudice. in your mind it is justifiable and natural consequence to their stereotypical lack of acceptance of gay people and rejection of western values. and statistics can be easily manipulated, ComRes springs to mind
More than one I suspect, James!
And how many suicides were there after Labour and their banker friends screwed over the ecomony?
Frankly, the cuts are a result of the Labour mis-management of the economy and financial sector, so if you must pin the suicide on anyone, you might want to look towards Nu Labour and its champagne socialist supports.
tories have cut taxes for the richest people while closing places for older, disabled and vulnerable people some who will be lgbt. its shameful that we are thinking about them but considering lgbt disabled people were shut out of last years pride im no longer supricesed at the selfishness of some lgbt people http://www.disabledgo.com/blog/2011/07/another-pride-access-shocker-leaves-disabled-people-feeling-invisible/
it should be called gay supremacy it has nothing to do wuth pride and self respect for all
Was the Pink News reporter actually at the hustings?? This report was nothing like what actually happened. Boris has dismantled LGB&T liaison in his term as Mayor. A small example: he withdrew the GLA from the Stonewall Equality Index for a nugaTory saving of £2,000! A sum he undoubtedly has vouchsafed personally for a single meal at the Bullingdon Club. This he claims to be part of the necessary savings from the huge budget of the GLA? The Pink News reporter cannot have failed to register the howls of disbelief from the audience at this ludicrous claim.
Boris has proved he does not care about LGB&T issues by his deeds. Ken has proven that he does. It’s all about track record.
Meanwhile the LGBTory press continues to call his peacemaking with Muslim interests against our interests. Talking to Gerry Adams was a good idea, talking to Jomo Kenyatta was a good idea. First you talk and then you deal. Our Muslim LGB&T brothers and sisters deserve nothing less.
Actually there was no £2000 saving. As Ben Summerskill (Chief Executive, Stonewall) had to repeatedly point out to Boris entrance into the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index is FREE. The GLA was pulled out of it by Boris for ideological reasons because he was about to cut LGBT services at CIty Hall (LGBT officer cut, Pride Reception cut, Soho Pride funding cut) and knew that the GLA would fall from its place at the best public sector employer in Britain (a position earned through the hard work and equalities work of Ken).
Boris was embarrassed to have this raised publicly (if it hadn’t he would not have agreed to this) and he only agreed to going back into the Index if it cost nothing. So LGBT people – up to 750,000 of us in London – would not even be worth 0.0003p each to stand up for for our rights in the workplace (which the Tories are eroding for everyone, to make us easier to sack). We are not even mentioned in Boris’s manifestos – pets are more important to him politically!
Possibly there could actually be some cost involved in all the faffing around City Hall would have to do, other than handing over cash to Stonewall.
“”I find abortions abhorrent but I am pro choice”"
So it’s OK for Muslims to find homosexuals and/or homosexuality abhorrent and immoral as long as they don’t want to ban homosexuality?
That might be good enough for you, Uncle Tom, but it’s not good enough for me. That’s still homophobia.
what you are proposing is a stalin russia/ north korea democracy
you want to skip tolerance and force everyone into acceptance
“”I’ve known gay muslims ffs.”"
So have I. Anomalies here and there, however, doesn’t change the overall picture – namely, that Muslims are, by and large, homophobic.
“”how many muslims do you know, personally, that’s brought you to the conclusion…?”"
Thousands. I was born in a Muslim-country, raised in a Muslim family and attended a Muslim-majority school in London.
Do you consider yourself Muslim in any way; in terms of belief, heritage, culture or any other way?
Its seems you might have done so (perhaps still do) at one point from the comment you made.
Clearly there are a lot of gay uncle toms (kane, James!) in our midst.
When quoted the figure from recent reseach which found that 0% of British Muslims view homosexuality as morally acceptable, they ran to the defence of Msuliums and argued that as long as Muslims don’t want to ban homosexuality that they think it’s immoral/abborant and this doesn’t make them homophobic. It’s only, according to these uncle toms, when someone wants to ban homosexuality that they become homophobic. So I can hold whatever horrible/nasty view I want about homosexuals/homosexuality, I won’t be a homophobe as long as I’m willing to tolerate those immoral homosexuals HAHAHA.
Stupid uncle toms LOL – you should be ashamed of yourselves. Stop licking the arseholes of homophobic Muslims!!!
in your worlds only muslims are homophobic? sask sikhs jews buddhists the same question and you may get the same results. my point is tories are bad for london . I want rent control, godtransport, libraries, emas. what had muslims got to do with that?
“”only muslims are homophobic?”"
Ken said he wants to make London a beacon of Islam. He associates with extremist Muslim clerics. This is why the discussion is about Islam. If Boris Johnson said he wanted to make London a beacon of Christianity and if he invited Christian extremists to City Hall then the discussion would be about Christianity.
Secondly, two wrongs do not make a right. Just because other religions are also homophobic doesn’t excuse Muslim homophobia.
Thirdly, if your point is about Tories being bad for London then that’s fine. Just don’t defend Islam.
where have I defended islam?
By your utter failure to recognise Ken’s comments on making London a beacon of Islam and condemning Ken’s links with Islamic extremists who want us dead. I do not want a mayor to be inviting extremists to City Hall who want me dead. It makes me very uncomfortable.
while you odiouspeople see islam add the enemy the nhs is being dismantled, tuition fees are 9k , homeless people are being forced out of london so are poorer people, older people are living in fuel poverty while the companies make billions. the young poorer lgbt people who are not rich are screwed. and you guys are obessed about a bunch of idiots. I dont have time for islambut for more years of boris will see a lack of investment everywhere except zone 1
James, we’d all like rent control, good transport, libraries etc, but there’s a small issue of money at the moment.
You will recall the last (Labour) government spent hundreds of billions we hadn’t got and now we;re screwed until we have sorted the mess out.
gay uncle tom?! clearly you like to confuse and stretch definitions just to fit your narrow and simplistic view of the world. stating statistics just to prove the point is a lazy job of relaying on half truths, statistics can be easily manipulated simply by the way you ask the question, recent case of ComRes shows how this can be done.
it is not question of who want to ban what, it is about your insistence on forcing everybody into acceptance, skipping things like tolerance and the right for people to determine their own views.
having view that homosexuality is incompatible with religious convictions is not homophobic, but acting on those views is. what we want is tolerance and live and let live attitude, not forced acceptance that you demand.
The Gallup survey in 2009 was drawn up and supervised by muslims (Dalia Mogahed, Ahmed Younis, and Mohammed Younis). I’m disgusted by the number of Uncle Toms on here. F**cking traitors. It’s clear most of them would still be in the closet if it wasn’t for the rest of us. Dalia Mogahed is less blind than these Uncle Toms, and you can see in this video she is a very orthodox muslim.
“”Jewish and Christian and Islamic teaching that homosexual acts are sins and punishable by death originate in the Abrhamic Bible in Leviticus. Read it!”"
So two wrongs make a right? Judaism and Christianity also condemn homosexuality, so it’s OK for Islam to condemn it as well?
“”Ken’s engagement with different moderate Islamic leaders.”"
Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is a ‘moderate’ Islamic leader? Who do you think you’re kidding?
Of course many denominations and religions condemn homosexuality and none of that is right.
Some do not – in all religions and denominations.
Why do you feel you need to particularly concentrate on Muslims – it seems Islamophobic
I’ve already explained why the focus is on Islam/Muslims. Ken associates with Islamic preachers and said he wants to make London a ‘beacon’ of Islam. If he associated with Christian preachers and said he wants to make London a ‘beacon’ of Christianity, the discussion would be about Christianity.
But he never said that. Why don’t you check the facts. Though not sure why anyone would be talking about facts with this shocking bias. Ben cohens answer is laughable. Pink news has become tge online wing of lgbt Tory. A party which contains the most homophobes. It’s sickened me.
What a load of rubbish. I remember people saying pinknews is anti-Tory and too pro Labour. Do you just want every reference to a Tory to be “Tory Scumbag x said”? The truth is that Labour had 13 to propose equal civil marriage. At the last election writing on PinkNews, Gordon Brown ruled it out!
The gay community didnt even want it then? Who is opposing gay marriaqe now? Tory MPs. Who always votes against gay equality? Tories. Wake up. The Tories hate us
Whilst I’m not a Labour voter, I cannot let this pass without a counter-comment….! Prior to 1997, The Conservative Party had 18 years to improve LGBT rights. They did not. They chose instead to make the lives of LGBT people worse. They *deliberately* chose to make it worse. If they were indifferent to it, they could simply have left things as they were. They didn’t leave it as it was. They deliberately made it worse. They have now been in power (with the lib-dems) for almost 2 years. If equal marriage was a priority we would have it. We do not. So, do not let your anti-labour, pro-tory bias cloud your judgement Jim. And please don’t insult me by telling me that the tories voted for a lower *discriminatory* age of consent for gay men as this is an improvement……!
Ken does seem to have a special fondness for Islam.
Do you know if he’s preached in any churches, synagogues, sikh or hindu temples etc recently?
Anyone know the answer to my question?: Has Ken preached in any churches, synagogues, sikh or hindu temples etc recently?
Because the Muslims are the largest and most vociferous of the religionists. Christians and Jews might condemn homosexuality but they don’t hang, stone or throw them off cliffs.
Isn’t a gay person allowed to be Islamaphobic Why would i have positive feeling towards a belief system that calls for my execution?
Why does Ken Livingstone keep going on about them? He seems totally obsessed.
Interesting to note the above message is (at the time of writing) marked down at -5
ken is concerned with things that matters to muslims like widespread islamophobia and demonisation of muslims in right wing section of media.
he is not there to preach, but to assure. and im not here to support islam and its teachings but to point out where is ken coming from when dealing with muslim community.
Hey I’ve seen all the various comments here. I should point out that on Thursday PinkNews was accused of an anti-Tory bias. Saturday a pro-Tory bias. In truth we don’t have a bias in regards to political parties. Both articles had the same author. Obviously all the writers and people involved in the site have their own political views but they shouldn’t be apparent. Because of my job on c4 I have to be impartial, but I feel it might be apparent from my Twitter where I’m leaning towards preference wise (still undecided though). I haven’t been writing any of the stories though.
Comment from a non Londoner – really disappointed that marriage equality wasn’t even mentioned at all.
In the middle of a consultation on marriage equality with a huge amount of vicious and nasty homophobic remarks directed our way I would have thought it had deserved at least a one liner from each of the candidates.
A really positive statement from Boris at least would have made headlines. Im not sure anything they said is going to be headline news.
“A really positive statement from Boris”
??? Ken is so obviously FOR marriage equality but no-one mentions that. Boris is the Teflon Twonk of this campaign, no-one notices that he is a wolf in cartoon Old English Sheepdog clothes.
Well that’s what I mean really. I know what Ken and the lib dem and Greens candidate would say but I’m not quite sure what Boris would say.
I’m not a Londoner so I can’t vote but we are in the middle of a consultation, the knives are out , in particular from the Tory backbenchers in parliament. A statement from a high profile Tory figure saying something positive would be useful at this time. It’s a golden opportunity missed to promote marriage equality and refute some of the Tory backbenchers and churches.
He may have said something positive in the past, I don’t know, times have moved on, the LGBT issue in the UK that is getting on the national and international websites is a Tory govt bringing in marriage equality and the whole issue gets ignored.
It should be expected Ken supports marriage equality due to his past support. Boris Johnson supports marriage equality too and that’s despite a dodgy past – which I acknowledge but is firmly in the past now. We should be getting behind him to support efforts to give us marriage equality.
In reality though, the mayor doesn’t have power in this area but knowing they support our cause is of course a great thing.
I think my real point is the timing. We are in the consultation period, there is huge publicity against marriage equality and here we have lost a perfect opportunity to get an up to date statement from all candidates. A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since their initial statements on marriage equality and we could have got them to have commented on the abusive comments from Tory backbenchers and the churches and it would have gone on the national and international papers!
I don’t think anything they said will get public airplay.
I agree, John. Those vicious and nasty homophobic remarks directed our way haven’t been countered by anyone, certainly not the Guardian or the Times. In fact, nobody has really spoken up or taken any of them to task, let alone debunk the lies and myths they’re perpetrating ad infinitum in the Mail and Telegraph. Bradshaw didn’t help matters either, if fact made them worse. The problem with our side is that there’s no passion, no conviction to push back at the hatemongers who seem to have carte blanche to run roughshod over us and they get away it every time. Just look at the press coverage they get. We get virtually nothing. With every passing day, I become less confident in equal civil marriage ever becoming a reality.
There is a good article in the Independent this weekend exposing the sham of reparative therapy, and The Guardian have also exposed reparative therapy too.
More could be done though.
I wish those red T-shirts they are holding up in that picture said “Support Marriage Equality”….
I suppose it would have been too much to expect a question to the candidates on the marriage question at a Stonewall event. No money in it I suppose.
Is it only me that sees that tackling hate crime, bullying etc starts with getting equal treatment under the law and refuting religious justifications for discrimination?
Frankly I don’t see whether or not there is a free piss up at the Mayoral mansion for the Pride organisers is the big issue.
The whole hustings feels more like bugger marriage equality and more like which candidate is going to give Stonewall the most money?
I don’t think the mayoral candidates should be deluded in thinking that the 350,000 gay people of London will pass their votes purely on the basis who promises to give Stonewall the most money!
It would have been good to hear a ringing endorsment of marriage equality from the Labour candidate.
Right now I’m thanking our lucky stars that we don’t presently have a Labour government with Ben Bradshaw as Equalities Minister.
I’m a natutral labour voter but very doubtful at present. It seems to me that Ken is very old school labour and I don’t remember they were very pro gay rights back in the 70′s. He still seems to give out mixed messages.
Obviously the Lib Dem is pro. As for Boris, he doesn’t seem to be saying anything negative and at least he stood up for us over the Bus adverts this week.
are you for real? go to boris quotes
And check out Ken’s manifesto which includes clear support for equal marriage rights for LGB&T people – here http://www.kenlivingstone.com/ken-launches-lgbt-manifesto-ahead-of-london-gay-mayoral-hustings
When will Pink News report on Sheffield’s council elections, or are you only bothered about London?
Is it only Sheffield that is holding council elections?
I am not joining the Pinknews bashing on the headline, which I think is (now) fair but…
I asked Boris the question on the equality index and was highly disappointed by the answer and by many others of Boris’s answers. Even if it does cost £2k, which apparently it doesn’t (I’ll check on Monday whether we as an employer paid anything to enter and if so how much), that was a trivial sum. Boris casually agreed to re-enter when he learnt it cost nothing. He should (if this is correct) be called out for his ignorance of the costs as much as anything.
He throwaay remark that “OK, we’ll write you a manifesto” was frnkly offensive.
My husband and I came with open minds and left knowing the choice for first preference vote is between Paddick and Livingstone.
“”where have I defended islam?”"
When I spoke about homophobia in Islam and quoted the Gallup research which found that 0% of British Muslims thought homosexuality was morally acceptable, you ran to the defence of Islam and homophobic Muslims by basically saying that it’s OK for Muslims to think homosexuals/homosexuality are immoral (and disgusting and so on) as long as they don’t want to ban homosexuality.
You’re an Uncle Tom, James! (Oh, and, you’re also a hypocrite.)
What about the contributer who pointed out a more recent poll demonstrated that British Muslims are not as homophobic as you claim from the results of the Gallop poll and that the interpretation of the the results is simplistic – given that 47% of British Muslims are proud of gay rights in the UK?
“”having view that homosexuality is incompatible with religious convictions is not homophobic”"
That is ridiculous! So, I can believe that homosexuals are disgusting, immoral, sinful and want nothing to do with them as long as I don’t want to, e.g., ban homosexuality? If so, then I guess in the same way I can think black people are retarded, predisposed to criminal behaviour etc and not be racist as long as I don’t call for blacks to be discriminated in law, yes?
No! Just no! If someone thinks homosexuals are immoral (etc) they ARE homophobic. End of. Similarly if someone holds negative views of black people they ARE racist! It doesn’t matter if these people don’t want to use the law to discriminate against gays or blacks.
You, kane, might be OK with people thinking that you’re immoral and sinful for just being who you are – for just being gay – as long as they don’t beat you up or throw you behind bars. Others, however, like myself, have greater expectations.
How do you deal with those people who have negative views of black, white and Asian people (are they plurally racist)?
How do you deal with those people who have negative views of gay, lesbian, bi and heterosexual people regarding them not complying with a particular holy book – are they heterophobic, biphobic, homophobic?
What about people who are anti-Muslim (all Muslims) regardless of what their views are and getting to know them as individuals? Are they stereotyping and Islamophobic?
‘So, I can believe that homosexuals are disgusting, immoral, sinful and want nothing to do with them as long as I don’t want to, e.g., ban homosexuality?’
religious point of view doesnt condemn gay people but sexual behavior inc. heterosexual sex outside marriage. it doesnt say gay people are disgusting immoral or sinful nor condone homophobia. you blindly equate homophobic actions of minority of extremists with majority. your follow up comparison on racism is a nonsens. it just show how blinkered your views are
and what happened to the notion of tolerance in your world?
It IS homophobic! Why is gay sex, whether it’s within or outside marriage, regarded as sinful? Heterosexual sex within marriage, however, is accepted. That’s homophobic. It’s discrimination against gay people.
‘Why is gay sex, whether it’s within or outside marriage, regarded as sinful?’
it is an aspect of religious belief and as such should only concern people of faith.
but the status que has to be challenged by opponents within the church, mosque or any other temple. you cant simply force them to reject it
of course it is homophobic for religious people to interfere in public matters that dont interfere with religious institutions, such as equal marriage
Their homophobia does not justify your Islamophobia, SamB
You may be right, but it is not illegal to have an opinion, even if you consider it bigoted. Voicing it is an entirely different matter.
I read it and I’m still undecided!
I encourage people to watch the full Stonewall Hustings here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B_zidtiPIw&feature=youtu.be
(45.25) Question on Stonewall Workplace Index to Boris about why he withdrew from it. Only interested in going back in under public pressure and if free (he thought it cost £2000 – or 0.0003p per LGBT Londoner: we cost too much apparently)
(1:00:14) Question about LGBT inclusion in manifestos Boris has no mentions anywhere and considers doing this to be “divisive” when he is trying to unite London. This is a totally offensive – and homophobic – idea that it would divide London to address murder and violent attacks on LGBT people. On the spot Boris suggests that his Deputy Mayor Richard Barnes write an LGBT Manifesto before the election – tokenism under public pressure. Ken says to use his (see http://www.kenlivingstone.com/ken-launches-lgbt-manifesto-ahead-of-london-gay-mayoral-hustings). We are not in Boris’s next 4 year plan! [continued->]
(1:09:56) Question returning to Boris’s Crime Manifesto and why LGB&T Londoners not even mentioned
I’ve had enough of pink news. That headline is outrageous and essentially trading on racism
I have long argued that Boris’s bumbling nature allows us to overlook the fundamentally flawed aspects of both his candidacy and of Boris himself. It’s not just that he belongs to another age, it’s that his views are homophobic and racist and we overlook them because people say “Oh, that’s just Boris”.
On driving Chelsea tractors through London Boris says:
“Tee hee, I said to myself … out of my way, small car driven by ordinary person on modest income. Make way for the Nissan Murano.”
Please note “ordinary” people are defined by their “modest” income which presumably makes high income earners extraordinary.
Boris has also compared gay marriage to bestiality. Is this really the person that one would want representing the most multicultural city on Earth? Can one imagine any other politician being able to call black children “piccanninies” and comparing gay marriage to bestiality and for them not to be hounded out of office?
But then there are his actual policies.
London has an estimate of 5% or 400,000 LGBT persons living in London, refer http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/05/27/gay_london_feature.shtml
I’ve got to say, I’m incredibly frustrated by some of the comments on here and on Twitter, particularly in relation to the inclusion of Ken’s references to Muhammed’s last sermon. The vast majority of the comments criticising this, appear to lack understanding of what the Prophet said during this farewell sermon.
It’s a sermon principally about tolerance, for the relationship with non Arabs (essentially non-Muslims), anti-racism and also actually for some degree of equality for women, certainly it discusses in a very positive sense the rights of women, particularly enlightened for the era and local gender norms.
I studied this farewell sermon as part of a theology degree about 8 years ago, which had a heavy focus on Islamic law and philosophy. But it’s really easy to find on the internet with some obvious searches (http://p.ink.cx/IMWrCX). I don’t see the reporting of Ken’s references to it as a negative thing at all. On the contrary, it’s a pretty positive contribution.
I agree, Ben. It is disappointing that some people appear either not to have read the last sermon or completely misunderstood it.
It is very clear to me that in the final sermon Mohammed preached tolerance, and equality. He preached that there was no supreme race, language or people.
The words included:
“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves”
Well, I think a lot of Muslims must misunderstand their own prophet. I see an awful lot of intolerance coming from them on a daily basis.
Ben, I’m one of the people who criticised the headline and the fact that it mentions Ken read from Muhammed’s last sermon. My reason for criticising it was because I knew that a lot of readers would have no clue about the true message of the sermon and would simply jump to the conclusion that Ken was ‘jumping into bed with the muslims’ again. You will know this is a myth that large sections of the media have cultivated with regards to Ken in recent years. I therefore felt the headline was exploiting the anti-islamic feelings within the LGBT community and the UK as a whole. I see that the headline has been changed again and I now feel it is fair. It now explicitly says that the last sermon is about tolerance. If you feel I am misguided or over-reacting or indeed am myself racist, then look at some of the responses my comments provoked. A great deal of them provoked racist and (possibly illegal) anti-islam diatribes. Most of my comments were voted down quite consistently.
I’m shocked at some of the comments on this thread, they are border-line racist and plenty of people seem to think muslims are the sole cause of all homophobia and you’d think Ken Livingstone was Osama Bin Laden himself! I’m glad I don’t live in London where everyone seems to be crazy!
Most people who read Pink News won’t know anything about Islam at all so you can’t expect that people would understand the significance of this sermon – not everyone has studied theology! They just see the reference to Islam and go crazy – just look at some of the comments about Muslims which are basically racist.
Is Muhammed’s last sermon part of the Qur’an? If not, what is its status?
The reason I ask is because there are sections in the Qur’an which seem quite disrespectful to both Christians & Jews.
The last sermon is mentioned in almost all books of the Hadith.
I think most of us who don’t live in London (and many millions don’t!) wonder what the fuss is about.
Maybe Londoners should take Billy Connolly’s advice – don’t vote. it only encourages them.
Pink news is relentless in it’s trashing of labour, especially ken. It is losing all credibility that it had. I am now looking elsewhere for gay news. It was a great site but has become the gay equivalent if theDaily mail. Ken is vilified despite his incredible and unrivalled history of supporting us. Shame on you Ben and pink news.
Judging by the huge influx of pro Ken commentators, I take it the Labour party media campaign has kicked off.
Welcome Labour trolls one and all.
Its a pity the Labour Party didn’t put as much effort into running the country as it does to distorting the media.
I just don’t understand Boris’s obsession with getting more police. You have a barrowful of rotten apples? Buy a second one then? Don’t think so! Running scared of getting in professional management and making them accountable, issit, Boris? Scared of another strike if you don’t double their numbers?
“”Their homophobia does not justify your Islamophobia, SamB”"
Equating my dislike of Muslims/Islam because of their homophobia is like equating a black person’s dislike of the KKK because of the KKK’s racism.
In other words, it’s ridiculous.
No your Islamophobia is like the racism of the KKK
I’m not sure why Ken has more time for Muslims than other religions. The Qur’an tells Muslims not to be friends with Christians and Jews. So his concerns about “islamophobia” seem like hypocrisy.
So far no-one has confirmed that Ken has preached in any other religious buildings. He might just as well support Lord Carey and complain about gay marriage and the persecution of Christians.
Video of Boris showing his committment to gay and racial equality by defending a racist and homophobic mentor for young people;