Reader comments · Update: ‘Homophobic’ woman from Nebraska ‘has mental health problems’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Update: ‘Homophobic’ woman from Nebraska ‘has mental health problems’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. She is sufficiently functional to get herself in front of a microphone in an official hearing.

    That the ranting of a rabidly homophobic conservative is indistinguishable from someone with certified mental problems is very telling in and of itself.

    1. Anti-gay Christians are working with anti-gay psychiatrist to shock the penis of gay men who get aroused by pictures of other men, how crazy is that? If ever there was an unholy Alliance that is it, anti-gay Christians and anti-gay psychiatrist. They are the ones who do the ex gay or pray and shock treatment the gay away. They are the insane ones who need to be arrested and put in prison for crimes against humanity.

    2. You don’t know how schizophrenia works, do you? Not about being physically functional.

    3. Lynda Yilmaz 13 May 2012, 8:05am

      Always singing from the same hymn sheet as me Valksy! I see someone else mentioned that in the US EVERYONE has the freedom to make their comments. I actually like this. However, what about the people who are supposed to be looking after her and are aware of her mental health problems? Did they try to dissuade her from making a complete idiot of herself in front of the world? I love the second half of your comment btw!

    4. “sufficiently functioning” not “functional”! lol.

      So, where did you get your expert knowledge and experience of psychiatry from? Yale, Cambridge, several years in an NHS mental hospital?

      Anyone with a small smidgen of intelligence would have known that this woman was severely mentally ill from looking at the original video. It is a disgrace that she wasn’t protected from giving this evidence, which has possibly even led to death threats and the like from equally disturbed people – going by the things commentators were saying about her when the story first broke.

      Her own carer has said that she is not a (rabidly homophobic) ‘conservative’ and that her illness would eventually lead to trouble for her. She is a vulnerable person, and those who are not mentally ill and who have taken time out of their obviously busy lives to attack her should be deeply ashamed of themselves…

      Maybe Pink News will check out the facts before publishing stories from now on?

  2. I wonder if all rabidly conservative homophobes are schizophrenic, and how would know the difference?

    1. Paranoid or bizarre delusions, disorganized speech, disorganized thinking, social or occupational dysfunction- sounds like rabidly conservative homophobia to me (even though that’s the description of schizophrenia)!

      1. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:17pm

        Sounds a bit like you too.

    2. I have a schizophrenic friend and a schizophrenic cousin, both of whom support gay marriage – does this now invalidate the whole gay marriage cause? Of course not…

    3. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:22pm

      I find your comment highly offensive that anybody with a mental health issue could be automatically considered to be a homophobic Tory.

  3. That There Other David 12 May 2012, 11:34pm

    No surprise, but yes, it does indeed raise questions regarding others who state such views.

  4. oh do i feel feel like s**t now :( poor woman.

    1. Jean, you are s**t.

      1. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 11:04am

        Michael N, you need to grow up.

    2. She’s your spiritual sister, Jean, of course you feel sad. Nice to see you back, though.

    3. ….and you so sound so like her, Jean. Might we suggest seeking treatment yourself

      1. I’m sorry, but why is it that no-one can tell that Jean is clearly a troll.

  5. Schizophrenia doesn’t justify what she did – she might be mentally unstable but that doesn’t mean she should be given some sort of diplomatic immunity – she made the decision to go to the hearing and present her case, which cited lots of unusual references – clearly she’d been planning this for a long time.

    1. That There Other David 12 May 2012, 11:45pm

      I get the impression from the article that she does this sort of thing for any issue being debated. The equality debate was just this week’s theme to protest for her. Next week it’ll be poor water quality or the new highway route.

    2. Exactly. If people knew of her illness, she shouldn’t have been allowed to speak there.

      1. That There Other David 12 May 2012, 11:48pm

        In the US everyone has the right to speak. Despite incidents such as this it’s a far better system than one that would ban people from stating their views in public.

        1. She’s speaking in a government hearing, which should not be allowed. Hearings that could possibly decide LGB people can be discriminated against.

          1. That There Other David 13 May 2012, 12:13am

            Do you honestly not think that the people running that hearing are fully aware of this woman?

          2. If they wanted an opposition statement, they should go with a person that at least is coherent at least.

            Yes, I’m aware they’re aware of her, but it’s still no excuse for her extreme homophobia. I don’t care what type of mental illness she has, she’s still a bigoted, evil homophobe that shouldn’t be allowed to speak such nonsense in front of government.

          3. “She’s speaking in a government hearing, which should not be allowed. Hearings that could possibly decide LGB people can be discriminated against.”

            The same way transphobic people shouldn’t be allowed at these hearings to argue equality? Yes, that would look hypocritical, and somewhat mad.

    3. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:09pm

      For fcks sakes, show a little pity!
      That’s like telling someone with no legs to play better football.
      The woman is ILL. She should be recognised as such, and not allowed to be given a seat to vent this stuff in the first place, but equally, what is done is done, and she needs help, not spiteful retorts from the likes of arseholes like you.

  6. Perhaps the “religious” have a hand in some of her care. Healthy people pick up hate and vitriol quite easily from these religious types, this lady is a vulnerable individual do imagine their potential influence on her. I was indeed initially shocked at this story but please let’s now look at this story with open eyes and not verbally bash this lady… We’re not Christians after all

    1. Lynda Yilmaz 13 May 2012, 8:02am

      Nice comment John Paul. I agree. Vulnerable people are easy pickings for religious groups.

  7. So she suffers from the mental illnesses of homophobia and religion as well as schizophrenia.

    If she’s functional enough to make it to a political hearing, then it can’t be used as an excuse. If she was in such horrible condition, then she shouldn’t have been allowed to speak. I think she’s just looking for an excuse for what she’s said since the video has gotten so much attention.

    1. people with mentall illnesses aren’t incapable of using a microphone, or even functioning in society without generally being noticed as being ‘different’. I think it’s fair to excuse her for making these delusional statements as she doesn’t know what she’s saying!

    2. They’re not incapable of holding a microphone or speaking, but sometimes mental illness affects you ability to think and speak clearly, like in her case. It just contributed to her already existent homophobia. You don’t just start saying things like this, it’s pretty obvious she was anti gay before.

      1. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 2:56pm

        Well thanks for the well informed opinion on mental illness…not!

    3. Quite right.

  8. I don’t think it reflects poorly on society that people were making fun of her- they didn’t know before now that she’s mentally ill, therefore people weren’t being hurtful. If she was mentally well and stated these views, then it’d be fine to mock her cos they’re ludicrous!

    1. It’s fine to mock her views whether or not she’s mentally ill

      1. Is it fine to mock your views even though you’re mentally ill?

      2. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:11pm

        I guess you are the type that laugh and point and cancer sufferers and kick cripples? You really are a piece of low-life.

  9. Well Christians are schizophrenic ;)

    Paranoid or bizarre delusions- Believing the world was created in six days, the world is 6000 years old, the world only had one language and race up until less than 6000 years ago, all the animals in the world could fit one one boat, donkeys talk, women are less than men, homosexuality is unnatural, bats are birds, slavery is okay, etc

    Disorganized speech- speaking in tongues

    Disorganized thinking- Need I say more?

    Social or occupational dysfunction- religion controls your life, who you’re friends with, what you do

    All jokes aside, I hope she gets better, and repents for her homophobia too

    1. That’s just Creationism buddy. Liberal Christians like myself believe in natural theology which reconciles science with faith.

      Furthermore, we have to interpret what the Bible said in the context of our current society. It also preached that a raped virgin should marry her rapist and that disobedient children are to be stoned; both of which are, of course, wrong. You also have to think about ‘why’ stories like Noah’s Ark were written. The Bible is a collection of many different types of literature, myths and legends among them. It was more likely a story to give the Jew’s a racial identity while they were held captive in Babylon or whatever. Just like our stories of King Arthur or Robin Hood.

      A lot of the irrational thinking is in the old testament. Jesus actually preached some really great stuff, it’s a shame some Christians aren’t more like him.

      Also speaking in tongues is only really present in Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity…it is side-lined quite considerably.

    2. Also, I think Christianity broadens who I’m friends with because I never would have been friends with my church friends if I didn’t attend. One of my best friends is an atheist, religion or outlook on the world doesn’t affect who I’m friends with; why should it?

      I make my friends on their qualities, so as a result I have quite a broad and large selection.

      May I reiterate that it has no influence over my hobbies, it does however make me think about things and the best way to act in situations.

      Now, although this woman said some truly awful things she probably didn’t mean it. Schizophrenia is a complicated condition so if she issues an apology I would be more than obliging to forgive. However, I can’t say I was offended by what she said because it was so ludicrous. Made me chuckle more than anything else.

      Let’s take it at face value.

  10. if she has mental health problems then she should not be allowed a voice on legislation, nor should she be entitled to vote.

    1. That There Other David 12 May 2012, 11:53pm

      In the UK all sufferers of mental illness, even those who reside in hospitals as a result, have a right to vote thanks to the 2006 Electoral Administration Act). Why should the USA operate differently?

      1. because she doesn’t know the nature and the quality of what shes saying, shes not even sure if she truly believes it. She’s just saying it because shes heard other people say it.

        My sister is mentally ill and I know that there are times when she doesn’t know whats shes saying or being said to her and just repeat what other people say, I have been on the receiving end of it and then she doesn’t remember what shes said.

        Which is why I do not believe that the mentally ill should be allowed to vote because they can end up voting for something they do not actually truly believe.

        1. That There Other David 13 May 2012, 11:34am

          “She’s just saying it because shes heard other people say it. ”

          That, I’m afraid, is the same for the vast majority of the electorate. Very few people actually sit down and think their way through issues. It’s much easier to abdicate the thinking to others (e.g. newspapers) and parrot another’s opinion.

          1. unfortunately those people who do not suffer from the same issues are doing it out of laziness or gullibility whereas my sister genuinely doesn’t know if she believes it or not it was just the last opinion she heard about it, she can’t keep more then one person’s viewpoint in her head and think about it to work out what she actually thinks about it.

        2. Jock S. Trap 13 May 2012, 11:51am

          mental illness comes in different forms… are you saying all with mental health issues shouldn’t vote or just some?

          Where do you draw the line because I’m pretty sure most of the electate has or has had problems with mental health at some stage in their lives for all different reasons.

          1. Im obviously talking about those that have severe mental health issues where they are at the extent they need someone to take care of them either at home or in hospital, although I suspect her trips to these debates is her brothers way of making her someone elses responsibility for the day afterall looking after someone like this is very draining and you end up having no life of your own.

            Im talking from experience when I say that as well. I really don’t think this lady is getting the care that she needs.

    2. They shouldn’t have the right to vote if they have a serious mental illness, like schizophrenia. It affects their judgment too much.

      1. The whole point of ‘free speech’ is that she can say what she thinks. We can’t start selecting who can and can’t vote or speak…it’s too extreme and could lead to suppression of minorities.

        1. and what does she think Tommack? Is this really what she thinks or what some so called medical professional has said to her during one of her appointments which are meant to be focused on improving her health instead of indoctrinating her politically.

      2. “They shouldn’t have the right to vote if they have a serious mental illness, like schizophrenia”

        Another classic fascist comment from the local idiot and bigot.

      3. Jock S. Trap 13 May 2012, 11:56am

        But a lot of people with mental illness and schizophrenia can control symptons with medication. Is it fair to exclude?

        Yes I do question this woman being allowed to testify but the fact he was says more about the people wanting her to, knowing she has such problems.

        Having said that are we in danger of hiding such people because we cannot face then, no wish to see them?

        I’d much rather these people we out there so we can educate than hide away as something to be ashamed of.

    3. I think any normal person would recognise that video for what it was, and make a reasonable judgement about the quality of its contents and the authority of its presenter.

      I think there’s more harm in silencing such people than in letting them have their say.

      Having said that, I am concerned over the quality of care she is receiving.

      1. What an appalling comment, how can you even comment on the quality of care someone is receiving?

        1. Oh dear!

        2. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:14pm

          He has a point. Who is keeping an eye on this lady?
          Having a right to vote is one thing, but allowing people with such conditions to ramble in unimpeded is not. She should have had a carer with her just to make sure everything was OK.

  11. Jonathan Wright 12 May 2012, 11:47pm

    More than the fact that she’s ‘fully functional’ to stand before the committie, I’m more worried that she is a registered lobbyist! If she has been diagnosed with mental health issues, she should not be in a position to lobby for anything without being accompanied or under strict guidance for both parties.

    If the legislative body wants to be taken seriously from here on out, I think they should being to re-evaluate the nature of her contributions (especially if she makes as many as she does).

  12. So if the family care about her so much, where were they at the hearing?

    1. and if not why not?

  13. Her brother is disappointed in society? Where the hell was he when she chose to get up on national television in her diminished mental state?

    1. Ah, so we’re supposed to just shove anyone with a mental illness out of the way so delicate people like you don’t have to deal with the reality of it?

      1. I think there is a difference between advocating for a vulnerable person and ‘hiding’ them. There is a history of these sorts of videos going viral on-line – and the internet isn’t exactly renowned for being a place filled with non-judgemental people. Looking after and supporting someone who is mentally ill does not equate to letting them do whatever they want.

      2. Quite right, Laurence!

        Shame on you all for marking this comment down. You’re worse than the rabid xians!

    2. I posted a comment somewhere along these lines when I first saw the video. She was obviously suffering from some sort of psychological retardation, and I couldn’t fathom for the life of me what sort of friends or family would allow her to make such a spectacle of herself.
      The brother’s attempt to make us all feel guilty by “having a go at a woman with mental problems” is trying to hide his own shame at having not prevented her from making a public ass of herself.

      1. Jock S. Trap 13 May 2012, 12:01pm

        I would imagine the kind of people that let her speak were/are the kind of people who used her to get Their own discrimination across. If anything it shows up those people more than this woman in question as the typical religious hateful cowards they really are.

        Clearly people who have no shame in allowing a vunerable people do their dirty work then take the blame.

        1. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:24pm

          Oh stop reading your political agenda crap into stuff that is quite obviously not there. That is purely your typical paranoid speculation.

  14. The lady had difficulty stringing a coherent sentence together,so it ought to have been apparent that she had SOME sort of problem! Shame on the state of nebraska for allowing this woman to make a fool of herself in public If she was known to have a mental illness!

  15. I don’t see why homophobia and mental heath problems are in ‘quotes’. Those things are pretty obvious and real.

    1. Spanner1960 14 May 2012, 1:37pm


  16. Should we smell a rat here? The mental health announcement conveniently emerged quite some time*after* her rant went viral, so I wonder about the context of all this. Just how and why did she get to the podium if she has mental health problems and (might be) in care? Does she have carers? Do her carers support such views about homosexuality? Did they (possibly) let her ‘loose’ for effect? This is a sad case, but not easily indistinguishable from the rant of some GOP supporter, Teabagger or pastor – you have to ask what political messages were taken in by this person, how she was socialised etc. Someone who was certified would not be quite so coherently awful, they would have strayed into other issues, etc. I think this is a performance of sorts. We need to know more about her circumstances and the calibre of her support system. I call shenanigans.

  17. I agree with John-Paul. I don”t know about the United Kingdom, but in New Zealand, religious charities do provide assisted living for people with schizophrenia, who do imbibe those attitudes at their residences. So, what about LGBT people who live with schizophrenia? Let’s not pathologise them too. I agree Jane should be under better are, though.

  18. I would argue that ALL bigots have mental health problems!

  19. Scott Amundsen 13 May 2012, 2:24am


    Whine, whine, whine. The fragmented nature of her diatribe is an indicator of schizophrenia; however that does not mean the THOUGHTS expressed were not hers. And if her brother cares so much about her, how is it she was able to be out and about when she was CLEARLY off her meds??

  20. Too bad it was Nebraska, and not California… Judge Walker would have had a field day as chair!

  21. We as a group are so vocal about the religious when they talk nonsense about us, but then here we are dragging down a mentally ill person! Some of the comments here are not very nice! You could just as easily be telling a Tourette’s sufferer not to swear in front of your kids (or indeed not let them near where kids might be) cos that seems to be the direction some on here are taking against this lady? As I said in my last post, we are not Christians, drop the vile!

  22. ‘Homophobic’ woman from Nebraska has ‘mental health problems’

    We all spotted that, we’re all familiar with similar conditions in Keith and Skinner.

  23. ‘Medicate H8’, could catch on, posters banners leaflets ect ect.
    First demo:
    Westboro baptists church


  24. Your original “insanely homophobic” headline is starting to look rather insensitive, isn’t it?

    1. The truth is often painful. Doesn’t stop it being true.

      1. It was just the use of the word “insane” I was objecting to, actually. As someone who has a lot to do with mental health provision, I find it a highly damaging and often offensive word.

      2. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 2:55pm

        That’s usually the reason used by homophobes when they say that gay men used to be widely known as sodomites. It doesn’t stop that reason being ignorant and thoughtless thought does it?

    2. Jock S. Trap 13 May 2012, 12:04pm

      I have to agree Brendan. At the end of the day was this her opinion or an opinion but the people that let her, clearly a vunerable person in society, do their dirty work and leaving her to take the blame?

  25. de Villiers 13 May 2012, 9:52am

    I’m astounded at the nastiness of people here. The woman has mental health issues. She cannot be considered fully responsible for herself. She did not choose her disability.

    If nasty religious Christians made fun of a gay person with mental health difficulties then people would readily be outraged.

    1. Oh, lighten up you dullard, you’re always so far up your own arse.

      1. Completely agree with you.

    2. Well, I have to say that I’m going to side with the unpopular for once! I agree very much with Katie who commented earlier. At the time, we didn’t know she was mentally ill, so we mocked her supposed ignorance and it was justified. However, in the light of this extra bit of news, I really do feel uncomfortable about mocking her further. Sometimes in life we really just should know what to leave unsaid.

      1. Its perfectly fine to mock her ridiculous nonsense, but cruel to mock her for her illness.

    3. If she’d been slagging off black people or using racist views she’d have been removed from the podium, and half the self-loathing hypocrites defending this homophobic woman on here would be arguing from the other side.

      1. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:17pm

        It’s all “Free Speech” apparently.

    4. de Villiers 13 May 2012, 4:19pm

      Lighten up at people making fun of a person with mental disabilities?

  26. If her condition makes her irrational and incapable of a lucid contribution she has no business being allowed to speak. In this case, the fact that a mentally ill person is not weeded out of the democratic process serves only to lessen the credibility of all other speakers, and is furthermore a waste of the time of all involved (and presumably a waste of public funds into the bargain).

    If she *is* mentally competent to speak then her unsupported hateful rantings serve as a stark example of the same bigotry spouted by all those who hide their hate behind religion.

    1. “If her condition makes her irrational and incapable of a lucid contribution she has no business being allowed to speak.”

      I don’t agree with this, Paul. Mental illness is an illness like any other; she still has a civil right to free speech.

      Of course, it may sometimes be necessary sometimes to say, as kindly as possible, “I’m sorry, but we need to get on to the next commenter.”

      I’ve worked for local government in the U.S., and these sorts of meetings are open to the public and everybody gets a chance to speak. They are often not widely attended, but have a few “regulars” who attend every meeting. Sometimes a mentally ill, not very coherent person is one of the regulars (I’ve seen it before). They are tolerated, and rightly so, I think.

      1. If you generalise mental illness, then I totally agree with you.

        I was not intending to generalise, quite the opposite : my point is whether or not she is mentally competent in the eyes of the medical profession and the law. If her condition inhibits her ability to recall facts and to synthesize arguments, it doesn’t seem fair to her or to her audience to allow her to continue : she isn’t going to be in a position to defend herself and may even be doing her self harm.

  27. I have depression but I’m not this crazy like her. Rather than whining about how awful gay men are, maybe she should increase the dosage of her medicine. That might help her with the spelling problem.

  28. If the Svobodas don’t like it, can’t they keep this savage animal on its lead in the yard? And muzzle it? Frankly, I hope not. She’s better than our Jean!

    1. I see lots of you have decided to attack me and defend this woman. Hey-ho! If she’d had a pop a people on the grounds of race she’d have been physically removed from the podium. And the people on here giving me the thumbs down would have cheered her removers on. Stop being so bloody craven.

      1. I think you’ll find the thumbs down are for the phrase “savage animal”. Not a terribly humane thing to say about a woman with severe mental health problems.

      2. And if you had done the same, called a person of colour a “savage animal”, then what?

  29. Maybe I was a bit hard on her yesterday… as some have already stated there is an element of Poe’s law about someone with mental health issues at an anti-discrimination meeting venting homophobic rhetoric.
    Frankly I have heard similar diatribes from Fox News pundits and from the likes of Stephen Green so telling the certified mentally ill from everyday homophobes who aught to know better but don’t is a bit of a minefield.
    I apologise for my previous insensitive comments.
    I hope she does get the care she needs.
    Though I also agree that a legislative hearing about gay rights isn’t the most constructive platform for someone with acute schitzophrenia to vent.

  30. The first time I saw it my first thought was: “She’s got to be mentally ill”.
    *Sigh* I am at odds with this one. On one hand, I despise the derision of those with mental health issues. On the other hand I have a nasty feeling about how this all came about in the first place…like many other posters I am worried and suspicious about the way the family only arrived on the scene post hoc.
    The woman in question is not being treated ethically if she is being allowed to publicly humiliate herself – which leads me to think one of two things.
    A) Nobody cared originally as they thought she’d just be ignored.
    B) They didn’t see anything wrong with her views.
    Who knows? I won’t mock the woman, the blame lies on the support network (or lack of it, perhaps) that lies behind her.

    1. Louisa, I suspect what’s going on is

      C) Her family want her to live as normal a life as possible, and that means she is free to express her views at a local meeting.

      It sounds like she’s a regular there, and the family did probably expect her to be indulged/ignored. These sorts of local government meetings are usually not paid much attention to outside of a few local regulars. This time, her diatribe happened to get recorded and picked up by the social media.

  31. A point to remember is that the ideas in her deranged rant are not original. The delusions of the mad are always related to their cultural context. In one form or another these examples are common currency, and even considered uncontentious, among religious homophobes. That is what is truly worrying – and the fact that nearly 3000 people have signed up to her Facebook page.

  32. Has she been invited to speak at a conference in Oxford or Chancery Lane yet? Or maybe to address the Ugandan parliament on the Kill the Gays Bill. I see little difference in the nonsense they spout.

  33. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 11:03am

    Yes mental health issues are not a placebo for unsavoury opinions but they do need to be taken into account. I don’t know that much about mental health but it was fairly obvious from within the first 10 seconds of this womans speech that she had actual severe mental health issues or learning disabilities, and that was when I stopped watching it. I am not impressed that PN didn’t focus more on this in their initial report and instead let indignation ride roughshod over objective reporting, it’s the standard I expect from the Daily Mail et al not PN. What about some investigation or analysis as to the abuse that is made of vulnerable people like this by the bigots who have all of their faculties?

    1. Whole-heartedly agree, Paul.

  34. Jock S. Trap 13 May 2012, 11:44am

    hmmmm… no surprise there then.

    Doesn’t this show that when people want to homophobic laws they’ll find the people they want at any cost… any people?

    Think it says more about the states and religious groups in question.

    1. Perhaps, Jock, but it’s a risky strategy hitching your opinions to people who are mentally ill. I certainly feel the link between bigotry and insanity has been strengthen by this incident

  35. casparthegood 13 May 2012, 11:52am

    Undiagnosed mental illness may be an excuse for a public outburst like thgis but when the subject is known to have “problems” surely its sensible to protect them from themselves? Where the hell were her carers when she was making a fool of herself spouting nonsense like that?

  36. Sounds like there are a lot of things mental health problems are being used to justify, no sympathy at all for this bigot. I also agree that her family are to blame for allowing this to happen.

    Lock her up and throw away the key!

    1. Appalling comment!

    2. Jock S. Trap 13 May 2012, 12:15pm

      FIne so then you lock one vunerable person away and all the people responsible will do is find another vunerable person to exploit.

      Great thinking…. Not!

    3. I find it a perfectly acceptable comment, I find your response pathetic, if you are going to criticise another person post please be articulate and creative enough to explain why.

      1. I think you’re addressing me, Brido. I apologise. I thought it was bleedingly obvious. Do you feel that “Lock her up and throw away the key!” is an appropriate thing to do to a person with schizophrenia?”. Have you no sense of the history of minorities, including homosexuals? Do you know they used to lock us up? Do you know they used to say we were sick and deviant? Or is it just a case of “bugger you Jack, I’m alright” with you? Is that articulate enough for you now? Do you get it now?

        1. Yes I was addressing you Wingby and thank you for your response. Yes I am aware of the history of minorities and how these things changed. It wasn’t through people like you who turn a blind eye and accept excuse after excuse to justify why things are said, it took and still does take people who will stand up and defend themselves.

          I thought these comments were shocking when I first heard them and now that there are claims made of a mental illness, I still find them shocking, it doesn’t mitigate anything IMHO.

          1. So you stand by your word then, and you would lock up this woman who has a poor grip on reality and throw away the key?

            Do you really feel so insecure that you feel threatened by this schizophrenia patient?

            And as it happens things have changed through people precisely like me, marching in the 70s and 80s, standing up and being counted, lobbying Stonewall to change its anti-equal marriage status, etc., etc. The difference is, I’ve defended myself and us in person against people who have been a real threat to us, not thrown words at some poor deranged person who can hardly string a coherent sentence together from the comfort of your living room.

            Focus your anger on the people who feed her these ideas, and ease off a bit on the Daily Mail like “lock em’ all up” wails please.

          2. Yes, checked out my previous comments. Nothing inconsistent there. :-)

      2. I work with fact Wingby, fact is that these comments were made. Now someone is claiming that mental illness is to blame, I’m suddenly giving out sympathy… chance!! The circumstances surrounding this lead me to believe the mental illness line is just an excuse, so yes throw away the key.

        Your a hypocrite, did you recall your comments in the previous thread when this story first broke?

        You really are full of your own self importance aren’t you?

        1. Pot. Kettle.

          1. Ok. Well we can agree to disagree then.

        2. Sorry posted in the wrong place. Checked out my previous comments. Nothing inconsistent there. :-)

          1. Yawn, are you still trying to pick a fight with me?!? Haven’t you got something better to do on a Sunday?

  37. Nice to see so many in the gay community willing to bully a woman who so obviously had severe mental problems. Shame on all those who a) took this story seriously in the first place and b) don’t even have the decency to see an episode of schizophrenia for what it is.

    Why did the authorities allow this woman to give evidence, as she so obviously is a vulnerable person, in need of protection. Those of you who took her seriously seem to need some help yourselves.

    1. The enquiry took her seriously, for that reason alone everything she said was of note. Has the enquiry struck her statements off the record or are they still there for posterity?

      1. How do you know the enquiry took her seriously? I missed that bit. They certainly treated her with equal dignity: that’s evident, and appropriate, but how do you know what they all made of it?

    2. “Those of you who took her seriously seem to need some help yourselves.”

      The same can be said about those who take religious people seriously.

  38. I feel sorry for her and her brother seeing as she clearly has mental problems, but I can understand he would feel angry at everyone mocking her. But it’s not because people don’t understand mental problems, it’s because what she said is also said by others who are supposedly totally sane.

  39. Christopher Lines 13 May 2012, 12:13pm

    If she is a ‘protected person’ then why is she allowed to leave the assisted living facility? The reason the video went viral and that her comments were taken seriously is that she herself has not been vetted. My other question is that how does a person with allegedly such a diagnosis as schizophrenia make the cut to be a lobbyist? BTW. That’s a tacky wig underneath that tacky hat.

  40. It is interesting that people in this mental state always rant about the same things, right wing politics and religion.

    I have never heard one of these ranters who have lost it, ranting about there not being a god, or about wanting peace and justice, and equal rights for all.

    This has to be worthy of scientific enquiry?

    1. very true.
      I would love to read a study on this topic. Why does religious extremism attract mentally unhinged people?

    2. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 2:51pm

      I’m know expert but probably the same reason that the Daily Mail is so popular, it plays on fears and indignation. As far as I’m aware schizophrenia causes sufferers to be prone to irrational fears. Homophobia is an irrational fear so it’s hardly surprising when there’s so much bile being spouted by anti-gay people in the public domain that someone suffering a schizophrenic episode is going to latch onto it.

    3. There is a correlation between schizophrenia and religious dogma, and its well established. One feed the other, and validates persecution complexes.

      Search for this paper:- “The relationship between schizophrenia and religion and its implications for care” Sylvia Mohr, Philippe Huguelet – Swiss Medical Weekly 2004 ; 134 : 369 – 376

  41. To me, it shows how little her family care about the well-being of their sister.

    If they know she is prone to these insane public outbursts, then it is up to them to make sure that she doesn’t end up in front of a publicly broadcast forum that is being filmed and viewed but thousands of concerned citizens.

    Family don’t let mentally ill family members spew hatred in front of news cameras… at least, they don’t do it then complain that the news cameras were on.

    The brother and family have quite a bit of nerve complaining about “society” when he himself shirked his responsibility.

    HE knew she was mentally ill.

    “Society” didn’t. It’s not like Jane Svoboda comes with a huge tattoo on her forehead that says “schizophrenic”.

  42. Paddyswurds 13 May 2012, 12:52pm

    We have been told, after the fact, that this woman is ill, and to be honest her demeanor indicated as much.
    However if you go to YouTube and watch the original clip; when it ends you will get a screen with further related clips and there were several people who came after her, one of them a medical Doctor, who were just as grossly homophobic; and who were just as outlandish in their assertions, were they also schizophrenic??……..
    I suspect that the reaction to this woman’s illiterate rant on behalf of the religious right and the Republicans shocked even the most rabid conservatives and that they felt they needed to mitigate what had happened by claiming , “oh she is really ill” as this was the only out they had.
    This woman is well known in Nebraska for her homophobic rants and anti GLB campaigning and there never was any talk of her being ill before this. ..
    I am sceptical as I believe nothing is at this stage, beyond the religious right or the Repukelicans………

    1. Medicate H8!

    2. Well if its not true then she has made a horrible mockery of those that actually do have mental health issues.

      I have met people sectioned under Mental Health Act in my visits to these units who are more coherent and ‘normal’ then her and that says something.

  43. god I feel a bit of an asshole now after what I said about her :(

    1. to be perfectly fair, it is sometimes nigh impossible to discern the mentally ill from all the other religious fundamentalists.

      remember, you can’t spell “fundamentalist” without “mental”.

    2. She generally has been, everywhere…

    3. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 8:51pm

      If you’re serious then you are a despicable human being who would rather basque in indignation than stop to think about how mental health issues can effect someone. And if you were going for witty – epic fail!

      1. Paul.Essex/London 13 May 2012, 8:54pm


    4. Spanner1960 13 May 2012, 9:20pm

      Many have the same opinion about LGBT people.
      In fact, that’s precisely what they do in Iran.
      Hope that makes you feel happier.

  44. drdata1967 13 May 2012, 6:32pm

    If she’s a “protected person” maybe her “protecters” could stop her from getting up in public and spouting anti-gay rhetoric and crazy talk about the Chinese government sending subliminal messages. On the other hand, now that I know how easy it is to become a registered lobbiest, I’m going to do it and recite Vogon poetry twice a month.. “oh, freckled grunt buggery..”

    1. FearsOfGun 16 May 2012, 5:30pm

      Unless she’s deemed a threat to herself or others, her family’s hands are pretty much tied.

  45. Watching the video, she appears very incoherent and delusional and I’m not in the least bit surprised that she might be schizophrenic. Alas, Christian fundamentalists tend to prey on delusional people.

    I don’t see why a diagnosis of schizophrenia should be dismissed as an ‘excuse’. She clearly needs help. Way to stigmatise mental illness.

  46. She has spoken in the past about “Chinese subliminals” ? Now I want to read what she has to say about Chinese subliminals, it must be as funny as Community’s “Harrison Ford is irradiating our testicles with microwave satelite transmissions”. Hahahaha, I love conspiracy theorists, they are hilarious.

  47. GingerlyColors 14 May 2012, 3:26am

    I hope they don’t accuse her of being ga-ga! That would be an insult to Lady Ga-Ga who has been a valuable ally of ours.

  48. If she has schizophrenia then fair enough, she cant be held responsible for what she says and therefore should not be made fun of. However, why on earth would someone with such a severe mental health issue be allowed to speak publicly at such an important gathering??

  49. FearsOfGun 16 May 2012, 4:18pm

    Her family can’t “prevent” her from speaking. Guardians only have so much power when it comes to the rights of people with mental and intellectual disabilities.

    She’s considered to have the same rights as anyone else, that includes free speech and being allowed to go before the city counsel.

    1. FearsOfGun 16 May 2012, 6:52pm

      To add people can only be “locked up” if they are deemed a threat to themselves or others.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.